Favorite

7 Legitimate Defenses of Some of Disney's Most Nefarious Villains



The legal side of Reddit recently took on some of Disney's evilest villains as clients, and came up with pretty solid defenses for the lot of them:

Share
Tweet
Stumble
Pin It
Email
  • 1

    King Scar, accused of murdering his brother, the late King Mufasa

    Via: DoctorFahrenheit
    Per his counsel, DoctorFahrenheit:
    "What crime are we talking about here? Mufasa was killed by a stampeding herd of wildebeest. It was a tragedy, and our leader Scar mourned his brother's death before putting his personal pain aside to lead a nation that needed him.

    And now his nephew, who mysteriously ran off after his father's death, shows up and accuses him of foul play years later? A kid who has spent his life up until this point shirking all responsibility, living with a couple of deviants, and doing God knows what. This runaway, who has never held down a job mind you, suddenly can't get his fix so he comes home and starts making demands. When his loving uncle, Scar, refuses to just hand over everything and suggests that Simba enter a rehabilitation program all of a sudden he starts throwing around wild accusations.

    This case has no merit."

  • 2

    The Sea Witch Ursula, accused of thieving Princess Ariel's voice

    Via: jacdeswilliams
    Internet attorney jacdeswilliams says,
    "Ursula made a contract with Ariel that had no clause saying that Ursula was not allowed to interfere. The contract stated that she had to get Eric to fall in love with her without her voice, she failed, and she has to pay the price for her failure. It's not Ursula's fault Ariel doesn't put things by a lawyer before she signs them."

    This defense only holds up if Ariel is old enough to enter a legally binding contract with Ursula, but we have no real way of knowing when one becomes an adult in Atlantian law.

  • 3

    Prince John, persecutor of the thief Robin Hood

    Via: hamdinger125
    Advocate hamdinger125 says,
    "Prince John was the ruling patriarch of England in his brother's absence, and was perfectly within his rights to try and capture and execute a known thief."

  • 4

    Prince Hans, accused of the attempted murder of Queen Elsa

    Via: AdultSupervision
    Legal adviser AdultSupervision posits,
    "Prince Hans' attempted assassination of Queen Elsa was carried out on behalf of the nation of Arendelle, which would almost certainly have suffered tremendous loss of life and a devastating economic downturn had the winter gone on any longer."

    Just...forget about that stuff with Princess Anna.

  • 5

    Lady Tremaine, "evil" stepmother to Cinderella, accused of negligence and child abuse

    Via: Christopherhaze69
    Defender Christopherhaze69 claims,
    "As Cinderella's guardian it is perfectly within her rights to protest her marriage at such a young age even to royalty. Locking her up was an act of maternal love for her daughter in law as her step sisters were much more ready for such a significant relationship."

  • 6

    Shere Khan, pursuer of the terrorist Mowgli

    Via: butz1819
    butz1819 speaks for the hero Khan,
    "While the violent intrudor, who goes by the savage name "mowgli", endagered the security and peace of the entire jungle, as he brought a weapon of mass destruction, that by experts is known as "fire", into the sovereign territory of the jungle, my client, the noble and acknowledged Mister Shere Khan, was one of the few citizens to realize the potential threat caused by this unlawful human creature.

    Selflessly he fought the creature, while others were too lazy or driven by foolish and egoistic attemps to attain power thorugh the human.

    My client should therefore be treated as a hero and the true villains should be punished according to the laws of the jungle. Meaning Mister Shere Khan should be granted the right to kill and eat them."

  • 7

    Gaston, accused of attempted murder of the creature known as "the Beast"

    Via: woodbetween
    Defense from the legal adviser woodbetween:
    "The Beast lived in post-revolution France, probably during the Terreur. If the Beast is considered by the courts to be an animal, then there's nothing illegal with killing a dangerous animal that is threatening a human's life. If the Beast is considered a human, then he is also royalty and an enemy of France. The hard part would be defending the Beast in court, not Gaston."
  • -
  • Vote
  • -
Share
Tweet
Stumble
Pin It
Email

Next on Cartoons & Anime

Squeeze You Until Your Eyes Pop
Comments - Click to show - Click to hide