• That's why it depends who is administering the use of the lasso.  If it's police or another government agent (FBI, or possibly Wonder Woman if she's actively working with the government) then there are all kinds of Constitutional problems with using the lasso.  If Wonder Woman is a private citizen, a lot of that goes away. The counter arguments on admissibility from the defense are likely in the "more prejudicial than probative" area.  See, as I've been saying, there are a couple levels that we're talking about here.  The prosecution is probably happy to avoid getting into whether the lasso actually compels you to tell the truth.  They'd be happy if the lasso was just a rope and the defendant just admitted to the acts of which they're accused.  That's admissible hearsay (or not hearsay at all in some jurisdictions), and it pretty much proves their case.   Getting into whether the lasso has magic that compels subjects to tell the truth makes things more difficult.  The defense is going to argue that there's no evidence that the magic actually works the way it's advertised.  Maybe the lasso compels you to say only lies, or maybe it compels you to say what the interrogator wants you to say.  You can't just take Wonder Woman's word that it's truth magic.  If the defense can get the Court to recognize the presence of magic working in the lasso (it's certainly a long shot, but they could call Wonder Woman, who would likely admit that the lasso does work on magic) the prosecution would have to make some kind of showing that the lasso produces reliably truthful testimony and does not prejudice the defense.  I have no idea how they'd do that other than some kind of scientific trial whose results could also be admitted into evidence, but if they couldn't, then I think there's a decent chance that the lasso testimony would be thrown out.

• As I'm still on a Takei kick from the above vid: Oh my! :D

• Wait, why do I have to watch an advertisement before I get to watch what is essentially an advertisement?

• I don't think you can be forced to incriminate yourself, nor can you be forced to give up your right to remain silent. Post 9/11 in America, it's anyone's guess.

• Well, I'm imagining two scenarios.  If the question is just "Is a statement made by the defendant admissible." then the lasso really isn't important in terms of admissibility.  It's a statement by a party.  As long as Wonder Woman testifies to the statement, it's it.   I kind of got the impression, however, that we were talking about giving statements made under the influence of the lasso some special status as super reliable.  After all, we're supposed to believe that it doesn't just compel people to say something, but to say the actual, unvarnished truth.  Rather than just being a question of admissibility, this now goes to reliability or being given some higher weight by the court.  In that case, you'd have to make some kind of showing to the court that statements made under the influence of the lasso are especially reliable.

• Duly noted and thank you Metacafe

• Nothing wrong with that. In the word of Queens "Fat bottomed girls, you make the rockin' world go round"

• Kinda thick from the waist down, no?

• Check out house of the dead.

• I think you are right except for one thing.  Why would the lasso need to be reliable?  If the lasso is not reliable, then the accused made a statement voluntarily that implicated himself.  You would have self-incrimination problems if it is used by the police..  It is the statement that is important not some scientific process. 

• I think Durance's contract states she cosplays in every show she's in, am I right?

• This.... makes my head hurt. Thanks, Rob. I've now started drinking BEFORE work. Granted, not a huge step, as I work retail, but still. Also, no way in hell WW would grunt like that and need that many punches to knock a guy's ass out. She's pretty much Batman vs Guy Gardner from JLI: one punch and done.

• Yep, Greg Rucka mentioned it during his awesome run on Wonder Woman when she was Ambassador 

• Wonder Woman's original purpose was to get tied up in every story, so fire away.

• Sounds kind of like Harvey Birdman, or Dan Slott's run on She Hulk

• But they're great fun at parties.

• Originally it was a lasso of obidience. And Amazon prisoners on Reforn Island wore magic girdles that purged their hateful thoughts, and forced peace and love into their minds. Only when the prisoner was capable of feeling love without the girdle, were they released. The Amazons have a pretty questionable set of judicial practices.

• That clip makes me want to make a sexist comment that would undermine the whole purpose of strong female characters such as Wonder Woman. Oh, the conundrum!

• There are a few issues, but the answer is probably.  The biggest issue is who is using the lasso to coerce a confession/statement.  If it's the cops, or another government agent, you'd probably run into some Constitutional problems.  If, on the other hand, we're talking about Wonder Woman operating in a private capacity, then the statements are probably admissible regardless of the presence of the lasso as long as they can clear arguments about hearsay and relevance.  If the question is, "Will statements made under the influence of the lasso be assumed to be true by a Court?" then it gets more complicated.  You'd have to establish to the Court that the lasso is reliable in a way that warrants relying on it to a high degree (think DNA evidence, which had to be proven to be reliable, but is now widely regarded as such).  Now that I think of it, Law and the Multiverse has to have discussed this.

• I think precedent from the comics have established that no, lasso-induced confessions aren't admissible. I'm almost sure it came up during a WW guest spot in Manhunter.

• Seconded (I think we've both been on this bandwagon for a couple of years now), and now she's got the acting credibility to do so with Haywire looking good. At the very least, it'd be nice to have a female action star who could legitimately kick a little ass, unlike the SMGs of the world.

• "Adrianne Palicki is a better actress than Durance" In the category of "most unnecessary statements of 2012...", Rob, you've got the early lead. I think my goldfish is a better actress than Durance.

• This makes me want to see a show where superheroes are put on trial.  Are confession made under the influence of the lasso of truth admissible in a court of law?

• She definately wears the suit better and she beat that guys ass like a rented mule. I think the perfect person to play Wonder Woman would be Gina Carano. 

• DAYAAAAM! LOOK AT DAT ASS!

TotalComments: 25