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.'"
Wow I feel like a moron for have ever attempted to defend Hans online at all. Like he was friends, and his wife was seeing, a guy that murdered several people.
Now he's just going to fess up to the murder.
I guess this marks the end of ReiserFS. I'm sure no one in the Linux community wants to be associated to that piece of work.
did the article just speculate?
No where in the article does it say that he has agreed to it, they are speculating that there might be a reduced sentence if Hans discloses where the body is. Also, he is most likely going to be someone's "slave" once he is in prison, so if he gets 15 or 25 years it is most likely going to be in protected custody (= voluntary solitary confinement) and 15 years alone is going to mess him even up let alone 25 years, either way he is done for.
Glad I'm not in the US, getting life in prison for something that has way too many loose ends, just isn't right.
(On a side note, whats with those extremely long terms in prison? Anyone going in for 25 years will never be able to get back into society - I thought the point of prison was to punish and correct the guilty and get them back into working order. There was a couple who got life in prison for mistreating their child to the point of death (raised her as a vegan) - a British couple got 3 years community service for the same thing)
tribal-level prejudice flows in your veins
Yup. I think that such biases are actually stronger in support of someone for irrational tribal reasons than they are, these days, when it comes to being irrationally against someone who's not in your tribe. Classic examples these days would be the small number of people who poll saying they'd vote against Obama because he's black, compared to the huge number who will (and say they will!) vote for him because he's (to whatever degree) black. The folks who completely tossed their reason out the window over Reiser because he's a fellow nerd really do get a chance to stop and think, now. It's very similar to those that tolerate script kiddies and web site defacers because they feel some kinship to them, despite the fact that if the same kids did something similar in meat space (to their car, with spray paint) they'd get all upset.
It was fair to assume Reiser's innocence until the testimony and his behavior started stacking up.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
IANAL, but in all the Perry Mason stories I read, the trial always start with proving Corpus Delicti which, as Perry Mason always explains, is not the body of the victim, but a proof that a crime was committed.
In this case, I wonder: wasn't Reiser committed wrongfully? Because if finding the body could turn the conviction from first degree to second degree murder it clearly means that first degree murder hasn't been proved beyond reasonable doubt. At least, "beyond reasonable doubt" doesn't seem like something that could be dispelled by examining a body that has been hidden for several years.
And what if, after examining the body, evidence is found that death could have had a natural cause, or be a suicide? With that reasonable doubt, would the conviction be reversed?
Finally, the juror mentioned in this article that made his decision based on the accused's eyes really scares me. What if I had been tried? Would a crazy schoolteacher send me to prison for life because he didn't like the look in my eyes? There's so much debate on lie detectors in general, experts cannot agree on which subtle body signals will tell if someone is lying or not. If trained police agents, people with vast experience in interrogation practices, using advanced equipment for evaluating stress, cannot tell for sure if someone is lying or not, how come a fifth-grade schoolteacher is able to tell just by a glance at the eyes?...
I'm not saying Reiser is either guilty or not. But that juror's statements make me hope I never stand trial, not under that system, unless there's at least one honest man in the jury to restrain the crazy old schoolteachers.
How about renaming it for the woman he killed? NinaFS, perhaps?
The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
Problem is, he thought he was so smart that that sort of illogic would bamboozle at least 1 of 12 jurors. Let me be the first to say "I told you so!" All you who said he didn't do it, welcome your new "I told you so" overlords.
He's only doing this because the body will eventually be found anyway, in which case, "In Soviet Amerika, body reveals YOU (to be a killer)."
Jurors aren't (usually) stupid.
Kevin Smith on Prince
I'm in the "law enforcement business" and have also been through the jury selection process personally, although always am dismissed due to my obvious bias due to my job affiliation.
The challenge process does not disprove my assessment. What you're left with is always the lowest common denominator that both sides can agree on. That nearly invariably filters out all but the most apparently malleable minds.
Since you've sat as a juror, I'm sorry that I've indirectly insulted you, maybe both sides of your case actually wanted someone intelligent in the box, but it's certainly the exception and not the rule
Sorry about the "TV" remark - it's just that people believe in "Law and Order" momemts. Jury duty is WORK, not a show.
Nowadays, jurors will hear evidence related not just to DNA, but also blood spatter analysis, cellphone tower coverage and call records, autopsy reports, reports from the cops, EMT and doctors on the scene, other experts and witnesses, as well as the defendant. They get the reports, records, photos, and the actual evidentiary pieces, such as the murder weapon(s), clothing, etc. to take with them into the deliberation room.
They also get careful instructions from the judge.
Then again, we do things differently in Canada. For example, unlike the US, jurors are forbidden, under penalty of going to jail for 2 years, of ever revealing anything that was said or done during deliberations. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, I told my employers that I would only hand in the notice for the trial AFTER it was concluded, and I didn't tell anyone who was on trial - I didn't want anyone searching the net or reading newspaper articles and accidently influencing me. Jury duty pays $90/day, plus transportation, parking, and meals; I lost money, and so did other jurors, but obviously some things are more important. People that don't want to make the sacrifices (including, in this case, a whole month off work), aren't the type of people you want on a jury anyway, right?
Think about it - there are no "tell-all" book deals by jurors after a trial in Canada - and I believe it's better that way. We reached a decision. How or why we reached it is just between the 12 of us. We'll never talk about that part of it again, even amongst each other.
Kevin Smith on Prince
because his wife's lover wasn't a serial killer. He was mentally ill.
One of the people he claimed to have murdered is still alive.
Neither the defense nor the prosecution want stupid jurors - it makes the job of putting forward their arguments harder, not easier.
Having recently gone through the jury selection process (I wasn't picked), I can say that although they don't want stupid people, they do seem to want ignorant ones. Both the prosecutor and the defense pretty much axed anybody who expressed any knowledge of the law, typical judicial conventions, or Constitutional knowledge. It seemed that if you could name the top ten finalists on American Idol but couldn't name your congressman, governor, or senator, you were just what they wanted. Sheep. Mindless, thoughtless, easily-led sheep.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky