It was, actually, a few times! I still have it, since I imagine a lot of the websites still exist. Just not all of them. But government ones, like military ones, for sure.

you are fighting an uphill battle. Frankenstein is essentially 300 pages of whining by a deadbeat dad.

you might have something on point 3, but you'd have to get the jury to do some real mental gymnastics to sell them on points 1 & 2.

Well so much for that

That is definitely kind of unexpected. Yea, usually those places don't sell books. Was that book useful to you?

Maybe he was nervous? Definitely an unexpected way to find a book though, almost sounds like something from a comedy sketch.

Hmm.. the title certainly seems interesting.

That's great, those mini libraries can be really useful sometimes.

Ha, what a story. Did you think someone was going to come back to claim the book while you were reading it?

Oh, interesting.. Do you remember the author? Sounds like such an intriguing discovery.

Did he ask for the book back?

"Realistically," it all depends on what legal standards are being applied. I'm unfamiliar with nineteenth century English law and am too lazy to try to look it up.

But given that you say the charge treats the monster as a human child, I think your strongest argument is probably going to be that the monster isn't human and therefore the charge doesn't apply. "It" is a scientific experiment created by Frankenstein, not a natural person (in fact, it's decidedly unnatural). Frankenstein gets off on a technically. He probably would have some liability for his creation, at least in most jurisdictions of the modern US, but the prosecution should have covered their bases and been more careful with the charges.

Ohh... It reminds me of the way I lost a book. I was dating someone a long time ago and I let them borrow a signed first edition of a Rupert Sheldrake book, because we were trading books. For some reason she kept the book and I kept the dust jacket. Years later I found the dust jacket and I really wanted that book back but I had lost contact with her. Finally I was able to talk to her again and I asked for the book but never could get it back. Hmm.. Well that's certainly one way to find a book.

The crimes in question were committed in the 18th century. I think the statute of limitations might be up on this one.

That's impressive. Did you enjoy the anthology? Some books can be quite heavy, but you really lucked out it seems. I rarely ever find money in books.

For a last ditch effort, you could try to look up the laws in the early 1800s (1818?) or whenever the book is actually set, to see about negligence laws. Most likely, it was lax or nonexistent, so your mock court proceeding shouldn't be taking place at all. And if they say that they are having a modern court proceeding, bring up statute of limitations since the actions occurred.

It has been ~205 years since my client allegedly committed this crime, ~185 years past the statute of limitations or whatever if he is guilty of anything. Also a funny ending could be saying that your client has been dead for hundreds of years, and thus cannot be charged.

These probably don't really help you that much.

You could argue that instead of acting in disregard for obvious risks to human life and safety, he does the exact opposite. He protects humanity by refusing to create a second supernatural being from coming to life that could threaten thousands of lives.

Plus, right when the being is created, there's no way of knowing if it's actually living. Living means the seven criteria in biology that we specify, so you could maybe refute that Frankenstein is indeed a living being since it cannot reproduce (maybe??).

Along the same vein, right when it awakens, there's no way to know its intelligence, capacity to understand human language, speak, or possible danger to humanity. It could've stood up, walked over to him and then fell over dead again, how was he to know when the galvanization would stop working? We find out later that the monster can jump great distances, run at a speed much faster than humans, has superhuman strength, and withstand frigid temperatures well. Maybe it is even a different species at this point, and that could nullify the negligence part for Victor as creator/parent/assumed guardian.

If you want to go hail Mary, I would actually argue that in order for criminal negligence to be applicable a reasonable person in the same situation would had to have perceived that your reincarnated monster would be super strong and aggressive.

Because there is zero precedent for such an event, there is no way to know what a "reasonable person" would typically perceive, and thus the standards of criminal negligence can't be applied.

I teach both The Outsider (some may know it as The Stranger) by Albert Camus, and There There by Tommy Orange, to my senior (in Canada, Grade 12) English classes.

It was only after two years of teaching both that I picked up on a line in the first chapter in There There narrated by Edwin Black, an obese young man who has been constipated for several days. At one point, he comments, "You could either shit or not shit."

I immediately grabbed a copy of The Outsider and turned to a few pages before the end of Chapter 6 in Part I, in which Meursault muses (with a gun in his pocket), "I realized at that point that you could either shoot or not shoot."

The fact that Tommy Orange is very well-read, and his character, Edwin, has a M.A. in Comparative Literature, leads me to think it is not a coincidence.

For point two, I would say that it is not a capable human adult and is under your care. You're as responsible for its actions as you would be for yout child's or those of a pet of yours

For point one, letting the monster escape is itself negligence

I'd personally try to plead insanity

JK Rowling did this as well, only in that case it was dogshit.

The Regulators might be my favorite Stephen King book. It's definitely my favorite "deep cut."

Personal conduct

Please use a civil tone and assume good faith when entering a conversation.

[removed]

No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment once you've made the edit, to have your comment reinstated.

Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this:

>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<

Click to reveal spoiler.

>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<

To this day, I do not believe I would understand the subtext of Hills like White Elephants without being told what it was. I'm not sure if it's a changing of the times sort of thing. Maybe.

But god damn is the actual meaning of what's going on buried in there in a way that the whole conversation is very confusing until you know about the part that isn't being said.

It wasn't really strange, but one slow rainy night, I found a copy of Crime and Punishment in the break room at a place where I worked overnights when I was in my early 20s. I had always thought of that book as a big hard classic, but I was bored and started reading it. It was so good! That really started my love for classics as I hadn't read anything outside of school assignments in a while at that point. I never found out whose book it was (small workplace), and I left it in the break room for the next person.