The Law In Order: Spugbug

Pranking is back! And fresh from pranking the Conservatives of the USA with a sophisticated Election rigging where he managed to oust a 9D Chess Grand Master, dispose of all evidence of thousands of dead voters, machine tampering and ballot stuffing here is Orlok with his latest retro review. Now if he can just produce a slew of unreliable or intoxicated witnesses, he may just get away with it!

DATELINE:
April 2107 (Prog 413).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE:
John Wagner and Alan Grant pull the wool over Kim Raymond’s eyes.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
An after-dinner game turns deadly.

WHO’S THAT IN THE HELMET?:
Judge Wall and his bitching moustache analyse the vid call. .

IT’S CULTURAL, INNIT?:
JT Edson was an English author famed for his western series of books. .

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
This is decent enough from Raymond. He drops in a circle panel and makes the citizens involved look like a typical bunch of mooks. I must say that as one of the more unloved artists from the classic 80s run, Raymond does actually have a style for the layouts.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
Three. It’s another light tale and not one to become a classic. The voice print analysis ends the investigation really quickly and the whole thing is self-contained enough to work on that basic level. There’s something pleasing about cits in the far future still engaging in dickery.

The Law In Order: Monsteroso

Oh great, giant fucking robots. The only thing worse than having them roam the place freely is making them large enough to smash up the city when they go mental. We have all had the metal bastards rebel against us at some stage in the form of a Roomba with attitude or a malfunctioning sexbot with a grip of iron, but it’s a fool’s vision to allow them to get big enough to demolish buildings or punch out a Kaiju.

DATELINE:
April 2107 (Prog 412).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE:
John Wagner and Alan Grant activate Robin Smith.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
A giant robot goes on the rampage.

WHO’S THAT IN THE HELMET?:
Judge Virgil and his magnificent tache are killed in the robot’s knee joint.

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
Standard stuff from Robin Smith and the robot design looks utterly 1970s. Even in the 1980s it looked dated.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
A very thin tale that could easily have been a Daily Star strip. Three.

The Law In Order: Juve’s Eyes

Orlok used to know a pyro. No, not someone who could start fires with his mind, but someone who genuinely liked to set things ablaze. It is unknown if this was genuine psychopathic behaviour or simply a bid for attention but said person would set fire to farts, maths text books and (on one sad occasion) an entire 1977 Ford Escort. But, like the saying goes, burning will follow playing with fire and he ended up losing his eyebrows. 

DATELINE:
April 2107 (Progs 414-415).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE:
John Wagner and Alan Grant turn the heat up on Ron Smith.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
A juve with pyrokinetic abilities falls in with a bad crowd.

WHO’S THAT IN THE HELMET?:
Judge Persol is used as pun.
Judge Sharba is burned alive but has the steel balls to call it in.

IT’S CULTURAL, INNIT?:
The apartment number of 16-66 ties in nicely with the date of the Great Fire of London.
Judge Persol’s name is used as a nice pun on the washing powder brand of Persil.
Ferd(inand) Marcos was a piece of shit who became the President of the Philippines.
Brigitte Barot (sic) is probably a nod to the famous French actor and activist. I’ve no idea why the D has been dropped, though some may argue she herself dropped the “D” when she divorced Roger Vadim.

ANY LAW LORE?:
Complicity to murder will get you thirty years.

CANON FODDER:
Puerto Nova is mentioned for the first and only time.
Here the Holocaust Squad appear to be employed for fire fighting rather than for the suicide missions we have previously seen.

WHAT THE DROKK:
We have to talk about the el Chupacabra in the room; the comedy accents and slurs here are a difficult read.

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
When it comes to one pagers of total destruction, Ron Smith is the go to guy. The detailed carnage is incredible. There’s even a circle panel for fuck’s sake.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
Five. Though a thin tale of psi abilities gone awry, this look at the plight of Primo Vesta (and his fucknut family) is well realised. The juves he falls in with are absolute cunts and fully deserve to be torched up but Vesta himself is a tragic character. It’s also disturbing to see that immigrants are still treated pretty shitly (“Thanks, Trump!”), and their ignorance of the law is preyed upon by those out to exploit it. Some great art on offer here, too.

The Law In Order: Ashen-Faced

Bloody scientists. One minute they are warning us about the dangers of climate change and asking us to make very small changes to the way we do things and the next they are trying to cheekily save lives by recommending mask use or social distancing. Why can’t they mind their own fucking business and let us kill ourselves off so that the cockroaches can take over. Mind you, for every Fauci there is a My Pillow Asshole so there is hope. 

DATELINE:
April 2107 (Daily Star).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE?:
John Wagner and Alan Grant turn Ron Smith into a flat earther.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
An experiment backfires.

WHAT’ THE DROKK?:
How does a pile of ash speak?

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
Standard.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
Three.

The Law In Order: Game For A Hoot

Despite being a very nice man, Beadle was a notorious practical joker. Now, such jokes have their place in the world, but now when they become so elaborate as to try and make it a national pastime. Or give Noel Edmonds ideas. Fun fact: Jeremy Beadle had a tiny cock; but on the other hand, he didn’t.  

DATELINE:
March 2107 (Daily Star).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE?:
John Wagner and Alan Grant get pranked by Ron Smith.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
A practical joke backfires.

WHO’S THAT IN THE HELMET?:
Judge Souster, the hero of Dan Tanna, has a monument marking the spot where he fell. Dredd remarks that he has made more scrawler busts dead than alive.

IT’S CULTURAL, INNIT?:
Jammy Boodle is an obvious play prankster Jeremy Beadle.
Game For A Hoot is a nice nod to Game For A Laugh.

ANY LAW LORE?:
Dredd can knock five years off a murder charge if it is well deserved.

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
Standard.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
Just three.

The Law In Order: Pest Treatment

Imagine being a fan of a fascist? It must be so difficult to keep up to speed on who are the enemies this week. Is it foreigners? Is it liberals? Is it any press that no longer buys your chosen leader’s bullshit rhetoric? And sooner or later you must know that friends or even family will be targeted and you will have to make a choice. In the case of Dredd, the fan club must be even more precarious because you know he’ll either kill you or lock you up. 

DATELINE:
April 2107 (Daily Star).

WHO’S RESPONSIBLE?:
John Wagner and Alan Grant unfriend Ron Smith.

WHAT’S IT ALL ABOUT (IN ONE SENTENCE)?:
Dredd meets the president of his fan club.

WHAT’S THE ART LIKE?:
Standard, but I do like the design of the holding posts.

HOW MANY LINKS?:
Three.