Remmick's Interrogation: Picard's Integrity Under Fire
Plot Beats
The narrative micro-steps within this event
Remmick confronts Picard with accusations of Prime Directive violation and personal bias, but Picard stands unflinching, defending his choices and demanding an end to the baseless investigation.
Who Was There
Characters present in this moment
Calm but resolute, masking personal pain beneath professional duty.
Dr. Beverly Crusher maintains firm professionalism while rejecting Remmick’s personal attacks, defending Captain Picard’s integrity and separating personal grief from official matters with resolute composure.
- • To maintain professionalism and protect Picard’s reputation.
- • To deflect inappropriate personal questioning.
- • To uphold Starfleet ethical standards despite political tension.
- • Personal feelings are irrelevant to the investigation.
- • Picard acted honorably despite difficult circumstances.
- • Remmick’s approach is invasive and inappropriate.
Composed with quiet strength, deeply confident in his moral and command decisions despite external pressure.
Captain Picard calmly and resolutely admits to his deliberate Prime Directive violation involving the Edo, standing firm against Remmick’s accusations and demanding the investigation’s end to protect the ship’s command integrity.
- • To affirm the validity of his controversial decision.
- • To assert moral authority and end the damaging investigation.
- • To protect the Enterprise’s command structure and crew morale.
- • His intervention was justified ethically and professionally.
- • Starfleet principles transcend rigid adherence to protocol when justice demands.
- • Prolonging the investigation harms the ship and crew.
Measured composure, focused on truth and procedural correctness without emotional bias.
Data calmly and logically responds to Remmick’s accusatory questioning, defending Captain Picard and the accuracy of the ship’s logs, asserting a rational and truthful perspective grounded in his programming.
- • To maintain the integrity of the Enterprise and its captain.
- • To provide truthful, unambiguous answers per programming.
- • To resist Remmick’s insinuations and uphold Starfleet principles.
- • Captain Picard and the ship's logs are truthful and accurate.
- • Loyalty is secondary to truth in this context.
- • Remmick’s suspicions are unfounded.
Cautiously defensive with underlying impatience toward Remmick’s accusatory tone.
Worf answers Remmick tersely, defending Captain Picard’s procedures with guarded brevity, demonstrating his warrior discipline and loyalty amid skepticism and subtle hostility.
- • To shield Captain Picard’s reputation and command decisions.
- • To answer questions without giving ground to suspicion.
- • To maintain his role as loyal officer amid political tension.
- • The contaminant incident was accidental, not due to negligence.
- • Picard’s leadership should not be undermined by external investigation.
- • Remmick’s questioning is unnecessary and disruptive.
Calmly aggressive, masking an underlying agenda of mistrust and institutional skepticism.
Commander Remmick conducts a systematic interrogation of key Enterprise officers with a relentless and suspicious demeanor, pressing for admissions of wrongdoing and Prime Directive violations, embodying Starfleet's internal oversight and political pressure.
- • To uncover evidence of Captain Picard’s alleged violations and leadership faults.
- • To pressure officers into revealing hidden information or inconsistencies.
- • To assert Starfleet oversight authority within the Enterprise command structure.
- • Captain Picard has acted improperly and might be concealing truth.
- • Starfleet’s integrity depends on rooting out such violations.
- • Interrogation and pressure will yield the truth.
Objects Involved
Significant items in this scene
Dr. Beverly Crusher's medical notes and notebooks are implied as part of the investigative materials Remmick consults, framing his personal and professional scrutiny of Picard's decisions and their consequences, highlighting the intersection of medical ethics and Starfleet command.
The ship's logs serve as a central evidentiary artifact referenced repeatedly during the interrogation, underpinning Remmick's accusations and Picard's defense. They represent the official record against which all claims are measured, symbolizing the clash between bureaucratic scrutiny and command discretion.
Location Details
Places and their significance in this event
Relva 7’s orbit situates the Enterprise in a high-stakes context where Starfleet Academy exams and external crises unfold, heightening the narrative tension and underscoring the contrast between individual trials and institutional pressures.
The Observation Lounge functions as the formal, tension-charged setting for Remmick's interrogation, its confined and subdued environment amplifying the psychological pressure on officers while underscoring themes of surveillance, mistrust, and fragile command unity.
Narrative Connections
How this event relates to others in the story
"Worf’s vulnerability in confiding his fears parallels his later steadfast defense of Picard during Remmick’s harsh questioning, showing his psychological complexity."
"Worf’s vulnerability in confiding his fears parallels his later steadfast defense of Picard during Remmick’s harsh questioning, showing his psychological complexity."
"Worf’s vulnerability in confiding his fears parallels his later steadfast defense of Picard during Remmick’s harsh questioning, showing his psychological complexity."
Part of Larger Arcs
Key Dialogue
"REMMICK: "There is a problem with this ship, Mister Data. It's in the records, somewhere. I need your help to find it.""
"DATA: "All the ship's records are available to you, sir.""
"PICARD: "Yes. It's exactly as I explained it in the log records.""
"PICARD: "One of my crew was held unjustly. I stand by my decision.""
"PICARD: "Mister Remmick, you have talked to everyone on this ship. I think you've had enough time to find out whatever it is you need to know.""
"PICARD: "The only thing I'm guilty of is allowing this charade to go on too long.""