Welsey's hands move position slightly between shots when Tom-- er, Locarno visits him and Wes tells him that Picard knows the full strength.

I always amazed at the doorknobs in the cadets' quarters at Starfleet Academy.

Suppose Nova Squadron was actually able to pull off their stunt at graduation. Was everyone supposed to be so awed by this spectacular display that they would forget that this was an illegal and highly dangerous maneuver? And would any captain want a hot-headed showoff like Locarno to serve on his ship?

The answer? Probably. Starfleet does seem to have a rule that the results do justify the methods. There are more examples of this than can be believed sometimes.

Yeah, Bela, just watch DS9.

Sisko felt sorry for the Cardassians for some reason and decided to tell them about the coming Klingon invasion, nearly destroying useful long term allies for no reason at all. He was not punished because their attack on the station merely almost succeeded.

Peter.

Is this Locarno and Tom Paris supposed to be one and the same person? If not, why not? How difficult would it be just to have worked this into Tom's character?

And if so, how come the name is different? Did he change it after leaving the Academy - not likely cos his dad (supposedly an Admiral) is called Paris too. The only explaination could be that he changed his name before going into the Academy so as not to be "under the shadow" and changed it back once he left.

They are different characters. It would have been simple to make Tom Paris into Locarno but for whatever reason TPTB decided to have Tom as a new character.

The probable reason is that Locarno never confessed of his own accord, and pushed the cover up forward, even when Wesley wanted to come clean. Paris, on the other hand, as he told Harry in Caretaker, falsified the report of the flight accident that killed 3 other officers, and would've gotten away with it, but his conscience couldn't take it, so he confessed, demonstrating that he was a conflicted guy who wanted to do the right thing, and struggled to do so, whereas Nick was not remorseful or penitent about his actions, and therefore, made a less than honorable character.

Now for the (non-trek/real world) reason. They would have had to pay royalties to the writer of "The First Duty" for every episode Nick Locarno appeared in. This has been discussed elsewhere.

Equating the cadet's actions to those of captains who have broken the rules at various times is preposterous. First of all, the cadets didn't do what they did because their backs were to the wall, and they were in a no-win crisis situation involving lives at risk where they had to make a difficult choice, as did Picard in Justice, Pen Pals, and Homeward, etc. They ELECTED to do what they did for personal glory, not to save lives.
Second, whatever Kirk or Picard or Sisko did, they did not cover up those acts. Even if it were decided by Starfleet Command that their actions were wrong, they all had a good faith belief that their actions were the correct ones, and all them accurately document their actions in their logs for review by Starfleet, as seen in episodes like Coming of Age(TNG), The Drumhead(TNG), and Trials and Tribble-ations(DS9). No such thing can be said for the cadets.

As for Peter's irrational comments, let's clarify a couple of things, shall we? First, Cardassia had fairly good relations with the Federation by the end of DS9's third season, not just the Klingons. A treaty existed between the Cardis and the Federation since a year before The Wounded(TNG), and the Cardis also signed one with Bajor in Life Support(DS9). Relations seemed pretty good by the end of Explorers(DS9).
Second, saying the Sisko nearly destroyed long-term allies, or that he did what he did cuz he "felt sorry" for the Cardis is silly, not only because had he not did what he did, another ally would've simply been destroyed instead, but also because it absolves the Klingons of all guilt. The Feds did what they did not simply because the invasion of Cardassia was wrong, but because of what it represented, a shift back towards the old ways for the Klingons, where they sought to expand their empire through conquest. This was made quite clear in the episode by the fact that Cardassia was not their only target. Martok's son and his friends started trouble on DS9, presuming to interrogate its citizens, and Gowron even ordered Colonel Kaybok to stop ships in Bajoran space. The Feds had to make it clear to the Empire that they would not be pushed, or allow others in the A-Quad to be pushed around.

Spockania, as for your assertion that Starfleet has a rule that results justify the methods, again, I would point out that rule-bending may be justified in the eyes of SF if it has the effect of saving lives, preserving the peace, maintaining territories, bringing criminals to justice, etc., and in general, things that benefit the interests of the Federation, and stability in the A-Quad. I fail to see where exactly the "results" would've been in a dangerous shuttle maneuver that serves only the cadet's personal glory.

Obviously, there are times when the captains do make some questionable decisions, particularly Janeway, but it should be pointed out that these are usually slip-ups on the part of the writer, who may not think it through when writing some of these things, like Kirk's leaving certain artifacts behind on Sigma Iotia at the end of A Piece of the Action(TOS), or Janeway giving the Hirogen holotechnology at the end of The Killing Game part II(VOY). In these cases, the writers, for whatever reason, seem genuinely unaware of these plot deficiencies. In The First Duty, they are obviously depicting the cadets' actions with the awareness that their actions were wrong. It would be hypocrisy if the writers showed both main characters and the cadets breaking important rules for the same reasons, and not dealing with them identically, but when they do with the captains, it is usually for good internal reasons, in situations different from that of the cadets', or for external bad writing.

On page 334 of the NextGen Guide, Phil wondered why the doors "erp" when they are human powered. This is a college, with horny college students, the "erp" tells the kids to pull their pants up. (Wouldn't that have made a great scene? Mom and Captain Picard walk in and there is a naked women under the covers. Or better yet, if Robin Lefler walked in. "I can explain. I'm taking Figure Drawing and she agreed to pose.")

There is mention of hitting the emergency transporter and later Wes says that he managed to activate his escape transporter. If the purpose of these things is to save lives, then why does it have to be manually operated? Isn't that like having an air bag in a car that must be blown up by the driver before a crash?

Picard says the First Duty is to the Truth! If that is true, then why did Picard allow the Paxans to mess around with the crew's memories in Clues?

Well, the law has certainly changed in 400 years. Let's say that five present day college students were performing a stunt that resulted in the death of one of them, what would be the response? I think the District Attorney would probably file criminal charges against the survivors and the family of the dead student would probably file civil charges against them, but in the more enlightened 24th century we learn that the proper course of action is to expel one of the students and make the other three take the year over. Oh, what a cruel and unusual system of punishment the 24th century chooses to use. Does 24th century law have no humanity?

"Isn't that like having an air bag in a car that must be blown up by the driver before a crash?"

-- We're talking about an escape mechanism, not a safety feature. Would you want an ejector seat that could be automatically activated when your craft senses danger?

I think the District Attorney would probably file criminal charges against the survivors and the family of the dead student would probably file civil charges against them, but in the more enlightened 24th century we learn that the proper course of action is to expel one of the students and make the other three take the year over.

The manuver is not illegal, it's simply banned at the acadmey. If a group of people are practicing some manuver for an airshow or driving on a racetrack and someone dies in an accident you don't bring criminal charges aginst them. But if the blue agnels were preforming a stunt that the military banned they could be brought up on charges for doing so.

No but there would still probably be a civil lawsuit. People sue over less than death.

KAM: Picard says the First Duty is to the Truth! If that is true, then why did Picard allow the Paxans to mess around with the crew's memories in Clues?

Luigi Novi: Because the Paxans would've killed everyone had he not.

"No but there would still probably be a civil lawsuit. People sue over less than death."

My standard response to this sort of thing is; "you can sue for pretty much anything. You probably won't win though."

KAM: Picard says the First Duty is to the Truth! If that is true, then why did Picard allow the Paxans to mess around with the crew's memories in Clues?

Luigi Novi: Because the Paxans would've killed everyone had he not.

NarkS: So then the First Duty is to life, and the Second Duty is to the truth. No wait, the First Duty is to the Prime Directive. No wait, the First Duty is to the Omega Directive, no wait, the First Duty is to get your crew home...

You may not win in court (depending on how sympathetic the jury is) but those out of court settlements can be pretty profitable too. Especially if a court case would lead to a PR nightmare. Just a bit cynical about corps and our legal system.

Of course we do not know how liable (sp) laws work in the 24th century. They may have no case at all because even if Nova Squadren pressured him into doing it the choice was still his and he chose to do the manuver. They all took the same risk and no one forced him to do it.

Well, I would think liability laws would either be just as enlightened as today, (or more, if you're of the opinin that there are still flaws in ours today.)

Of course, LIBEL laws are a different story.

A nice touch, although someone probably mentioned it before: The flag at Starfleet Academy is shown flying at half staff.
I also liked seeing Ed Lauter as the father of the deceased cadet. A very versatile character actor, one of those actors who seems to have been in almost everything.
Never mind if no one actually forced the cadet to do the Colvord Starburst. Peer pressure is one of the most enormous factors in the behavior of a young person.

In answer to Phil's question as to why Boothby doesn't have steam coming out of his mouth in his conversation with Picard is because Boothy is A MARTIAN...my favorite one to be exact. (nyuk nyuk nyuk SLAP! OW!)

How come there were no attorneys present at the trial? (Both prosecution & defense) They had 'em in STVI.

AND

It surprises me that Wesley's confession was allowed...because the Admiral rang the bell and declared the hearing closed.

There was no trial in this episode, John. It was a hearing regarding the investigation of the cause of the shuttle accident. There was not trial, because no one was charged with anything.

Ah! A hearing to decide if there should be a trial. I get it.

A hearing to establish what caused the shuttle crash.

A hearing to establish whether there should be a trial is a grand jury, which is held after someone is already charged with a crime. While the term used at the Academy may be different, the operative differnce is that charges are already filed in such a circumstance. In the episode, no indication is given that the authorities have any particular suspicion about the crash being caused by deliberate wrongdoing on the part of the cadets.

Thanx Luigi, To misquote Dr. McCoy, "I'm a nitpicker, not a lawyer."

TRIVIA: This episode is now part of the required training program for the U.S. Armed Forces!

Where did you hear that? Not being aggresive merely curious.

It was mentioned on DVD #7 of the 5th season STTNG DVD set. (memorable missions or missions overview..can't remember exactly which)

Luigi Novi: A hearing to establish whether there should be a trial is a grand jury, which is held after someone is already charged with a crime. While the term used at the Academy may be different, the operative differnce is that charges are already filed in such a circumstance. In the episode, no indication is given that the authorities have any particular suspicion about the crash being caused by deliberate wrongdoing on the part of the cadets.

:: You're right. But in today's military, there is a "firewall" between accident investigations and disciplinary/criminal proceedings. You can be compelled to cooperate in the former; in exchange, the results are privileged and cannot be used collaterally in the latter, where you retain the usual legal rights and procedural safeguards. It would now appear that firewalls have no place in a force-field society.

Ah. That would explain why I have not heard anything about it since I do not have the DVDs yet. Very interesting. Thank you.

NANJAO: The flags at Starfleet are at half-staff during the show to mark the death of the Cadet. A real nice touch indeed.

Locarno could probably not have been used in place of Paris on Voyager, because Paris was a Starfleet officer, even though he was in a brig when Janeway met him. Nick Locarno was tossed from the Academy, and I doubt Janeway has the pull to get him a commission in the face of his actions.

I think the commandant of the Academy let the other members of Nova Squadron stay and repeat their present year because of Locarno. He took personal responsibility for Albert's death, for the cover-up and for pressuring them into trying the Kolvoord starburst. As he was their effective CO, and an upperclassman, he could argue that they were acting under his direction, so he had to take the blame when something went wrong. I guess Starfleet considers that to be the duty of a commanding officer to his command.

I have to agree with NarkS' comment what the first duty is. It seems like they set things up as the highest law of Starfleet, then show people tossing that highest law aside when it becomes inconvenient. Picard may think the first duty is to the truth, but Starfleet does not expect its officers to blow up their ships or sacrifice their crews to defend the truth.

Locarno could probably not have been used in place of Paris on Voyager, because Paris was a Starfleet officer, even though he was in a brig when Janeway met him. Nick Locarno was tossed from the Academy, and I doubt Janeway has the pull to get him a commission in the face of his actions.

But that was stuff that was worked out after they decided that the characterw oudl not be Locarno. All you have at the begining is that he was a member of the marquee who had previously been kicked out of starfleet in discrase. Torris was an acadmey dropout and Janeway made her the cheif engineering officer.

There is a difference between a dropout being appointed chief engineer in an extreme emergency, and a person tossed from the Academy as a result of an accident that led to a cadet dying and several others covering it up, being commissioned and made pilot of a new, advanced ship not in an extreme emergency. I think that you are arguing based on reality and not what is on the show, since the primary reason it seems like Locarno should have been a character on Voyager instead of Paris is because both were played by the same actor.

Paris wasn't the pilot until after the "extreme emergency" (the same one that led to Torres becoming Chief Engineer). Prior to that, he was an observer, and snubbed by most of the crew.

Also, you're missing the point that generaly when one comes up with characters for a show first you work out who the characters are and how they got to where they are now before little stuff like does he get to fly the ship in the alpha quadrent or take over when the helmsman is killed in the delta.

BF: The manuver is not illegal, it's simply banned at the acadmey.

Which means that it violates Starfleet military law. This could be considered any number of infractions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as used by all U.S. armed forces), resulting in possible criminal action within the military court system.

When Ron Moore wrote the original ending of this story, Wesley did not admit the truth but rather remained quiet. He thought it important that Wesley stick to the word he gave his friends. Michael Pillar overruled him on the basis that it sent a wrong message. It makes for an interesting debate, is it better for someone (in this instance, a college-age kid) to respect authority or to keep his word to his friends.

Moore talks about it in this interview.

It would have been interesting to have Wesley keep up the squadron's story, and the actual events of the accident left ambiguous. Of course, that would require the makers of the show to abandon the idea of a perfect future.

Trike: is it better for someone (in this instance, a college-age kid) to respect authority or to keep his word to his friends.
Luigi Novi: Telling the truth to the school officials wasn't important because it was important to merely "respect authority." It was important because the first duty is to the truth. Whether someone keeps their words to their friends should only be the salient point if he gave his word over a necessary good cause, and in a good-faith manner. The cadets had no business trying such a dangerous, banned stunt, a stunt that got Josh killed, let alone cover it up later and blame Josh for it.

An example where a lie or cover-up was necessary was Clues, wherein the crew would've been killed had they not.

It's too bad they didn't stick with the original ending, and have Westley keep quiet at the end. True, it would have tarnished Roddenbery's idealized vision of honest, honorable, flawless 24th century Starfleet officers, but on the other hand, it would have made for some very good drama! It would have given Westley's character a bit of a dark edge. Additionally, it would have been interesting to see how Westley's refusal to come forword would have effected his relationship with Picard and other Enterprise crew members. I'm glad this episode didn't try to depict Lacarno as an outright, one dimensional villian, but instead made him sympathetic to a point. Lacarno wasn't an evil person, he was a basically good guy who made a terrible mistake and got in way over his head to the point that he tried to cover up his mistake by lying. When he was exposed, he took full responsibility and tried to save the other members of the squad by insisting that they were only following his orders. The episode also did a good job of juxtaposing one's duty to tell the truth and one's loyalty to friends. One of the better episodes of the season.

At the beginning, Picard visits Boothby and talks about a mistake he as cadet made, and how Boothby forced Picard to accept responsibility. This hints strongly that humans will always makes mistakes and the important part is learning from them, not trying to avoid them.

So why is Locarno expelled at the end? He now has no chance at all to learn from this incident. I think he has shown many admirable qualities of an officer, he just was misguided in attempting to much and then covering up. But the loyalty, team spirit and inspiration he has shown (when Boothby talks about Locarno being "Father figure, friend, older brother, everything the other cadets need") would make him a good officer, and he would have learned the most from this disaster (as opposed to others who only hear the story).

My guess is that it's more of a publicity decision of the Academy: Boothby tells that the Nova Squadron is admired by all the other cadets. Maybe the Academy was afraid if they let Locarno stay on despite his blame in the accident, it would send the wrong message to the cadets.

The punishment of the remaining team isn't well thought out: flying privileges and one year academic credit are revoked. What has this got to do with team pressure (and thirst for fame) leading to the accident, or team pressure leading to the cover-up? Shouldn't they get exercises in where duty to the team stops, when to stand up and so "No"? (Or talk to the other cadets what they did wrong to prevent the rest making the same mistake?) From an enlightened and creative Starfleet, I'd expect more. (I also missed that no mention was made as to how similar team pressure among the rest of the cadets will be dealt with: will the Academy change procedures /introduce new exercises to prevent similar, or will they file it under "one bad case, no relation to the rest"?)

And how does Boothby know so much about the cadets? He knows not only about the celebration (I can accept that), but what cadets think and feel about the Nova squadron and even what the members of Nova feel about Locarno! I didn't see Boothby acting like a counselor to any other cadet. If Picard hadn't mentioned it, I wouldn't have thought so.

For that matter, are there no counselors in the Academy itself (with promise of confidentaly) to counsel cadets, so Weasley has to decide his problems all alone? (And Josh can't get advice if he feels unsecure about flying?) Has this to do with the military structure, where no secrecy is assured (officers are obliged to report problems immediately instead of helping the cadets work on them), or with the macho image of future Starfleet captains which daren't admit to human weakness?
At the hearing, Locarno answers to the question of the admiral why they didn't report about Joshs flying problems that he didn't want to tattle on his teammate and try to help him get together first. This doesn't imply an atmosphere of trust between cadets and officers. It sounds as if a cadet with problems will be punished (maybe flying revoked) instead of getting help (maybe extra flying lessons or counseling). I don't think that's a good idea. (And how is this situation handled on board Starfleet ships? Haven't we seen the officers talk to each other or Picard whenever they have any problems?)

constanze: At the beginning, Picard visits Boothby and talks about a mistake he as cadet made, and how Boothby forced Picard to accept responsibility. This hints strongly that humans will always makes mistakes and the important part is learning from them, not trying to avoid them. So why is Locarno expelled at the end?
Luigi Novi: Since we don’t know what exactly the incident was concerning Picard, we can’t really compare and contrast them, nor assume Locarno’s offense was analogous.

constanze: He now has no chance at all to learn from this incident. I think he has shown many admirable qualities of an officer, he just was misguided in attempting to much and then covering up.
Luigi Novi: Well, obviously, some might disagree. Some might think the word “misguided” applies to offenses that were not committed entirely knowingly or willingly, or that involved some degree of naiveté or ignorance. Locarno’s acts, however, were not only knowing and willing, but multiple: trying a dangerous banned maneuver that got Josh killed, using his influence to convince the rest of Nova Squadron to lie about it, and even—get this—blaming Josh for the accident, with a straight face, right in front of his grieving father, and refusing to come forward until another Squadron member exposed them. I think that’s a lot more than “misguided.”

constanze: But the loyalty, team spirit and inspiration he has shown (when Boothby talks about Locarno being "Father figure, friend, older brother, everything the other cadets need") would make him a good officer, and he would have learned the most from this disaster (as opposed to others who only hear the story).
Luigi Novi: First of all, fraternity jocks who torture new fraternity pledges by whacking them in the rear end with wooden paddles can be said to exude “loyalty, team spirit and inspiration.” Loyalty, in fact, is utterly worthless if it’s misplaced.

Second, Locarno didn’t display loyalty, since he was the leader of the Squadron. It was the other Squadron members subordinate to him that showed loyalty to him, which he abused. How can you show loyalty to subordinates that you manipulate into helping you cover up a crime? If anything, Locarno exhibited total lack of loyalty—to the two things that was rightfully derserving of it—Starfleet, and its rules, and Josh Albert. Loyalty means nothing if it’s blind loyalty to someone undeserving of it.

constanze: My guess is that it's more of a publicity decision of the Academy: Boothby tells that the Nova Squadron is admired by all the other cadets. Maybe the Academy was afraid if they let Locarno stay on despite his blame in the accident, it would send the wrong message to the cadets.
Luigi Novi: So in other words their decision wasn’t a sincere one made in good faith solely on its own merits? I don’t think there’s any substantiation for it, and even if it were revealed to be the case, making an example for other potential offenders is one of the legitimate aims of punishment.

constanze: The punishment of the remaining team isn't well thought out: flying privileges and one year academic credit are revoked. What has this got to do with team pressure (and thirst for fame) leading to the accident, or team pressure leading to the cover-up?
Luigi Novi: Punishment doesn’t always have to follow a “theme” pertaining to the offense, nor is it Starfleet’s obligation to come up with one. The cadets should be lucky they’re even allowed to remain in the Academy.

constanze: Shouldn't they get exercises in where duty to the team stops, when to stand up and so "No"? Or talk to the other cadets what they did wrong to prevent the rest making the same mistake? I also missed that no mention was made as to how similar team pressure among the rest of the cadets will be dealt with: will the Academy change procedures /introduce new exercises to prevent similar, or will they file it under "one bad case, no relation to the rest"?)
Luigi Novi: And who says that these things were not indeed incorporated into their future duties at the Academy?

constanze: And how does Boothby know so much about the cadets? He knows not only about the celebration (I can accept that), but what cadets think and feel about the Nova squadron and even what the members of Nova feel about Locarno!
Luigi Novi: Behavior that can be discerned by their reputed friendships with one another, behavior that he witnesses on campus, and even time that he himself might have spent with them.

constanze: I didn't see Boothby acting like a counselor to any other cadet. If Picard hadn't mentioned it, I wouldn't have thought so.
Luigi Novi: It can be presumed that he had such a relationship, just as he had with Picard, Chakotay, and presumably many other officers.

constanze: For that matter, are there no counselors in the Academy itself (with promise of confidentaly) to counsel cadets, so Weasley has to decide his problems all alone?
Luigi Novi: Presumably.

constanze: And Josh can't get advice if he feels unsecure about flying?) Has this to do with the military structure, where no secrecy is assured (officers are obliged to report problems immediately instead of helping the cadets work on them), or with the macho image of future Starfleet captains which daren't admit to human weakness?
Luigi Novi: Maybe with the fact that maneuver was a dangerous banned one, and Josh couldn’t mention it to anyone else? And because he didn’t want to seek advice, for the same reasons that many people don’t like going to counselors for advice? Hell, for all we know, maybe he did go a counselor. So what? What in the episode contradicts the possibility?

constanze: At the hearing, Locarno answers to the question of the admiral why they didn't report about Joshs flying problems that he didn't want to tattle on his teammate and try to help him get together first. This doesn't imply an atmosphere of trust between cadets and officers. It sounds as if a cadet with problems will be punished (maybe flying revoked) instead of getting help (maybe extra flying lessons or counseling). I don't think that's a good idea. (And how is this situation handled on board Starfleet ships? Haven't we seen the officers talk to each other or Picard whenever they have any problems?)
Luigi Novi: See above answer.

Luigi addressed several of constanze's points. But...

For that matter, are there no counselors in the Academy itself (with promise of confidentaly) to counsel cadets, so Weasley has to decide his problems all alone? - constanze

First of all, we don't know what "promise of confidentiality" entails. It's a misconceived notion that "confidentiality" means that a person is excused from revealing anything discussed in a privileged conversation. For instance, lawyers and doctors cannot claim confidentiality if they receive knowledge that a crime is going to be committed (in a US court). If a client or patient says, "I'm going to kill my coworkers tomorrow," then the lawyer or doctor is obligated to report it.

So going back to Starfleet Academy... it's possible that confidentiality doesn't prevent a counselor from reporting a crime (especially one with consequences as large as this one) after the fact. We simply don't know enough about the rules that govern the counseling department.

In any case, (again, not being certain of the rules at Starfleet Academy) perjury is a crime that perhaps a counselor cannot claim confidentiality over. In other words... if a counselor knows the truth and knows that a cadet is going to lie about it in court, then that counselor is obligated to either prevent it or report it.

Secondly, there are millions of people with millions of psychological and health problems who refuse to go to a doctor/counselor/therapist. So it wouldn't be surprising if Wesley (who is accustomed to doing things himself) wouldn't turn to a counselor. Additionally... perhaps there are bad memories attributed to going to a counselor (father's death).

So it wasn't that Wesley didn't have anyone to turn to... it's that he didn't turn to anyone... that we know of, anyway.


It sounds as if a cadet with problems will be punished (maybe flying revoked) instead of getting help (maybe extra flying lessons or counseling). - constanze

That is one interpetation.

It's also possible (and more likely) that Locarno was suggesting that Josh (coming from a Starfleet family) would have been embarassed had the truth of his difficulties come up. Teens often turn to their peers for help with schoolwork, rather than turning to a teacher, parent, or other authority figure. It doesn't mean that the student think he/she will get punished because he/she is having trouble in math!

Richard Fancy (Saltek) was Elaine's boss, Mr. Lippman, on the first few seasons of "Seinfeld." Top of the Muffin to you!

A lot of familiar faces in the cast of this one--Ray Walston, Ed Lauter (it seems like he was playing a bad guy in every '70s movie at one time), and Robert Duncan McNeill.

On the subject of counseling and psych tests, I think a line from the non-canon novel Final Frontier - from memory, I hasten to point out - puts it nicely:

"George, if Starfleet rejected all the people with somekinda psych problem, they'd have enough left to crew maybe one space cruiser. A small space cruiser."

MISSED OPPORTUNITY: Beverly's conversation with Wesley after he finally told the truth.

good 1215402161120

The real reason that Locarno wasn't Paris is because they would have had to pay the writer of this episode royalties every time Paris appeared in an episode. The official reason was Locarno's crime was considered to great for redemption but that's a lie. Especially as Paris was responsable for three peoples deaths as opposed to Locarno's one death.

As for a collage student not shopping their friends my loyalty to my friends greatly outweighs my loyaly to my university. At my university there was NO reason to respect any authority the University conned money off it's students and the student body (the Student Union) refused to investigate allagations of it's bouncers assulting the girls. It does if course depend greatly on what's done but in my opinion unless they're hurting or bullying someone your loyalty to your mates outweighs any respect for school rules.

Suppose Nova Squadron was actually able to pull off their stunt at graduation. Was everyone supposed to be so awed by this spectacular display that they would forget that this was an illegal and highly dangerous maneuver?

10 years after that question was asked:

I believe Phil talked about that in his 2nd Next Gen guide. He correctly pointed out that even if the maneuver went off perfectly they would probably still be in hot water. But I agree with Phil when he says that Nova Squadron's actions are still believable because as illogical as they are; these are college seniors we're talking about. College kids do lots of crazy, illogical things; and these guys are hot shot pilots to boot.

Boothby was never given a first name. Could it have been...Martin?