Hans Reiser is on trial for the murder of his wife, Nina. Wired's Threat Level blog has been covering it for a good four months. "gavel to gavel," as they put it.
Whoops, missed the conclusion. Thanks for the pointer!
As for the verdict, it's all about how one views the presented evidence; more of an emotional cast than anything, in my eyes. I would say that the "first-degree" part of the verdict is justified. I'm just not sure the "guilty" part is.
He somehow managed to fuck up a defense that started with "She was fucking an admitted serial killer", if that gives you any sense of his incompetence.
Defence case: She was having an affair with his friend. His friend who gave evidence here. His friend who has admitted to several murders over a period of time.
Prosecution case: (bloodstains, he washed his car to the point of leaving an inch-deep pool of water in the back seat, his possession of several books on police pathology and procedure, more prima facie damnatory stuff, even if they don't have her body.)
Defence case: ‘I... are you sure, I... No, I can't stop you but I advise you strongly to... Oh, well. It's you're funeral, Mr Reiser.’ Reiser takes the stand and systematically eliminates every shred of jury sympathy, while simultaneously pissing on the concept of human credulity.
Result: The Jury turns around and says ‘fuck you, you fucking freak: guilty, can we hang him now, or do we have to wait until sunup?’
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 09:30 pm (UTC)Just striving for accuracy, here.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 10:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 10:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 10:32 pm (UTC)-- Steve's not certain he agrees that a first-degree conviction was merited, but he ain't a lawyer and there was a lot of evidence of premeditation
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 10:36 pm (UTC)As for the verdict, it's all about how one views the presented evidence; more of an emotional cast than anything, in my eyes. I would say that the "first-degree" part of the verdict is justified. I'm just not sure the "guilty" part is.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 11:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-03 11:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 02:04 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 05:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 05:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 06:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 10:50 am (UTC)Defence case: She was having an affair with his friend. His friend who gave evidence here. His friend who has admitted to several murders over a period of time.
Prosecution case: (bloodstains, he washed his car to the point of leaving an inch-deep pool of water in the back seat, his possession of several books on police pathology and procedure, more prima facie damnatory stuff, even if they don't have her body.)
Defence case: ‘I... are you sure, I... No, I can't stop you but I advise you strongly to... Oh, well. It's you're funeral, Mr Reiser.’
Reiser takes the stand and systematically eliminates every shred of jury sympathy, while simultaneously pissing on the concept of human credulity.
Result: The Jury turns around and says ‘fuck you, you fucking freak: guilty, can we hang him now, or do we have to wait until sunup?’