Oh god, Stickie… :(
Well, since that’s probably the last example (Bartholomew), that probably means it’s the last trial Stickie has to go through… and we don’t know that it’s Stickie yelling in disbelief, there. Maybe there’s some overly-zealous misandrist in the gallery who’s been viewing Stickie’s travails as a cause célèbre.
I suspect that the person yelling “No!” was the prosecuting attorney, because they were counting on getting a conviction to impress their superior and get a promotion.
She looks like the third woman who refused to participate in the rape examples. I think she really doesn’t like the author about now. Can’t blame her.
The case against Bartholomew was doomed from the start, though. The prosecutor had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stickie didn’t consent and that Bartholomew knew that she didn’t consent. It’s an almost impossible task.
You mean the woman in the bottom left frame? the “no!” isn’t coming from her. It is coming from off frame.
Now I want some tacos. Anyone want to join me? We just need to get the cheese, and the salsa, and the beef, and the spices, and the shells, and the tomatoes, and the lettuce, and the sour cream…
Taco taco taco taco taco taco taco taco
I COUNT 28 TACOS THERE! That’s like, 14 tacos apiece! SHEESH!
Well, as has been noted…
So… two tacos for DC and the rest for Pi, then?
Dragons love tacos too. (funny kids’ book)
I’m lost here :-( There’s a parallel court trial going on here? Could anyone summarize/link so that I can make sense of it?
It’s a call-back to the chapter on rape: http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1228
Either it’s the trial of the last example in the chapter, or Stickie had a VERY bad week…
Thank you, good guy UsaSatsui!
Funny, I pictured Marv as more of a quesadilla man.
He needed to tell her, “I am nacho friend.”
Then she should respond with “Can’t we taco bout this?”