The People v. “She Is Online.”
Court Clerk:
“All rise!”
“This Honourable Court is now in session. The Honourable Justice Commonsense presiding.”
Judge:
“Be seated.”
“Bailiff, why is there an unusual number of people smiling at their phones in my courtroom?”
Bailiff:
“Digital evidence, My Lord.”
“Everyone appears to be checking whether the accused is online.”
The Judge looks around the gallery.
“Put the phones away.”
A few screens immediately disappear beneath tables.
The Judge narrows his eyes.
“I said put them away.”
Reluctantly, the gallery complies.
Court Clerk:
“Case No. 015.”
“The People versus ‘She Is Online.'”
Charge: Aggravated Green-Dot Temptation, Unauthorised Digital Surveillance, Emotional Overinterpretation, and Attempted Conversion of Online Presence into Personal Invitation.
Prosecutor:
“Ready for the People, My Lord.”
Counsel:
“Ready for the Defence, My Lord.”
Judge:
“Bring in the accused.”
The accused enters the courtroom.
It is Mr. Everyman.
The Judge looks at him.
Then at the prosecution.
Then back at the accused.
“Again?”
Mr. Everyman:
“My Lord?”
The Judge sighs.
“Nothing.”
“Proceed.”
The Case for the Prosecution
Prosecutor:
“My Lord, this is a simple case.”
The gallery laughs.
The Judge looks up.
“Whenever Counsel begins with that sentence, it is rarely simple.”
The Prosecutor smiles.
“Quite right, My Lord.”
“The People intend to prove that the accused was perfectly peaceful.”
“He was minding his own business.”
“He had no immediate intention of contacting anyone.”
“He was not looking for anyone.”
“He was not conducting surveillance.”
“He was simply…”
The Prosecutor pauses.
“…on WhatsApp.”
The gallery nods.
“And then…”
A screen appears.
ONLINE
The courtroom goes silent.
The Judge looks at it.
“That is the evidence?”
“Yes, My Lord.”
“One green dot?”
“Yes, My Lord.”
The Judge sighs.
“Very well.”
“We have been here before.”
Exhibit A: The Green Dot
The Court Clerk places the phone before the Bench.
No photograph.
No message.
No status.
No call.
Only:
ONLINE
Prosecutor:
“My Lord, within seconds of seeing Exhibit A, the accused began asking questions.”
The Judge looks towards Mr. Everyman.
“What questions?”
The Prosecutor opens his notebook.
“Is she still awake?”
“Why is she online?”
“Was she not supposed to be resting?”
“Who is she talking to?”
“And finally…”
He pauses.
“…the question that brings us before this Honourable Court.”
The Judge raises an eyebrow.
“What question?”
The Prosecutor looks at the accused.
“Should I say something?”
The gallery erupts.
Judge:
“Order!”
Exhibit B: The Internal Debate
The Prosecutor displays a transcript.
Heart:
“Say hi.”
Brain:
“No.”
Heart:
“Just say hi.”
Brain:
“Why?”
Heart:
“Because she is online.”
Brain:
“That is not a reason.”
Heart:
“It is enough of one.”
Brain:
“It is absolutely not.”
Heart:
“She might be awake.”
Brain:
“She is online. That is all we know.”
Heart:
“Still…”
Brain:
“Maintain steeze.”
The gallery explodes.
The Judge removes his glasses.
“Are these two witnesses known to this Court?”
Court Clerk:
“My Lord…”
“The Heart and the Brain were both witnesses in Case No. 001.”
The Judge looks towards the gallery.
“I knew I recognised the handwriting.”
The Prosecution Calls the Heart
Court Clerk:
“Call the Heart.”
The Heart enters the witness box.
The Judge looks at it.
“Long time no see.”
Heart:
“My Lord.”
“Still getting people into trouble?”
The Heart looks down.
“Not intentionally, My Lord.”
The gallery laughs.
Prosecutor:
“What happened when you saw that she was online?”
Heart:
“I noticed.”
“Then?”
“I wondered.”
“Then?”
“I became interested.”
“Then?”
“I suggested saying hello.”
The Judge nods.
“And the Brain?”
The Heart sighs.
“The Brain told me to maintain steeze.”
“Did you?”
The Heart hesitates.
“Externally.”
“And internally?”
The Heart looks away.
“My Lord…”
“Yes?”
“I had already opened three imaginary conversations.”
The gallery erupts.
Judge:
“Order!”
“Three?”
“Yes, My Lord.”
“None of which actually happened?”
“None.”
The Judge writes something down.
“Proceed.”
The Prosecution Calls the Brain
Court Clerk:
“Call the Brain.”
The Brain enters.
The Judge studies it.
“You appear more tired than the last time I saw you.”
Brain:
“I have been doing overtime, My Lord.”
“Because of the Heart?”
“Among other things.”
The gallery laughs.
Prosecutor:
“What did you tell the accused?”
“I told him that being online does not mean being available.”
“Did he listen?”
“Eventually.”
“What did he initially want to do?”
“Send a message.”
“What stopped him?”
“I reminded him that there was no invitation.”
The Judge nods.
“Good.”
The Prosecutor approaches.
“Brain, is it reasonable to wonder why someone is online?”
“Yes.”
“Is it reasonable to know what they are doing simply because they are online?”
“No.”
“Is it reasonable to assume they are talking to someone else?”
“No.”
“Is it reasonable to assume they want to hear from you?”
“No.”
“Then what does the green dot actually prove?”
The Brain pauses.
“That the person is online.”
The Prosecutor smiles.
“Nothing more?”
“Nothing more.”
The People rest.
The Defence
Counsel:
“My Lord, the prosecution has built an entire criminal case around a green circle.”
“The Defence submits that my client committed no offence.”
“He saw someone online.”
“He wondered.”
“He was tempted.”
“He did not act.”
“He did not send the message.”
“He did not demand an explanation.”
“He did not ask, ‘Who are you talking to?'”
“He did not post a cryptic status.”
The Judge nods.
“An important distinction.”
Counsel continues.
“My client merely experienced what millions of human beings experience every day.”
“Curiosity.”
“Affection.”
“Interest.”
“Perhaps even a little hope.”
The gallery becomes quieter.
“But he maintained restraint.”
“And that, My Lord, should count for something.”
The Judge looks at the accused.
“It does.”
Cross-Examination
Prosecutor:
“Mr. Everyman, did you see that she was online?”
“Yes.”
“Did you think about messaging her?”
“Yes.”
“Did you wonder why she was online?”
“Yes.”
“Did you wonder whether she was talking to someone?”
A pause.
“Yes.”
“Did you wonder whether she might be thinking about you?”
Another pause.
The accused looks at the Judge.
“Possibly.”
The gallery erupts.
Judge:
“Order!”
The Prosecutor smiles.
“Did you have evidence of that?”
“No.”
“Any message?”
“No.”
“Any invitation?”
“No.”
“Any indication?”
“No.”
“So, Mr. Everyman…”
The Prosecutor leans closer.
“What did you actually know?”
The accused pauses.
“That she was online.”
The Prosecutor nods.
“Exactly.”
“The People rest.”
The Judgment
Justice Common Sense sits quietly.
He looks at the green dot on the screen.
Then at Mr. Everyman.
Then at the Heart.
Then at the Brain.
“These two have been here before.”
The Heart smiles.
The Brain does not.
The Judge continues.
“The Court remembers Case No. 001.”
“A status picture.”
“No caption.”
“No explanation.”
“Just confidence.”
“And yet the accused somehow found himself before this Court.”
The gallery laughs.
“Fourteen cases later, we have returned to the same application.”
“Only this time…”
The Judge points at the screen.
“…the evidence is even smaller.”
“A green dot.”
The Court is quiet.
“Let this Court therefore establish something important.”
“Being online is not an invitation.”
“It is not a summons.”
“It is not a declaration of availability.”
“It does not tell you who the person is speaking to.”
“It does not tell you what they are thinking.”
“And it certainly does not tell you that they want you to enter their evening.”
The Judge pauses.
“But the Court will not criminalise curiosity.”
“Nor will it criminalise affection.”
“Nor will it condemn the little moment when the Heart says…”
The Judge looks towards the Heart.
“What did you say again?”
The Heart smiles.
“Say hi.”
The gallery laughs.
The Judge smiles.
“Yes.”
“That.”
“There is nothing wrong with wanting to say hello.”
“The wisdom lies in knowing whether there is a reason beyond the green dot.”
The Judge leans forward.
“Because sometimes the green dot is simply a green dot.”
“Sometimes the person is online because they are talking to someone.”
“Sometimes they are online because they are scrolling.”
“Sometimes they opened the application and forgot it was open.”
“Sometimes they are doing absolutely nothing.”
“And sometimes…”
The Judge pauses.
“…they are simply living their life.”
The gallery becomes quiet.
“And you are not entitled to manufacture an invitation from their presence.”
He raises the gavel.
“Neither, however, should you manufacture rejection from it.”
The room falls silent.
“That is where Common Sense comes in.”
Verdict
The accused, “She Is Online,” is hereby found:
NOT GUILTY of being an invitation.
NOT GUILTY of being a declaration of interest.
NOT GUILTY of being evidence of emotional availability.
However…
GUILTY of causing unnecessary temptation.
GUILTY of encouraging speculative thought.
And GUILTY of being a remarkably powerful green circle.
Sentence is hereby passed:
The accused shall remain online without fear.
Mr. Everyman shall maintain steeze.
The Heart shall be permitted to notice.
The Brain shall be permitted to advise.
Neither shall be permitted to fabricate evidence.
Furthermore, Mr. Everyman is expressly prohibited from sending:
“So you are still awake?”
unless he has an actual reason for asking.
The Judge looks over his glasses.
“Not because she is online.”
“Because that, My Lord, is not a reason.”
The gallery applauds.
The Judge bangs his gavel.
“One final matter.”
“To anyone currently staring at a green dot and constructing an entire conversation in their head…”
He pauses.
“The Court sees you.”
The gallery erupts.
“Maintain steeze.”
Bang.
The Principle of the Court
“A digital signal is information. It is not interpretation.”
“Being online tells you someone is present.”
“It does not tell you they are available.”
“It does not tell you they are waiting.”
“And it certainly does not tell you what they feel.”
“Sometimes people do a lot without doing anything at all.”
“And sometimes…”
The Judge looks towards the green dot.
“…we do all the doing for them in our heads.”
Court is adjourned.
Next Week Before This Honourable Court…
Case No. 016
The People v. “Just One More Thing.”
The prosecution alleges that the accused had already ended a conversation, said goodnight, closed the application and put the phone down…
…only to return seven minutes later with:
“Actually…”
The Defence maintains that the accused merely remembered something important.
The People intend to establish that the alleged “important thing” was not important when the conversation was ending and became important only after the accused realised they were no longer talking.
The Court will determine whether “Actually…” is a legitimate conversational amendment…
…or the linguistic equivalent of reopening a case that had already been adjourned.
Proceedings continue next week.
