Reiser - Trades Body For Lighter Sentence

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by CyberBullets, Jul 8, 2008.

  1. CyberBullets

    CyberBullets I reach to the sky, and call out your name. If I c

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    11,865
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    BC, Canada/Stockholm, Sweden
    CLIFFS: Reiser sent his wife to /dev/null :o

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/07/BAN011LDR8.DTL

     
  2. TheDarkHorizon

    TheDarkHorizon \xC0\xFF\xEE

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,396
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I was pretty sure he didn't do it. Whoops :o
     
  3. Limp_Brisket

    Limp_Brisket New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    48,422
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
  4. SLED

    SLED build an idiot proof device and someone else will

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2001
    Messages:
    28,118
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    AZ, like a bauce!
  5. GOGZILLA

    GOGZILLA Double-Uranium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Messages:
    10,760
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Plantation, FL
  6. burn__

    burn__ New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    10,673
    Likes Received:
    0
  7. red

    red New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    87,095
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. red

    red New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    87,095
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's another version that says "creator jailed," but I think this one is funnier.
     
  9. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's actually a very useful feature. Not many filesystems give you that option, and when you really need to get rid of your wife, there really isn't any other way to do it.
     
  10. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Too bad there weren't more dorks on his jury. His bullshit defense worked on so many of you.
     
  11. red

    red New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    87,095
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't follow the case very closely myself, but I do recall reading an article about the evidence he was convicted on and finding it a little thin. He certainly looked guilty as hell, but there was absolutely room for doubt. Until now, obviously.
     
  12. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    His defense was plausible in light of the complete lack of physical evidence. That doesn't mean it held water, it meant it didn't leak because there was no water to hold.

    The jury still convicted based on circumstance and hypothesis, which was the wrong thing to do, even if the end result was correct by accident. You don't convict because you think the guy's guilty, you convict because you know the guy's guilty.

    Yes, if there had been more dorks on the jury, he probably would've gotten off, but not because we're suceptible to bullshit -- because we'd actually consider the facts (or complete lack of facts) instead of thinking "ew, that dude's creepy, he sure looks like a wife-killer".
     
  13. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are wrong. You don't convict because you KNOW he's guilty. You convict if he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You are applying the wrong standard. He was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but not if the jury had to KNOW he was guilty period.

    There was tons of evidence, but you identified with Reiser so you ignored it. Enough circumstantial evidence results in a conviction in our judicial system. That was the defense's strategy - that you identify with Reiser so you ignore all that evidence - there just weren't enough dorks on the jury for it to work.
     
  14. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Guilty of murder beyond a shadow of a doubt.
     
  15. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Incorrect. The standard used was reasonable doubt, not shadow of a doubt.
     
  16. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    yeah, that's what got me last time. reasonable vs no doubt at all.
     
  17. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    Beyond a shadow of a doubt would mean that anyone who hid a body would get off. Lame.
     
  18. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't need a body to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. Any tissue fragment, combined with evidence of trauma capable of causing death, is sufficient.
     
  19. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    either way, all of the law & order and monk type shows have shown that the defense is looking for "reasonable doubt."
     
  20. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, and they also demonstrate that it's acceptable to flip out in the middle of a courtroom and to make pathos arguments instead of logos arguments. Which is to say, those shows are full of shit. It's TV drama, for crying out loud.
     
  21. Mike99TA

    Mike99TA I don't have anything clever to put here right now

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,553
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    Except your arguments are completely blown out of the water by the fact that he actually did do it, and just admitted to it, so you defending him because you thought his arguments were ok is just silly since they obviously were false.
     
  22. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    My arguments aren't blown out of the water, because I'm not arguing whether he did it. I'm arguing that he was convicted improperly; the prosecution did not have a strong enough case. Did he do it? Yes. Does he deserve to go to jail? Yes. Did the jury do the right thing? No, because they were only correct by accident. They could've just as easily convicted a different guy based on the same shit and been totally wrong.
     
  23. Limp_Brisket

    Limp_Brisket New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    48,422
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    stop being so pathos
     
  24. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm annoyed, yes, but that was a logos argument. The jury is supposed to interpret evidence. In this case, they interpreted the guy's character instead, and just happened to get it right.

    The reason it bothers me personally is because I share a few personality traits with Hans Reiser, as do most of you I suspect, and had someone pointed at one of us in a lineup, and had the prosecution made the same case, we might very well have been convicted by the same jury based on the same flawed reasoning.

    Worse still, if the appeal landed in the courtroom of a judge who was more of the mindset that we should have to prove the prosecution wrong instead of the prosecution having to re-prove themselves correct, then the verdict would never get overturned because the prosecution's case is based entirely on guessing the intent of someone who does things that don't always make sense, and you can't change someone's opinion with another opinion.
     
  25. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    This opinion is ridiculous to everyone but you. You think its reasonable because you very much identify with the killer. Its kinda sick.
     

Share This Page