Slashdot Log In
Hans Reiser Gets Sentence of 15-To-Life
Posted by
Soulskill
on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:05 PM
from the bye-now dept.
from the bye-now dept.
mallumax writes "Hans Reiser was today handed a prison sentence of 15-to-life for murdering his wife. Earlier this year, he pleaded guilty and led police to his wife's body. His jury trial concluded in April with Reiser's first-degree murder conviction. That carries a 25-to-life term, but the authorities, in a backroom deal, later offered him 15-to-life if he produced his wife's body and waived any rights to appeal his conviction."
Several other readers contributed coverage at SFGate.
Related Stories
[+]
Hans Reiser Guilty of First Degree Murder 1395 comments
Anonymous Meoward writes "Today Hans Reiser was found guilty of first degree murder in Oakland, California. Quoting Wired: '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... The turning point in the trial came when Reiser took the stand in his own defense March 3.' Whether he really did it or not, Hans basically just didn't know when to shut up."
[+]
News: Hans Reiser To Reveal Location of Wife's Body 882 comments
dlgeek writes "The story of Hans Reiser is well known to all Slashdotters by now. Some still placed doubts about the conviction, stating that he might be innocent. It now seems that all doubt has been quelled, since Alameda County District Attorney Thomas Orloff has revealed that Hans Reiser will disclose the location of Nina's body for a reduced sentence.
The deal is not yet finalized, though. 'There's been some overtures,' Orloff said, 'But everything is in its preliminary stage.' The deal would reduce his conviction from first degree to second degree murder. In addition, an anonymous source close to the situation said that 'the only real leverage he has is if he can provide a body. He really doesn't have any options left. Even if he won a retrial somehow, he'd likely be convicted.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Interesting)
If he hadn't been able to produce the body of his wife then there could have been some uncertainty of his guilt. But since he did he must have been guilty, at least enough guilty for imprisonment.
If the evidence in itself was enough or not - it's another question but the court decided it was.
So in this case we should be able to call this a closed case. What we then think of the legal system is a different issue.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Informative)
Citation Granted [sfgate.com]
Under a heavy police guard, Reiser, handcuffed to his attorney, William Du Bois, led officers through heavy brush and poison oak to where his wife's body was buried off the 8200 block of Skyline Boulevard.
"Without any hesitation, he went exactly to where the grave site was," said Oakland homicide Lt. Ersie Joyner. Police said there were no signs that the grave had been dug before Nina Reiser was killed.
Good enough for you?
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Interesting)
He's probably guilty, but I don't like the system of offering people lower sentences for "cooperating".
If all evidence points against you, even if you're innocent, you're likely to confess to get a lower sentence. IMO, there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE to the inquisition, where people would confess having sex with the devil in order to get off with less (in that case only an execution, instead of days of torture followed by execution.)
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Insightful)
If all evidence points against you, even if you're innocent, you're likely to confess to get a lower sentence.
Were he innocent, it would be have difficult for him to produce a body.
It seems to me that the bargain worked for everyone. Hans gets less time, and society gets to know beyond all reasonable doubt that he's truly guilty. His kids get to know the truth. Nina's family doesn't have to wonder for decades.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:4, Interesting)
You claim that wrongful convictions are "extreme exceptions". Do you have evidence for this? Data on wrongful convictions is difficult to obtain for obvious reasons.
I did manage to find this article [latimes.com] which indicates that the wrongful conviction rate is somewhere in the neighborhood of 1-5%, depending on what data you listen to. That strikes me as enormously high, particularly given the huge US prison population.
Parent
Screwed up legal system w/everyone a criminal (Score:5, Informative)
You are incredibly deluded.
It's incredibly easy for police to create circumstances to prosecute you and imprison you.
The cops can and do lie -- OFTEN to get convictions, but you, under the principles of "free speech" are not allowed to lie to them. Two very good videos:
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1 [youtube.com] and
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2 [youtube.com].
The cop admits it -- he can follow anyone driving around and find something to arrest them for.
It's the same throughout the U.S. Our laws are crafted to make *everyone* a law breaker -- this enables the police to selectively enforce laws against anyone they don't like for any reason. Of course, they don't go hog wild -- prosecutions take time & paperwork. But the police get to selectively choose who to arrest -- where to focus efforts, and even whether or not to prosecute. With "consensual crimes" (activity you engage in by yourself or with consenting adults), they have turned to using "asset seizure" as a tool that they rely on to fund their departments and budgets. As an example -- the DEA has almost exclusively been using cash & property seizures against medical marijuana co-ops -- and NOT prosecuting the people. If they prosecute the people, they would potentially have to make a case in front of a non-sympathetic California jury, but if they just take the cash, product and easily disposed of assets, they can get large amounts of cash added to their budgets -- and little that the victims can do to get the money back (since, unlike laws regarding people, the current courts have ruled that property doesn't have to be assumed innocent until proven guilty -- it only takes a lesser "preponderance of evidence", instead of the "beyond a reasonable doubt". Any Cannabis defenders that become too public -- they'll try to take them down -- but they really only want to go for the ones that are causing the most problems (politically). A recent case where the feds prosecuted a grower had him only get a few months (he was growing as a medical provider) -- so then they called in the IRS to have them examine his operation -- and they are trying to go for tax evasion now. Of course if you pay income tax on drug proceeds, the IRS will turn you into the feds. Not sure why that doesn't count as self-incrimination.
The police and judicial system in the US is very corrupt -- with 5% of the population and 66% of the illegal drug consumption in the world --- and the US leading in pressuring other countries to crack down, the absurdity is hard to miss.
The claims are we are having problems affording prisons because of all the prisoners -- but the fact is, if we turned out all the non-violent Cannabis offenders, we'd cut the prison population by 60-66% (its about 450-500 thousand out of 750,000 in the federal system that are in for drug-related offenses -- often with mandatory sentencing being used to ensure the prisons stay full. Treatment programs are another big and growing business (as well as drug testing) -- with the biggest increase coming from those needing "treatment" programs for marijuana -- not because of a problem with marijuana -- but because they can trade prison time for taking a rehab program instead on 1st offenses. So the stats for those in rehab for "marijuana addiction" are used to fuel the myth that it's a "growing problem". The growing problem is that our screwed up legal system has turned everyone into criminals -- with selective enforcement used as a tool to strike at political undesirables.
Unfortunately, prohibition was proven not to work and was theoretically repealed, but the joke was they just moved onto finding a new substance to prohibit. Marijuana criminalization was lead by ex-anti-alcohol FBI enforcers (Anslinger, primarily) who were out of a job after prohibition was repealed -- but they needed to create a crime to stay on the "public dole"...so they did. Since Cannabis was made illegal, consumption has
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope that Hans will be well supplied with computers, materials and a place where he can continue his work. As far as repaying society continuing with his work is the best he could hope to do as it will benefit us all. And if he is allowed to save the profits from his efforts he will have a means to sustain himself when he leaves prison. That benefits all of us as well.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Interesting)
Hans Reiser's carelessness with his wife's murder is typical of his carelessness with his file system design: he came up with complex arrangement to reduce his perceived risk, and focused on it to the point where all else was ignored and became destructive. Then he tried to deny that it was his fault, with contrived and obviously false claims of innocence based on how clever he was rather than the actual timelines and evidence.
Given the poor history of ReiserFS and its tendency to zero files, to lie about the availablility of files in failing hardware, or to destroy itself if you actually run the repair tools on it, why would you want him to continue to work on it?
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why should he not be allowed out ever again?
How would the world be a better place if he was newer allowed to get out?
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
Oh I dunno - between having his geek parents name him after a file system, then being set up for the murder of his wife ... this poor fucker just can't seek to catch a break.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
But, then again, I'm not a mathematician...
...but I did watch a lot of Matlock when I was younger.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
By my calculations, it ceases to be "reasonable doubt" and veers off into "complete mathematical certainty" when they use phrases like "Reiser's chilling confession," and "led authorities to [the body]".
Those do raise a good deal of suspicion, but what convinced me in this case was: "And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling kids and your dog!"
Parent
It's not a complete mathematical certainty (Score:5, Funny)
complete mathematical certainty?
1. Someone framed him then told him about the location of the body. (Aliens, Dick Cheney, etc)
2. Hans is actually a genius, he built an interdimensional gateway like in Sliders and his evil otherself killed his wife. Consumed with guilt he decided to confess because it was easier than explaining the interdimensional gateway.
3. He was drugged by the CIA to do it as a way to silence him. Now any secrets he tries to reveal will not be taken seriously.
4. Hans's wife was actually an alien spy here to help start the invasion process. If the other alien spys find out what Hans knows then the invasion cannot be stopped.
5. Mass hallucination. Hans didn't kill his wife and he never confessed.
6. Dick Cheney did it during a hunting accident
7. Hans' car is intelligent like Herbie, but in a fit of jealous rage his car kills Hans' wife. To protect his friend, a car, from dissection, he tries to cover up the murder and ends up getting caught.
8. Nina was an android that Hans built, therefor no murder was committed
9. It was a suicide pact and Hans backed out. Consumed with guilt and shame he confesses to murder rather than admit the truth.
10. There is no Hans Reiser
(by no means does this post mean I condone murdering spouse, family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances, stranges you talk to at the check-out, or aliens that later turn out to be people due to hallucinations)
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
Or statistics...
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah? Prove it!
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
Let's start by assuming the opposite...
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
Shit, he's on to us.
Parent
Re:Try to be objective, everybody. (Score:5, Funny)
I haven't laughed so hard in a while. Do you realize, kind sir, that you are asking slashdot to basically pack up and go on vacation?
Objectivity. Distinction between conviction and sentence judgements. People more knowledgable than us. Discarding of mathematical certainty.
Well, I forgive you: it is Friday night, you'll see you error tomorrow morning..
Parent
Re:what are you talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
So while Reiser's guilt is not a mathematical certainty, it's well beyond what a reasonable person could have any serious doubts over considering how the case played out. From the prosecution's perspective, it was a win--they can feel confident they put the guilty person behind bars and saved the taxpayers the expense of a long court battle and appeals process.
Parent
I think he got a pretty good deal out of it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I think he got a pretty good deal out of it (Score:5, Insightful)
Reiser is a sociopathic killer. He punched Nina in the face, and strangled her for "cavalierly" telling him that she intended to continue to bring their son to a doctor for his hearing problems. I don;t think their is any objective way to say "she was a bitch to him". I think he would think any reasonable woman would be a "bitch" to him.
Parent
So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Interesting)
I understand that it was probably in everyone's best interest to produce Nina's body, but I can't help but feel that Hans was essentially rewarded for hiding it so well. His sentence was reduced from 25-to-live to 15-to-life just for leading police to where he buried her.
Still, glad to see this soap opera is over.
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Informative)
He was offered only 3 years if he plead manslaughter. He refused. 15 to life (which means that he has a life sentence and is eligible for parole in 15 years) seems like a pretty good choice. Especially if he does reform. Society earns nothing by keeping him locked away longer if a parole board feels he's fit to leave. 15 years means that he's going to miss out on potentially some of the most interesting parts of what could have been his life. So it's not as if he will not learn anything.
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Crime and punishment... (Score:5, Informative)
Anal rape and beatings are not part of the sentence handed down by the judge, but deprivation of liberty is.
Bearing this in mind, it isn't inconsistent to design these institutions with rehabilitation in mind.
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Funny)
Your post seems to have been of some of its words.
Parent
It's also good because (Score:4, Insightful)
He can't appeal. That is part of pretty much any plea: You have to allocute to the crime (testify as to the details under oath) and wave the right to appeal.
Even if he had no real chance at winning an appeal, he could cost the government a lot of time and money by filing appeals.
That another reason that prosecutors like getting plea bargains. When you admit you did it, you generally have to accept the consequences and don't get to appeal later. Thus even in the case of some courtroom convictions, they are willing to make a deal similar to this. You don't get away with it, but if you'll own up to what you did and relinquish the right to contest your conviction, you get a lighter sentence.
Plus, of course, closure is important to the family and friends. I'm sure there are people out there who loved Nina Reiser. Knowing for sure what happened and being able to have a funeral goes a long way.
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Informative)
From a story in the LA Times [latimes.com]:
"The parole board grants release dates to a relative few. Schwarzenegger vetoes most releases approved by the parole board, as did his predecessor, Gov. Gray Davis. Since taking office, Schwarzenegger has allowed 191 lifers to leave prison -- about 1% of more than 16,000 who had parole hearings."
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Insightful)
You think rational, intelligent people can't fly into a rage?
If you pile enough on someone and they get angry enough, that intelligence doesn't mean a whole lot, because enraged people aren't rational.
Intelligence also doesn't necessarily keep you from panicking once you realize you've done something that can land you in prison (or the electric chair) for the rest of your life.
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:5, Insightful)
You think rational, intelligent people can't fly into a rage?
Oh of course I think they can. They'd also know when to take a plea bargain that'd land them a lot less jail time when there's a pile of evidence being stacked against them. He may be brilliant with computers, but he's a dunce at crime.
If you pile enough on someone and they get angry enough, that intelligence doesn't mean a whole lot, because enraged people aren't rational.
Rage isn't an emmotion you can sustain continuously for months.
Intelligence also doesn't necessarily keep you from panicking once you realize you've done something that can land you in prison (or the electric chair) for the rest of your life.
Panick too gives way to reason given enough time.
He was an idiot for killing his wife. He was an idiot for doing such a poor job at covering it up. He was an idiot for trying to pass his explanations as plausible. He was an idiot for not taking the plea bargain. Now he's an idiot that will rot in prison for something few can sympathise with. What a waste of a technically sound but socially crippled intellect.
Parent
Re:So he was rewarded for hiding her body? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's idiotic. They already had a conviction. They made the deal so they would have the body for the victim's family, and so they could avoid appellate court.
Parent
Terms of his imprisonment... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Terms of his imprisonment... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
I just don't know what to say about this. It's sad, upsetting, and yet just at the same time. On one hand I'm happy (can that even be the right word?) to see that he repented. On the other hand, I'm frightened by the thought that he killed her over a flippant remark about taking the kids to the doctor. On one hand it's also good that he didn't get off with a 3 year sentence, yet you can't help but feel for the fact that his own arrogance got him into this trouble.
Worst of all, events like this always create ugly questions in one's mind. e.g. It's a natural reaction to assume that murders are people who would stand out as a societal misfit. Someone who you would never place trust in or respect. Yet here we have an instance of someone that I had previously respected and was even considering contacting (partly because of several pushes from acquaintances) to work out new possible uses for Reiser's filesystem.
That's a very unsettling thought. If we cannot trust even the basic morality of people who have worked hard for their measures of respect in today's global community, who can we trust?
The whole thing is just... sad.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
First -- why is this marked redundant? This is just some guy's personal thinking on the subject (granted there's a grammatical glitch in the first sentence, but this is Slashdot, not Harper's Review, and who here hasn't posted without proofing?).
Anyway, regarding murder over a flippant remark: This was the last trigger in an acrimonious divorce where both parties used the kids as pawns in their own games. Murders happen in such circumstances all the time because of the buildup of mutual anger over the years -- that's why he was offered manslaughter the first time around. Nobody thinks he'd commit murder over a flippant remark in normal circumstances, it's the emotional trainwreck built up behind that remark which snapped him.
Few of us are immune from going overboard. Most of us don't kill but most of us have probably blown up verbally and regretted it later at least one time in our lifetimes. Sometimes it can go farther. One of my girlfriends once choked me to the point of dizziness (out of anger, nothing kinky going on) over some remark so slight I can't even recall what it was. Fortunately, we split up, she got married and has kids. I truly don't think she is a psycho murderess at heart -- she was just royally pissed off -- we were so wrong in every way. It happens. And I'm not innocent either, I tried to smother her with a pillow in my sleep (I have no memory of this, she told me about it the next day and I believe she was telling the truth -- I've always been a sleep walker/talker). Obviously our relationship could not be described as "healthy". Makes for some good stories though.
Parent
so everyone who defended him (Score:4, Insightful)
simply because he wrote a file system
are you ready to examine prejudice at work in your mind?
many scowl at black people who defend oj simpson simply out of racial affinity
well now you know, in your mind, is the same process at work
Finally the End (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally, the end to a tragic tale. Nobody won.
The kids lost their parents.
Two sets of parents also lost their kids.
A bunch of people lost one of their best friends.
The local community, particularly Russian immigrants, lost a potential doctor.
The Linux community lost a dedicated developer of innovative free software.
The DA's office lost a lot of time and money over the last two years prosecuting this case.
Everyone loses.
Re:Finally the End (Score:5, Funny)
Way to be emo about it.
We DID get a lot of material for some great jokes.
Life goes on, man.
Parent
Namesys' customer service was 'painless' (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder what kind of service Namesys gave to any of its customers and users. Reiser was arrogant and annoying, and that is toward the people with the power to send you to jail forever.
His attonery also says "Hans killed Nina for making a 'cavalier' remark", but he killed her painlessly.
Are anyone that reported defects in the Reiser FS still alive?
Was the level of customer service that you would be killed painlessly as opposed to really bad customer service where customers are tortured before they succumb?
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:5, Insightful)
Now let's hope some fellow inmate does what needs to be done, and puts an end to this vile piece of garbage.
You are no better than him if you are advocating someone murder him. One murder does not justify another.
Parent
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:4, Funny)
He's not your typical week noodly nerd. Six+ feet tall, good physical condition, judo black belt, and knows how to choke a bitch out.
Parent
Re:Fuck You, Hans Reiser (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a huge problem with it, and not because of any chance of miscarriage of justice.
'Civilised society is judged on how it treats it's prisoners and it's disabled.'
The US 'corrections' system has a long long way to come yet.
Parent
Re:He should have gotten the chair (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:He should have gotten the chair (Score:5, Interesting)
No, it isn't irrelevant, not even in the courts.
This was the original statement the GP post made:
She was going to take the kids, and she'd already gotten them Russian citizenship. He probably wasn't going to see them again until they were grown. People have breaking points. If someone pushes the right buttons enough times, they can generally be driven to kill regardless of whether their lives are threatened. The legal system takes this into account when deciding how to charge someone, and how to sentence them if they are convicted.
If he had killed her for no reason, he would be facing life in prison right now. If he hadn't rejected the initial manslaughter offer, he'd only be facing three years, because he was provoked, enraged, and did not premeditate the murder. Seriously.
Parent
Barbaric (Score:5, Interesting)
luckily there are countries where this kind of barbarism is not done anymore. It is not helping to defeat violence in a society if the state itself is conducting violence and killings in the name of revenge.
How about some extra torture before killing the delinquent?
I wonder if the US will ever get out of the dark ages and ban the death penalty or if their citizens will go on to demand that this barbaric ritual of revenge can be carried out so that their low instincts can be satisfied.
Parent