except that its not the same thing as theft at all.. with theft, you KNOW the person is missing it, who cares what happend to it? the thief isnt being convicted for destroying stolen stuff, but for stealing it..
Hans is being convicted for KILLING someone whom they do not have confirmed to be dead, and without any real hard evidence he really did it.
I ask you again, would you put your life in the hands of that jury, if you were innocent, and trialed for murdor?
and because the body eventually turns up, that prooves a specific person did something?
without REAL and HARD evidence that a person has done something, you can not in good concience convict him of it.
You don't need a body to convict.
Saying "what are the odds twelve random people will agree!" is not convincing. It's not the same thing as the odds of getting heads after twelve coin flips. It's not a game of chance. You are leaving out important information like "what are the odds that twelve random people will agree when presented with the same information?" It's like you are saying "what are the odds that all 458 people who have been into space agree that the earth is round?" Wow that must sound pretty unlikely to you huh? Well the odds are pretty damn high since they've seen the same evidence. Your argument is illogical.
What you are saying here is that if someone hides the body well enough (s)he should get away with it. This makes no sense either and the courts disagree with you. I think it's about time you dealt with the reality of this case.without REAL and HARD evidence that a person has done something, you can not in good concience convict him of it.
What are the odds that (the probability that all 458 people who have been into space agree that the earth is round) is wildly different from (the probability that 458 school teachers who have NEVER been into space agree that the earth is round)?
Reiser was framed. The JURY was RIGGED. Simple.
Last edited by Jade; 05-03-2008 at 03:26 AM.
Maybe Reiserfs have had to be stopped somehow and one way to do that was to eliminate Hans from the project?
How do you propose that anyone know for sure if no identifiable remains are found? At some point it has to be acceptable to presume someone dead if there is no evidence that they're still alive.Originally Posted by Redeeman
Last edited by Ex-Cyber; 05-06-2008 at 06:24 AM.
And how i propose anyone knows? well.. its called a freaking investigation, and not a witch hunt, isnt it? for instance, if they had a big juicy video of hans with a chainsaw or blender, totally destroying her, then i would call that EVIDENCE(you know, what traditionally is used in PROOVING things), and that evidence would pretty much proove guilt, even if the remains couldnt be found afterwards..