Friday, January 6, 2017

Episode One: The Phantom Kimness - A One Act Sci-Fi Play

SCENE:  A small Y-Wing transport ship flies toward a Space Craft Base.  [INTERIOR] A human inside a healing Bacta tank is awakened by associate droids.

DROID:  Lord DeGuerin, Admiral Schneider has arrived.

DEGUERIN:  Send him in, Jim.

The DROID retreats through the doorway, as ADMIRAL SCHNEIDER enters, and kneels.

SCHNEIDER:  Lord Vade . . .

DEGUERIN:  DeGuerin.  It's Lord DeGuerin.  This blog doesn't have the money to pay royalty fees.

SCHNEIDER:  Oops.  Sorry.  Lord DeGuerin.

DEGUERIN:  Rise, Admiral Stanley.

SCHNEIDER:  You wanted to see me, your worship?

DEGUERIN:  Yes.  You've been making some statements to Jar Jar . . .

SCHNEIDER:  Binks?

DEGUERIN:  No, Rogers.  With the Chronicle.

SCHNEIDER:  I think his name is Brian.

DEGUERIN:  Whatever.  Anyway,  you've been making statements about the Temple case.

SCHNEIDER:  Yes!  I thought with Empress Ogg finally taking over . . .

DEGUERIN:  Silence!!

SCHNEIDER:  Yes, my lord.

DEGUERIN:  You made a lot of statements to Jar Jar.

SCHNEIDER:  Brian.

DEGUERIN:  Whatever.  You made a lot of statements to the Houston Chronicle about Empress Ogg's plans regarding the Temple case.

SCHNEIDER:  Yeah, I basically told them how she was going to spend the next couple of months acting like she was really thinking hard about what to do and then dismiss it.

DEGUERIN:  Fool, what part of "Phantom" in Phantom Menace do you not get?

SCHNEIDER:  I don't understand.

DEGUERIN:  It is supposed to be a secret, you imbecile.

SCHNEIDER:  It is?  I thought when she hired Clappart and Denholm that we were all totally out in the open . . .

DEGUERIN:  Silence!

SCHNEIDER:  Sorry!

DEGUERIN:  Empress Ogg does not wish to reveal herself to the Je --

SCHNEIDER [Interupting]:  . . .  General public (remember licensing).

DEGUERIN:  Oh.  Thank you.  Yes, General public.  She does not wish to reveal her plans to the general public yet, or there may be dissent.

SCHNEIDER:  Dissent?  Why would there be dissent?  Why would anyone fail to support the Empress if she were to dismiss the Temple case?

DEGUERIN:  Apparently, there are some fools who believe his case should be retried.

SCHNEIDER:  Have we not vilified Siegler enough?

DEGUERIN:  Of course we have.

SCHNEIDER:  What about the alternative theory of pinning it on the disgruntled high school children?

DEGUERIN:  That was a more foolish idea than adding Ewoks to Return of the Jedi.

SCHNEIDER:  But we had General Gotro add Finding 37 . . .

DEGUERIN:  And she got caught.  That was foolish.

SCHNEIDER:  I told her not to do it.

DEGUERIN:  I thought you said it was an accident.

SCHNEIDER:  Whatever.  Bygones.

DEGUERIN:  The fact of the matter is that we must continue to operate in complete secrecy.  No one can know what we are doing on the Temple case.

SCHNEIDER:  I'm pretty sure everyone knows at this point.

DEGUERIN:  Silence!  We have the time to make this all go away after we are done.

SCHNEIDER:  But the Empress said in her campaign ads that she was here for the victims . . .

DEGUERIN:  She said she would never jail a rape victim.

SCHNEIDER:  That's what I mean.

DEGUERIN:  This isn't that type of case.

SCHNEIDER:  Oh.  But what about other victims?

DEGUERIN:  We've made the phone number for Victim Witness unlisted.  It will be another three and a half years until the next election . . .

SCHNEIDER:  Wait, I forgot that she has to run for re-election.

DEGUERIN:  It's okay.  So has she.

7 comments:

Luci Davidson said...

That's funny Murray and so true!

Anonymous said...

Well done Mr. Newman

Anonymous said...

As well written and sadly funny as this piece is how tragic that our elected DA can even consider not having the Atty. General's office re-try the Temple murder.

If Temple is as innocent as he claims then what is the harm in assuring that his murdered wife and child have justice?

Jason Truitt said...

"If Temple is as innocent as he claims then what is the harm in assuring that his murdered wife and child have justice?"

What the Hell kind of logic is that? "If you're not guilty, what harm will trying you again with a special prosecutor do?"

Are you ^$#&%$#& kidding?

I don't have a dog in this hunt, but that is one of the most pro-state, anti-civil liberties things anyone has ever said on this blog. And that's saying something.

Anonymous said...

Jason,

There was never a finding of actual innocence; so your "logic" is quite befuddling indeed.

Are you suggesting that absent a confession there is no point in ever retrying a murder case?

At the end of the day seeking justice ought to be the end game for any prosecutor?

VMI

Jason Truitt said...

I never said there was a finding of logic--I quoted another poster. You know, that sentence between the " and the " ?

If you need more unbefuddling, please let me know.

Jason Truitt said...

DAMNIT--"finding of innocence."

Come on Murray, how about a little editing.