Basil Chupin wrote:
Stan Goodman wrote:
At 16:23:42 on Tuesday Tuesday 29 April 2008, Basil Chupin
wrote: jdd sur free wrote:
Stan Goodman a écrit :
But the remarkable thing is that the man now has at least 25 years of incarceration to look forward to, under circumstances that at the very best will be exceedingly trying, and the only concern expressed here is "what will happen now to ReiserFS.
THAT is the depressing part of it.
this is the only part is relevant to *this* forum. we don't either have to know why his wife got killed...
Considering that she hasn't been found I cannot see how anyone can claim that she was killed.....
The court didn't have much trouble, probably because traces of her blood were found in his car.
No, on a bag which was inside his car (according to what I read), quite a different slant to what you have implied - which, BTW, is exactly why circumstantial evidence is a lot of codswallop because it is nothing but hearsay and interpretation of what what someone thinks they may have seen or heard or imagined.
Hearsay and circumstantial evidence are quite different. For one, circumstantial evidence is....evidence (evidence of what is a matter of opinion) and admissable in court, whereas hearsay is not, because it is not evidence of any sort. I can claim that you told me something..regardless of whether you said it or not. Your footprint near a crime scene is evidence that you were there... but not in itself conclusive of anything other than at some point in time, your path through life went near the place where a crime was committed. Circumstantial evidence is a piece of a puzzle. Hearsay is a novel. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org