Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Also, something no-one seems to have pointed out as a possible character flaw - she framed in her office an article that involved the death of a guy. Because she didn't like him, like Jonah, she took amusement from his death instead of the slightest moment for 'oh, shit, someone died? damn that sucks'. Not exactly the strongest respect for people's lives there I'm afraid.
Put me down for saying 'Wrath' is Noa's flaw.
 
On a completely separate topic -


Who wants to bet that Peter Parker was listening at the door just then?
Uncle JJJ: with great power comes great accountability
If the student's have to cheat, Noa could probably argue that the damages caused are due to being a mutant, not the cheating, and that the punishments he would have received for cheating are less severe that the ones he has suffered for being belived to be a mutant.
Additionally she could argue that making the public belive he is a mutant has presented an immenent danger to his life as people want him dead for being a mutant.

She could point out that the damages goes beyond the tennis world as he has struggled to find lawyers willing to represent him due to them believing he's a mutant.
She could argue that punishing a cheater may be just, but banning him and endangering his life for cheating is not
I never argued that if my convoluted plot happened Noa wouldn't have any counter argument. The bullshit she had to endure in the first case convinced me more than enough.
 
A rich client who wants to prove their defamer wrong to the point of humiliation rather than a settlement, the knowledge that the defamation is fundamentally incorrect, and the chance to influence case law regarding a topic with personal interest. If Nora doesn't enjoy working on this case, she's not living her life to the fullest.
 
Disgraced Judge Runs Down District Attorney
Blood on the courthouse… driveway?

In perhaps the most serendipitous example of coincidence, newly-retired Judge Philip Andrews, in his haste to leave court for the final time, fatally ran over District Attorney Louis Young earlier this afternoon—

Magneto did this, I'm almost certain. Fits with his mindset.
 
For people wondering why Jameson is being such a good dude here, well, I just laid down the thread for a subplot. I wonder who knows their Spider-Man lore well enough to figure out what has been set into motion... or possibly averted? Who knows!

Also, I finally had a chance to go and really show everybody one of Noa's major character flaws. I'm honestly a little disappointed in myself for not having made it all that evident just yet. Then again? Given how plot-development-heavy everything has been, and how much work I had to do to characterize everybody else, I figure I can let the main character's foibles slip in the short term.

And if you can put a definitive label on this character flaw, you may have an internet cookie.

What the death of on of the Stacy family?

And as for the flaw? She Sonderless. And also greedy.
 
Not very.

Any number of Mutants could have taken control of the car, any number of other mutants could have taken control of Judge Andrews or Young, a bunch of mutants that could have illusioned either so they didn't see the things that needed to be avoided. Heck, there are even some Mutants like Domino who could have altered probability so it happened.

And of course all the various powers that could be used to cause the event that I'm not thinking of.
I...think you're looking at this from the wrong angle.

Sure, it's possible to construe literally any event on Marvel Earth as something maybe some mutant or other super did. That's not actually something possible to investigate, though.

However, when one conspirator kills another conspirator, you don't need an imagined semi-omnipotent third party to create a criminal interpretation of that.
 
Huh, I wonder what Peter thinks about Noa at this point. There's a bit of dangerous, even if he's not entirely sure why at this point, and objectively he's been technically in a negative light both times she's brought him up, but he's probably smart enough to realize the first was for a good cause and the second was talking JJJ into a more reasonable position. And yes, if he was listening in at the door, well, his opinions on JJJ and Noa are very different than if he hadn't been.
 
I get that you're going for a Legally Blonde sort of thing here, but as a queer dude who is also a total mess all the time, it does make me wince a bit at the stereotyping.

From the other side of the coin, as a straight dude who puts in the effort to look put together, I also do the wincing.

And as somebody from the outside looking in, it is not as if stereotypes of all stripes aren't applied by people who should know better.
 
This is an amazing line. But I am slightly feeling like the aforementioned flaw might be 'hubris'. Nora is putting in an enormous amount of effort and money to try and totally crush this specific opposition when she could 'just' beat them and save her money and energy for other cases and expanding her fledgling firm. She's got a lot of eggs in one basket right now.

Wasn't it discussed that this case would most likely set precedent for future rulings on mutant laws.
If this case turns out in her favour then it could set a precedent that you can't just acuse someone of being a mutant without clear proof

I see it more Practically personally.

This is Nora's First Case with her new Firm and it's got a lot of scandal, drama, and Interest going on in it, all tied together with the Client giving the go ahead to be as theatric and public as possible.

Nora's betting on Winning, and with the blank check she's been written she'll be able to make a huge splash for her Firm's Reputation by pulling out all the stops and doing a double whammy of humiliating her opposition and setting down (eventual) multi-billion dollar legal precedent.

It's a lot of money to put down for one Case, especially if her Client isn't covering it, but the practical benefits in reputation, fame, and notoriety will pay dividends for the rest of Nora's career.

I wouldn't be surprised if this case firmly establishes Nora as The Dreaded in Law Circles, especially when DAs who ride dirty against her seem to keep dropping like flies :V
 
That is such a brilliantly simple way to shatter the defamatory arguments. I can't believe I hadn't thought of it, but it feels obvious in retrospect, and that's always a good sign that you've written an expert well.
 
You know the funny thing?

I am pretty sure those collage students would have done the same for a tenth of what she offered.
Oh they absolutely would. Let's be real, they're college students. Noa is massively overpaying.

But she also wants them as motivated as humanly possible... and if you dangle a particularly large prize in front of someone, with the only thing between it and them being a physical feat, what's more likely: they stop at one and say "alright, I did my best, good enough"?

Or they become filled with [DETERMINATION] to keep going, emboldened by dollar signs, the dream of telling their student loan payments to go fuck off, and being able to have the best and snazziest stuff compared to everyone else on campus?
 
The thing for Noa is that if she wins this case then it puts her law firm on the map, even if she's overpaying to do it, it's going to pay back because of the amount of other work a high profile win here get her.
 
"Why do you have such a problem with Spider-Man anyway?" I asked, somewhat expecting that my question would wind up being rhetorical.

"His face!" Jameson pulled his still-unlit cigar out of his mouth, and pointed it at me. "He won't show his face. Can't trust him!"

"And what about the Avengers' Iron Man?" I asked, drumming my fingers on the arm of the chair I sat in. "His face is obscured entirely, too, and he's never been seen without it, nor do we know who he is under the suit."

"Ah, but the difference there is he's held accountable!" Jameson crowed. "If the Iron Man fucks up, Stark has to deal with it. After all, he's the one who hired him, made his stuff. But the Spider-Man?" He scoffed. "None of that. Cause you see, it's not just the webhead's face. It's that one day, he could screw up, get people killed… and then the Spider-Man disappears, and now there's nobody left to blame."
… Ok, I gotta go off on a bit of self-indulgent tangent because I don't know how much of the comic Noa knows, or even is canon for this story, but it's all very similar and I have a shallow need to be praised for successfully googling stuff.

So for those who don't keep up with comics, there was this little plot arc for Spectacular Spider-Man back in 2017. In the issue "My dinner with Jonah", Spider-Man agrees to give Jonah an exclusive interview over dinner in his apartment. There's stuff about Peter having a secret half-sister, Jonah's long since lost the Bugle, but that's not important right now.

The big thing is that Jonah's decade long grudge, to the point he's created a villain or lethal manhunt on multiple occasions to kill Spider-Man, because Jonah thinks the only person capable of making Spider-Man accountable is himself. And he has such a blind, all-consuming vendetta… Because he got his first and second wife killed.

Joan Jameson, Wayne'd in an alley by a masked mugger after she begged Jonah not to fight back. Marla Madison, took a blow from "Spider-Slayer" Smythe mid-Spider-brawl and begged him with her dying words to not "waste any more of your life on hate".

As far as I know, the earlier jealousy over not being a successful superhero to the people himself hasn't been retconned, but the fact he's lost the person closest to him twice by a masked killer left an impact compounded by the childhood abuse.

The real bombshell of the interview was Peter Parker unmasked to Jameson, when the former realized just how broken and alone the man had become. Showed that he did have a friend in Peter, in Spider-Man. And that part about the "royalty" account isn't far from the source material: Jonah views Peter as something of a second son, even helped Peter evade SHIELD and NYPD to find the truth on Teresa Parker and the Tinkerer. They have a great dynamic the rest of the Tinkerer arc up to issue 307, even when it gets into Comic Book Wierdness.

It's a time travel causality-alien invasion-universe hopping road trip story. Weirdness!

How much of all this is tied to this story, I don't know, but it's very much a difficult spot for Noa to bring up if she does know and it has occurred. She doesn't know Jameson like she does other characters, discussing a deeply personal trauma like your wife getting shot in front of you and the culprit never getting caught isn't something she's in a position to do. Which makes his current counter arguments harder to push back against: She knows he's being irrational, under the surface. But without that outside context knowledge, she's got very little.
Also, I finally had a chance to go and really show everybody one of Noa's major character flaws. I'm honestly a little disappointed in myself for not having made it all that evident just yet. Then again? Given how plot-development-heavy everything has been, and how much work I had to do to characterize everybody else, I figure I can let the main character's foibles slip in the short term.

And if you can put a definitive label on this character flaw, you may have an internet cookie.
Hm… I think there's two types of answers that have come close, but I can't say if I can put a definitive name on it either. She's throwing around a ton of money, and is very much going for the throat of her opponent rather than just go for a surefire shot. Some combination of anger and excessive generosity….

"Vengeful Righteousness"? Jules Winfield vibes, you know? Only replace the guns with paperwork.
 
So after reading some of the reactions, I gotta say...

References aside, October didn't do an awful job? Like I'm weak for a Legally Blonde reference, but the most important thing here is context.

Bears (beefy hairy gays) weren't well-established as a subculture in the male-male queer community until the 80s - in fact, it mostly got off the ground during that time period to divorce itself from the well-kept, clean-shaven mainline subculture. It took off during the AIDS crisis, in fact.

So, a gay man being well put-together in this time period - the 80s, which I am sure is going to have at least one reference to said crisis - just marks him as part of the former subculture.

Further, the man is gay and European - and from the description, white. As a white gay athlete, he falls into a specific mold, the sort of twunk/hunk ideal that a lot of the male-male community held/holds on a pedestal. Setting aside body image and those issues in the community, the sterotype exists because it was considered desirable in those circles.

On another note, this image was ubiquitous enough that in '94 the term 'metrosexual' was coined because the trend of straight/heterosexual men adopting that level of self-maintenance. Like, it was shorthand for 'wow, you're looking pretty clean - you sure you're just into chicks?'

So yes, while today in the year 2022 such a portrayal is stereotypical and can be interpreted as a poor jab for a reference, if one considers the time period and culture being written in it's actually decently true-to-life.

/rant

Sources: A bit of quick googling and a couple queer history classes back in college.
 
Mh! How much does Noa actually know about this sport?
Would she recognize if one of the college students made a shot by actually cheating? And what if said student said in court he cheated to make that shot?
Though this might be my brain on Ace Attorney.

In short, Noa is overconfident.
Keep in mind, the students will be working in pairs, 1 making the shot and 1 filming, so both would need to be in on any cheating.

Which might make it easier to cheat if they work together, admittedly.

But as long as the shots _are_ possible, they can make money while practicing their skills.
 
Oh they absolutely would. Let's be real, they're college students. Noa is massively overpaying.

But she also wants them as motivated as humanly possible... and if you dangle a particularly large prize in front of someone, with the only thing between it and them being a physical feat, what's more likely: they stop at one and say "alright, I did my best, good enough"?

Or they become filled with [DETERMINATION] to keep going, emboldened by dollar signs, the dream of telling their student loan payments to go fuck off, and being able to have the best and snazziest stuff compared to everyone else on campus?
*Stops and thinks about it for a moment*

Did she remember to have them sign a release of liability form so they can't sue her if they get injured trying to replicate the shots?
 
Hmh I am wondering where she would get up to a million in money for the payouts.

(Also I am wondering if we ever get a look back at her line about how she killed her old life , or if that has been retconned)
 
Hmh I am wondering where she would get up to a million in money for the payouts.

(Also I am wondering if we ever get a look back at her line about how she killed her old life , or if that has been retconned)
There's a particular point, the aftermath of the case after this one, that I want to get to before we start looking at the past. It's a very good way to sort of "cap off" that part of the story, and gives a good opportunity to tie off loose ends.

Going by my estimates… I'd say it should be around chapter 22-25 or so where I get that chance.
 
Back
Top