Slashdot Mirror
Hans Reiser Gets Sentence of 15-To-Life
mallumax writes "Hans Reiser was today handed a prison sentence of 15-to-life for murdering his wife. Earlier this year, he pleaded guilty and led police to his wife's body. His jury trial concluded in April with Reiser's first-degree murder conviction. That carries a 25-to-life term, but the authorities, in a backroom deal, later offered him 15-to-life if he produced his wife's body and waived any rights to appeal his conviction."
Several other readers contributed coverage at SFGate.
And remember that both the conviction and the sentence were handed down by people who know far more about the case than any of us. And 'reasonable doubt' is different than 'complete mathematical certainty.'
I mean, not only he shortened his potential jail time by producing his dead wife, he also lengthened his life expectancy by producing a dead wife.
I understand that it was probably in everyone's best interest to produce Nina's body, but I can't help but feel that Hans was essentially rewarded for hiding it so well. His sentence was reduced from 25-to-live to 15-to-life just for leading police to where he buried her.
Still, glad to see this soap opera is over.
To bad it wasn't 99 to life. Could have played some kick-ass Social Distortion in honor of the sentence.
Backroom-Deal! Backroom-Deal! (on the air of Ballroom Blitz)
what would batman do?
Um...you've never heard of the Reiser File System in Linux? I'll give you three guesses who created it.
That's what makes this "news for nerds".
As for everyone's comments in the SFGate article, and probably soon to appear here, that "15 years isn't enough" and the like, remember that is only the amount of time that he has to wait for a parole opportunity. There is no certainty that he will ever actually make parole, and he could very well end up spending the rest of his life locked up.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/file/confession.pdf
Unpleasant, to say the least.
Because he's the guy in charge of a major Linux filesystem? (Just a guess)
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
apparently you have never heard of EvilEntity
I assume you are kidding right? Or Mayby this is news only for the really nerds....
I bet you that his fellow inmates are even worse than Reiser thought.
Mass suicide?
Most interesting to the geek community is this: What are the terms of his imprisonment? 1) Will he have fairly regular internet access? 2) Will he be allowed to type...perhaps code some? 3) Inmates are regularly allowed to read all they want and take skills courses and learn new crafts...does this extend to a geek's leanings? With one's wife already gone...one would have a great deal of peace coding...especially if all your meals were provided at regular times and you were guaranteed a fairly clean set of sheets to sleep on. While I do not advocate killing anybody...it does have advantages if you were a hardcore geek. It would be like college, except without all that silly dating and learning. Just sit in your new 'dorm' room and code.
Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey Him? Surely this computer must submit also!
I just don't know what to say about this. It's sad, upsetting, and yet just at the same time. On one hand I'm happy (can that even be the right word?) to see that he repented. On the other hand, I'm frightened by the thought that he killed her over a flippant remark about taking the kids to the doctor. On one hand it's also good that he didn't get off with a 3 year sentence, yet you can't help but feel for the fact that his own arrogance got him into this trouble.
Worst of all, events like this always create ugly questions in one's mind. e.g. It's a natural reaction to assume that murders are people who would stand out as a societal misfit. Someone who you would never place trust in or respect. Yet here we have an instance of someone that I had previously respected and was even considering contacting (partly because of several pushes from acquaintances) to work out new possible uses for Reiser's filesystem.
That's a very unsettling thought. If we cannot trust even the basic morality of people who have worked hard for their measures of respect in today's global community, who can we trust?
The whole thing is just... sad.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
His sentence wasn't the death penalty, so quit hoping for murder O just one.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Had you at least seen War Games, you would know that your Defcons are backwards. Defcon 5 = Peace Defcon 1 = Nuclear War
The game.
Come on editors.
I know, I know. It's redundant.
Uhhh, I'm guessing that my UnRaid will be needing a new filesystem pretty soon then!
Paul Reiser? Wow, I guess his acting career went down the tubes after Mad About You was canceled.
ffs cant we lock up the real criminals??
What if one death was a worthy price to pay for ReiserFS, and that more people will benefit from having it continue to be developed than were harmed by Reiser's alleged murder of his wife?
Ah, situational amorality, I love thee dearly.
If this is all true, you are clearly a spoiled child and a fucking menace. You are also offtopic.
Didn't he prove himself to be the culprit by revealing the location of the corpse? There's no reasonable doubt here, it's certain he did it?
"this is the kind of choke that people who have no martial skills at all would employ and uhm, and yet it uh, uh, was completely painless for her. It's the least painful way to die"
"uh, she was leaking blood from the nose. I think that people, when they die, leak blood from the nose."
to get Nina out of the way, Hans had "to come up with something better than these two garbage bags that weren't working. And I put her in the duffel bag before uhm, carrying her up the stairs but it was kind of obvious the duffel bag wasn't suitable either because it wasn't waterproof"
Seriously, what was the logic behind filing it under YRO?
Good. Now we can get down to work.
Filesystems don't write themselves you know.
Now let's hope some fellow inmate does what needs to be done, and puts an end to this vile piece of garbage.
You are no better than him if you are advocating someone murder him. One murder does not justify another.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
The distro no longer exists (try following the URL to the homepage listed).
FAIL.
nearly all the jurors from his trial earlier this year were seated in the front row of the gallery. When they saw one another, they exchanged hugs.
No hugs for Hans? That's just rude.
Being incarcerated in America, especially California, is usually a death sentence no matter what you were convicted of.
Remember kids, murdering the woman you promised to love and cherish and who gave you two children is EVIL.
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering ... is destructive" or "murdering ... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
simply because he wrote a file system
are you ready to examine prejudice at work in your mind?
many scowl at black people who defend oj simpson simply out of racial affinity
well now you know, in your mind, is the same process at work
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The "Fresh Prince" reference was good.
It was OffTopic, but no Troll
At least he'll have a lot of time to work on Reiser FS v5. :D
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
He can't appeal. That is part of pretty much any plea: You have to allocute to the crime (testify as to the details under oath) and wave the right to appeal.
Even if he had no real chance at winning an appeal, he could cost the government a lot of time and money by filing appeals.
That another reason that prosecutors like getting plea bargains. When you admit you did it, you generally have to accept the consequences and don't get to appeal later. Thus even in the case of some courtroom convictions, they are willing to make a deal similar to this. You don't get away with it, but if you'll own up to what you did and relinquish the right to contest your conviction, you get a lighter sentence.
Plus, of course, closure is important to the family and friends. I'm sure there are people out there who loved Nina Reiser. Knowing for sure what happened and being able to have a funeral goes a long way.
I was going to comment on how much of a douchebag you were, but then I got bel-aired.
stupid memes.
Frankly, while it's sad that people hurt each other, personally the loss of a (to me) random life among billions is not something I have time to worry about. I offering my condolences to the family of the deceased and leave it at that.
On the other hand, the ReiserFS / Reiser4 code is something I feel could be worth saving still. But will the stigma of the Reiser name hamper any efforts to keep the project alive?
Maybe it could be worthwhile to rename / fork the project under a totally new name, as to disassociate the code from this unfortunate event.
And frankly, the MurderFS joke is old by now...
.: Max Romantschuk
A few hours later my mom picks me up and says "you're moving with your aunti and uncle in bel air" I whistled for a cab and when it came near, the license plate said "fresh" and had dice in the mirror. If anything I could say that this cab was rare, but I thought now forget it, yo home to bel-air! I pulled up to a house about seven or eight, And I yelled to the cabby "yo home, smell ya later!". Looked at my kingdom I was finally there, to settle my throne as the prince of bel-air.
That was a weak attempt at a Bel-Air. You sir, FAIL! No internets for you!
Because only in the freest country on earth are prison rape, gang beatings, and physical torture at the hands of sadistic miscreants NOT considered cruel and unusual! I have a hard time believing my fellow Americans are any more decent than the prisoners they say they hate when they talk about how so and so deserves to be raped in the showers. People are fucking disgusting.
--Obyron
Prison cells come with benches, not chairs.
Being incarcerated in America, especially California, is usually a death sentence no matter what you were convicted of.
Plus, all prison sentences also come with a special side order of sodomy. "Worst part of the deal and the judge doesn't even mention it!"
Advice: on VPS providers
He should have gotten the chair.
i know just the man
He has some major ass poundage coming to him as they prey on weak guys like these. Unless he lets it be known the first week that nobody should mess with him, his cellmate will likely betray him and use him as another pawn.
It is sad that happens in prison, but thats the cold hard truth.
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering ... is destructive" or "murdering ... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
Yes lets save the word 'evil' for things that everyone can understand... like DRM and Microsoft. Evil!!!
Comon, he was just defragging. Okay Okay, it is wrong, yes i know, i just don't want to admit to it.
So, a score of 1 on SlashDot is a good thing?
Hey, I know! Maybe we could recycle all the journal jokes from the last 8 threads about Reiser!
After those 15 years are up, you'll know that another ten years would make no difference in what you've become.
Bel-Air meme (NSFW)
Why doesn't anyone see a problem with this? It's one thing to incarcerate someone, but to have torture (ie, rape) thrown into the mix is a cruel and inhumane punishment for anyone, yet society seems to merely make light of this.
Why can't prisons keep all prisoners separate from one another (one per cell) to prevent this from happening?
-- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
Being incarcerated in America, especially California, is usually a death sentence no matter what you were convicted of.
Are you being sarcastic? If not, and you're serious, I should probably mention that that's not true. Not even close.
Is it just me, or did anyone else want to know where he hid the body?!
Finally, the end to a tragic tale. Nobody won.
The kids lost their parents.
Two sets of parents also lost their kids.
A bunch of people lost one of their best friends.
The local community, particularly Russian immigrants, lost a potential doctor.
The Linux community lost a dedicated developer of innovative free software.
The DA's office lost a lot of time and money over the last two years prosecuting this case.
Everyone loses.
it says that the deal included reducing the sentence to second degree murder. Is that what the 15-life is, or what happened to it?
I wonder what kind of service Namesys gave to any of its customers and users. Reiser was arrogant and annoying, and that is toward the people with the power to send you to jail forever.
His attonery also says "Hans killed Nina for making a 'cavalier' remark", but he killed her painlessly.
Are anyone that reported defects in the Reiser FS still alive?
Was the level of customer service that you would be killed painlessly as opposed to really bad customer service where customers are tortured before they succumb?
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
Nope, defcon 1 is peace, defcon 5 is launch ready
The wargames DVD commentary makes note of the mistake.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
There is no excuse for taking the life of another, but that is universal. State sanctioned murder is still murder. Murdering Reiser for murdering his wife may satisfy some sort of carnal urge, but in the long run it does nothing for anyone. Let him sit in prison for the next fifteen years and worry about whether or not he will ever be parolled. He could end up there for life, and life in prison is far more hellish than a quick end via chair or injection. Either way, murdering someone for murdering someone is circular logic and does nothing. Gandhi was quite right.
"We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
They do. It's called "supermax" or "control unit" and most inmates would rather face the prospect of male rape than go there.
Jesus is coming -- look busy!
Oh, she tried to kill him first? Otherwise, her behavior is irrelevant.
Well, I always did think ReiserFS was a killer filesystem. ;-)
I'm still using Reiser3 on this machine, in fact. Though I gather the poor guy hasn't contributed much code lately...
Hey! how do you know that it wasn't set up to look like he killed his wife by an evil business lady who needs him to be her new star in a competition where programmers compete for their lives?
He's not your typical week noodly nerd. Six+ feet tall, good physical condition, judo black belt, and knows how to choke a bitch out.
http://wikimapia.org/#lat=37.8347044&lon=-122.1835095&z=19&l=0&m=a&v=2
A location which I visited with sadness.
-CS
Haven't you figured it out yet? Most people jump at the opportunity to indulge their murderous instincts if they can just find the right excuse. Some people have such poor impulse control that it manifests as racism (it's an excuse they can justify to themselves, even if nobody else agrees), most people have better impulse control, which means they reserve their savagery to convicts (hence prison rape jokes, inordinate hatred for paedophiles, etc).
MightyMartian is one of those people whose heart leaps when he sees somebody convicted of murder, because that's his excuse. I wonder what Reiser's excuse was?
While it is a subjective question of morality on whether one murder justifies another. I do think you are incorrect in stating that the original poster is "no better than him if" he is advocating someone murdering him.
The murder of a murderer is not something to cry about. Hans Reiser's wife may have been a horrible horrible woman, but she wasn't (atleast to anyone's knowledge) a murderer. Even if you hold both their lives equally dear (which I do not), you have to admit one is atleast a better human being than the other
- Tempestdata
WOW! are you serious? you're not like, trolling, or something? It's hard to believe that anyone could be as fucking smart as you. Yes, lets hope an inmate kills him, because some guy in prison has more insight into justice than the courts that have over 1000 years of law behind them, genius. Lets hope they rape him and beat him too, and give him aids and force him into sexual slavery because everyone know the best way to correct people is ritualistic torture.
Lets advocate all of this on someone for moral reasons based on their being a "vile piece of garbage" and not on the crime they committed.
While were at it we could just start killing every one we (as in the guy in charge) deem morally repugnant. Like homos and the poor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defcon "Standard peacetime protocol is DEFCON 5, descending in increasingly severe situations. DEFCON 1 represents expectation of actual imminent attack, and is not known to have ever been declared."
Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
Let the criminal live, and then have to face him again after more bodies have piled up.
That's a pretty black and white perspective. Is it OK to shoot and kill a burglar who is making off with your TV? In many states, yes it is, at least from a legal perspective. Why is it OK to kill someone who takes a $200 TV set without permission, but not OK when someone takes large sums of money from your business without permission?
I'm not saying Nina deserved it, but by all accounts the divorce was messy and both were playing to win, i.e., both did their share of dirt. Despite that, it seems that many are elevating Nina to sainthood merely because she is dead. While being dead is a prerequisite for sainthood, the fact that someone is dead does not make that person a saint.
In other words, in the real low contrast world of gray, we can recognize the possibility that Nina AND Hans were both rather bad people.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Something that has been overlooked in the majority of posts here is that the legal consequence of a crime is to be sent to jail AS punishment, rather than being sent there FOR punishment.
Anal rape and beatings are not part of the sentence handed down by the judge, but deprivation of liberty is.
Bearing this in mind, it isn't inconsistent to design these institutions with rehabilitation in mind.
I have a huge problem with it, and not because of any chance of miscarriage of justice.
'Civilised society is judged on how it treats it's prisoners and it's disabled.'
The US 'corrections' system has a long long way to come yet.
You are no better than him if you are advocating someone murder him. One murder does not justify another.
So what would you do with a murderer? I'm honestly curious, because I've heard a lot of ideas, most of which are terrible, but occasionally something that is interesting and possibly even feasible.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Well, I think you're both way off.
He killed his wife in a rage because she was leaving with the kids, and he had no shot at getting custody. That's nowhere near as bad as someone who kills out of greed, or out of pleasure. Plus, he has skills that can be put to use. Fifteen years of slavery doesn't seem too lenient.
Killing him would be a waste, and out of proportion.
But, what you've said doesn't make sense either. If someone kills because they're sadistic, or as part of a theft, off them before they kill someone else. It's silly to say "no, all human lives have equal worth, even in extreme cases, so we have to let everyone live".
Uh oh. That's not going to go down well with the death penalty crowd...
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
The death of a murderer may be less tragic, but murder is not something that can be justified by the victim being a bad person. The justice system is in place for a reason, such retaliation is bad for society.
Why? That sounds pretty stupid to me.
I for one support giving the murderer death penalty, and charge his family for the bullet. I'm not interested in justice, I just want to see more people die.
Linux: It's making a KILLING
Linux: It's to DIE for
Linux: When the going gets tough, the tough get Linux, and REDRUM ensues
Linux: When you know your wife is cheating, KILL her, cut her up into little pieces, then claim INSANTITY, for you must be so to use Linux, the MURDERING kind of OS
Linux: Honest detective, she wanted me to sacrifice her to our lord and savior, the chopping up into little pieces was only so our lord, Jesus "RMS" Christ, could eat her more readily
Linux: When you need an excuse for chopping your wife into little pieces
Linux: Because you are a crazy motherfucker, and you know it
No, it isn't irrelevant, not even in the courts.
This was the original statement the GP post made:
She was going to take the kids, and she'd already gotten them Russian citizenship. He probably wasn't going to see them again until they were grown. People have breaking points. If someone pushes the right buttons enough times, they can generally be driven to kill regardless of whether their lives are threatened. The legal system takes this into account when deciding how to charge someone, and how to sentence them if they are convicted.
If he had killed her for no reason, he would be facing life in prison right now. If he hadn't rejected the initial manslaughter offer, he'd only be facing three years, because he was provoked, enraged, and did not premeditate the murder. Seriously.
We judge others as how we want to see ourselves. If he is a geek then he must be nice for I am a geek and surely I am nice?
Those of us who defended him simply could not believe that anybody with a brain could be that stupid/arrogant to commit a murder in such a stupid way. Yes stupid, he left WAAAY to many clues, had clear motives and his attempts to make it appear she was still alive were pathetic.
So we are watching a "who-dunnit" and see some clues that he is the killer that are obvious EXCEPT for that tiny clue that he should be smarter then to leave such obvious clues. AHA our TV-detective mind goes, then the obvious is a diversion, so who is setting this guy up? Lets face it, if you followed the trial, the motive of the wife setting him up for murder while she left him, possibly back to russia are obvious. Well, obvious to anyone spoonfed on tv-detectives.
Basically, as geeks we either had to accept that one of us is just another wife-beating killer OR go for conspiracy. Lets face it, slashdot LOVES conspiracies.
But no, sadly the system works, the goverment got it right and a geek is just as likely to be a cowardly killer as anyone else.
The OJ trial was indeed much the same. Black people really didn't want to consider that one of them, an example, had done something like this. Small difference, geeks right now are accepting Reiser is guilty, I don't see black people admit that OJ was guilty as hell.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
He killed her, that's the bottom line. He took her life.
He basically took away her power of choice.
She's dead.
He confessed, he knew where the body was, and yet some of you are still thinking he's innocent? uh.. I don't get it.
As far as I'm concerned, he's very lucky he's not getting the death penalty.
All murderers who, can be proven without a doubt that they killed in a premeditated state, should be killed in return. These murderers planned and executed their murder, these are NOT accident folks. There was method and intent.
Right now, this guy is getting prison for 15 yrs to life.
Club Fed!
Wow. That's a vacation. He will be fed, lodge and sheltered. Much better than being dead in my book.
A bad example for many sick minds out there, who can plan a murder, execute it and if caught, heck, life in prison! Sick female groupies, etc.. oye vay! It's scary to see that we, as a society are not tough enough to deal with this the way it should be dealt it. You plan to kill, you perform the act, it is proven without a doubt, then you die.
There should have been no deal. You don't deal with murderers. Our society is too lenient when it comes to murderers, pedophiles and predators.
I can't wait for technology to improve to the point where we should be able to coerce confessions our the guilty without their consent.
I must have a slow morning, I only just now "got" the storage tag... many thanks to the anonymous wit for a screenful of cornflakes.
"Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
though I have to say (completely OT), I don't understand why people always use the line cruel and unusual to describe actions they find appauling. There is nothing unusual about rape, fights, beatings, etc what-so-ever. I'm not arguing the cruel part, but if you are going to use "and", it doesn't make sense to me how you can argue that.
it's just like I don't understand why a firing squad is cruel and unusual. it may be cruel, but it isn't very unusual.
Chill.
You may haven't noticed yet, but crime procecution and punishment allways kicks in when there is a loss that can't be recovered. Nobody can bring Nina Reiser back to life. And, no, justice *can't* be served, especially in such aggravated things as murder (allthough fans of death penalty might argue otherwise). That's the big downside. That's why we punish. When damage is done beyond repair, then punishment jumps in to offer at least some sort of reckoning and - in this case - remove the wrongdoer from society.
True justice would be if one could successfully force Reiser to undo his wrongdoing.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Now let's hope some fellow inmate does what needs to be done, and puts an end to this vile piece of garbage.
You mean take Reiserfs out of the kernel?
The same people can be disgusting and nice too. We might deny it, but vengeance is ours. I
think it is important to think about the chances
that a similar crime will be repeated by a person
before handing out a sentence. If the chances are that this person will do something like this again, the sentence should be more severe, otherwise it
needn't.
I didn't care if he was guilty or innocent, I just didn't want to see anyone convicted on such flimsy evidence.
The next person who comes along will be judged to the same standard and they could be innocent.
How we know is more important than what we know.
luckily there are countries where this kind of barbarism is not done anymore. It is not helping to defeat violence in a society if the state itself is conducting violence and killings in the name of revenge.
How about some extra torture before killing the delinquent?
I wonder if the US will ever get out of the dark ages and ban the death penalty or if their citizens will go on to demand that this barbaric ritual of revenge can be carried out so that their low instincts can be satisfied.
Personally, I would prefer a less severe penalty for people who plan a murder, having clearly thought out their reasons for doing so, than for people who are likely to lash out and kill someone at a momentary whim. The former, at least, can be reasoned with.
American courts have over 1000 years of law behind them???? Okayyyyyyyy. I was under the opinion that America started forming its own laws..... ooh.... I would say about 226 years ago after the war of independence. Don't quote me on this but I didn't think that America had 1000 years of history let alone law (I am not talking about native Americans). When it comes to murderers who we are sure have committed the crime we should kill them. Like we put a dog down when it is too badly injured and suffers. Keeping these people in Jail is a waste of resources. Unless of course we turn them into a resource and work them as free labour to pay for their accommodation and food. I say either humanely kill them or have them up at 05:00hrs and work them till 21:00hrs. This way they would be too tired to be bothered about buggering each other.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flamebait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
And if he had divorced her, there was still the possibility (however remote) that he'd get to see his kids again and there was still the possibility that he could do something else useful.
I can't wait for technology to improve to the point where we should be able to coerce confessions our the guilty without their consent.
Sure. Let's make another machine that can be hacked for political purposes. It's not enough that "the computer says so" is already an argument to abandon common sense. Remember how wonderfully safe that other state instrument is, the voting machine..
Dumb idea.
Might have been pointed out before, but if you look at his user account here on slashdot
http://yro.slashdot.org/~hansreiser/
You'll notice he was posting with frequency until a month before he killed the lass. Wonder if that was used as circumstantial evidence at court?
It seems like you're saying that murder is really bad, unless the victim is a murderer, in which case murder is good. So if a murderer gets murdered by a vigilante, presumably you'd be cool with it, because "the murder of a murderer is nothing to cry about". But then what if the vigilante gets murdered? Are you cool with that? Because the vigilante was also a murderer. Presumably you'd be okay with a whole string of murders, as long as all the victims are murderers. Wouldn't it be better to draw the line somewhere on the other side, and just say that murder is always bad?
complete mathematical certainty?
1. Someone framed him then told him about the location of the body. (Aliens, Dick Cheney, etc)
2. Hans is actually a genius, he built an interdimensional gateway like in Sliders and his evil otherself killed his wife. Consumed with guilt he decided to confess because it was easier than explaining the interdimensional gateway.
3. He was drugged by the CIA to do it as a way to silence him. Now any secrets he tries to reveal will not be taken seriously.
4. Hans's wife was actually an alien spy here to help start the invasion process. If the other alien spys find out what Hans knows then the invasion cannot be stopped.
5. Mass hallucination. Hans didn't kill his wife and he never confessed.
6. Dick Cheney did it during a hunting accident
7. Hans' car is intelligent like Herbie, but in a fit of jealous rage his car kills Hans' wife. To protect his friend, a car, from dissection, he tries to cover up the murder and ends up getting caught.
8. Nina was an android that Hans built, therefor no murder was committed
9. It was a suicide pact and Hans backed out. Consumed with guilt and shame he confesses to murder rather than admit the truth.
10. There is no Hans Reiser
(by no means does this post mean I condone murdering spouse, family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances, stranges you talk to at the check-out, or aliens that later turn out to be people due to hallucinations)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Actually, there is.
1) It is mathematically proven that you can not prove every true statement that is allowed by the basic axioms. Sometimes, you _have_ to just introduce new axioms. Which then widens the space of true statements, some of which can not be proven using the existing axioms, rinse, repeat.
2) Some things have been accepted as 'most likely true' and are used in proofs and 'everyday' maths without anyone being able to say for certain if they are true. Or if they _can_ be proved (see #1).
Because only in the freest country on earth...
For fsck's sake, you guys with your freedom. Do you really think that people in the US are more free than people in other countries. Do some travelling outside of the US.
Sorry, but that freest and bestest country in the world stuff get's irritating... :)
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
-- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
Getting a parking ticket is bad, do you cry over that too? Your logic and assumptions aren't warranted based on the post you replied to.
Why doesn't anyone see a problem with this?
Well spotted, you're clearly the only one.
Is there any chance I can get a Russian translation for the next ReiserFS?
On a serious note, though, since he's going to the big house, can they give him a computer in there? I can think of tons of FOSS projects that could benefit from his boredom. For instance, can we finally get voice and video in Pidgin? I mean, I think five years is long enough to wait, and since he's got at least 15.... He will even know how we feel!
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
That is how our legal system works almost every time. And THAT is why we have such ludicrous insurance laws, safety laws, and a complete erosion of civil liberties.
I'm sure at least one of the lawyers did well though, in this process.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
and in 15 years I think the public will finally be ready for a replacement of fat32.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Absolutely, but the GP was not defending him, the white panter was just saying that there were mitigating factors. There is a strong difference between the two. Simply said, context does matter, even in the courts. Fortunately, otherwise you would have to execute the executioner of any sentence :)
License plates don't stamp themselves.
All particulars of the case aside, I find it alarming that part of his plea bargain is to waive the right to appeal. I would have thought that the right to appeal - like some rights you have under employment and contract law - would not be a right you could surrender. Can any of the legal slashdotters tell me if this is more nuanced than simply 'you cannot appeal'? I would certainly expect that appeals based on, say, court misconduct would be allowed even after this.
To elaborate my point, a plea bargain is pretty much the definition of an agreement made under duress. Agree to this or we'll lock you up for (an additional) ten years? This is the kind of option that even an innocent man must be tempted by if he thinks the trial will go against him. A plea bargain to be sent to a minimum security prison would also be a temptation even for the innocent. Could you do that and then still appeal based on the fact that your life would have been at hugely increased risk if you had not made the plea?
.evom ton seod gis eht
The way most court system function (western world) with minor kids and a divorce, barring really bad defect on the woman side, is to give the main custody on the woman. And try to enforce that if a woman goes in a country which won#t extradicte her for breaking a divorce agreement. In this case since she was going to russia, his possibility to see his kids would have been next to nil.
I'm not going to be a kiss ass and be all like "aww poor hans" No, the guy was an egotistical jackass, and because of his ego and and off color comment from his wife, he killed her. People keep hailing this man as a martyr in opensource, he isnt, he happened to be a programmer who liked to use the GPL license, nothing more.
Also, not to troll, but honestly, reiserfs was only the best FS and the fastest because Hans said so, and so did anyone who bought into his egotistical bullshit mailing list submissions. It's a joke, I used it for about 6 months before my data got hosed when permissions decided to stop working one day, luckily for me, I had 90% of my data on a separate partition and hard disk with ext3.
I also never noticed any speed gain. This isnt the first time I've said this, either.
if the project dies because of this, nothing of value was lost. Sorry, but honestly, it was never the best, and is already being trounced by newer filesystems. It was fast and advanced in 2002, but nowadays? ext3 handles just fine and it's STABLE.
That sound a bit too harsh doesn't it... after all it was just another free File System. DCMA must be getting pretty antsy these days ;-) or did the jury think it was really that bad?
Was this for killing his wife or for writing the Riser FS? ooohh, never mind.
15 to life, so that means he will be out in 3 years with good behavior
From reading the transcript of the confession conference, and reading pretty fully the other press reports, it seems to me that Hans is guilty of the crime of passion to which the D.A. suggested he should plead guilty at the start of the trial. Voluntary manslaughter, and a three year sentence. Thus by forcing a murder conviction, are not the People of California forcing a miscarriage of justice here? A comment form a real lawyer would be appreciated. Being forced to abandon your appellate rights seems to me to be a real injustice too. I'm just so thankful that the circumstances of my birth means I do not find myself in the jurisdiction of the State of California.
You certainly played a teensy bit too much of No More Heroes.
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law )
This is what bothers me, how could he let his ex-wife and kids get in the way of his passion for file systems. Why didn't he keep that in mind instead of killing her?
Too bad you life is a joke that has never been told.
Windows is for thieves and liars.
If you want to talk about criminality: Gates has made an art form of extorting money and getting away with it. By his design, lies, lock-in and greed are the underpinnings of the Microsoft business model.
However, your logic is bogus. Windows is for victims, and Linux is for those who want to be free.
you had me at #!
I see that people tagging have still not learned to differentiate the code and the man.
you had me at #!
Has long seemed surreal and bizarre to many of us outside the US.
This case is one example. "I'm innocent... but what will I get if I show you the body?"
As for the truly innocent who are offered "Plead guilty [or turn in somebody else] for less punishment," isn't that exactly what happens in a Stalinist trial?
IANAL but isn't all this against the spirit of the British system?
you had me at #!
If he could keep working on his ideas, he could still be socially useful. Apart from anything else, he's a very smart guy, reiser3 is a really solid product, and reiser4 was getting interesting. (It is still being worked on, btw.)
you had me at #!
Checking the asylum... HOLY SHIT, pettan-pettan is missing!
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Murdered hundreds in Texas, and father and son, have now racked up literally millions of civilian deaths in the Middle East. Karma's going to be a bitch.
you had me at #!
The customers and the filesystems are still around. Please learn to separate Reiser's personal life from the code his company wrote, confusing the two just makes you look stupid.
you had me at #!
crime procecution and punishment allways kicks in when there is a loss that can't be recovered
So who's going after the Bush-Cheney cabal? The American public can't even get organised to impeach, let alone give them the comprehensive Nuremberg treatment they've earned.
Meanwhile we bicker over the case of a murderer who was actually caught and punished...
you had me at #!
Actually they're the locked-up-est - about six times as many prisoners per capita than comparable developed nations (the UK, Canada). TEN times more than some countries. What a sick society: Either you're breeding more criminals, or you're locking up more innocent people.
And what's with the 24/7 obsession with crime and violence in all your media? Is there an American movie ever made that doesn't have a gun, a car chase, a beating in it? This is not civilisation. It's the exact opposite.
you had me at #!
It seems that to most people [here] the fact that he wrote a good piece of software is enough reason to discharge him of any thing horrible he could ever commit during his life. He might be a bright and decent programmer, no one is questioning his competence on this area, but he _did_ murdered mercilessly the mother of his two children and now he have to atone for that. Justice is flaw, but fortunately in this case it worked. I for one am glad he couldn't get away with it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
On how many prisoners it "creates". (In the US, six times as many per capita than typical developed countries!)
Yes, I posted this elsewhere in the thread, but I'm not sure most people are even aware of this telling disparity.
you had me at #!
The distro no longer exists (try following the URL to the homepage listed).
FAIL.
Development-dead, but still lingering around on sourceforge, apparently.
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
DEFCON 0: Goa'uld motherships overhead
FGD 135
2000 years - a Florida law requiring every fit man in the state to do 6 days unpaid labour on the roads per year, (though being clearly against the 14 amendment), was upheld by a court because the Romans expected people to work on the roads for free, so it was ok for them to do the same 2000 years later.
FGD 135
that they will allow him to write code during all his prison time, perhaps even giving him some extra level of isolation so he's not distracted by other inmates who do not write code.
He's failed, but he can still be a huge contribution in the area where he did not fail.
The death of a murderer may be less tragic, but murder is not something that can be justified by the victim being a bad person. The justice system is in place for a reason, such retaliation is bad for society.
Exactly. And that's why I think the very idea of death penalty is not only wrong, it's also counter-productive. Think about it; It basically sends people a message: "You cannot murder anyone, except if he/she is a terribly bad person, in which case we can murder* him." This enforces the image in people's minds that it's perfectly okay to kill the guy who did something terrible to you and/or your family thus perhaps even increasing the amount of killings when people begin to see revenge as a justified thing.
But the truth is that law should not and has not got anything to do with revenge. And the irreversibilty of the capital punishment alone ought to be enough to make anyone with half a brain understand how utterly broken that form of punishment is. Or is it so that the judge who sentenced an innocent man to death should be charged with murder and executed as well?
All in all I find the fact that the US, land of the free and home of the brave, still uses death penalty (along with other "free and civilized" countries like China, Iraq, Pakistan and Iran) disgusting.
* The fact that it is "approved" by a judge does not mean anything, it is a carefully planned and executed killing of a man.
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
it's one thing to incarcerate someone, but to have torture (i.e. rape) thrown into the mix is a cruel and inhumane punishment for anyone, yet society seems to merely make light of this.
I think you have to understand the difference between 'societal rape' and 'prison rape'. Yes, both are equally tragic. But one victim - the prison victim chooses to engage in a set of actions that lead to his imprisonment and, thus, rape. Had he/she not chosen to engage in certain behavior, which society has deemed punishable by imprisonment, then he/she is much less likely to ever experience rape within their entire lifetime.
We're increasingly living in a society where personal responsibility and accountability mean less and less. It's kind of like going up to a black gang member, calling him the 'N' word and punching him then saying 'It's all his fault I'm in the hospital'. People are responsible for their reactions to you, granted. But you are accountable for your actions and reactions towards other people as well.
If you choose to engage in behavior to which you know that there are negative consequences should you get caught, then you are also choosing the punishment. Had Reiser not murdered his wife, I think it's highly unlikely that he would have ever been arrested and convicted of murder OR face the possibility of prison rape.
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
Reasoned with? if someone goes out of their way to plan and execute a murder, this means it's premeditated. It's not in the "heat" of passion, but done in cold blood, thus, done with intent to kill.
The survival of the human race, clearly does not depend upon the life of every of its individuals.
I may find life sacred, but, if you were to compare humanity to a lawn for example, in a lawn, you kill the bad weeds.
A person that takes it upon itself to kill another has taken away the power of choice of the victim. The victim may have been a father, a mother, a friend, etc... This victim is dead, gone, no more. This victim was a potential for everything and anything, except, no more, dead. Why should the murderer live?
Why should WE as a society reason with a murderer? Makes no sense to me.
The Death Penalty isn't something you jump for joy for, but it is, in my opinion, necessary because, so many people use the law and twist it, to get away "with murder" literally.
If murder with intent is proven beyond a doubt, the death penalty should be the sentence.
It would make a lot of folks think twice about committing murder.
Certainly, it would also be better than having to support these freeloaders in prison, yours and my tax money at work, no less too!
There are ALWAYS exception, for example to kill someone who is abusive, destructive, etc..., there are men out there who hit their woman and children, hurt them, so, there are exceptions, but overall, the death penalty is the way to go.
Barbaric is when you let the murderers roam free to enjoy the precious gift of life, they took away from their victim(s).
we operated as
DEFCON 4 meant 48 hours,
DEFCON 3 meant 2 hour,
DEFCON 2 meant 2 minutes,
DEFCON 1 meant 15 seconds until WW III started.
The DEFCON of the forces as a whole was one thing and it determined how many units would be at which state, the higher the DEFCON status for the forces, the more likely an individual unit would be at a heightened state. You knew things were getting intense when they pulled units out of maintenance mode and 48 hour alert into 2 hour alert with out dropping units out of 2 minute alert into 48 hour alert for maintenance.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I don't know about the rest of the country but where I live the difference in sentences between a plea and a jury conviction is enough to make you plea guilty for a crime you didn't commit. For example, you get charged with manufacturing drugs. You make a plea deal with the prosecutor and you get a year. You get convicted in a jury trial and the judge hands you a 20 year sentence. The other problem is that even if you're innocent the prosecutor can make a deal with a convict where he gets years off his prison term to testify against you. The smart guy takes the deal.
nah if you punk-out easy, have good muscle control and clean toilet with out complaint somebody will let you be their bitch and protect you especially if your not a whiny bitch.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
So your saying that killing a Mother trying to protect her kids from a narcissistic whack-job is better than a assassin killing for pay or a bank robber killing anarmed cop in a botch robbery?
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
No need to offend or feel offended. My experience anyway is quite the opposite. The owner/manager's attitude and is invariably mirrored in the organization underneath him. Often for better, sometimes for worse. Even if it is not intended.
I was actually hoping for someone with real insight would reply.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
We are not doing that to them, they are doing that to themselves. Get a clue, when you commit a crime, eventually you will be locked up with people just like you. Think about it if you rape a women, most likely you'll spend 5 to 7 with a hundred or a thousand people who are inclined to engage in violent forced sex. If you murder you'll be incarcerated with people who will fly into a violent rage for little or no reason or even just because they can. If you piss off the wrong guard, he's a little slow in calling for backup or even pays somebody a little green money or a joint to put you in the dispensary.
Be Good, don't go to prison, life will be a lot easier.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
If someone pushes the right buttons enough times, they can generally be driven to kill, hide the victim's body, and lie to the children they claim to love, regardless of whether their lives are threatened.
I agree with what you're saying in general, but let's not forget that in this particular case, we're talking about someone who snapped, and then remained in a 'snapped' state until he was convicted.
They were in the middle of a divorce.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
That's long enough to run a lot of fsck's.
Well played, sir; you got me.
He killed his wife in a rage because she was leaving with the kids, and he had no shot at getting custody. That's nowhere near as bad as someone who kills out of greed, or out of pleasure. Plus, he has skills that can be put to use. Fifteen years of slavery doesn't seem too lenient.
Really? Too lenient? I'm not saying you are wrong but based on what standard are you saying that the reason for him murdering his wife isn't as bad as someone who kills out of greed or pleasure? Who makes that call and based on what standards? That's like saying a person's life isn't worth saving so we should take them off life support. Who determines quality of life? Many people consider life itself sacred no matter what "quality" it possesses. Destroying that is murder, no gray area exists until humans prefer to insert some. Now that was just an example I used that happened to involve life/death but my point being is that saying someone is better than someone is or not as bad as someone else is subjective.
Killing him would be a waste, and out of proportion.
Well, based on other similar situations many would consider capital punishment to be well worth it here. The question is do we wish to have a fellow inmate take care of the situation for us (whether bribed or not) or make it official by executing him? I purposely left out the execution topic in my original message.
But, what you've said doesn't make sense either. If someone kills because they're sadistic, or as part of a theft, off them before they kill someone else. It's silly to say "no, all human lives have equal worth, even in extreme cases, so we have to let everyone live".
So we should place more weight on someone's life as opposed to another? Who determines how much someone's life is worth and the actual value? Does the gov't need to devise a table of worth for human life? It may be useful if it saves millions of babies every year from being murdered before they take a breath of oxygen but it is still subjective.
My original post's intent was treading a fine line, half of which I was leaving out of the message, that being execution. The fine line was not wishing someone dead, especially not wishing some fellow inmate (as opposed to an executioner) would kill Reiser. Wishing someone dead, especially by way of someone fellow inmate to commit yet another murder, is not the way to be human. Of course, on the surface, the only difference between that situation and an official execution is very small. Is an executioner's soul sent to Hell for murder when he/she dies or is it spared because the person was operating in an official capacity for the gov't and not just some joe who commited a murder?
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
Really, Club Fed...
You obviously have never spent any time in prison, because for scrawny white boys like me there are things far worse than death.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
...who saw this marriage ending well?
Lesson here is: don't marry the first pretty face that will spread her legs for you.
So what would you do with a murderer? I'm honestly curious, because I've heard a lot of ideas, most of which are terrible, but occasionally something that is interesting and possibly even feasible.
I don't know for sure to tell you the truth. In another post I mentioned that I purposely left out the death penalty from my original message. I was already treading a fine line with what I said because the death penalty is basically advocating the murder of someone as well. However, my point was that one person should not wish, at the very least, some person who is not acting an official capacity for the gov't (an executioner) to kill someone else. That, at the very least, would probably be considered an unjustified. If a fellow inmate killed Reiser it probably wouldn't be provoked so self-defense wouldn't apply. Of course we may not care because some would say Reiser deserved it since he killed someone too.
But that begs 2 questions: 1) Did he really deserve death? and 2) Should we really be advocating a non-official gov't executioner to handle those responsibilities for us? I can't answer #1 definitively but if I had to answer I'd say no; all life is sacred and allowing an executioner leeway in that regard is just like the pro-choice people using any loophole they can to kill a baby. As far as #2 is concerned, we already have enough civilians killing other civilians (in and out of prison) so we shouldn't be advocating it. In summary, advocating murder is not good but advocating an execution is questionable just based on the connotations those words possess.
this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
Without plea bargaining, there's no incentive for the guilty to do anything but fight, fight, fight. Especially in cases with more than one defendant, they're a good incentive to get confessions, and therefore bring down larger criminal conspiracies. Because every American (and it's the US justice system we're talking about) has the right to a fair trial, American trials are necessarily long, expensive and complex. Plea bargains make the system workable from a practical perspective.
Pleas are a huge problem in things like drug-related crime, where circumstantial and physical evidence can point to a number of individuals, who may have varying levels of involvement in the drug trade. Then the plea incentives tend to push guilty defendants to implicate otherwise tangential or unrelated people, on the theory that the more people you link to the crime, the lighter your own sentence will be. A lot of women are in prison right now for having drug-dealing boyfriends, and a lot of addicts are in prison as dealers because they were at the scene of a drug raid.
It's also a problem in death-penalty cases, where the choice between fighting, losing and dying, and cooperating and living, can push innocent people into confessing to crimes they didn't commit. Particularly if you're African-American, you stand a great chance of being convicted, wrongfully or not, once you've been charged with murder. Under the circumstances, plea bargains become coercive and wrong, and does rise to the level of witch-burning.
Part of the solution to the problem is to beef up the very inadequate system of public defense. Having adequate representation will usually mean, as in Reiser's case, that you'll be able to give something of value (the body) to the police in return for getting a lighter sentence, if you are indeed guilty, but also having the option of going to open court to defend your innocence. Having a shoddy lawyer means that you never really get to consider fighting it out in open court, and you might not even get the best deal from the police.
Another part is getting rid of the death penalty. And then there's entrenched American racism, which is a tough nut to crack. In Rieser's case, I think the system worked well.
Civilised society is judged on how it treats it's prisoners and it's disabled.
Why? That sounds pretty stupid to me.
For the same reason I judge people by how they treat waitresses and secretaries. Everybody treats the powerful well; it's only when you look at how they treat the powerless that you find out what's inside of them.
I have never heard of "cooperating with police" to mean anything other than the suspect establishing guilt or at least providing fresh evidence that is in some way relevant. If he had told a bunch of lies to get off easier, that would be the opposite of cooperating, because they would run around chasing things that aren't there. In this case, he knew a lot about the murder because he knew where her body was, and no one else seemed to. That's cooperating. Saying you killed her but producing no evidence to support it is pleading guilty, not being cooperative.
If you know a lot more than everyone else, you can cooperate with police but still plead innocent. Like saying I don't know who did it, but here's everything I know maybe you can figure it out.
There are probably gaps which might allow the types of abuse you mention, but I cannot think of one example that I have ever read. It is usually pleading guilty to a lesser offense which is the type you describe, and which is highlighted on the "cop shows". That is the type where the prosecutor seems to have a 50/50 chance of winning and offers a reduced sentence. Then the defense advises the suspect to take it because their defense is pants. Cases like these mirror what you bring up, not as a rule the cooperation part.
Also keep in mind if someone murders someone else, the reduction would probably be from intentional murder to unintentional murder. They would never reduce from murder to jaywalking, unless they clearly didn't have enough evidence to win at trial. If I know you did something, you might not know how much I know. So I say I'll reduce the sentence if you cooperate. Then you provide the evidence I need for me to prove that you are guilty of the reduced crime. Some will provide more, some less, and sometimes I have what I need, but there are probably many complications in there. Shortly, a prosecutor will do what needs done to get an appropriate punishment, and not waste more time to make sure the punishment is perfect.
Reisser is not EVIL and to me that is the scariest part, not only do people like that cast a reflection in the mirror, they frequently look like pillars of the community.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Because only in the freest country on earth are prison rape, gang beatings, and physical torture at the hands of sadistic miscreants NOT considered cruel and unusual!
It's the and , now if it were an exclusive or that would be different because when you put that many sadistic miscreants in one place cruelty isn't unusual it's common. Besides we don't perform the rapes beatings and torture, they do and when they are caught the system prosecutes to the fullest extent of the law.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
15 years was ok in these circumstances?
What circumstances?
"Nerd hero butchers wife" circumstances?
Sheesh.
By "and" they mean "or" (||). It doesn't read "or" because "prohibit cruel or unusual punishment" reads like "exclusive or". So they use and. It's prohibited if it's cruel, it's also prohibited if it's unusual.
There are 11 types of people, those who know unary and those who don't.
If you wouldn't convict on what we knew about Hans murdering his wife you wouldn't convict on anything. Fortunately, the American justice system has a process to filter the truly mindless people from juries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEFCON
Something you allude to, but is often forgotten: different installations/units/theaters can have DEFCON levels that differ from the general defense posture of the US.
Leben Sie jetzt die Fragen.
Their victims, however, aren't so lucky. Child rapists, people who rape and murder a 16 year old and dump her in the woods, people who torture somebody to death over the course of a few weeks, people who shoot a mother of 3 for a few hundred dollars, etc... are the ones who get off easy. Their victims don't.
So you go on weeping for murderous scum, meanwhile they'd have no compunction about murdering you and everyone you love. Reiser does deserve to be raped in prison and brutalized in general for what he's done to his children, not even considering what he did to his wife.
If someone who rapes and murders a 4 year old child can be incontrovertibly proved guilty, beyond any kind of rational doubt then personally I'd be cool with flaying him alive in public, old school. Would certainly tend to discourage others from doing the same.
He should have gotten the chair.
Mr. Ballmer was unavailabe at the time, sorry.
I don't read him as sociopathic. Like any other good engineer he saw a technological solution (murder) to a sociological problem (faithless gold-digger wife). It is only a pity he didn't do a better job of it.
Hans, you'll be missed.
you have to admit one is atleast a better human being than the other
I fear anyone who feels they can make that judgment.
Property is theft.
nO access to computers. No access to the internet. access to a (paper) law library & confinement to an overpopulated dorm where he can either be one of the woods or a victim. Geeks don't prosper in prison & stay geek. Forget anything you've ever seen at the movies or on tv.
By "usually" do you mean to imply that a majority of prisoners die from unnatural causes prior to being released from the system?
\I've certainly heard of occasional cases of death in prison but what this is suggesting sounds extreme. There must be publicly available data on this... anyone have it or know where to find it?
Let's not over dramatize this:
True, Reiser was a valuable contributor. Also true that the kids lost their parents, but in Reiser's case that is academic since his whore of a wife already managed to kidnap them away to her family in Russia. Think of the positives: Nina, the gold digging harlot i dead. Their children will at least be free from her poisonous influence. Also, Reiserfs wasn't as much of a boon as some make it out to be, it was unstable at best. It's not as though Volkerding died.
...can mean anything you want it to mean. In this case it meant that the prosecution & justices were annoyed by something the couldn't understand ( i.e. the whole context of Your, Mine & Reiser's existance).
THis is actually quite common - i.e the outrageous sentences handed out to ten hackers, radiculous awards in software piracy cases - that which is incomprehensible is to be destroyed or at least repressed.
That's right, Hans killed the bitch. If he were a drunken jelous redneck or coked-up paranoid lawyer in a jelous rage, he'd have gotten off with a 3-5 years involuntary manslaughter & substance abuse cunseling. Reiser's real crime, the one that earned him the difference between 3-5 year and 15-life was that he Is a Geek.
I never believed Hans would have done it.
In my mind, advanced concepts and nobility of character went hand-in-hand; they would be, in my distorted view, two manifestations of the same high spirit.
Obviously, after he could produce the body, it was shown I was too naïve. Tsk.
Now, posts like yours make me worried about mankind. Just like thinking about how we can *self-censored* a *self-censored* in a second, and how we can afterwards think: "Oh, we're so nice!".
"I find your lack of faith rather disturbing".
She was going to take the kids to the doctors, I haven't read anywhere that she was taking the kids out of the country. As for the russian passports, I'd love to have duel citizenship, it gives you more choices. It's not like she couldn't have gotten the passports after she "fled". The reason they are in Russia now and will not be coming back is that Nina was murdered, so they are being raised by their maternal grandparents instead of being orphans.
Since becoming the Governor of California Arnold has murdered-killed-terminated a number of prisoners with so called State Execution when he could have stopped himself from becoming a murderer and saved some lives. It's ironic that a murderer like Arnold "The Govenator" Schwarzenegger decides the release of other murderers, such as Hans Reiser. I guess it takes one to know one...
I used to be a fan of Arnie until I learned about his excessive steroid use and his eagerness to actually kill people.
Perhaps the Saudi legal system would be more to your liking than the American one then. In this country we supposedly value the rule of law, and believe that all men-- even murders, rapists, and other "scum"-- are created EQUAL.
Not long ago the media was reporting the story of a man, I believe in Texas, who was falsely convicted of rape and exonerated after some long (many years) period of time due to DNA technology. Should he have been beaten and raped himself in prison? Do you just say Oops and apologize when it turns out that person really wasn't guilty?
The true test of the Freedom of Speech is whether or not you believe it applies to people who disagree with you, and people who say horrible, deplorable things. Likewise, societies should be judged by how they treat the lowest among them, not by the smiley gladhanding you do with those you have deemed to be above the Untouchable caste.
Being forcibly removed from society and deprived of your freedom is the punishment. Being stripped of your dignity and sense of self-worth is the punishment. Being stripped of the rights you have as an American citizen is the punishment. These things are awful, but they are earned. I don't have a problem with that. However, if we are going to deprive people of their freedom and place them in confinement, we have certain responsibilities to see that they stay healthy, that they are fed, and that they have access to opportunities to better themselves so they won't have to be criminals if and when they get out of prison. That is justice.
I agree that, among a prison population, a certain degree of uncivilized, violent, disturbing behavior is probably inevitable. However, we have a responsibility to try to prevent it, seeing as it is as much a crime as-- say-- Hans's murdering his wife. Just because you do not like the victim doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent crimes. To say that criminals deserve to be beaten, or raped, or abused is no different than saying that some wives deserve to be killed, and some children deserve to be violated. In a society that claims to believe in justice and the rule of law, crime is crime REGARDLESS OF THE VICTIM.
--Obyron
I'm wondering if the prison system in California will allow Hans Reiser access to a computer to continue his work on the ReiserFS if he so chooses?
You are incredibly deluded.
It's incredibly easy for police to create circumstances to prosecute you and imprison you.
The cops can and do lie -- OFTEN to get convictions, but you, under the principles of "free speech" are not allowed to lie to them. Two very good videos:
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1 and
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2.
The cop admits it -- he can follow anyone driving around and find something to arrest them for.
It's the same throughout the U.S. Our laws are crafted to make *everyone* a law breaker -- this enables the police to selectively enforce laws against anyone they don't like for any reason. Of course, they don't go hog wild -- prosecutions take time & paperwork. But the police get to selectively choose who to arrest -- where to focus efforts, and even whether or not to prosecute. With "consensual crimes" (activity you engage in by yourself or with consenting adults), they have turned to using "asset seizure" as a tool that they rely on to fund their departments and budgets. As an example -- the DEA has almost exclusively been using cash & property seizures against medical marijuana co-ops -- and NOT prosecuting the people. If they prosecute the people, they would potentially have to make a case in front of a non-sympathetic California jury, but if they just take the cash, product and easily disposed of assets, they can get large amounts of cash added to their budgets -- and little that the victims can do to get the money back (since, unlike laws regarding people, the current courts have ruled that property doesn't have to be assumed innocent until proven guilty -- it only takes a lesser "preponderance of evidence", instead of the "beyond a reasonable doubt". Any Cannabis defenders that become too public -- they'll try to take them down -- but they really only want to go for the ones that are causing the most problems (politically). A recent case where the feds prosecuted a grower had him only get a few months (he was growing as a medical provider) -- so then they called in the IRS to have them examine his operation -- and they are trying to go for tax evasion now. Of course if you pay income tax on drug proceeds, the IRS will turn you into the feds. Not sure why that doesn't count as self-incrimination.
The police and judicial system in the US is very corrupt -- with 5% of the population and 66% of the illegal drug consumption in the world --- and the US leading in pressuring other countries to crack down, the absurdity is hard to miss.
The claims are we are having problems affording prisons because of all the prisoners -- but the fact is, if we turned out all the non-violent Cannabis offenders, we'd cut the prison population by 60-66% (its about 450-500 thousand out of 750,000 in the federal system that are in for drug-related offenses -- often with mandatory sentencing being used to ensure the prisons stay full. Treatment programs are another big and growing business (as well as drug testing) -- with the biggest increase coming from those needing "treatment" programs for marijuana -- not because of a problem with marijuana -- but because they can trade prison time for taking a rehab program instead on 1st offenses. So the stats for those in rehab for "marijuana addiction" are used to fuel the myth that it's a "growing problem". The growing problem is that our screwed up legal system has turned everyone into criminals -- with selective enforcement used as a tool to strike at political undesirables.
Unfortunately, prohibition was proven not to work and was theoretically repealed, but the joke was they just moved onto finding a new substance to prohibit. Marijuana criminalization was lead by ex-anti-alcohol FBI enforcers (Anslinger, primarily) who were out of a job after prohibition was repealed -- but they needed to create a crime to stay on the "public dole"...so they did. Since Cannabis was made illegal, consumption has
I'll just signal that I completely disagree with your world view.
Granting the power of life and death to a state over its constituents is something that I'm not comfortable with. Granting them power to give and take liberty at will is also something that I'm not comfortable with. The civilians should be more responsible for protecting themselves than the government is, and will also have better information to do it most of the time.
While I'm posting, I'll just throw another one out there: premeditated murder should have a lesser punishment than a "temporary insanity" crime of passion. I'd rather have people on the streets (or alive, or whatever) that think about things before they do them than apes that kill people when they get agitated.
I've always been a sleep walker/talker
I remember reading a long article about people who were prone to violence in their sleep, or when on the weird twilight edge between consciousness and unconsciousness. Perfectly normal people have done some scary stuff in these situations.
I remember that I once had a bad dream and then ended up somehow socking my GF in the arm, but actually attacking somebody or smothering them is scary stuff.
Recommendation: people should not approach you when you're sleep-walking...
You have nothing to fear, I just happen to believe that people who show that they have no respect for the rights of other people (in this case the right of a person to live) , dont deserve that right themselves. For instance, a liar should not be offended when he is lied to. A thief should not be offended when he is robbed. And a murder should not be surprised if he is murdered. If you live by the sword, you should also expect to die by it.
- Tempestdata
The fact that you still want him to contribute to "the community", despite the fact that he brutally murdered his wife, the mother of his children... then hid her body, lied to investigators and the court...
Wow. There are just no words for how disgusting that is.
It seems to me that you have a sense of "justice" that is totally divorced from the question of morality, insofar as the two are distinguishable (please forgive me for being a little hard on you there). If morals have any defensible purpose, it's that they serve as guidelines to make the world a better place.
In other words, how can you talk about who "deserves" what without explaining how such evaluations make improve the lot of those involved?
Property is theft.
Yes, nowadays there is no doubt. T'was not always the case, though... It took noted logician and philosopher Bertrand Russell some time and effort to prove precisely that equation.
This is on page 362 (!) of his mighty tome Principia Mathematica. Until he had completed his precise and rigorous proof, there was quite definitely some doubt.
Political language
Why don't we just call things what they are, for once? I'm a moral relativist just as most atheists out there, but in this case, "evil" as defined by consensus in our society is a perfect fit. Yes, it is evil to murder your wife in cold blood.
I'm not a moral relativist or an atheist, I'm an amoral nihilistic agnostic.
people defended the united states after 911
then you went to war against Iraq and killed 100,000s of people
so self righteous, you feel you can judge all
are you ready to examine prejudice at work in your mind?
where your arrogance is the cause
The last time an american sociopath strangled one Bush enacted the IMBRA effectively barring aspiring wives from entering if their legal pretense happend to be criminal or mentally unstable or somesuch. Developing nation girls surely will pay dearly for Reiser's short temper.
So you're saying you'd rather have dinner with someone who spent a lot of time thinking about killing someone and never realized it was a bad idea, than someone who knee-jerk killed? I can see where it's appealing to not have loose cannons walking around, but what about smart-bombs?
Really I think they should be treated equally. If you kill someone intentionally we remove you from society, permanently. Maybe the people who's lives have been effected by a murder should be left to decide what becomes of murderers.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!