Fadel, Bison, & Keen: The Implication of Victimhood and Human Trafficking
TW/CW Note: This essay argues the case of Fadel, Bison, and Keen being the victims of human trafficking. It also compiles and dissects evidence of that claim with sources, analyses of various scenes, and current Thai and International laws. It may be upsetting for some readers.
This meta/essay was written because I can't just watch a fun, Shakespeare derived show about gay hitmen and not get weird about it.
…And also because I have been working in the mental health/behavioral field for several years, almost solely with minors - some of whom were abused and exploited.
The more I think about Fadel's and Bison's circumstances - the canon evidence, the implied manipulation and abuse throughout the show, and everything that WASN’T shown or said to give Lilly any kind of legal legitimacy, the more I feel like they aren't as culpable for their crimes as they think they are.
But first, what constitutes as human trafficking on a Thai and international standard?
Under Thai law, human trafficking is comprehensively defined in the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act B.E. 2551 (2008). The Act outlines specific actions, means, and purposes that constitute human trafficking offenses.
Definition(s) of Human Trafficking
According to Section 6 of the Act:
"Whoever, for the purpose of exploitation, does any of the following acts: procuring, buying, selling, vending, bringing from or sending to, detaining or confining, harboring, or receiving a person, by means of threat or use of force, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power, or of the giving money or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, shall be guilty of trafficking in persons."
While this definition can be interpreted differently by various parties, the The Act further clarifies that exploitation includes, but is not limited to:
Sexual exploitation
Production or distribution of pornography
Forced labor or services
Slavery or practices similar to slavery
Involuntary servitude
Forced begging
Removal of organs for commercial purposes
Other similar forms of exploitation
It is worth noting that these forms of exploitation are ALWAYS considered trafficking when a child is involved, and Fadel, Bison, and Keen were obtained as minors under duress and violent circumstances.
Below are screenshots from The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act, which pertains to Thailand specifically. Highlighted statements support the claims being made in this essay according to their country’s laws on the matter.
Internationally, human trafficking is defined by The United Nations as:
"The recruitment, transport, transfer, harbouring, or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.”
Considering Fadel, Bison, and Keen were all orphaned when their parents were murdered by Lilly’s people, only to be put in the (dubious) custody of the woman who left them vulnerable to make them dependent on her, they more than fit this definition.
1. Acquisition through Deception and Questionable Guardianship
Following the murders of their parents, Fadel, Bison, and Keen were placed in the custody of Lilly—a woman they had no known relationship with prior.
All three came from wealthy families, yet no efforts appear to have been made to place them with relatives or protect their inheritance. They ended up with their parents' killer. Lilly tricking all three of their families into granting custody in the event of their deaths seems unlikely, but if she managed, this is still a form of coercion, considering what transpired.
Legal Framework: Thai Civil and Commercial Code Sections 1585–1588 require formal guardianship proceedings, prioritizing relatives and requiring oversight.
The UN Palermo Protocol and Thailand’s Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act B.E. 2551 (2008) would both consider guardianship obtained through fraud, deception, or abuse of power as qualifying mechanisms for trafficking. Considering Lilly had Fadel’s, Bison’s, and Keen’s parents murdered, then lied about who was responsible for their trauma and rehoming, she definitely committed:
Fraud, by misrepresenting herself - both to the boys and possibly to the courts for either legal guardianship, financial gain to obtain the families’ assets, or both.
Deception, by making her adopted sons trust her initially, only to manipulate them into thinking they were in danger and needed to be trained as hitmen.
Abuse of power, by using her position to manipulate them into a state of vulnerability so they would be reliant on her and loyal when it came to her training and orders once she gained their trust.
Conclusion: The guardianship and its legality may have never been formally investigated, and it may not have been obtained legally. If it was legally documented, Lilly likely obtained it through bribes and systematic manipulation. Considering all three boys seem to have come from wealthy families who would have likely assigned a guardian that their sons knew prior to being orphaned (a family member, a family friend), the circumstances are highly irregular. It also strongly suggests deceptive acquisition, qualifying under the legal definitions of trafficking.
2. Psychological Manipulation and Coercive Conditioning
Lilly began by treating the boys like sons, offering safety and structure before introducing training for violence and strategic killing. In the brief flashback we get, we see three boys standing in a line, foreshadowing their eventual soldier-like expectations. But when she sees one of their shoes untied, she bends down and ties it for them before telling all three they can call her “Mother”. This establishes a gentle, maternal bond that offers comfort, care, and parental authority. But this memory is sharply contrasted by the one following it when she has them practice their aim after the trust and need to impress her has been established. By the time she is sending Fadel and Bison on jobs she frames as necessary and noble, they are fully loyal to her and trust her knowledge, judgment, and orders.
She framed their actions as necessary protection or retribution for their parents' deaths, creating a false moral narrative to justify lethal missions. This manipulation led to emotional dependence, blurred lack of autonomy, and the belief that loyalty to her was synonymous with survival and justice.
Legal Framework: Thai and international trafficking laws recognize emotional coercion, abuse of trust, and manipulation of vulnerability as means of trafficking.
Conclusion: The grooming and emotional manipulation used to coerce minors into violence constitutes a clear form of non-physical coercion and entrapment. Despite Fadel and Bison being adults by the time they are arrested for their crimes, they were groomed, conditioned, manipulated, isolated from familial connections, and ultimately brainwashed as children.
3. Coerced Criminal Activity through False Narratives
Fadel and Bison were often told their assassination targets were involved with their families’ deaths or were dangerous criminals. While a few of these claims may have been true, other claims may have been used to manufacture moral permission to kill, embedding loyalty through deceit. They carried out violent missions under the impression that they were defending themselves or serving justice. Again, they were conditioned to prepare for this as minors, and possibly started missions prior to reaching adulthood. The timeline on their first kills was never substantiated, but their conditioning, grooming, isolation from family, and brainwashing make them qualify as victims being coerced into criminal activity through false narratives.
Legal Framework: The Palermo Protocol and Thailand’s anti-trafficking statute both include criminal exploitation through manipulation or deception.
Conclusion: Their participation in criminal acts under coerced moral justification meets the standard for trafficking-based criminal exploitation.
4. Sexual Exploitation via Implicit Coercion and Mission Pressure
This one is more of an interpretation, but I feel like it is worth exploring.
Going by what we see, it was not uncommon for Fadel and Bison to perform seduction-based roles as part of their missions—exotic dancing, acting as escorts, or using sexual appeal to disarm targets.
In the first scene of the show, Bison is posing as an escort and spending time with an older man. He starts singing karaoke with him, but is in the robe in the next scene and massaging the target, who is sitting in a tub, which is where the target is ultimately killed. Bison doesn't flinch. He almost looks proud of himself when the man is clearly falling for his advances. This notes satisfaction with his methods leading towards a successful, criminal mission that results in murder.
Fadel’s reaction towards such methods is a huge contrast.
In episode 3, Fadel and Bison are expected to seduce a person of interest through exotic dancing. She is then drugged and taken back to her room so they can go through her things and obtain information. Fadel initially pushes Bison to honey trap. He remains distant, cordial, and uses the excuse that Bison is better at it (which might imply Bison having less issues with it overall).
But this time, Bison refuses. It's worth noting this conversation happens right after he talks to Fadel about possibly dating Kant. He may have had little to no issue with it before, but does now that he is developing real feelings for someone. Bison pushes Fadel to be the one to seduce the woman. Unlike Fadel's stiff, professional request, Bison is humorous and playful. This continues despite Fadel showing discomfort and reluctance at the thought of dancing for her and the crowd. He ultimately goes through with it. Bison almost seems smug over not being the woman’s type and Fadel having to be the one to dance (although reacts with subtle and mild offense when the woman tells him that to his face). He also doesn't seem to empathize with his brother’s discomfort.
While it is possible that these methods were not suggested by Lilly and are only ones they resorted to as adults based on their own decision-making skills (as compromised as they were by their conditioning in other developmental areas), their reactions to this situation scream otherwise.
Fadel is reluctant and uncomfortable that he has to be the one to do it. His consent is dubious at best. He seems to depend more on Bison to carry out this type of skill due to contrasting takes on the matter.
Bison, on the other hand, seems to normalize honey trapping. He only takes issue with it when he is developing a romantic relationship. Even then, he teases and jokes about Fadel being the better man for this particular job, missing the quiet reluctance on Fadel's part. This hints towards desensitization, which can be a common coping response for abuse and complex trauma victims.
While Lilly’s conditioning on this front can only be speculated, we have a couple of pieces of circumstantial evidence that support the idea she either subtly planted seeds to put this method in her adopted sons’ toolkit or directed them to do it more overtly in the past - leading them to choose that method “freely” now.
Lilly’s recruitment of Kant into escort work—specifically to bring attractive friends to act as 'party favors'—demonstrates a clear pattern of sexually exploitative behaviors. While Kant WANTED to be invited to her circle to expose her for her crimes, she didn't know this. She viewed him as a young golf caddy, someone she could exploit with the promise of payment.
Lilly was a hitwoman herself. She may have resorted to honey trapping methods back when she was working beneath someone else. Cycled and generational abuse is unfortunately common, especially when the trusted figure refuses to admit they were once a victim or seek out therapeutic services/support.
So…
Legal Framework: Thai and international law define sexual exploitation to include pressured or coerced participation in sexualized roles, especially when the individual is underage or emotionally dependent. Regardless of when these behaviors started, they were conditioned, groomed, and isolated at a young age and made emotionally/psychologically dependent in adulthood. The crimes they were committing on Lilly's behalf fueled sexualizing themselves for information.
Conclusion: These sexually charged missions—especially when reinforced by peer pressure, manipulation, or emotional conditioning—fall within the scope of indirect sexual exploitation under trafficking statutes.
5. Systematic Emotional Abuse and Dependency Control
A strict performance-based hierarchy seems to have governed Lilly’s household. Compliance resulted in praise; deviation led to emotional withdrawal, ridicule, or humiliation.
Keen, unable to serve in the field, was repeatedly shamed and belittled, creating an obsessive need to prove his worth. He was often verbally and emotionally abused by Lilly. Fadel’s and Bison’s insults towards him often hint at ridicule or - alternatively - resentment, since Keen has never had to kill anyone. Creating rifts within the formed sibling unit also creates a breeding ground for competition and a need to please the trusted figure, especially in the more isolated party. Keen’s need to impress Lilly later on by trying to carry out the hits on Fadel and Style (and Kant and Bison, if they had been tracked down) was almost inevitable.
Meanwhile, Fadel and Bison were rewarded for excelling, reinforcing a world where survival and approval were earned only through loyalty and effectiveness.
Legal Framework: Emotional abuse and psychological dependence are explicitly acknowledged in trafficking legislation as valid tools of coercion.
Conclusion: This emotionally volatile environment fostered long-term dependency and control which meets the criteria for non-physical coercive trafficking.
6. Threat of Retaliation for Attempts to Exit
When Fadel and Bison attempted to retire peacefully, Lilly appeared to give her blessing—then secretly instructed Keen to murder them and their romantic partners.
Keen failed, and was verbally abused by Lilly, solidifying the lesson that disloyalty equals death.
Years earlier, Fadel had tried to leave her control by planning to move in with his first boyfriend. Shortly after, the boyfriend vanished.
Fadel believed he had been abandoned until Keen later confessed that Lilly had put a hit on the man. When Fadel asks why he never told him earlier, Keen says she would have killed him too.
Legal Framework: Retaliation or threats tied to exit attempts are core indicators of trafficking under both Thai and international law.
Conclusion: The lethal consequences for asserting independence—whether through romantic relationships or attempted retirement—showcase total control through fear, reinforcing their status as trafficking victims.
7. Financial Exploitation and Asset Suppression
This point is also more theorized, but is still worth noting.
Despite their likely inheritance due to their families’ wealth, Fadel and Bison seem to only have limited access to the estates they were legally owed.
It is implied that individuals (likely tied to Lilly) pressured their parents to relinquish property or wealth, and that refusal to comply preceded their murders.
Once the boys were in Lilly’s custody, it is unclear if there is evidence of ethical estate management or legal oversight.
Considering Lilly’s obsession with status - displayed by her friend group, hangout spots, and greed, it would not be surprising if she took control of the majority of their estates. She may have given them access to just enough for them not to investigate the extent of what they lost out on. Bison mentions the island home was the only property that wasn't taken. Any uncovered inheritance in the form of cash, stocks, bonds, property, valuables, and other assets were likely fraudulently controlled and only partially handed over to keep Fadel, Bison, and Keen from asking questions. Otherwise, it isn't out of the realm of possibility that Lilly arranged to take ownership or be the beneficiary through fraud, coercion, deception, or bribery, which is likely how she also gained custody of three biologically unrelated minors.
In fact, Lilly likely wouldn't have taken in three minors she personally traumatized unless there was a great payout earlier on. While being able to condition and brainwash them helped her financially in the long run, it would have been a huge gamble legally and a risky investment if she had not gotten the majority of their inheritance. So she likely let them keep some of what was rightfully theirs and paid them good salaries, but robbed them of much more than what she gave.
Legal Framework: Financial control is recognized under Thai law and international trafficking doctrine as a coercive tactic when used to restrict independence or manipulate behavior.
Conclusion: Their restricted access to their potential inheritance—combined with the violent deaths of their parents following coercion—strongly supports a pattern of financial exploitation consistent with trafficking operations.
Final Summary of Evidence Compilation
Fadel and Bison experienced:
Fraudulent custody acquisition and loss of familial protection
Psychological manipulation and mission-based coercion
Forced criminal activity disguised as moral duty
Possible sexual exploitation through conditioned loyalty and mission expectations
Emotional abuse and performance-based affection to ensure compliance
Lethal retaliation for attempted independence
Possible economic exploitation, likely linked to their parents’ murders
These experiences satisfy all legal definitions of human trafficking under:
Thailand’s Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act B.E. 2551 (2008)
The UN Palermo Protocol, ratified by Thailand in 2003
By this criteria, they were victims—trafficked, conditioned, and controlled through emotional, economic, and psychological means.
Legal and Moral Culpability
Legally and morally, Fadel, Bison, and Keen are victims of human trafficking going by the current laws and standards when their circumstances are examined.
But are they culpable for the crimes they committed under Lilly’s control and manipulation?
Yes and no. Morally, they are culpable in the sense that they committed murder and had awareness of what they were doing. They may have thought they were killing bad people, but they also seem to have known that killing was wrong. They knew to lay low and to not get caught. Their situation and upbringing led to other disturbing behaviors (kidnapping their significant others upon being betrayed). In some ways, yes. They have a history of being morally in the wrong and likely know as much, especially after Lilly’s lies and crimes are revealed.
However, with all of the circumstances listed above that support the idea they were victims of human trafficking, they would have had a strong case that might have excused them from legal culpability if presented extensively and correctly by knowledgeable legal representation.
“Each Party shall, subject to its domestic laws, rules, regulations and policies, and in appropriate cases, consider not holding victims of trafficking in persons criminally or administratively liable, for unlawful acts committed by them, if such acts are directly related to the acts of trafficking.”
“Any person who is a victim of trafficking in persons shall receive protection and appropriate care from the Government, including physical, psychological, and social rehabilitation, legal assistance, and compensation for damages.”
Source: Thailand Anti-Trafficking Act B.E. 2551 (2008), Section 41: https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Thailand197.pdf
“Trafficked persons should not be subject to arrest, charge, detention, prosecution, or be penalized or otherwise punished for illegal conduct that they committed as a direct consequence of being trafficked.”
Source: UNODC Issue Paper on Non-Punishment Principle: https://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/ICAT/19-10800_ICAT_Issue_Brief_8_Ebook.pdf
“The non-punishment principle is integral to fulfilling human rights obligations to victims, and obligations to prevent and suppress trafficking in persons and other serious crimes.”
Five years for murder charges? Normally a great deal. It is understandable why Fadel and Bison jumped on it, especially when they do not identify as trafficking victims and feel responsible for their prior crimes now that they know about all of Lilly’s lies. A life on the run was not appealing at that point. Serving five years so they could move on with their lives and hopefully be with their partners after the fact was preferable.
But I can only assume they declined legal counsel and a hearing/trial in exchange. If they requested legal counsel and got someone knowledgeable in exploitation, their cases and histories could have been examined in their entirety. A legal counsel set on advocating for them would have likely picked up any prior legal loopholes Lilly took advantage of, along with any fraud, coercion, abuse, and legal/illegal inconsistencies. With this evidence being documented, a strong case for their status as trafficking victims could have been established. This could have led to an even lesser sentence or no sentence at all. If it was determined that they needed to be in a restrictive environment, they would have likely ended up somewhere that focused on rehabilitation - not punishment - and it may have been for a much shorter time. Their status as trafficking survivors (if accepted by the courts, legal counsel, and Fadel and Bison themselves) would also likely result in expunged and sealed records.
So while this drama is classified as a romantic comedy based on a Shakespeare play, it is ultimately tragic when it comes to systematic failure - as well as the long-term trafficking, abuse, and manipulation not being legally recognized for three key characters. Fadel, Bison, and Keen will likely never truly understand the scope of injustices they have faced. They were not only failed by Lilly. They were also failed by the system that should have saved them from her.
