Chad Perrin wrote:
> 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.
>>
>
>
It's probably going to be remembered like Sid and Nancy. Regardless,
it's hard to discern the truth as a third party that didn't see what
took place.
Regard
Randall Johnson
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:16:17 EDT