Slashdot Mirror
Hans Reiser To Reveal Location of Wife's Body
dlgeek writes "The story of Hans Reiser is well known to all Slashdotters by now. Some still placed doubts about the conviction, stating that he might be innocent. It now seems that all doubt has been quelled, since Alameda County District Attorney Thomas Orloff has revealed that Hans Reiser will disclose the location of Nina's body for a reduced sentence.
The deal is not yet finalized, though. 'There's been some overtures,' Orloff said, 'But everything is in its preliminary stage.' The deal would reduce his conviction from first degree to second degree murder. In addition, an anonymous source close to the situation said that 'the only real leverage he has is if he can provide a body. He really doesn't have any options left. Even if he won a retrial somehow, he'd likely be convicted.'"
Which, while it might be true, is still stupid.
Imagine if Albert Einstein had accepted the position of leader of Israel after World War II and ordered some massive war crime, like say slaughtering the Arabs with nukes.
Would we just toss aside General Relativity, never to see it again, because we don't want to be associated with the author?
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
I hope this thread has minimal snarky sarcastic comments, this is just sad all around.
Don't feel bad. From the informaton that was coming out about the trial, there really was reasonable doubt until he took the stand. And the guy is quirky, so it's easy for geeks (who are often quirky) to identify with him.
I've got the troll points for arguing that he was guilty from the get-go, and I think that he is. But, in this case, I think before those people who supported him jump off of a mental cliff, let's let the DA actually deliver the body and the proof of Hans's cooperation. The story is believable enough, but, let's let the DA PROVE it first.
This is my sig.
Wow I feel like a moron for have ever attempted to defend Hans online at all.
You shouldn't. To most people, even people who "defended" him, it was more likely than not that he was guilty. But the legal criterion is "beyond a reasonable doubt". I think based on the publicly released evidence, there was still a reasonable doubt.
I still don't feel really comfortable with jurors making decisions based on "looking into people's eyes", as one of the jurors was saying; given how many people believe in astrology, mind reading, new age, and other supernatural stuff, I think there there's a lot of potential for bad decision making there. And there are, indeed, lots of wrongful convictions, so it's not like the system is working perfectly.
Still, it looks like the jurors were right on this one.
ReiserFS is maybe created by a murderer, but that doesn't mean it's bad. Hans Reiser may have comitted an intolerable crime, but if you would rob yourself of what might be the best filesystem for your application, it would just be a bloody shame. In my opinion using ReiserFS doesn't immediately mean you agree with his actions. It just mean that you prefer ReiserFS over other systems.
:)
This being said though, I prefer ZFS myself
Also, considering Microsoft has so many employees, I have no doubt, that there have been people working there that comitted far worse than a crime of passion. Doesn't mean that the product is bad... Well, okay it is, but not because of some employee going nuts.
Besides, I think there are many CEO's or CFO's or any C?O's out there that have comitted far worse than a single murder, like Shell pumping oil in africa, killing thousands knowingly by pollution. If you'd go your route, you wouldn't be able to get groceries anymore in a normal fasion, because the truck getting the groceries might have filled it up with diesel at a shell.
Manuals are your last resort only
oj simpson's case was skewered in this country by race. that is, more black people tended to think of oj as innocent, and more white people thought of him as guilty
the hans reiser case reveals that techies suffer this same sort of prejudice as black people concerning oj simpson. had this guy not authored a file system,
1. no one would care about this case
2. most would assume his guilt
a lot pof people here think of themselves as intelligent and unbiased. if you assumed reiser's innocence, take a good har dlook in the mirror. tribal-level prejudice flows in your veins
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It sounds like they're in discussions about it. Presumably the DA wouldn't leak something about a deal of that nature unless he's really bad at his job. I would think that kind of publicity from the DA could earn him some censure, at he very least.
Long terms in prison tend to be the result of mandatory minimum sentences. Politicians, in a zeal to "fight crime!!111" have placed certain minimum terms on crimes, so judges can have their hands tied in sentencing. For the record, depending on which case you're thinking of, the US couple got 99 days in jail. And none of it was related to the death of their child, it was for neglect of their other four children (being underweight and malnourished).
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
In the end the article just says the judge assumes Hans will reveal the body to reduce the sentence. The summary is bad for this article.
Hognoxious hit that detail on the head
"Well if the DA says it then it must be true! I mean a DA is a kind of lawyer, right?"
Alright alright, I'll RTFA before posting next time.
I would never say someone is guilty just based on a confession. There is ample evidence that confessions have quite a high false positive rate. However, taken in conjunction with evidence, it is as 'sure' as it gets.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
Prosecutor: Come on, you've been found guilty. Your only hope of improving your situation even slightly is to admit you did it and tell us where the body is.
Reiser: Didn't do it.
(lather, rinse and repeat)
There is no confession. Just speculation that he will.
I thought the point of prison was to punish and correct the guilty and get them back into working order.
That can be a point of prison but there are at least four not always compatible reasons from prison:
1. Deterrence.
2. Reformation.
3. Punishment.
4. Removal.
Ultra long sentences serve 1,3, and 4 at the expense of 2. Furthermore, reform tends to get lip service at best in the US. We're generally a revenge minded lot Who Want Criminals Off The Street And Thinking Twice About Messing Up.
The opposite, I think. The parole board isn't there to second-guess the jury, or give you time off "just in case". They assume that because you were found guilty, you are guilty and your protestations to the contrary are simply because you refuse to face up to the fact you are guilty, so you can't yet be paroled.
This means, of course, that if you are innocent, it sucks to be you when you front up to a parole board.
Disclaimer: I garnered my knowledge from someone who was innocent but in jail, and also the movie Double Jeopardy, starring Ashley Judd.
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
from the provided article, I spotted one very interesting comment:
Conclusion: Either he is guilty and gets 15 years or he is innocent and gets 25 years.
For that reason I think the whole idea of "making deals" should be tossed out. Criminals should not be allowed to trade aspects of their crime to reduce their sentence. All that seems to do is encourage them to plan their crime more carefully so they have more "bargaining power" if caught. If he did it, and hadn't hid the body as well, and they found it, he wouldn't be offered this option to reduce his sentence.
Although someone else said that recently no governor has granted parole for anyone convicted of 1st or 2nd degree murder, so it may not matter either way. The "to life" probably will be applied.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Being 1st degree or 2nd degree isn't a matter of whether you have any sympathy for him - it's a matter of whether it was premeditated (planned) - 1st degree - or unplanned in the heat of the moment (2nd degree).
The evidence one hears in the press of her blood in the car, the front seat mysteriously gone missing with no explanation, and the car hosed down inside, all might tend to point to something that was perhaps unplanned (you'd think a nerd could plan it better), but OTOH we didn't hear all the evidence, and the jury that did hear it apparently thought it was planned (maybe for the exact reasons you suggest).
Why not? They learned it the hard way.
It's like they're making a fake murder case.
I'm almost convinced that they are. The man who killed several people made that claim but neglected to check one minor detail. Specifically, he forgot to ensure that the people he claimed to have murdered were actually dead.
And regarding the lack of a body - that hasn't been needed for a conviction for many years, simply because there are so many ways to dispose of a body such that there is no way anyone on Earth will ever find it again.
Looking at the facts, Reiser's estranged wife disappeared off the face of the earth without even attempting to contact her own children, and shortly afterwards he's found to have removed a seat from his car, hosed down the inside and taken a book called "How to get away with murder" out of the local library. He'd have needed a pretty good alibi to shoehorn reasonable doubt into those facts.
Our German scientists were better than the Russian's German scientists.
I drank what? -- Socrates
I feel like a moron for have ever attempted to defend Hans online at all
Whoa there, never feel like a moron for defending the accused before (most of?) the evidence is in and the jury has deliberated; that's the whole point of the innocent until proven guilty system. Otherwise we'll have to chant 'burn the witch' before the dunking tests.
(This is getting off topic and is just my view on prison sentences in general)
While I can follow the logic - if people fear prison, harsher sentences will make them fear it even more - I think making prison sentences too harsh will force people to become desperate, desperate animals will fight to their death and thus you end up with more violent arrests where the one being chased will have no regard for others life since their own life is now on the stake.
Here in Denmark we used to have next to no high speed chases, when police came you would generally just give up, get the slap on your wrist, serve the time and get back out for a second try. Lately sentences has gone up, crime has become more violent (but less frequent) and you hear about high speed chases about once a week.
Yes it sucks that people only serve 6 months in jail for rape (in Denmark), but at what point have they suffered enough? Will someone ever be punished enough for the victim to feel restitution? (I think it has been proven that having the victim and perpetrator meet along with counseling works better, than locking him up for umpteen years)
(Disclaimer been victim of assault and I think the 2 month probation and an apology was sufficient - also been victim of a hit-n-run where I think the driver got correct sentence (lost his license for a year and have to do a full drivers test to re-qualify) and paid for destruction of property)
He is a murderer
No disagreement there.
a sociopath
That is a scientific term with specific meaning. I have seen no evidence that he is.
must be imprisoned for life
Why? We let lots of murderers go after only a few years. Hell, you'll get more jail time for selling pot than you will for murder.
Oh, and if you do include yourself amongst those who might even consider killing someone over a spurt of fury or over a great disappointment, then you have serious issues my friend. I recommend a group of good mental health professionals.
Sorry to say it dude, crimes of passion are in the human genome and there is nothing you can do about it. Want proof? Ask any parent if they could kill someone who harms their children. I know I could. If anyone touched my son or daughter, there wouldn't be enough left to identify.
I used to be afraid of big dogs, I was bitten by a german sheppard when I was a kid. So, I generally avoided them. One day, I was with my son in the park and a couple loose dogs were growling, fighting, and coming toward us. Instinctively I put myself between my son and the dogs, I had to kick one in the mouth before they ran away.
This is a true story, and I tell you, it makes no difference if it is dogs or people, if its your children, you'd kill.
Since we all have the capability of murder, we have to gear our prosecution on the motivations. Self defense, perfectly understandable. Fit of rage? not as bad as cold hearted killer.
Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down
That's not my department, says Werner von Braun
- Tom Lehrer
CAUTION: Product may be hot after heating
And anyone they killed is going to have a hard time getting back into society, as well.
I guess Nina is going to have a hard time "reaquanting herself with the social order" given that she's now in permanent "non-voluntary solitary confinement".
As for the starvation of a defenseless child... I don't even know how you can trivialize something like that.
Huh.
Punishment here seems to fit the crime.
That actually worked for Hitler. When he signed off on the cute car design that he had commissioned, he had the foresight not to name it something like the "Führerwagen". The rest is history.
I was kind of on the fence about all this, as you never get a true/complete picture from the reporting.
Until I read, however, that he had removed the front passenger seat from his car so he 'could sleep in the car', and then claimed that he threw away the seat (or was unable to produce it).
That goes against the instinct of every geek-like person I've met - they'd all keep the seat, so they could replace it later if they needed to use it, or wanted to sell the car, etc. "I'll keep it just in case."
That was the bit of his story that made me think "uh oh".
Good job I wasn't on the jury, eh? :)
How many thousands upon thousands of people died today?
How many people here know Hans or Nina Reiser?
Every time something like this happens, the tissue brigade (not that one, the other one) comes out berating others for not being all solemn about it. I don't know Hans or Nina Reiser, or their kids. If I could have intervened to stop the murder of this complete stranger, I would have, but pretending that this emotionally affects me in any way, shape, or form, is just being a drama queen.
It reminds me of when I was a kid and we used to drive out to my grandparents house for Easter on Good Friday and between 12 and 3 - the hours we'd be traveling - my mother would insist that there be no music or discussion in the car, because, you know, Jesus suffered on the cross two thousand years ago during those hours (supposedly). And she's screw on this phony bullshit look of solemnity and I'd just want to ask my father, "Is she REALLY serious?"
I wasn't listen to my Walkman, couldn't play electronic games - nothing. I had to sit there in the car in the fucking purgatory of the Poconos and pretend to be really upset about Jesus dying (which is particularly stupid if you already know the end of the story), but lucky me, I had several days, and several hours, of *church* in front of me to look forward to. Hooray.
This particular case is of interest only because many of us use MurderFS (sorry, sorry, shouldn't make light of this), and if we didn't, this murder really wouldn't make a damn bit of difference any more than the thousands of other deaths happening around the world right now.
As for joking about death, murder, mayhem, genocide - as far as I am concerned, the worst atrocities our species are capable of are definitely worth humor. Humor may be the only thing that even comes close to standing up to the very real and unpleasant reality of our own mortality. There is a big difference between joking about this or any other serious event, and somehow taking pleasure in other peoples' loss. Humor takes a little of the wind out of tragedy. Or it's supposed to, anyway.
I don't know Hans or Nina Reiser, nor the guy on his deathbed in Swaziland who is about to expire right now, and I'm not going to sit here and pretend I am in any way emotionally invested in this enough to alter my behavior. This is how the human psyche works, thank god, or we'd do nothing but sob ourselves to death - what matters is what happens to our respective tribes. Everything outside of that is merely fodder for the rest of humanity to go into phony mourning in a display to everyone of how sensitive they are.
Fuck that shit.
You've been watching too much TV. You also forget that both sides can challenge potential jurors, either for cause, or for no cause whatsoever. The people who don't want to do their civic duty will lie to get out of jury duty - that leaves a pool of people who are there, for the most part, because they won't concoct BS stories to get out of service, and take their committment to a fair trial seriously. I've not only seen real juries, I've sat as a juror in a murder case.
Besides, the proof is in the pudding - the jury got it right, despite the lack of a body, which SO many slashodotters claimed was a fatal flaw in the case against Reiser.
Kevin Smith on Prince
#ifdef __cplusplus
#define NULL 0
#else
#define NULL ((void *)0)
#endif
More about NULL
Whether it influenced his joining the SS or not, civilian rocketry was forbidden by the Nazi party, so it was either join them or don't do it. While I don't know his personal beliefs, in many ways he was a victim of circumstance - he was an SS officer before he claimed to have known about the deaths in labor camps (though I'm sure he knew they were anti-semitic) and at one point was under investigation by the gestapo during the war for anti-patriotic thinking. Given the situation and the government running a police state spying and incarcerating anyone that opposed them, I imagine he felt powerless to change it. Giving Werner von Braun the benefit of the doubt is noble (I'm German), but there is one thing that smart people in Germany during 33-45 realized: if you are unscrupulous, there is no limit how far you can get.
Like all scientists, he had a dream he would sacrifice anything for. Even the lifes of others.
British people are still outraged over the fact the the guy responsible for bombing London would sit next to a pool in Texas in the late 40s instead of the trial-bench in Nurenberg.
During the Nazi-reign, nearly nearly endless resources could get committed to your project - if you had the buy-in of the handful of top-brass that were able to directly talk to the Fuehrer and influence him.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin