Padme Amidala: an accessory to murder

An issue that has been very much ?glossed-over? in Attack of the Clones was Padme Amidala becoming an accessory to murder.

Anakin confesses to her that he killed men, women and children (the Sandpeople) and Padme never lets anyone else know about it. By legal definition, a person is an accessory to murder by simply failing to report the crime to the proper authority; the Jedi Council in Padme?s case.

Padme?s crime is further compounded when, in Revenge of the Sith, she acts shocked and goes into denial when Obi-Wan tells her that Anakin killed younglings?despite the very fact that years earlier Anakin had confessed about killing children.

It could be inferred that Padme herself is partially responsible for the killings of the younglings as she did not inform the Council of Anakin?s killings of the Sandpeople. Had she done so, Anakin would have been kicked out of the Jedi Order and the future events: Anakin going to the Dark Side, Anakin killing younglings, Anakin becoming Darth Vader may never have occurred. At the very least, Padme would have absolved herself of responsibility.

Padme has long been made out to be a virtuous, strong-willed, righteous do-gooder in the Star Wars saga, but I believe it?s shamefully disingenuous to ignore the fact that she was also an accessory to murder.

 

Anakin is a Jedi. Jedi kill. Jedi execute. Jedi accidentally kill, sometimes. Anakin might have been acting un-Jedilike, but he was still a Jedi.

No one knows how the Republic legal system covers that. Tuskens were attacking people, kiidnapping people, murdering people and torturing people, after all. And again, Anakin was a Jedi.

To say Padme Amidala was an accessory to murder, considering who knows what the Republic would have thought of that if people had known, is far-fetched at best.

 

Technically, by US Law, Padme would have been an accessory to murder and she would serve time for it if a situation similar to this occurred in the real world. Just knowing about a murder without telling the "authorities" implicates you and gives you guaranteed jail time. I was just discussing the lack of every law being mirrored into the "Star Wars" universe, but murder seems to be cut and dry. It is true that Jedi kill, but it is against the Code for a Jedi to kill haphazardly and with emotion. Anakin was a member of the peacekeepers of the galaxy, much like the police do in the real world; if a cop kills a person, it will be investigated, but it is unlikely that Anakin would've be sentenced for it because, A.) the murders didn't happen on a Republic planet, and B.) the Jedi do have a license to kill and wouldn't be sentenced in the same way that another citizen would, kind of like a Court Marshall. More likely, he'd be punished by the Council, maybe even kicked out of the Order, but Padme would be sentenced just like anyone else in all probability.

 

PADME : I can't believe there is still slavery in the galaxy. The Republic's
anti-slavery laws...
SHMI : The Republic doesn't exist out here...we must survive on our own.


No jurisdiction on Tatooine anyway. What do you want Padme to do, turn Anakin over to the Hutts ??

 

Several great points have been made about the law of the Republic, the Star Wars Galaxy vs. the law of the United States, the Planet Earth, etc.

However, let?s crystallize the argument: the killing of children is never acceptable under any law anywhere. Let?s also understand that Anakin is mandated to his Jedi duties under the Jedi Code. Certainly, the Jedi Code would never condone the killing of children no matter where Anakin was: in the Republic/out of the Republic/anywhere.

Padme as a Galactic Senataor is well aware of the laws of the Republic and certainly realizes that Anakin?s killing of children goes against the Jedi Code not to mention going against pure morality. Padme is also a champion of children having assisted refugee kids to escape a dying planet (AOTC cut scenes). The killing of children would go against every fiber of Padme?s being.

Thus, when Anakin confesses to killing children and Padme informs not a single authority (the Jedi Order most specifically) about his crime, she becomes an accessory to the crime. This is why Anakin?s future killing of younglings becomes partially Padme?s responsibility as she may have prevented it years earlier.

 

As far as I see it, Padme finds herself in the position of a soldier's wife. She knows her hubby has committed atrocities and is witness to the emotional fallout, but because she sees good in him, she aims to keep his wrongdoings a secret while hoping to exorcise his demons through love.

As is often the case in real life, her efforts fail miserably.

 

Yeah, it's not quite so cut and dry as saying that Padme is an "accessory to murder."

Unless, of course, the Tusken women are also "accessories to murder" because they allowed their men to torture Shmi to death on their property without trying to stop them. Anakin should not have killed the Tusken children and most likely should not have killed the women either (unless you believe that being an accessory to murder warrants the death penalty), however, as far as I'm concerned, his slaughter of the men was purely self defense.

The slaughter of the Younglings is on another level entirely, however, Padme is an "accessory to murder"...how exactly? Because Obi-Wan told her about it and she didn't say anything? What about Obi-Wan and Yoda? Are they "accessories to murder" as well since they actually saw the footage and the dead Padawans and didn't tell anyone? The murders of the Younglings came about because Anakin was stupid enough to believe Palpatine when he said that slaughtering everyone in the Temple would give him enough power to save Padme.

Another point on the Tusken slaughter before anyone argues that Anakin had no right to kill the Tusken men: as someone has pointed out already, the Republic does not exist on Tatooine. What was Anakin going to do? Report the Tuskens to the Hutts? The Tuskens had not only kidnapped Shmi and tortured her over a period of a month, but they had also murdered 26 farmers who went to rescue Shmi, and cut off Cliegg's leg. I don't have one iota of sympathy for the Tusken men. And again, why accuse Padme of being an "accessory to murder" but not the Tusken women?

I think Padme should have encouraged Anakin to at least tell Obi-Wan what happened, if not the Jedi Council. And that encouragement should have come later, not in the Lars garage right after Shmi died. However, I don't think that not doing so makes her an "accessory to murder," simply because I don't see a connection between the deaths of the Tuskens and the deaths of the Younglings.

 

That does not matter. In real life, if an individual, being a citizen of a certain country, commits murder in another country then they will be held by their own until they are expedited to the other country for judgment. In the "Star Wars" galaxy, even if there is no government on Tatooine, they are still bound by the laws of their own land and would more than likely be punished by them.

In real life, it is a simple thing. What you guys are saying about her not necessarily being an accessory are common arguments in court cases. She does know the law and, if she doesn't tell someone or at least convince Anakin to tell someone, the case against her would be clear. The point about the wives of Tusken Raiders being accessories doesn't apply here because, as I said, one is bound by their own governments. As Puuduu noted, there is no government on Tatooine. I'm sure that if the Raider responsible for a murder was somehow captured then he would be judged under the laws of the planet which the victim is from, but that would be a nowhere game with the Tuskens so hard to tell apart and so hard to find without getting slaughtered. If both the defendant and prosecution are from Tatooine, there is no trial to be had. One could take it up with the Hutts to seek out revenge, but Jabba would probably eat you if you couldn't pay him off. Accessories are under the same jurisdiction, local or foreign, as the murderer himself.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

 

Using that argument, Anakin would be tried either by the laws of the Jedi, which he probably should have been, or the laws of Tatooine--and again, what laws?

If Padme were tried by the laws of Naboo, I'm pretty sure the self-defense argument would come into play because of the points that both of us noted. The Tuskens kidnapped and murdered Anakin's mother and slaughtered 26 farmers who tried to rescue her. Anakin went into the camp to get her, and was attacked by the Tusken men. He was supposed to do...what exactly? I'll agree that he could have and should have only killed the men, and could be tried for murder of the women and children. But I still think it's a stretch to call Padme an "accessory."

 

So then, what I'm reading is . . . when all is said and done, Padme ultimately deserves to die!

 

Slowburn makes a very good point. The difference between the law of the Republic and the law (or lack of law) on Tatooine is irrelevant. You cannot make the argument that being an accessory to murder is crime in the Republic but not a crime if you're outside the Republic. Just as you could never make an argument that killing children is murder in the Republic but not murder outside of the Republic.

Futhermore, this really has nothing to do with the wives of the Sandpeople also being accessories to murder. I'm making the argument that Padme Amidala, Galactic Senator, former Queen of Naboo, champion of the rights of the people of the Republic commits a crime: accessory to murder when she does not report Anakin's killings of the Sandpeople. You can make a stretch and say Anakin was justified in killing the Tusken men, and perhaps the women as well. But you cannot justify his killing of the children. And the reason this ties into the murders of the younglings in ROTS is that had Padme reported Anakin's killing in AOTC, the future deaths of the younglings may have been prevented.

 

Padmé's not a rat.

--MissPadme

 

It's a stretch to say that Anakin was justified in killing the Tusken men? Really??? After they had tortured his mother to death, murdered 26 farmers who came to rescue her, and cut off his stepfather's leg...and knowing that Tatooine has no justice system and if Anakin had not done what he did, the Tuskens would have continued to kidnap, torture and murder people? It's a "stretch" to say that he was justified in killing them?

And it has everything to do with the wives of the Sandpeople being accessories to murder, unless you are also making the argument that it was perfectly OK for the Sandpeople to murder Shmi and those 26 farmers, and therefore only Padme should be condemned for, as MissPadme said, not being a rat, but it was perfectly OK for the Tusken women to not be rats.

 

If you had read my full argument, you would know that I agreed that there are no laws on Tatooine and Anakin IS bound by the laws of the Republic. The laws of Naboo are the laws of the Republic, being a Republic planet. I'm sure representatives from Naboo would be present in the hearing, but the prosecution would still be by the Republic. Anakin may well have the argument that it was self defense, and if he were aquitted of the charges then none would be pressed against Padme. There's no stretch, just concrete law.

Now, when it comes to the issue of personal opinion, I think Anakin every right to kill the men of the camp. I can't say I wouldn't go into a fit of range if I found my step-mother that way. The men should have been the only ones killed, we're in agreement about that. The children and women may be of the same tribe, but they (as far as we know) did not torture Shmi. If it were up to me, I wouldn't sentence Padme for just knowing about the murders at all, I'm merely conveying a look on the situation from a legal standpoint. I am 100% sure that she would be convicted in a Republic court regardless of how I feel about it.

 

The children and women may be of the same tribe, but they (as far as we know) did not torture Shmi.
But we dont know that they didnt either. The women may have been with the men when they stole Shmi and the little kids could have been the ones that finished off the farmers after they were knocked to the ground by the Tusken men and women. Like Clieg said, theyre more like mindless monsters. Anakin dealt with the mindless monsters by becoming a mindless monster, fighting fire with fire.

 

would you report your mate or boyfriend if he killed some human/animal things that slaughter for fun? id be like /hi5 lol

 

Some of the arguments are silly like those that attempt to reduce the Sandpeople to mindless monsters. That's Clieg Lars point of view. I'd like to hear the Sandpeople's point of view. Perhaps the moisture farmers were intruding on sacred burial grounds, perhaps the moisture farmers killed some Sandpeople in other attacks... Have we heard the Sandpeople's side of the story? That's why I loved the game KOTOR: you actually did hear the Sandpeople's perspective.

Other arguments that attempt to show Anakin's killing of the Sandpeople as justifiable also hold no water. If he was justified in killing them, then why does he keep it a secret from the Jedi Order? Why doesn't he just tell the Jedi Order about what happened if he's so justified in killing them? If he did no wrong, then why hide it? Why doesn't Padme tell anyone else about it? Why does she keep it a secret?

It's a secret between Anakin and Padme because it was wrong - it was murder. Plain and simple.

 

The Sandpeople shot at pod-racers, attack, torture and kidnap people. In SW, that's being evil.

That doesn't justify killing them of course.

We haven't heard the point of view of the Empire either lol.

 

Good point.

And if "murder is murder, plain and simple," then it shouldn't matter whether Shmi was intruding on sacred burial grounds or not. The Sandpeople murdered her. Plain and simple.

Again I would have to ask, why is it OK for the Tusken men to murder Shmi, but not OK for Anakin to retaliate against the Tusken men?

As far as Anakin "keeping it a secret" from the Jedi Order "because it was unacceptable," we don't know that that's exactly how it happened. The Jedi were not around when Anakin confessed to Padme. It would be interesting to speculate how the conversation might have gone if Obi-Wan had been waiting for him in that garage instead of Padme. I would venture to say that it would not have gone that much differently. And if Anakin were so sure he would be prosecuted for defending himself, why would he have told Padme, knowing that she is a Senator? Why would have have told Palpatine, thinking at the time that he was not only a decent man but also the Chancellor of the Republic? If Anakin thought he would be prosecuted under Republic laws, telling the Chancellor of the Republic about it would be dangerous.

Make the argument if you want that the Tuskens were perfectly justified in kidnapping Shmi and that Anakin is just a spoiled brat and Padme an enabler, but don't make the argument that this issue is "plain and simple" without also proving these points. In order for this issue to be "plain and simple," you need to make the argument that the Sandpeople were justified in committing murder but Anakin had no right to self-defense. Nothing "plain and simple" about that.

 

Just to play devil's advocate for a second...what does Padme know for sure, really? All she has is a "confession" by a clearly emotionally distraught 18 year old. How can she know that Anakin is telling the truth, rather than the ramblings of a kid who discovered his mother's body? She wasn't at the Tusken village, she has no direct evidence that Anakin actually did what he says he did. If she had been there with him, clearly, she would be an accomplice. But, she was at the Lars homestead when all of this went down. She has no first hand knowledge about any crimes being committed, just a tale told after the fact. She doesn't really know that Anakin did anything at all. Further, there would be no way to prove that Anakin confessed to her in court, as it wasn't being recorded. Lets assume she turns him in...if Anakin denies he made any kind of confession to her, what proof does she have otherwise? It would be his word vs. her word. In a US court of law, Anakin's confession to Padme is meaningless, because it was completely unprovable.

Now, with that being said, I agree that she would qualify as being an accessory after the fact. I just brought out the counter argument to demonstrate that it might not be so cut and dry. I was just playing defense lawyer for a minute.

 

All of this is moot on Padme's end, sad to say.
Tatooine was in the Outer Rim, and the Republic had no jurisdiction there.
Senators, smugglers and slimy-villains all get the same treatment. Everything is fair game in the Outer Rim and especially on Tatooine. Just ask Greedo, or WalrusMan. Or Watto even, if you prefer Infinities.


Just like the movie "Shooter", Danny Glove-walker skated because his genocide-crimes were committed in another country.

Now, the Jedi might have had something to say to one of their own, but the Republic? Nothing. And Padme isn't an accessory to anything. She just listened to an emo-Jedi spout off about things she had no control over. Technically, he protected her by eliminating them as a threat to her... I know its a stretch, but its true from a certain POV. They killed his mother, after all. So the argument does have some validity... And really, what was she going to do to the man that saves her life at the end, rat him out? After telling him she loved him? Their love-story wasn't pretty; not by a longshot, but it sure was complicated.

Doesn't make it right, but it is, what it is....

 

That's the first thing that came to my mind as well. I doubt Tatooine has an extradition treaty, either.

We're talking about a different planet. Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of species of animals on earth where the adults (usually males) kill their young. That's the law of nature.

I'm sure you don't know all the rules that the Tuskens live by. And are you saying the Hutts, the de-facto law on Tatooine at that time, would have had a serious problem with Anakin's actions?

But she wasn't in the Republic. Here's the problem with holding someone accountable to laws of another region: If I go to Germany and drive 100 miles per hour on the Autobahn, can I be arrested for speeding when I get back to America?

Now, speeding isn't exactly the same as murdering children, but again, how can you hold someone accountable for acts that occurred outside of your jurisdiction?

What if it were permissable under Tusken law? I mean, you do realize you are arguing this on a planet where the Hutts, the de facto rulers of Tatooine, enjoy dropping pretty girls into rancor pits, right?

Yes, and it was obviously a expectation of the race as well. Hell, I didn't seen Sebulba being concerned about whether or not his actions led to the death of fellow racers, did you? "Murder" obviously doesn't carry the same connotation on Tatooine that it does here. Mos Eisley was described as the most wretched hive of scum and villainy, and Mos Espa wasn't much better. Did Han looked concerned about being arrested after killing Greedo in cold blood? (Lucas' own words, and the reason for the dreaded "Han-shoots-second" change)

And I wonder how many Republic-law-cheerleaders here would be so supportive of the rules of the subsequent regime? I'm guessing all of you were disgusted by the acts of the rebels against the establishment? How DARE they go against the rule of law!

Laws are just agreements of mutual understanding in regards to expected behavior, and they are subject to change as the folks who make and enforce them change.

 

On the plus side, we dont know how many untold lives were saved in the future because of the Tuskens being scared off by Anakins actions that night.

From Wookiepedia:
"Anakin Skywalker became a legend after he slaughtered a tribe of Sandpeople out of revenge for killing Shmi Skywalker Lars. He was depicted as a vengeful ghost or desert demon, and the Tuskens made ritual sacrifices to ward him off"

Tatooine justice works in mysterious ways, heh.

 

And to think, I thought only the Force worked in mysterious ways...

 

Ok anakin_girl, the Tusken women were also accessories to murder. There. Are you happy now? I never made the argument that the Sandpeople were blameless. But two wrongs don't make a right. You're trying to say that because the Sandpeople killed Shmi, Anakin now has the right to kill them. That kind of logic doesn't work with the laws of the Republic nor the Jedi Code.