VN Ren'Py Law School [S2 Ep.4 v1] [MisterMaya]

[-Kuro-]

Hopefully not, they are studying to be lawyers, I don't think it would fit this story if they have to rescue Sana from the mafia guys...

aside of that they have a wealthy mf on their side Stan Makic Jr aka Jack havin him vouching for MC.. i find it quite unlikely to something so bold as a kidnap

 

[TonyMurray]

agree with u, if Lana was important in the "path creator" in espide 4 she will be somewhere but she is not

Honestly, I see this as more likely an oversight than anything else. Why would you have a couple of Lana scenes in S2 if she wasn't going to be important enough to include, bearing in mind you have a prerequisite variable set in S1 for them. Dev did say that you should use you saves from S1 if possible, as if there are bugs, the new path creator is most likely where they'll be (or words to that effect). I don't think dev would create those scenes in S4 and have some new variables come out of them just to piss people off if they weren't continuing with saves exported from S1. The more obvious answer is that he overlooked the variable, because of course it would be a lot of variables to take into consideration and abbreviate into a handful of questions for those essentially starting here from scratch.

 

[-Kuro-]

Honestly, I see this as more likely an oversight than anything else. Why would you have a couple of Lana scenes in S2 if she wasn't going to be important enough to include, bearing in mind you have a prerequisite variable set in S1 for them. Dev did say that you should use you saves from S1 if possible, as if there are bugs, the new path creator is most likely where they'll be (or words to that effect). I don't think dev would create those scenes in S4 and have some new variables come out of them just to piss people off if they weren't continuing with saves exported from S1. The more obvious answer is that he overlooked the variable, because of course it would be a lot of variables to take into consideration and abbreviate into a handful of questions for those essentially starting here from scratch.

we have a "scene" with Sienna .. and she is important? she is even in miri's path thing.. and she is not importat ( at least not until now) so that what u said is pointles.. because at least for me even Selena is more important than the scenes with Lana.

Editted: had to add.. even Lana said she does not want to have a bf.... that automatically removes her as a LI..she is just a fuck buddy..

 

[MisterMaya]

Honestly, I see this as more likely an oversight than anything else. Why would you have a couple of Lana scenes in S2 if she wasn't going to be important enough to include, bearing in mind you have a prerequisite variable set in S1 for them. Dev did say that you should use you saves from S1 if possible, as if there are bugs, the new path creator is most likely where they'll be (or words to that effect). I don't think dev would create those scenes in S4 and have some new variables come out of them just to piss people off if they weren't continuing with saves exported from S1. The more obvious answer is that he overlooked the variable, because of course it would be a lot of variables to take into consideration and abbreviate into a handful of questions for those essentially starting here from scratch.

Nah, it 's cause I make more money if people go and buy season 1

The more "serious" note is, I don't have to make that path builder, I do it because otherwise the game gets too big for one file.
But if I'm going to make two files I may as well make a path builder for new players to enjoy it
It's just that it's stupid not to play season 1 and get SG content, if you want it, gotta earn it!

 

[-Kuro-]

Nah, it 's cause I make more money if people go and buy season 1 View attachment 5566726

LOVE YOU MATE.. IM DYING HERE.. hahahaha

 

[-Kuro-]

MisterMaya now i know u read.. if any of our theories is correct.. PLEASE DONT CHANGE THE GAME BECAUSE OF IT.. btw great job with the characters..

 

[Hersom9912]

Fuck the whole court debacle about the assault was so wrong and bad at so many levels.
1) Police wasn't involved (Law school, right....)
2) Even with conclusive and strong evidence MC has to be grateful for their decision not sacking him? Fuck i would leave such a school after attitude like that.
3) If the whole situation would become public school would face very bad press on how they handled situation.

Dude sucker punches you with balaclava KICKS you while downed, attacks (or injures) your partner. Not to mention there is testimony and evidence of stalking behaviour.....+ heat of passion which usually serves as some form of defence.
IF SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE THANKFUL FOR NOT BEING SACKED AFTER ABOVE MENTIONED SITUATION, LEAVE THAT PLACE IMMEDIATELY YOU ARE IN A WOLF DEN WHO ARE AGAINST YOU.

Possibly the worst (yet what i've seen) fail of the author. You can sweep porn logic under the rug but not the real world law logic.

 

[-Kuro-]

Fuck the whole court debacle about the assault was so wrong and bad at so many levels.
1) Police wasn't involved (Law school, right....)
2) Even with conclusive and strong evidence MC has to be grateful for their decision not sack him? Fuck i would leave such a school after attitude like that.
3) If the whole situation would become public school would face very bad press on how they handled situation.

Possibly the worst (yet what i've seen) fail of the author. You can sweep porn logic under the rug but not the real world law logic.

most colleges would directly kick you out if u get into a fight.. so MC was lucky he wasnt expelled..

 

[Hersom9912]

most colleges would directly kick you out if u get into a fight.. so MC was lucky he wasnt expelled..

Well most colleges would get a court case after that if student has some good defence lawyer. It's not so clear cut.

 

[-Kuro-]

Well most colleges would get a court case after that if student has some good defence lawyer. It's not so clear cut.

Only if some felony happened should get to court... if they were wise enough: Jacob expelled for asaulting another student.. MC expelled for excesive force use ( what is actually a fault and depending on the severity of the injuries can be considered a felony), just remember Viktor asked MC to stop unless he want to kill Jacob.. if u take in consideration Viktor knows how to fight.. Mc was prob close to commit some severe damage

 

[Hersom9912]

Only if some felony happened should get to court... if they were wise enough: Jacob expelled for asaulting another student.. MC expelled for excesive force use ( what is actually a fault and depending on the severity of the injuries can be considered a felony), just remember Viktor asked MC to stop unless he want to kill Jacob.. if u take in consideration Viktor knows how to fight.. Mc was prob close to commit some severe damage

I understand this.
But it can be easily classified as crime of passion (heat of passion). In which case assault charge is at best highly debatable. Due to sudden attack of a masked man (shock + self-defence sets in) then he downed him and punched him but was stopped from his crime of passion due to another person who could easily confirm that he was out of his mind.

In most cases under the same premise. School would try to shut down this case offenders father would likely offer a sizeable amount as hush money to MC and likely instead of expulsion ask school to give him an option to leave the school (transfer).

I just don't know, every US state is different every college is different. I'm not a judge but i worked in PD and in most cases as long as there were no severe damages and "victim" under passion punched a 1-2 times a downed opponent (he was conscious, with unconcious it's a different story) this case would be dropped or viewed as self-defence case.
Downed opponent doesn't correlate with defenceless or "safe" in most cases when downed opponent simply defends or even better pleads than you MUST STOP but 1-2 punches while he is still conscious under those circumstances? Nope, don't see it as something MC should be apologetic about

 

[-Kuro-]

I understand this.
But it can be easily classified as crime of passion (heat of passion). In which case assault charge is at best highly debatable. Due to sudden attack of a masked man (shock + self-defence sets in) then he downed him and punched him but was stopped from his crime of passion due to another person who could easily confirm that he was out of his mind.

In most cases under the same premise. School would try to shut down this case offenders father would likely offer a sizeable amount as hush money to MC and likely instead of expulsion ask school to give him an option to leave the school (transfer).

that would be a mitigating circumstance, but wont exonerate MC for his crimes.. just would ( potentially) make the punishment not to be so severe.. a mitigating circumstance its not an exonerative action.. just lowers the severity of the outcome but does not eliminate it. The same way Aurora was just temporary suspended instead of ejected for cheating.. ( i would bet that outcome is because she was assaulted), and for MC as you see in game.. instead of direct expulsion he faced College table.. thats the " mitigating circumstances" outcome.. not being directly expelled.. but have the chance to defend himself...
as i see that college tribunal was kind of a favor to MC..not to Jacob.. he was obviously going to be expelled. how do i know? the way Jack talks to him.. and the way he talks to MC is waaaay diferent.. much more severe to Jacob than to Mc
At the same time that "trial" was kind of a lesson to MC.. even if you are right..even if you do the correct things.. law can be twisted.. (the baclava not taken as prove 4 example) what did MC did? he got more proves.. making him think like an actual Lawyer.. if you lack of evidences.. find more.. what he did with the pictures AND aurora testimony
but without aurora testimony i bet my balls he would be expelled

 

[Hersom9912]

that would be a mitigating circumstance, but wont exonerate MC for his crimes.. just would ( potentially) make the punishment not to be so severe.. a mitigating circumstance its not an exonerative action.. just lowers the severity of the outcome but does not eliminate it. The same way Aurora was just temporary suspended instead of ejected for cheating.. ( i would bet that outcome is because she was assaulted), and for MC as you see in game.. instead of direct expulsion he faced College table.. thats the " mitigating circumstances" outcome.. not being directly expelled.. but have the chance to defend himself...
as i see that college tribunal was kind of a favor to MC..not to Jacob.. he was obviously going to be expelled. how do i know? the way Jack talks to him.. and the way he talks to MC is waaaay diferent.. much more severe to Jacob than to Mc
At the same time that "trial" was kind of a lesson to MC.. even if you are right..even if you do the correct things.. law can be twisted.. (the baclava not taken as prove 4 example) what did MC did? he got more proves.. making him think like an actual Lawyer.. if you lack of evidences.. find more.. what he did with the pictures AND aurora testimony
but without aurora testimony i bet my balls he would be expelled

Agreed mostly to everything you stated, except first sentences.
With all the proves he gathered his crime is basically a non-crime.

I might be evaluating from 10-15+ year standpoint. Not to mention coming from EU standpoint (not US, though US varies state by state, i'm fairly sure red states after all the gathered evidence would absolve MC of crime completely).
My final years in PD were like that: Police comes, arrests both parties, charges both and the victim (if there was) provides evidence that he was a victim.
In that case with all provided evidence i see that case of self-defence holding up completely.
If the balaclava guy was unconscious or damage was bigger while he punched him on the ground then sadly self-defence would not be applicable.

But overall? Solely depends on arresting officers report, witness reports and judge (some of them are fucking morons and what i've seen happening to law system in US recently, i see loads of bad judges). Though i'm more extreme in views, that specific case that we saw in the game in my subjective opinion would even allow MC to kill the guy in heat of passion i.e. fuck around, find out.
Though the whole shabang about not involving police sounds highly probable (i.e. uni wanting to keep it under the radar) but highly illegal so a bit funny how it all played out.


Laws in many countries are basically prohibiting people from defending themselves and somehow make them feel bad if they overused their power in self-defence cases, whilst in reality it very hard for untrained people to control their rage or strength especially if fight happened unexpected.
Just an example of lunacy in US where in some states you can kill intruders but in others you can get prison time. Though to my knowledge majority of EU countries also prohibit lethal action against robbers.............

 

[-Kuro-]

Agreed mostly to everything you stated, except first sentences.
With all the proves he gathered his crime is basically a non-crime.

I might be evaluating from 10-15+ year standpoint. Not to mention coming from EU standpoint (not US, though US varies state by state, i'm fairly sure red states after all the gathered evidence would absolve MC of crime completely).
My final years in PD were like that: Police comes, arrests both parties, charges both and the victim (if there was) provides evidence that he was a victim.
In that case with all provided evidence i see that case of self-defence holding up completely.
If the balaclava guy was unconscious or damage was bigger while he punched him on the ground then sadly self-defence would not be applicable.

But overall? Solely depends on arresting officers report, witness reports and judge (some of them are fucking morons and what i've seen happening to law system in US recently, i see loads of bad judges). Though i'm more extreme in views, that specific case that we saw in the game in my subjective opinion would even allow MC to kill the guy in heat of passion i.e. fuck around, find out.
Though the whole shabang about not involving police sounds highly probable (i.e. uni wanting to keep it under the radar) but highly illegal so a bit funny how it all played out.


Laws in many countries are basically prohibiting people from defending themselves and somehow make them feel bad if they overused their power in self-defence cases, whilst in reality it very hard for untrained people to control their rage or strength especially if fight happened unexpected.
Just an example of lunacy in US where in some states you can kill intruders but in others you can get prison time. Though to my knowledge majority of EU countries also prohibit lethal action against robbers.............

yep agree with the part of keeping police away.. that was at least shaddy... there was an agression and a subsecuent escesive use of force in a self defense situation ( mitigating bla bla bla) but yet police should have been there at least to file a report.
I wont say it may be diferent in the usa.. in versed in european law " spanish to be precise"
Law here states like: if u are asaulted ( 4 example) with a knife and u punch the guy... its ok.. but if you use a blade bigger than the other or another deadly weapon you are the criminal..
There was a famous case where an elder was asaulted (knife) at night at home and he shoot the buglar ( old man was a hunter and kept a shootgun) the oldman got in jail.. for excesive use of the force ( later on was set free because the judge who put him in jail was a prick.. the old man was self preserving his life and home.. no way shooting is a crime here.. ) but figures.. i was thinkin in a european law mindset.. may be diferent in the USA.
to make it even worse.. if its proven i have some kind of training ( hand on hand, martial arts or watever) and i put to the ground an asaulter.. he goes free and i get at least a big fine, because by the law a trained person is considered a potentially lethal weapon. Im trained in KFM ( what nolan used to depict batman fighting style, is a mix of several martial arts) if i have a fight with anybody 99% of times if i defend myself i go to jail or at least i get arrestd.

 

[Hersom9912]

yep agree with the part of keeping police away.. that was at least shaddy... there was an agression and a subsecuent escesive use of force in a self defense situation ( mitigating bla bla bla) but yet police should have been there at least to file a report.
I wont say it may be diferent in the usa.. in versed in european law " spanish to be precise"
Law here states like: if u are asaulted ( 4 example) with a knife and u punch the guy... its ok.. but if you use a blade bigger than the other or another deadly weapon you are the criminal..
There was a famous case where an elder was asaulted (knife) at night at home and he shoot the buglar ( old man was a hunter and kept a shootgun) the oldman got in jail.. for excesive use of the force ( later on was set free because the judge who put him in jail was a prick.. the old man was self preserving his life and home.. no way shooting is a crime here.. ) but figures.. i was thinkin in a european law mindset.. may be diferent in the USA.
to make it even worse.. if its proven i have some kind of training ( hand on hand, martial arts or watever) and i put to the ground an asaulter.. he goes free and i get at least a big fine, because by the law a trained person is considered a potentially lethal weapon. Im trained in KFM ( what nolan used to depict batman fighting style, is a mix of several martial arts) if i have a fight with anybody 99% of times if i defend myself i go to jail or at least i get arrestd.

Well that explains your mindset a lot.

Our EU laws are in short cuck laws. US varies state by state (majority like EU if i'm not mistaken).
Essentially what you've described applies almost to every EU state (though the who has a bigger blade is funny). Usually we calcified it like this: Physical strength < fighting style (i.e. martial arts) < special equipment (tasers, sprays, stiks likely all cold weapons) < firearms < vehicles
Civilians are allowed to defend themselves with equal measure whilst police can use firearms against someone who has special equipment. (basically police has higher level of allowed force)

As for defending yourself? It's murky and blurry in EU, in Central, Western and Northern EU likely this case (game) would be hard to handle and heavily dependent on judges logic and gender. In Souther, Eastern EU balaclava guy would get assault charges while other parties self-defence would be deemed just though once again heavily dependent on judges (also corruption).
USA though? Wild west.

My main argument would be bad guys ambush which enraged the victim and whilst enraged not being in control due to life-threatening situation (and seeing partner on the ground). I would also remark that victim stopped when confronted with reason. And point out that downed opponent doesn't mean that he was made incapable of further damage. Especially due to the fact assaulter didn't plead nor was unconscious. This potentially still had safety risk for the victim.
Crimes under passion usually help a bit in court, especially under above stated circumstances i.e. being ambushed. This implies victim didn't have any option to deescalate the situation OR run away and after being ambushed, assaulter pushed the victim into state of passion for which the victim didn't have control over until the other person reasoned with him.

 

[-Kuro-]

Well that explains your mindset a lot.

Our EU laws are in short cuck laws. US varies state by state (majority like EU if i'm not mistaken).
Essentially what you've described applies almost to every EU state (though the who has a bigger blade is funny). Usually we calcified it like this: Physical strength < fighting style (i.e. martial arts) < special equipment (tasers, sprays, stiks likely all cold weapons) < firearms < vehicles
Civilians are allowed to defend themselves with equal measure whilst police can use firearms against someone who has special equipment. (basically police has higher level of allowed force)

As for defending yourself? It's murky and blurry in EU, in Central, Western and Northern EU likely this case (game) would be hard to handle and heavily dependent on judges logic and gender. In Souther, Eastern EU balaclava guy would get assault charges while other parties self-defence would be deemed just though once again heavily dependent on judges (also corruption).
USA though? Wild west.

My main argument would be bad guys ambush which enraged the victim and whilst enraged not being in control due to life-threatening situation (and seeing partner on the ground). I would also remark that victim stopped when confronted with reason. And point out that downed opponent doesn't mean that he was made incapable of further damage. Especially due to the fact assaulter didn't plead nor was unconscious. This potentially still had safety risk for the victim.
Crimes under passion usually help a bit in court, especially under above stated circumstances i.e. being ambushed. This implies victim didn't have any option to deescalate the situation OR run away and after being ambushed, assaulter pushed the victim into state of passion for which the victim didn't have control over until the other person reasoned with him.

why u americans like to complicate everything so much XD??

 

[adanu]

why u americans like to complicate everything so much XD??

Why do you non-americans love to pretend the law is not nuanced?

 

[jobu123]

Failed? He just


Why do you non-americans love to pretend the law is not nuanced?

Generally, clarity is preferable. Leaving little grey areas is generally less equitable, and more progressive countries generally prefer equity and equality. Also, I could be very wrong, but I remember reading something along the lines of the laws in the US prohibit things whereas most places they allow things. Opt in vs opt out, or whatever.

 

[-Kuro-]

Generally, clarity is preferable. Leaving little grey areas is generally less equitable, and more progressive countries generally prefer equity and equality. Also, I could be very wrong, but I remember reading something along the lines of the laws in the US prohibit things whereas most places they allow things. Opt in vs opt out, or whatever.

To that you can add every state has its own laws whilst in all the rest of the world all countries has a single law for the whole territory...

 

[jobu123]

To that you can add every state has its own laws whilst in all the rest of the world all countries has a single law for the whole territory...

that's untrue. it's not true in Canada, for example.