 |
The Linux community and Slashdot crowed have been rallying around Hans Reiser since he was arrested back in 2006. His wife went missing, there is no body, no crime scene, no physical evidence, but yet he was convicted. What happened?
I have a theory, proven time and time again, about criminal defense practice. Confused jurors who are doing their job correctly will never find a defendant guilty. By being confused they will have reasonable doubt. The very last thing a defendant should do is testify and clear up the confusion. This case proves my theory exactly. If he never testified he would have walked away a free man.
In a murder case with no body, no crime scene, no reliable eyewitness and virtually no physical evidence, the prosecution began the trial last November with a daunting task ahead. By the time prosecutor Paul Hora rested his case February 14, he had called some 60 witnesses, but presented mostly circumstantial evidence demonstrating animus between Reiser and his wife, and suspicious behavior by the defendant following Nina’s disappearance in September, 2006.
The turning point in the trial came when Reiser took the stand in his own defense March 3.
By the time he was done, Reiser had succeeded only in dispelling the cloud of ambiguity surrounding his actions in the case, replacing it with a storm of very specific explanations that each strained credulity. Jurors had to choose between Reiser’s strained version of events and the plain conclusion that he was lying.
Update: Reiser’s attorney admits that his client’s actions did him in.
Immediately following today’s verdict, Reiser’s own lawyer suggested his client doomed himself when he insisted on taking the stand in his own defense.
“I’m sure he negatively impressed the jurors,” defense attorney William DuBois said.
Excellent. Commit the perfect crime, and then convict yourself. Can’t wait for the movie.
SN–good analysis. If ego weren’t an issue, probably no crime to begin with?
I think Bill Gates and Steve Jobs did away with the guys wife, as part of their plan to get rid of all the linux developers.
Says the man with the tin-foil hat…
meh… he’ll be out in 5 to 10
The jurors have spoken “the plain conclusion that he was lying”
Time to fire up “old sparky”.
Innocent? No evidence? Lets see, he removed a set from his car (“so it was easier to sleep in” yeah right), hosed out his car (to “clean” it) and weren’t blood splatters from his wife also found? Yep, he’s innocent alright.
G
[Duplicate comment deleted. – ed.]
There was plenty of physical evidence and extremely incriminating behavior leading up to his arrest. Blood spatters, removing the seats of his car, trying to hide the car unsuccessfully, buying a bunch of books on homicide investigation techniques, and the fact that he historically acted like a psycho. Throw in the strong circumstantial evidence like he was the last to see her alive, and the custody dispute motive, and it’s a done deal.
Don’t forget that both his AND his wife’s cell phones had their batteries removed to prevent tracking from cell towers, and her blood was on a sleeping bag cover in the car. Each piece of circumstantial evidence by itself didn’t confict him, but added all together, it’s a pretty solid conviction. Of course, the way this trial played out, I half expected her to walk into court just as the final gavel was coming down.
>>They also found a sleeping-bag cover stained
>>with a 6-inch wide blotch of Nina’s dried blood.
>>Reiser later testified that the couple had sex
>>in the sleeping bag on a camping trip prior to
>>their 2004 separation.
Yikes. That guy must have a heck of a schlong, if he made his wife bleed a 6-inch wide blotch on the sleeping-bag cover when they had sex. Ouch!!
#9 and we know that isn’t the case because he is a Linux guy.
This is the first time I’ve heard of a murder conviction with no body and no witnesses, not to mention no murder weapon. Jesus, how much of a jerk/idiot is this guy? I mean, he gets on the stand and his “bedside manner” is so bad that he gets convicted pretty much solely on his testimony? Geez.
fishy alarm – vibrating. doesn’t matter, i’ll continue to use his fine filesystem
I certainly never said he was innocent or that there was no evidence.
I really hate explaining law on this forum, it’s like explaining algebra to a monkey.
None of what you consider physical evidence is anything more than circumstantial evidence. Take the blood for instance, that does not prove a murder occurred. I’ve cut myself bad enough to leave blood on a towel. But I was never murdered. All of the evidence, every bit of it, was circumstantial. There is no physical evidence at all that a murder occurred.
Look at the spacing of his eyes – he’s guilty.