Gay Bondage Fiction | Adam Craig and his Sons – Page 1

A revolutionary father and his 3 sons are abducted by an oppressive regime and subjected to bondage, torture and slavery in this hot new series by Mohawk.

Adam Craig and his Sons - Page 1
by Mohawk
Series: Adam Craig and his Sons

A dictatorship had finally managed to establish itself in a land formerly free of such governmental control. The new leader called himself “The Chief” and required people to address and refer to him in that way. Freedoms vanished and old social institutions, like slavery (in somewhat new forms), had been reintroduced. Opposition, as in all tyrannies, was criminal and it was one of the crimes for which a person could be condemned to slavery. Due process was eliminated in favor of torture.

A number of people banded together to try to oppose the new regime, but it was a difficult fight. Infiltration by government minions was common. Betrayals occurred regularly, and those accused were automatically guilty whether the confessed under torture or not. (Why would you get arrested if you weren’t guilty?)

In the “new” tyrannical society, criminal justice (as it were) defined three levels or “statuses” which were organized in hierarchical fashion. A person convicted of a crime could be assigned by the court to any one of the three in particular ways. The first level was that of “prisoner”, the second was “private servant” and the third was “slave”.

After a trial, a convicted person would become a “prisoner”. The offense would then be deemed either minor or severe (a decision made by the court and not written in law – flexibility in law is always to be employed whenever possible!). A government appointed judge, who would determine the severity of the crime, would make a decision in a case and then the sentence would follow.

Initially, all convicted miscreants became prisoners until they were sentenced. If the judge so decided, the convicted person would either remain a prisoner, with a specific amount of time to be served, or could be immediately made into a government slave.

There were, however, rather strict rules about prisoners and slaves. Prisoners and slaves could only be held, at least initially, by the State. There were, however, rules by which a prisoner’s status could be converted from “state held” to “private servant”, although the rules seemed honored more in the breach than the observance The State did whatever it wanted. Consistency was never an issue. The State Prisoners and slaves were legally held to be “owned”, at least initially, by the state but it was possible for a private citizen to petition to obtain a “private servant” from among the prisoners. This status change meant that the State released a prisoner to a private citizen for whom the prisoner would become a servant. The prisoner would serve out his time as a “private servant” rather than an incarcerated prisoner. Once the state released a prisoner to a private citizen, he worked for his new “owner” “Prisoners”, as such, could never be held by any entity other than the state, hence the need to change the prisoner’s status from “prisoner” to “private servant”. Men who were classified as ”prisoner” or” private servant” status were sentenced for varying durations depending on how the judge regarded the seriousness of the crime. Prisoners might reasonably expect that at the end of their sentence, they would be released back into the general civilian population. Many of their rights as citizens might be permanently revoked, but to all intents and purposes, they could be considered “free men”.

Prisoners as such, were allowed, for a short while, to keep their own clothing through the sentencing phase, but later would be made to wear typical prisoner garb, which made them immediately identifiable on the street should he escape. At the end of their sentence their original clothing and other possessions would be returned to them.

“Private servant” was a status that allowed a prisoner to be removed from government ownership to private ownership. Changing an individual’s status from prisoner to “private servant” was fairly simple. The person wishing to have a servant would simply get permission from the government to take a prisoner, assume responsibility for his actions, and most importantly (naturally) – pay fees to the government - and then take control of the man. There was a written contract between the state, the servant and the new “master” or “owner” which described whatever details there were to be in the relationship between the “private servant” and his “owner” and the state. Basically, the state said little about the contract. It was seen as an arrangement between the prisoner and the private “owner” who was often, but not always, the person against whom the prisoner had committed the crime. It was a kind of pleasant arrangement for the victim of the crime who could now deal with the criminal personally. Occasionally the state might make suggestions that might go into the contract, but rarely did. Prisoners could not be compelled to enter into such an agreement but usually did, since the alternatives could be a good deal worse. The victims of the crime (who would likely be the person to whom the private servant would be assigned of course), were often willing to forgo, for example longer prison sentences for the ability to actually have their tormentors under their own control and inflict punishments on the perpetrators themselves. Prisoners, while fearful of what their former victims might do to them, were willing to agree if the contract indicated the servant couldn’t be killed or permanently maimed.

“Private servants” unlike prisoners, were given specific uniforms to wear which not only marked them as servants, but also indicated to some degree what kind of work they were doing at the moment. Prisoners had some rights; servants had a few; slaves had none.

Slavery on the other hand, was something quite different. A prisoner’s “slave” status was often decided at the end of the trial when the judge pronounced that the man, who had just been tried, had been found guilty of a “heinous” crime and was now a slave of the State. In effect, in some cases, a person’s “prisoner status” lasted only as long as the time between the finding of guilt and the sentencing.

Unrepentant prisoners (defined, naturally, by government decision) could, at any time, have their status changed from “prisoner” to “governmental slave”. Even if a prisoner had been given a limited sentence, once his status was changed, his status as slave was permanent and his sentence became a mandatory life sentence. It was, in part, a way for the government to control prisoners. Every prisoner knew that the government could, at any time, convert his status to slave status. As a result, prisoners tended to be well behaved.

Transition from prisoner to government slave was quite simple. The government (or member thereof) decided, for whatever reason, that he wanted some particular prisoner made into a slave, and the government made the decree. Usually, the request was made by some government branch, like “Public Works”, which might be shorthanded and in need of laborers. Any branch would simply take the sturdiest looking prisoners and make them government slaves. This was not unlikely to result from some government official having a grudge against a prisoner or a prisoner’s family, rather than any real need in the department of that government office or branch. It was all sort of personal.

There were no procedures to appeal to any government body for such a change of status. Once a prisoner was made a government slave, the job was done. Governmental slaves, like all slaves in the society, were not allowed any clothing. They could often be seen working completely naked in the streets. It saved money on prison uniforms.

Becoming a “privately owned” or” personal slave” from the status of prisoner was close to impossible. Most personal slaves, and there were many, had been moved to that position from having been governmental servants or personal servants. The personal servant’s owner simply brought charges of a contract violation, which were invariably upheld with or without evidence. A full citizen bringing charges against a convicted criminal was of course, always to be believed. Since personal servants were already held by private individuals and not the government, the government was not involved in such a change of status (other than the trial) and to note duly the change of status in the personal records, which the government kept on all citizens, free, prisoners, personal servants and slaves. “X has been transferred from the rolls of ‘personal servant’ to that of ‘private slave’”. At that point, “X” would be stripped of all his rights and all his possessions - including whatever he might be wearing at the time. He would stand naked and be photographed by government photographers. His photos would be attached to the appropriate government documents and filed away. There was no returning from the status of “slave”- of any kind. It was a “lifetime” position.

Changes in status from prisoner to privately owned slave generally occurred when some person specifically bribed a government official to make a specific person a slave, so they could buy them. The government was able to sell off governmental slaves to private individuals although this was almost always done through a slave auction in order for the state to get the highest amount for the slave.

1 Comment

1. 

   scotts60143 - September 6, 2024, 8:02 am

   Good beginning, although a little complicated to try and understand all the different status’. That aside, the pic with dad and the three sons is quite hot…especially that first son! Could definitely have some fun with that!