History YMMV / StarTrekDeepSpaceNineS04E18RulesOfEngagement

* FridgeLogic: Why does a Klingon passenger vessel even have a cloaking device? They're pretty top secret devices and to have a bunch of civilians on a ship with that is pretty foolish. (Of course, once the FrameUp is revealed, the question becomes moot.)
** The Federation's "no shooting at any decloaking ship in a combat zone ever" is a pretty stupid hill to die on, cedes even more of an advantage in a combat scenario to an opponent with cloaked ships. Even a simple guideline along the lines of "Federation starships may fire on decloaking vessels in a combat zone if they broadcast an all channels, languages & frequencies, a warning to third party ships not to decloak or they may be fired upon" would suffice.
** Worf is on trial for destroying an "innocent" transport ship in the heat of combat. Yet no one mentions the blatant hypocrisy that this whole brouhaha started with the Klingons ambushing a convoy carrying humanitarian aid (and going even further, that the aid was only necessary in the first place because of the Klingons' systematic slaughter of the Cardassians in a war which they preemptively started). Seriously, Ch'Pok should have been laughed right out of Federation space the minute he tried to slap such an accusation on Worf.
** Ch'Pok goads Worf into attacking him, and then says "I thought you said you'd never attack an unarmed man". Thing is, Worf [[ExactWords did not say that]]. Worf said he'd never attack a ''defenseless person''; Ch'Pok is, as far as we can see, an adult, able-bodied, male Klingon, and as both Worf and Ch'Pok are bare-handed, neither of them would be "defenseless" in a fight against one another. It still serves as an example of Worf not keeping his "Klingon urges" in check, but while a courtroom is not the right venue for a fight, there is a big difference between fighting someone who ''can'' defend themself and fighting someone who ''can't''.

* FridgeLogic: Why does a Klingon passenger vessel even have a cloaking device? They're pretty top secret devices and to have a bunch of civilians on a ship with that is pretty foolish.

* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: At this point the Federation is well into a border conflict with its former ally the Klingon Empire, but it very much wants them back onside what with the Dominion threat still hanging over everyone's heads. Given the absurdity of the idea that the Klingon legal system could possibly have jurisdiction over a serving Starfleet officer acting in a military capacity, it's quite possible that somebody up high was [[JuryAndWitnessTampering pressuring the judge]] to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons. Because otherwise, ''logically'' the entire plot should've been over and done with in the first five minutes after they explicitly established that Worf had acted within regulations.

* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: More like alternate plot setup interpretation. At this point the Federation is well into a border conflict with its former ally the Klingon Empire, but it very much wants them back onside. Given the absurdity of the idea that the Klingon legal system could possibly have jurisdiction over a serving Starfleet officer acting in a military capacity, it's quite possible that somebody up high was [[JuryAndWitnessTampering pressuring the judge]] to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons. Because otherwise, ''logically'' the entire plot should've been over and done with in the first five minutes after they explicitly established that Worf had acted within regulations.

* HilariousInHindsight: The plot: an esteemed officer (Worf) gets accused of attacking and killing innocent civilians. The exact plot (And title) of 2000's ''Rules of Engagement'' starring Creator/SamuelLJackson and Creator/TommyLeeJones.

* HilariousInHindsight: The plot: an esteemed officer (Worf) gets accused of attacking and killing innocent civilians. Wait, wasn't this a 2000 film starring Creator/SamuelLJackson and Creator/TommyLeeJones?