Hans Reiser found guilty of murder.

[bofors]

Hans Reiser was a file system developer well known in the Linux community: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReiserFS

 

He was charged with murdering his estranged Russian wife in California in 2006: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazi...7/ff_hansreiser

 

A jury found Reiser guilty today: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/r...r-guilty-o.html

 

While I suspect that Resier did actually murder his wife, the fact there was no direct evidence that he did, nor that his wife is even dead, should leave people concerned about whether juries understand the legal standard of "proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt". In short, Reiser's wife went missing and the jury convicted him on merely suspicious behavior. I do not think the facts of this case meet the high standard of evidence required in the USA, the same can be said about many other cases.

[Alessandro17]

I find it extremely disturbing.

Sometimes I believe it is a blessing we don't have juries in Italy.

Can he now appeal?

[bofors]

I find it extremely disturbing.

 

If you read comments to the Wired article on Reiser's conviction, you will see that we are not alone: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/r...r-guilty-o.html

 

Sometimes I believe it is a blessing we don't have juries in Italy.

 

Although I do not fully understand the Roman model of jurisprudence used in the Italy and France, juries are an important safeguard of English-based legal systems like that used in the USA. I would be scared to see what would happen here without juries, due to rampant abuse of government power America is in bad enough shape as it is (hopefully, the exit of Bush-Cheney regime will stop the situation from getting worse).

 

Can he now appeal?

 

Sure, and such an appeal may be automatic in California, but juries (and not even the highest court judges) are supposed to be charged with the determination of fact in the English model of jurisprudence. Basically, Reiser would have to successfully argue that the jury was improperly instructed or otherwise did not understand what "reasonable doubt" means. The odds of him being successful are pretty close to zero.

 

The other thing that should be said here is, that while Reiser is obviously an intelligent person, the population of the California penal system certainly is quite the opposite. Locking somebody like Reiser up with prison animals amounts to torture.

[munky]

The other thing that should be said here is, that while Reiser is obviously an intelligent person, the population of the California penal system certainly is quite the opposite. Locking somebody like Reiser up with prison animals amounts to torture.

 

What exactly are you saying here? That prisoners should be separated based on their IQ? That people should be treated differently under the law depending on how intelligent they are? How is it any more like torture for an intelligent man than a dumb man? Its still a cage.

[Alessandro17]

Although I do not fully understand the Roman model of jurisprudence used in the Italy and France, juries are an important safeguard of English-based legal systems like that used in the USA. I would be scared to see what would happen here without juries, due to rampant abuse of government power America is in bad enough shape as it is (hopefully, the exit of Bush-Cheney regime will stop the situation from getting worse).

 

The idea (enshrined in our Constitution) is that politicians/the government shouldn't interfere at all with the judiciary.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers

 

Also, we don't have a "public prosecutor" who must prove you guilty at any rate. The prosecution is left to a magistrate, who could autonomously decide that there is no case and recommend it to the judge, who will almost always agree.

I was looking for articles to explain this better, but all I found is:

 

http://www.jstor.org/pss/840104 (it costs $7.50)

 

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubblico_Ministero (Italian)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of...Judicial_branch (only a few words)

 

Overall, I'd feel much better safeguarded by the Italian system than by the American one.

However, since we have some among the most corrupted politicians in the Western world, they (politicians) are doing their very best to undermine the independence of our judiciary.

[bofors]

What exactly are you saying here? That prisoners should be separated based on their IQ? That people should be treated differently under the law depending on how intelligent they are? How is it any more like torture for an intelligent man than a dumb man? Its still a cage.

 

Due to the social-economic diversity of the USA, this problem may not be as apparent in Europe. But I am sure you can recognize the difference between going to a UK prison and let's say a Turkish prison. Now consider that the rotten cores of American cities are effectively third-world countries and that it is people from these centers of urban decay who form the vast majority of the burgeoning American prison population.

 

In short, Rieser is obviously not some vicious crack-dealing gang-member who stabs people for looking at him the wrong way. Locking Rieser up with such people is akin to torture, it is equivalent to putting him in a cage with rabid dogs.

[pebcak]

Why are you so sure he is not guilty?

[mindlessmissy]

C'mon... Look at the Man ..... You know he did Something ....

[bofors]

Why are you so sure he is not guilty?

 

Like I said in my first post, "I suspect that Resier did actually murder his wife... "

[A Nonny Moose]

Why are you so sure he is not guilty?

 

I suspect this isn't the case as much as it is a chance to slam the US legal system...

[munky]

In short, Rieser is obviously not some vicious crack-dealing gang-member who stabs people for looking at him the wrong way. Locking Rieser up with such people is akin to torture, it is equivalent to putting him in a cage with rabid dogs.

 

He murdered someone. That means he goes to jail. He goes to the same jail as anyone else who has murdered someone. If he didnt want to go to jail, he shouldnt have murdered his wife, simple as that.

 

On another note, if he wanted to get away with it, stupid mother f****r shouldnt have taken the stand himself. His legal team were doing ok until he tried to 'explainify' his weird and suspicious behaviour.

[bofors]

He murdered someone. That means he goes to jail. He goes to the same jail as anyone else who has murdered someone. If he didnt want to go to jail, he shouldnt have murdered his wife, simple as that.

 

So, your argument is that people are all the same? Every prison system and jail in the USA, classifies and segregates inmates on the basis of the violence of their crimes and history of cooperation as a prisoner. I am not suggesting that more civilized criminals like Reiser should not go to prison, I am saying that they should be separated from the street trash that is born to be incarcerated. American "correctional" institutions do not do enough to separate inmates into homogenous populations, instead they create conditions which ensures violent conflicts between racial-gangs.

 

On another note, if he wanted to get away with it, stupid mother f****r shouldnt have taken the stand himself. His legal team were doing ok until he tried to 'explainify' his weird and suspicious behaviour.

 

Oh, I think we can easily determine that with high probability that Reiser would have been convicted whether he took the stand or not. We know that the prosecution did not count on Reiser testifying at all (let alone so poorly) and that conviction rates are very high. To put it simply, if the prosecution had anything less than a case with near certainty of conviction against Resier, they would have waited for more evidence to be uncovered, specifically Nina's body.

 

I also have a couple more notes to make...

 

A certain category of people commenting on this case are clearly expressing personal anger towards Reiser. I think this is nonsense which stems from belief in the false concept of "free will". To put it in terms everyone here should understand, at a fundamental level people are machines just like computers. At a hardware level, people are defined by their genetic inheritance. In terms of software, the behavior of people is nothing more than reactions to the environmental based on childhood "programming". As such, the idea that Resier could have done anything different then what he did is plainly absurd. The blatantly hypocritical institutions of social control, specifically government and religion, exploit the fallacy of "free will" to the maximum extent that it yields them power over humanity. Allowing oneself to be manipulated into becoming angry with Reiser is about as rational as physically assaulting a computer on the orders of Steve Jobs.

 

Now, since there is no reason to think that Reiser is a natural born killer, let's consider the environmental situation that drove Resier to murder Nina:

 

The motives were also clear, said the juror. The 31-year-old wife had an affair with the defendant's best friend. And days before the murder, child welfare workers accused Reiser of being more than $10,000 in arrears in child-support. Jurors also noted that Reiser was frantically calling a local politician in a bid to change the family court system, which he blamed for initially giving full legal custody to Nina, Dunn said.

 

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/r...r-juror-de.html

 

To me, it looks like there is plenty of evidence to suggest that bad government drove Reiser to commit murder. Likewise, one could easily argue that Nina's questionable behavior was a direct cause of her own death. The case of a husband killing a wife (or vice versa) is hardly unique. Focusing the blame on Reiser for killing Nina is not only stupid, it is dangerous because it guarantees that the changes in government required to prevent virtually identical tragedies in the future will not occur. To summarize, people as a whole and the governments that represent them, not overstressed individuals like Reiser, are responsible for creating and solving social problems like those blatantly evident here.

[pebcak]

Ah, and women with short skirts are responsible if they are raped... stupid.

[borisbadenov]

Locking somebody like Reiser up with prison animals amounts to torture.

If he is an intelligent person, he would not have committed murder. If he is an intelligent person, he will surely know this about the prisons. If he is an intelligent person, he will learn to use soap on a rope.Kudos to Munky for saying it so plainly.Politicians are politicians anywhere in the world.

However, since we have some among the most corrupted politicians in the Western world, ...

One can only say this statement in the Western world as we live in a free and open society. In most of the rest of the world, corrupt politicians will just kill you.

[toml_12953]

"proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"

 

Remember, that doesn't mean beyond all doubt! If a judge decides that most people would conclude the defendant is guilty, then the reasonable doubt standard applies. Frequently, circumstantial evidence is sufficient to convict.

 

Tom Lake

[dakine]

I read the Wired article and I think he murdered his wife. The best thing that could happen to him is a death sentence (which I doubt will happen) then he will be put on Death Row at San Quentin for many years and be isolated from the general population. If he is sentenced to life in prison, he will be with the general population and probably many bad things will happen to him.

 

Most likely he will spend the rest of his life in prison, unless his appeal is successful.

[Alessandro17]

One can only say this statement in the Western world as we live in a free and open society. In most of the rest of the world, corrupt politicians will just kill you.

 

If you believe that politicians don't kill their enemies in Italy, you aren't well informed. They do, but then the "official truth" will be that the mafia or the "Red Brigades" are responsible.

 

If he is an intelligent person, he would not have committed murder. If he is an intelligent person, he will surely know this about the prisons. If he is an intelligent person, he will learn to use soap on a rope.

 

Except that even if a jury found him guilty, it doesn't sound like a fair conviction, thus he shouldn't go to prison at all.

 

In Italy we had a very similar case. Two children disappeared, and the father was suspected of murdering them.

In the end the bodies were found, and it was proven beyond doubt that it had just been an accident.

So what happens if one day somebody finds Nina alive and well in Russia?

Everybody who believed that Reiser was guilty should hang themselves in shame.

[borisbadenov]

So what happens if one day somebody finds Nina alive and well in Russia?

 

Never said justice was perfect but with such bleeding heart liberal sympathies in this chat/forum, let us all just open the prisons, jails, etc and let everyone free. I am sure that the world will be a much better place.

 

And see, you mention the red-brigade in Italy. At least you know about them I do not hear anyone clamoring about the lack of total human rights in places like north korea. Yes, let us just rail against the open society that allows us to speak freely. At least you know will will still wake up alive tomorrow.

[Alessandro17]

Never said justice was perfect but with such bleeding heart liberal sympathies in this chat/forum, let us all just open the prisons, jails, etc and let everyone free. I am sure that the world will be a much better place.

 

It is not what I said, did I? Many (most) convictions are safe, but this one clearly isn't.

It is easy to say: send them all to prison. But if one day it happens to you or to a close relative or friend of yours, being sent to prison while you are absolutely sure of your innocence, let me see if you don't change your mind in a second.

 

And see, you mention the red-brigade in Italy. At least you know about them I do not hear anyone clamoring about the lack of total human rights in places like north korea. Yes, let us just rail against the open society that allows us to speak freely. At least you know will will still wake up alive tomorrow.

 

As to real freedom of speech in Italy ask this man:

 

http://www.beppegrillo.it/eng/

 

And this one:

 

http://www.antoniodipietro.com/international.php (he just got elected with a few dozens more as an MP)

 

Or this one:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Travaglio

 

(Just to mention a few)

 

If Italians believed they had freedom of speech, why would they have gone to the streets on April 25, in 500 locations, collecting 1,300,000 signatures?

 

Which real freedom of speech can there be if the Prime Minister owns 3 of the main 7 Televisions, controls the 3 State owned ones and owns the majority of newspapers and magazine?

I almost prefer a "real dictatorship", at least you know you must fight them.

[solaar]

Someone disappears and someone else gets charged with murder and there's no dead body? What kind of arbitrary justice system is that?

[chris2k]

Someone disappears and someone else gets charged with murder and there's no dead body? What kind of arbitrary justice system is that?

 

Everything is possible in US and A

 

No seriously, I don't get it either...infront of a jury, lawyers become actors and who plays best wins.

[Alessandro17]

Someone disappears and someone else gets charged with murder and there's no dead body? What kind of arbitrary justice system is that?

 

Exactly my point. Next they'll charge people just because they don't like their faces.

[InorganicMatter]

Someone disappears and someone else gets charged with murder and there's no dead body? What kind of arbitrary justice system is that?

There were mountains of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence can't be considered that concrete up to a certain point, but when there's as much as there was in this case, it's pretty obvious. I mean really, he sprayed out the inside of his car with a hose because he was trying to clean it? Come on....you honestly believe that? When was the last time you took a hose to the inside of your $15k machine?

[solaar]

Nothing is obvious in legal matters unless there is evidence.

 

There are thousands of people disappearing every day.

 

Just imagine you have a quarrel with somebody, you part ways, you get over it and keep living your life normally, a week later the person you had a fight with is reported missing, they find you with a larger amount of cash in your pockets (to buy some new computer hardware for instance) and charge you with murder.

 

There is not even a witness who can come up with plausible 'circumstantial evidence' that the woman is certainly dead.

 

Beyond reasonable doubt, isn't it?...

 

geez...

[xx66stangxx]

You do realize that the News reports only partial of the entire story and it is flipped flopped so many freakin times; we are just told what they want us to hear. Obviously they had enough info for the 12 jurists to agree he was guilty. No morally good person, no matter of any religion, would want to charge someone for murder when they felt that person was innocent.