Slashdot Mirror
French Police Unsure Which Twin To Charge In Sexual Assaults
An anonymous reader writes "In a real life Prisoner's Dilemma taking place in the French city of Marseille, twin brothers have been arrested for a string of sexual assaults. While say they are sure that one of them committed the crimes (corroborated by a standard DNA test), police were told that it would cost upwards of €1m euros (£850,000, $1.3m USD) to distinguish between them using DNA evidence."
"Prisoner's Dilemma" does not just mean "a dilemma involving prisoners"
I have always wondered what would happen when this type of suspect turned up.(suspect having an identical twin)
Every set of identical twins I have known, has deliberately used the 'identity confusion' at some point.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
What if both of them were pointing at the other and saying "he did it!"
If AC actually bothered to read the definition of the prisoner's dilemma he would have determined that this is not the same situation. Sounds good, but wrong. You have two individuals, both know who the guilty party is. The best strategy for each to play is to proclaim their innocence.
I am not a French Lawyer, but I think that would be coercion.
Just charge the one with the goatee.
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
Will someone with a better understanding of genetics please explain how a genetic test is even possible?
My understanding is that identical twins -- arising from the same zygote -- are genetically identical. Not just "pretty much identical" as the article states.
What possible "genetic test" is being proposed that could differentiate between the brothers? Is the town being scammed?
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
How exactly is the innocent one proclaiming his innocence obstructing justice?
captcha: unproven
While '1 million euros' is a big scary number(and certainly higher than evidence handling for more prosaic cases), it isn't exactly free to have a bunch of cops go around swabbing at evidence, a judge, some lawyers, a jury, etc. Processing a case, especially a serious criminal case, just isn't inexpensive. Given the existing acceptance of the relatively high cost of justice, it seems strange to wring hands about an abnormally high cost cropping up in an abnormal case.
Even if justice didn't demand it, it seems like it would be trivially sensible to just quietly pay what it costs to get the DNA analyzed properly, if only to deter others from trying to get cute.
Wow, logic fail. I hope I never see you in a jury...
Saw this on an episode of Law & Order Special Victims Unit.
And they say television isn't educational...
Be seeing you...
Perhaps then bill each of them for half the cost, for not cooperating.
Who says the innocent one isn't cooperating?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
It's better for the guilty to go free than for the innocent to be punished.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
In the US, the basis of the legal system is that it's better to let ten guilty men go free rather than imprison one innocent man. Of course, this is a French court so they may or may not follow a similar philosophy.
... and that's why those of us in civilised countries consider the US to have a similar legal system to the brutal Sharia law of countries like Afghanistan, Somalia and Mali, among others.
>Perhaps then bill each of them for half the cost, for not cooperating.
Why would you bill both? If they both say they didn't do it, then one IS cooperating and telling the truth.
You want to charge him half a million dollars for being innocent and telling the truth?
That's why there are more prisoners per 100000 citizens than in any other nation, right?
That's why an innocent person never gets executed...well except for the dozens of unfortunate exceptions declared not guilty after being murdered by the state.
Suck it. The US justice and penal system is rotten beyond belief. Just like your political system. Your system does NOT work.
Lie detector tests aren't considered valid evidence in France.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9tecteur_de_mensonge
Nothing is enough for whom enough is too little - Confucius
Here in the Red States of America the prosecution is allowed to specifically threaten you with any ridiculous charges they want to get you to accept a plea bargain. Somehow coercion is allowed for both the police and the prosecution.
Well, I'm not sure how France's legal systems work, but a polygraph test in the US typically doesn't fly in court anyway. Usually they use a polygraph as a means of focusing on a suspect so they can acquire other evidence.
Let's say Twin A did it.
You presume that Twin B has proof of either their own innocence, or Twin A's guilt.
If Twin B does not, saying "it wasn't me" is not obstructing justice - it's telling the truth, even if Twin A tells a lie when saying the same thing.
Saying "It was him!", similarly, is of no help.
A completely dissimilar, and yet similar, situation occurred in NL a good while back; 'Nijmeegse Scooterzaak' Two kids on a moped, on the run from police, fatal accident. The prosecutor could not prove which of the two was the one operating the vehicle (each said it was the other). As a result, neither could be charged for anything too meaningful.
A lot of people did say "just charge them both, and find them both guilty", but there were quite a few people who said that if we, as a society, go down that road, that would be a terrible mistake to make - considering you are then willingly and knowingly finding an innocent person guilty; even if you don't know which of the two (or more) is the innocent one; also the opinion of the court that reluctantly let them off the hook for the greater charges.
The prosecutor has decided to appeal, though, which would land the case in something of an equivalent to a U.S. Supreme Court. I have no idea when the case is supposed to be heard, however.
Which to you imprison for rape and which for contempt?
Also, odds are they are both claimign to be innocent.
How is it contempt to claim innocence when you actually are?
You reply is ignorant.
"Another would be to come up with a huge list of possible things that only the criminal would know based on the crimes and quiz them and their whereabouts at the time. Yes, you can lie,..."
Only morons talk to the police.
You don't talk to the police.
Ever!
It can only hurt you.
Whereas in the good, honest Blue States of America, we just threaten hackers for political gain until they commit suicide. Much less expensive.
The justice system shouldn't be haggling over price.
They have suspects they are sure that did it. They have a method of determining which one, but they are dicking around because of cost?
Unacceptable.
I'm pretty sure the French police have probably thought of that...
One twin may actually have a legitimate alibi (receipt) at the time of the sexual assault with verifiable proof (security cam or employee).
No he would not have. As no one vouching for the alibi will be able to distinguish the two.
In the typical confrontation situation you have 10 cops and 2 suspects in one room, and behind a glass/mirror wall the witness is asked: which number do you recognize? And now?
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Any sympathy for the innocent one? I'd sure hate to be tortured because my sibling committed a crime.
I happened in Berlin: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-perfect-crime-twins-suspected-in-spectacular-jewelry-heist-set-free-a-614245.html
I think there have been other occasions too.
When you are wielding life and death IN MY NAME you better get it fucking right. Unjust imprisonment is rape too. Perhaps we should throw some accusations at you and see what sticks, for the greater good, of course.
Good-bye
Of course, only one of them is a rapist. A ball-peen hammer or garden sheers to the knuckles of the innocent twin evokes quite a bit more sympathy....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
And then judge specifically asks you if you have been coerced or promised anything and you say 'no, your honor' and everyone in the room winks at each other.
Good-bye
What system should replace the USA system of justice that jails more citizens per capita than any other western nation?
Anarchists never rule
Presumably, having earned an appropriate commercial vehicle operation license, and a past history of employment as a delivery driver, would be typical attributes for which someone would be termed a "delivery driver" even if currently unemployed, similar to how others might be referred to as "unemployed programmers," "unemployed engineers," etc.
Or, is the job of "delivery driver" so far below your contempt that it deserves no distinction from "unemployed bum"? I.e., are you a total elitist asshole?
Stress detectors unfortunately are prone to false positive results. If you run 1000 interviews you may have only one who lies and gets away with it but you may 'detect' 50 liars who are telling the truth.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's not as though it's unheard of for identical twins to have similar hobbies...
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
It sounds a little implausible, but perhaps I am unaware of the forensic issues. Due to massive improvements in DNA sequencing, it costs less than $10,000 to acquire a full genome (see https://www.genome.gov/sequencingcosts/ ). So, back-of-the-envelope:
(a) $20k to acquire both genomes, plus
(b) some computational effort to identify interesting DNA polymorphisms ($0 - $1000 ???), plus
(c) PCR'ing out and sequencing of a region of the crime-scene DNA (cheap; less than $100).
So $22k, not counting labor costs?
IAAMB (I am a molecular biologist), but not a forensic one. Maybe it just doesn't work that way. Anyone have other information?
But what if the innocent one has no evidence, or no alibi that will stand up to prove his innocence?
Then, you're relying on the guilty one to do the right thing and confess so his brother isn't jailed. He's a rapist, do you really want to rely on his good nature?
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
The fuck? How on earth is it a conspiracy of any kind to claim yourself to be innocent when you are?
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
Throw them both in jail until one confesses. If they want to act like children they can be treated like children..
What the fuck is wrong with you?
You're suggesting putting an INNOCENT person in prison for the "crime" of either (1) truthfully denying he did it, or (2) remaining silent on advice of his lawyer when there is likely nothing he COULD say other than a useless truthful denial.
Note that there is no reason to expect that the guilty party will EVER confess.
Further note that, if the guilty party isn't confessing then you are creating a no-win scenario for the innocent party. In fact you are creating a very substantial possibility that the innocent one could give a false confession because he has no reason not to, and he has nothing better to do. Hell, if the guilty one isn't confessing than it's actually entirely logical for the innocent one to confess. At least in that case he can hope that guilty one will re-offend and get caught, establishing the other's guilt at which point he can recant his false confession. That could be an innocent man's best hope of ever getting out of prison in your IDIOTIC proposal.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
2 unemployed truck drivers. Where are you going to get the money from?
I'd donate money to get an innocent man exonerated.
If you want to look for the real scum, look for those who would happily put an innocent person to death.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Have we forgotten about simple things like, for example, establishing who was where and when? You know, alibis?
If it's a "string" of rapes, surely one of the brothers has an alibi for one of them, at least?
expandfairuse.org
Inshallah, you are absolutely right. Police lying to murder and rape suspects is morally and culturally equivalent to culturally sanctioned rape, communal stoning (at least they're well socialized), and honor killings. How silly of us to think otherwise. Allah ackbar!
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
That's not really the best advice, what you don't want to do is talk to the police without your attorney present. If your attorney thinks it's a good idea to answer a particular question, then you may want to do it.
A ball-peen hammer or garden sheers to the knuckles works wonders
[citation required]
All the evidence I have seen indicates the opposite. Torture is a horribly ineffective means of finding the truth. In fact, throwing a coin is probably better.
If it isn't obvious why, the very simplified causation is roughly this: As torture proceeds, the goal of the victim becomes very simple: Make it end, no matter what. We KNOW that people will readily admit to crimes they did not commit under torture, including crimes that carry the death penalty. We know that people under torture reach a point where they would not only say "yes" but also thank you for it if you offered to kill them right then and there. We know that they will invent not only details of the crimes they are being questioned about, but also entirely new crimes.
We have historic evidence of people admitting crimes under torture where later investigations found conclusive evidence that they could not possible have committed them.
Torture does not work if your goal is truth.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
... and that's why those of us in civilised countries consider the US to have a similar legal system to the brutal Sharia law of countries like Afghanistan, Somalia and Mali, among others.
There are those of us in the US who agree that the US legal/penal/justice systems are brutal, regressive, unjust, and counterproductive, and do what we can to change that, but at the same time are opposed by authoritarian-types who claim that various improvements proposed by "bleeding-heart liberals" equate to being "soft on crime." However, my state struck down the judicial death penalty a few years ago and decriminalized marijuana possession last year, so I still have hope that improvements can continue, at least at the state level.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Switzerland: 722 years and counting.
licet differant, aequabitur
The "you know" part scares me. Millions of people "knew" the earth is flat. Heck, millions of people today "know" that gays are evil, women are the root of all evil, christians/muslims/jews/atheists/blacks/whites/cats are responsible for whatever.
If you can't prove it in a court of law, then how do you "know"?
Not to mention that in any civilized society, confession under torture is not admissible in court.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org