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.
what would batman do?
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
Had you at least seen War Games, you would know that your Defcons are backwards. Defcon 5 = Peace Defcon 1 = Nuclear War
The game.
that URL should be
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/confession.pdf
and oh, it is sad:
While the kids are sleeping, Hans is digging a grave for Nina. He comes home "and I was exhausted ... [the kids] would mercilessly jump on my belly and demand that I play with them."
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
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
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.
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
I think OP meant that there's a difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt and mathematical certainty."
So while Reiser's guilt is not a mathematical certainty, it's well beyond what a reasonable person could have any serious doubts over considering how the case played out. From the prosecution's perspective, it was a win--they can feel confident they put the guilty person behind bars and saved the taxpayers the expense of a long court battle and appeals process.
He should have gotten the chair.
i know just the man
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!!!
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.
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
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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 :)
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
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.
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.
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