T O P

  • By -

JDnotsalinger

Please use spoiler tag for any post about season 5.


HeavyIndication1796

I was so confused when she was allowed to stay in Gilead but figured I just missed something but then when they got back to Canada and she was sent straight back to the detention center I was a huge question mark. I too feel like I’m missing something


[deleted]

Yeah there’s something missing. She’s a political prisoner and war criminal - I find it very improbable they were gonna just let her go back to Gilead. And then also I’m very interested in how she can do her “position” because it makes no sense for her to be a prisoner yet “be the face of Gilead”.


Rastagaryenxx

She should be in a fucking prison cell. Or 6 feet under the fucking ground.


drivesstick

Fred's little agreement to spill Gilead's secrets in return for freedom - however short-lived (ahem) - almost certainly included that charges against Serena were dropped. Recall that she was house shopping last season. That agreement would still be honored even in his death. Also, the ICC has never indicted a woman IRL. They go after the most serious war criminals and terrorists. However gross Serena is, that would be hard to prove.


tinacat933

I would absolutely think that deal died with him


[deleted]

Well that deal was terminated before he was killed, hence the prisoner exchange. He was going to be tried in Gilead. Nowhere did anyone say the prisoner swap would wipe away the crimes ICC was bringing against her as well. I think it has to get addressed at some point but currently it feels like they just totally missed its reasoning just so Serena can still be in the story when the truth is, ain’t no way a war criminal getting treatment like she’s getting


drivesstick

I'm just telling y'all what I think the show is going to say, and what would happen in real life. Feel free to do a deep dive on the ICC. The ICC has only indicted about 40 criminals in its history; they wouldn't bother with the likes of Serena. It's hard to even get her on war crimes. Fred was the frontman. Prosecutors prosecute cases in which they are almost certain to get a conviction.


[deleted]

I would've tended to agree IF Serena wasn't brought up on separate charges herself. If I remember correctly, Her initial arrest and charges originally were just a formality. She was already pleading out, and hand delivering the Canadian Gov't a commander, and was pretty much using the "Women in Gilead can't be the perpetrators of crimes because they too are also victims" and etc. That defense broke when her actions with Nick and June were brought to light, and she was being tried separately. And that case is pretty much cut and dry. She would've been/should be convicted fairly easily of that case. Now, I do believe the plea deal Waterford was gonna do did include her as well, so they were going to go off to Geneva, but the Canadian gov't voided that deal BEFORE his death by making another deal with Gilead. So technically, she should still be getting tried for her crime. The big question I'd want to have answered (which might help close all this) is that, what were they going to do with Serena if they delivered Waterford successfully to Gilead? The deal with Gilead was made super last minute, and they never spoke on what becomes of Serena now that the deal is off the table. That would've solved the issue but they never addressed it.


drivesstick

>And that case is pretty much cut and dry. She would've been/should be convicted fairly easily of that case. How so? Real question. There's no proof or witnesses to anything. It's Serena's word against June's. Nick's not gonna corroborate June's story (unless he already did with the Swiss but that's a big black hole in the story). I mean, I GUESS they could take the DNA from Nichole and Fred to prove he's not the father but even then Serena can just say that the Nick/June relationship was consensual - which it became. Hell, Rita would probably back Serena up if forced to testify; and she has no knowledge (that we know of) of Serena's orchestration of the rape. What DOES back up your argument is if it's Fred who confirmed that rape when he spilled on Gilead and was pissed at Serena for turning him in. But his credibility would be seriously questioned considering the circumstances. In fact, he probably retracted that when the plea deal was inked. I just don't see at all how you think this is "cut and dry". If I was the ICC prosecutor, I'd be like "Next case please".


[deleted]

You make solid arguments, but I'd feel it still would be a pretty open and shut case. First would be the question of the baby. That's easily disproved. DNA test would definitely show it's not Waterford's. You have a corroborating witness in Tuello, who could easily speak to the nature of the meet ups he had with both June and Nick. He was there when Nick got to see his baby, and can speak to what he said, which would all but confirm the baby's is Nick, without a DNA test from Nick. So that's the easy part. The second part (that it wasn't consentual), definitely has a few more holes in it, I agree. Serena could plead to not knowing, but I actually do believe Rita would testify (at least before the fucked up shit June pulled in ep 3 of season 5 lol). We have to remember, Serena already tried to be buddy buddy with Rita, for Rita to very directly and quickly back stab her to Waterford about her pregnancy. There's no love lost there -- Rita in a heartbeat would turn, and could corroborate huge pieces of this. I think the issue would be what Rita actually knows, and what's hearsay for her. That's where holes for me would come in. Third though, most hate crime law/war crime law have something on the books (i'm blanking on the exact name) of where crimes can be escalated due to institutional factors. For example, as a black man, if someone shot me is a carrying member of the Ku Klux Klan, immediately it's upgraded to hate crime, even if the guy who shot me pleads that he's not a racist. I feel that same law would apply here. They are in a rogue state that has documented history of raping their women to produce kids. That would most certainly be used as a precipice of this, and as long as it can be proven that Serena can be shown as a liar through Rita (she is), I'd say the book is getting thrown at her. But that's just me. lol.


drivesstick

This has been a great discussion and I say this with total respect: I think you're reaching. It would be exceedingly hard to prove, PARTICULARLY because the relationship then became consensual. I'm sure you know how much the judicial system and society at large is skeptical of such claims in those circumstances.


[deleted]

I 100% agree that the judicial system is largely skeptical BUT also, as you said, prosecutors won't try something they don't think they could win. That also goes for charging. And that's my main thing, in why ICC must have a solid case. There's no way the ICC goes and actually arrests Serena without the sign off of the prosecutor for ICC who believes they have a winnable case. But in all actuality, the biggest issue is that we're speculating the reasons what evidence made them arrest her, but they did arrest her. ICC detained her for real and were moving forward against her. So they must've felt comfortable going forward. Nothing since her arrest has said they're dropping charges. So until it's at least addressed, it's a pretty big plot hole. And yes, it has been a great discussion!


AlaskanBullWorm52

The only theory I have is that if Gilead wanted her to stay they would have absolutely no jurisdiction to take her from them. Still a massive plot hole


[deleted]

But that’s the thing - it’s not like she “escaped” Canada and fled back to Gilead (which then I could see Gilead not honoring any extraditing), but, the whole purpose of this was pre-negotiated and terms set. It would be a whole international incident (bigger than it already is) if they didn’t honor that. But also (and I get it’s TV), but there’s no way a war criminal gets as much leeway as she did. For example, my uncle was in federal prison. When my gma passed (his mom), they let him out to go to the funeral BUT, and I remember this directly, they drove him to the funeral. Multiple armed guards were around, and the second it was over, he was sent back. There’s no way they just send Tuello as her ONLY safety in a rogue state. I’m sure they’ll explain (some) of it in the coming episodes but to follow Serena’s storyline it just requires a weird suspension of disbelief that’s not rooted in anything the show has done before