[conspire] (forw) Re: [Evals] Hans Reiser found guilty

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Adrien Lamothe (a_lamothe at yahoo.com):

> We don't know what is out of character for her. We certainly can"t
> make the claim that she is a pragmatic person. 

I certainly cannot agree, having gotten that clear impression from the
testimony of both sides' witnesses.

> The whole drama that was playing out with Hans, his wife, et. al.
> created a highly charged situation where practically anything is
> possible.

You're reaching.  (Are you attempting to troll me, or does it just seem
that way?  I really don't have time for deliberate trolling.)

Anyway, what's _possible_ is irrelevant.  What's plausible is quite
relevant.  (We were obviously not consulted, but it's still interesting
to imagine one's self needing to participate in such a jury.)

> But let's say she did decide to simply leave, sans children. That
> would end up having the same effect as what actually transpired.

Not if she didn't leave a car full of tossed-around groceries rotting
with the car mysteriously parked on a freeway frontage road, a big pile
of cash in her apartment, a series of dinner appointments uncancelled, a
newly acquired job un-resigned, a cellular telephone scattered around
her car with the battery removed, her purse and all regular ID in the 
car, both of her passports at home, her apartment still rented, her
current rent cheque apparently abandoned in the car, and a big
prepayment for classes at Kaplan Learning Center neither refunded nor
used.  Those were all details that immediately telegraphed to Oakland PD
that this was a life suddenly and probably violently interrupted, rather
than someone who made measured plans to go away.

> She didn't have to do anything special to frame Hans.

Wrong.  See above.

> The fact that she vanished is what set off the investigation and trial. 

Wrong.  It was her disappearance combined with the particular details of
the life that she left suddenly and the way she left it.

> It doesn't make sense, but it is still possible.

Completely aside from your being fundamentally wrong in the foregoing, 
court cases are not made from what is theoretically possible, but rather
from what seems likely -- plausible -- and for which prosecutors can
buld a case.

> Given the evidence, it is just as plausible she simply left as it is
> that Hans murdered her.

As you will see above, no.  The facts and circumstances favour her
disappearing suddenly and involuntarily.  Disappearing in that manner
makes it rather likely that she died through murder.   And the likeliest 
candidate for the murderer on a-priori grounds was always Hans.

> On another note, someone earlier this evening told me he heard on the
> television news that a major announcement in the case is expected soon
> and speculation is that Hans is going to tell them where the body is
> in exchange for a reduced sentence. 

"Someone" doesn't seem like a reliable source, to me, on multiple
grounds including the prosecutors having really no reason to consider
such a deal.  I'll not be holding my breath, anyway.

> This is only speculation....

That's one polite word for it, yes.  ;->