On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:02:54AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:33:03PM -0400, tom smith wrote:
> > This is a tragic outcome.
> > http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/hans-reiser-off.html
>
> Based on my readings about the trial, it seemed to me that regardless of
> whether Reiser was guilty, they didn't have the evidence to properly
> convict him. In other words, the jury was full of knuckleheads who
> returned a "guilty" verdict based on their dislike for the man on the
> stand rather than evidence supporting certainty beyond a reasonable
> doubt. Now, it looks like he actually did it.
>
> I guess it's smarter to be lucky than it is lucky to be smart.
Of course, after reading the article a second time, I see that there's no
specific indication that the headline was anything but sensationalism.
It's possible the overtures were made by the prosecution -- which means
it's still possible that Reiser has been telling the truth.
. . . or, as one commenter put it:
> Conclusion: Either he is guilty and gets 15 years or he is innocent and
> gets 25 years.
>
> Fascinating.
-- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Niccolo Machiavelli: "It is a common failing of man not to take account of tempests during fair weather."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:16:06 EDT