I remember, back at CU, I wrote a scenario for a moot court.
It involved a hijacking. The passengers were herded into the back of the plane and conspired to retake the plane by force. Alas, in their midst was a passenger that did not want to resist and he said he was willing to betray the other passengers in order to foil their plot. In the effort to suppress this quisling he was killed when his neck snapped.
The trial was set about the man that killed the quisling. As the quisling was not a direct physical threat the law--as written--did not exempt his killing.
I was excoriated for even fabricating such a scenario. No one wanted to play along becuase it was simply too absurd. Not even close to realistic. Utter nonsense.
And yet, here we are today looking at a group of human flotsam that not only would have served as prosecutor for my fictitious defendant but probably would have served as the quisling.
Y'all owe me an apology.
