Do you think Gary should plead guilty in court?

[Jennifer Garcia 555]

It would be very difficult to plea guilty to a crime that you do not remember doing. Even if there is proof that you did it. I think he should plea not guilty since it was a different Gary that did it. It is not fair that he should have to take the blame for something that he did not do. Even if it is impossible to prove.

It is not fair, definitely. As long as we look from the usual point of view. But what if you think about it this way: all the Garys from all the worldlines are not separate beings, but exactly the very same person. Let's use the analogy of a particle in a superposition, and Gary is like this particle. It's the very same him in all these worlds. In one worldline he makes one decision, in another - a different one. Sort like a video game, when you make a different move every time you play it again. But, it's still the same you.

In that case, the decisions that we make would not matter at all. Why try to make good decisions when another version of yourself will definitely make the bad choice and you could be blamed?

[Anna Bookowski]

This is quite complicated and disheartening. It won't be easy, fair and possibly for him to plead guilty, when he's totally ignorant of the crime. My opinion because no matter how authentic the evidence is, I can't agree to what I know nothing about.

I understand your point of view. Obviously, it's a terribly complicated situation without one right solution. It seems highly improbable to admit to doing something you don't remember. But then you see the recording of yourself doing it, and there are plenty witnesses to it. That makes it even worse. Such a difficult one and so many different opinions.

[Anna Bookowski]

He didn't have any intentions, he didn't kill Michelle in full control of his faculties. Sure, pleading guilty will give Michelles family closure, but he never meant that to happen. I think he shouldn't plead guilty.

Yes, I think I have to agree. As someone else said before, pleading not guilty might be the only possible way to keep the dignity. Just the fact that he actually did that and there is so much evidence against him makes it so complicated. I find it fascinating how many opposite opinions were expressed on this forum.

[Anna Bookowski]

He did commit the murder but did he actually commit the murder??
In my opinion pleading guilty won't have made anything better, and now that im thinking about it he might have pleaded guilty in another parallel universe!!

Ha, this is so interesting, right? The paradox of this situation is just crazy. At this moment, after reading all the comments before, I'm more on the side that he should plead not guilty. That's fascinating, because when I opened the topic, I was thinking the opposite. And now you get me thinking: yes, in one of the worldlines he must have pleaded guilty! I think in another one he just had to go insane. I'm sure that's what would have happened to me!

[Agnes Masobeng]

First of all Gary loved his girlfriend Michelle and would never hurt her in any manner. Killing her was way beyond. Second of all, he conscience was clean and clear. He doesn't remember committing such a heinous act as a result, he shouldn't plead guilty. Pleading guilty makes him a murderer.

[El_limitless]

For a person to be guilty of a crime in law, he must have formed the intention to commit the crime and have actually gone ahead to commit the crime. Gary did not form the intention that is fundamental to being guilty of a crime. He had no recollection of himself committing the crime, so in my opinion, he is not guilty and should not plead guilty.

[raj_nandani_poet]

In my opinion, he shouldn't plead guilty. I mean yes it was him but at the same time, it was not him. It indeed is a chaotic turn of events, but still, the person who used the knife for the stabbing was not the same person as Gary in that world. He was from a different world and the circumstances had made him an altogether different person.

[Troy Barnes]

Blue line Gary was falsely accused of killing the woman he loved above all. It would be an insult to her memory and an overwhelmingly frustrating incident if he was to plead guilty as he was nothing but an innocent bystander in the accident of Black line Gary's life.

[Anna Bookowski]

First of all Gary loved his girlfriend Michelle and would never hurt her in any manner. Killing her was way beyond. Second of all, he conscience was clean and clear. He doesn't remember committing such a heinous act as a result, he shouldn't plead guilty. Pleading guilty makes him a murderer.

It is true from our "normal" point of view. But the book and the multiverse theory have a hidden paradox in the story: this Gary is exactly the same Gary as the one who murdered Michelle, they're not separate beings. It's not easy to comprehend, but I guess this is exactly what makes this case so interesting. Of course, I agree that, after all, he isn't guilty per see, but in this situation, he also is. But I also suppose he should not plead guilty.

[Anna Bookowski]

For a person to be guilty of a crime in law, he must have formed the intention to commit the crime and have actually gone ahead to commit the crime. Gary did not form the intention that is fundamental to being guilty of a crime. He had no recollection of himself committing the crime, so in my opinion, he is not guilty and should not plead guilty.

On the one hand, you're right. But on the other, imagine that you are intoxicated (let's say you accidentally took some drugs or you're drunk) and it happens that you hurt or even killed someone else. You wake up and you don't remember it. But there's evidence against you and it's clear that you did it, even though, most likely, you had no intentions or recollection to do so. Are you not guilty of what happened then? Didn't you commit the crime?

[Anna Bookowski]

In my opinion, he shouldn't plead guilty. I mean yes it was him but at the same time, it was not him. It indeed is a chaotic turn of events, but still, the person who used the knife for the stabbing was not the same person as Gary in that world. He was from a different world and the circumstances had made him an altogether different person.

This seems logical, yes. This is how we would normally reason. But here we are with the quantum physics assumptions and multiverse theory! If we take a broader picture, we must understand that it is implied that all the Garys we get to know in the story (and all the other Garys we never heard about) are actually one and the same person. I mean, it would be different if it would be really someone else, let's say Sinead, who mentally broke in into Gary's dream, and killed Michelle. But as long as it's Gary, then no matter from which worldline, it's still exactly the same person! We may say it's Gary following a slightly different scenario. But they are not different people or separate beings. Gary exists in a quantum superposition. He's sort of divided between different worldlines, but it's still him who committed the crime.

[Anna Bookowski]

Blue line Gary was falsely accused of killing the woman he loved above all. It would be an insult to her memory and an overwhelmingly frustrating incident if he was to plead guilty as he was nothing but an innocent bystander in the accident of Black line Gary's life.

It does seem to be right and I understand your reasoning. But once again, there's a particular paradox introduced in the book and it's based on a quantum physics theory. There's an assumption implied that all the Garys from all the worldlines are the very same person. He was not falsely accused - he did it. The only complication is that he had no intention to do it and he doesn't even remember it. But it doesn't change the fact he killed Michelle, the only thing is he didn't want to. So maybe the solution should be that he should not be legally punished as he already suffers enough.

[Anna Bookowski]

It would be very difficult to plea guilty to a crime that you do not remember doing. Even if there is proof that you did it. I think he should plea not guilty since it was a different Gary that did it. It is not fair that he should have to take the blame for something that he did not do. Even if it is impossible to prove.

It is not fair, definitely. As long as we look from the usual point of view. But what if you think about it this way: all the Garys from all the worldlines are not separate beings, but exactly the very same person. Let's use the analogy of a particle in a superposition, and Gary is like this particle. It's the very same him in all these worlds. In one worldline he makes one decision, in another - a different one. Sort like a video game, when you make a different move every time you play it again. But, it's still the same you.

In that case, the decisions that we make would not matter at all. Why try to make good decisions when another version of yourself will definitely make the bad choice and you could be blamed?

I'm afraid that this whole thing implies that we don't have free will after all! I don't know, it's really confusing. It does sound like we don't really make any subjective decisions, that we are sort of computer program, operating according to an algorithm. It is kind of depressing. But let's not forget it's only one of many theories Who knows what's true after all?

[Guda Lydia]

A person is guilty when they have committed the crime. However, Gary's situation was different. He was actually the one that stubbed Michelle and at the same time, it was not him but another version. On the one hand, he needed to plead guilty to give the family closure and end the pain, and he also needed to prove his innocence. A very very difficult task that led to more rifts. Maybe he should have pleaded guilty, but resigning to a life of incarceration knowing of your innocence is also hard.

[yomide]

That depends on your point of view. From Gary's, pleading guilty means he intentionally, infact consciously, did kill Michiel. And i agree on that. From Gray's P.O.V, he shouldn't.