Author Topic: Black Stories II ~ Case 33: Cursed Vacation (Read 50728 times)

axman36 · « **Reply #570 on:** March 22, 2010, 06:56:14 AM »

At first I thought it was the electric chair from the flickering... but then I thought not when the light came from an actual light source.

So... did the light flicker because of the need for a large amount of power by another source?

If so, was said source the electric chair?

Was the person Stephen trying to stop from getting killed actually innocent?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #571 on:** March 22, 2010, 07:27:46 AM »

Quote

So... did the light flicker because of the need for a large amount of power by another source?

YES

Quote

If so, was said source the electric chair?

YES

Quote

Was the person Stephen trying to stop from getting killed actually innocent?

~~YES~~ NO

axman36 · « **Reply #572 on:** March 22, 2010, 07:32:59 AM »

Stephen learned on a phone that the man that was to be executed for a certain crime was actually innocent. He quickly ran over as fast as he could to try and stop the execution from taking place. As he reached though, he saw that the light from the room was flickering. He realized he was too late, the man was electrified on the chair and the lights flickered from the surge of electricity used.

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #573 on:** March 22, 2010, 07:58:19 AM »

Quote from: axman36 on March 22, 2010, 07:32:59 AM

Stephen learned on a phone that the man that was to be executed for a certain crime was actually innocent. He quickly ran over as fast as he could to try and stop the execution from taking place. As he reached though, he saw that the light from the room was flickering. He realized he was too late, the man was electrified on the chair and the lights flickered from the surge of electricity used.

YES. While the 'on the phone'-part is not neccessary, I still want one more info. It shouldn't be any challenge now, but: why Stephen? It wasn't just a coincidence that it was him who tried to stop the execution.

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #574 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:01:10 AM »

Did Stephen have evidence disproving the crime?

Was Stephan related to the person that was executed?

Was Stephan the one that the executed person was accused of killing :V

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #575 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:05:31 AM »

Wait, screw that. I read my card wrong.

Correction time, sorry for the mistake:

The person that was executed was NOT INNOCENT!

Quote

Did Stephen have evidence disproving the crime?

NO

Quote

Was Stephan related to the person that was executed?

YES. Not as family though, if that's what you thought of.

Quote

Was Stephan the one that the executed person was accused of killing :V

NO. Would be a hilarious plot-twist though :V

axman36 · « **Reply #576 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:07:04 AM »

Was Stephen actually the killer?

Did Stephen know that the man being executed was innocent the entire time?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #577 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:09:58 AM »

Sorry, I had to make a correction about the innocence thing. My mistake *bow*

Quote

Was Stephen actually the killer?

NO

Quote

Did Stephen know that the man being executed was innocent the entire time?

NO, as the man wasnt innocent after all

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #578 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:33:29 AM »

Was Stephen an accomplice to the crime?

Was it actually a killing? Is that relevant?

Was Stephan trying to stop the execution for the sake of the criminal being executed? For his own sake? For other specific people? For bystanders? (i.e. electrical problems making the chair a group death device for any observers)

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #579 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:37:01 AM »

Quote

Was Stephen an accomplice to the crime?

NO

Quote

Was it actually a killing? Is that relevant?

IRRELEVANT. The person was sentenced to death, that's all.

Quote

Was Stephan trying to stop the execution for the sake of the criminal being executed?

YES

Quote

For his own sake?

NOt really. It might have benefitted him though

Quote

For other specific people?
For bystanders?

NO

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #580 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:40:29 AM »

Is Stephan's relationship to the accused relevant? Is how he planned to stop the execution relevant?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #581 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:45:46 AM »

Quote

Is Stephan's relationship to the accused relevant?
Is how he planned to stop the execution relevant?

Both YES, as this is exactly what is still missing for a solution.

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #582 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:49:29 AM »

Was Stephan the executed person's lawyer? A recreational/locational friend? Business partner?

Was Stephan planning to stop the execution via primarily social means (i.e. interfering with the people working on it)? By cutting the power? Otherwise interfering with the physical requirements for the electrical chair? Or is execution by electrical chair not relevant for more than explaining the flickering?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #583 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:01:34 AM »

Quote

Was Stephan the executed person's lawyer?

YES

Quote

A recreational/locational friend? Business partner?

NO

Quote

Was Stephan planning to stop the execution via primarily social means (i.e. interfering with the people working on it)?
By cutting the power?
Otherwise interfering with the physical requirements for the electrical chair?

NOne of those. Social means might be the closest, but it's not the way he wanted to do it.

Quote

Or is execution by electrical chair not relevant for more than explaining the flickering?

YES. It was only for the flickering.

Thaws · « **Reply #584 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:14:20 AM »

Did Stephen has a witness to testify that his client's not guilty?

Did Stephen has some kind of evidence to prove his client's not guilty?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #585 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:20:46 AM »

Quote

Did Stephen has a witness to testify that his client's not guilty?
Did Stephen has some kind of evidence to prove his client's not guilty?

NO. The person was guilty.

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #586 on:** March 22, 2010, 09:48:33 AM »

Was Stephan planning to help the accused escape?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #587 on:** March 22, 2010, 10:13:08 AM »

Quote

Was Stephan planning to help the accused escape?

NO

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #588 on:** March 22, 2010, 11:04:18 AM »

Was Stephan planning to use legal (as in lawyerly) means to stop the killing (declare a mistrial, alternative guilt, paperwork errors, etc)? Are legal system factors relevant beyond the death sentence?

Is Stephan doing this for any reason beyond being the accused's lawyer?

Spidere · « **Reply #589 on:** March 22, 2010, 01:22:43 PM »

Was the execution postponed?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #590 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:08:59 PM »

Quote

Was Stephan planning to use legal (as in lawyerly) means to stop the killing (declare a mistrial, alternative guilt, paperwork errors, etc)? Are legal system factors relevant beyond the death sentence?

YES to both.

Quote

Is Stephan doing this for any reason beyond being the accused's lawyer?

NO

Quote

Was the execution postponed?

NO

Edible · « **Reply #591 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:14:17 PM »

Was Stephen attempting to get something akin to a will from the deceased?

In a perfect aberration of the courts, could some factor have led to the deceased's execution being postponed?

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #592 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:16:51 PM »

Quote

Was Stephen attempting to get something akin to a will from the deceased?

NO

Quote

In a perfect aberration of the courts, could some factor have led to the deceased's execution being postponed?

Aberr...what? *dictionary* Oh, okay. Ahem.... Whether the court was sane or not at the time is IRRELEVANT. Also, it was NOT about a postponing. Think about other measures in relation to someone sentenced to death.

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #593 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:31:14 PM »

Was it an attempt to declare a mistrial? Insanity defense?

What country's legal system is this based off of?

Edible · « **Reply #594 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:36:17 PM »

The factors I can think of that could legally stop an execution:

>Religious purposes (summoning a priest, etc. for confession before the execution)
>Legal purposes (Usually a will)
>Gubernatorial right (The ability of a governor to postpone an execution indefinitely)
>Procedure purposes (The execution equipment is improperly cared for, the person brought to be executed was the wrong person, etc.)

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #595 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:37:43 PM »

Quote from: Edible on March 22, 2010, 02:36:17 PM

>Gubernatorial right (The ability of a governor to postpone an execution indefinitely)

Mmmmmmm, delicious abuse of authority~

Dead Princess Sakana · « **Reply #596 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:02:31 PM »

Quote

Was it an attempt to declare a mistrial? Insanity defense?

NO

Quote

What country's legal system is this based off of?

Well, I'd say Germany's, but we don't have a death sentence, so... Most likely the USA's?

Quote

>Gubernatorial right (The ability of a governor to postpone an execution indefinitely)

Well, if it means indefinitely, let's count that one.

So, I guess I'll declare:

~CASE SOLVED~

~~Phoenix~~ Stephen was the lawyer of the person sentenced to death.
However, he managed to obtain pardon at the last minute.
He rushed to the prison to stp the execution.
When he saw the lights flicker, he knew he was too late.
The electical chair had already been activated.

This one is a bit weird.
You'd think they'd call the executioners if there was a pardon.
But noooo, let's leave it to the running speed of the lawyer whether someone will live or die.
Well, no break for you, my dear players.
The next riddle will start immediately.

Twentynineth Case: Overslept
A man fell asleep in his car and drowned.

Edible · « **Reply #597 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:05:40 PM »

Was the man operating the vehicle when he fell asleep?

Was the car already in the water when he fell asleep?

Was there foul play involved, or can the incident be blamed solely on the deceased?

Thaws · « **Reply #598 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:18:21 PM »

You know, the last case makes so much more sense if it was really Phoenix....
:V

Was it raining?

Was there an avalanche?

Was there some kind of relevant natural disaster that happened?

Was it sea water that the man drowned in?

RANDOM THEORY TIME : The man was driving to the beach. He parked his car by the seashore to watch the sunset, then he fell asleep in his car. Then the tides rised so much it drowned the sleeping man inside.

E-Nazrin · « **Reply #599 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:19:07 PM »

Was the car submerged in water?

Was he drowned in water? Or another liquid? Or not a liquid?

Was anyone else present at the drowning?