Logline
Commander Una Chin-Riley faces court-martial along with possible imprisonment and dishonorable dismissal from Starfleet, and her defense is in the hands of a lawyer who’s also a childhood friend with whom she had a terrible falling out.
Written by Dana Horgan
Directed by Valerie Weiss
I think Pasalk was pretty out of line with his approach - his questioning essentially amounted to a criminal investigation of someone else. My knowledge of law isn’t very strong, but that seems inappropriate.
You generally can’t make people incriminate themselves, and upping a charge from fraud to conspiracy would be exactly that. That is, in a court run by laws instead of TV logic she could’ve remained silent.
…unless there’s some special sauce in US law that says “once you take the stand” or something, dunno I don’t speak common law and Trek can’t help itself but assume US law but it definitely doesn’t look kosher.
In the US, wouldn’t she be able to plead the 5th?
TNG’s “The Drumhead” shows us that Federation law (or at least Starfleet Military Code of Justice) includes a similar right. Crewman Simon Tarses invokes the Seventh Guarantee when asked about his Romulan heritage.
It’s definitely possible that the Seventh Guarantee wasn’t part of the Code of Justice until after this incident, too. Maybe there’s a push for it after the United Federation of Planets v. Una Chin-Riley ruling because of the conduct of Pasalk.
It’s possible. In all cases, Batel clearly states to Pike in the mess that the interrogated person has to answer.
There’s nothing that beats the knowledge of the collective!
I couldn’t help but wonder whether they’re setting him up as a badmiral or it was just Chekov’s gun from the Vulcan brawl. If the latter, they did a lousy job of tying them together … I was going with option A while watching and only considered B afterward.