Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government News

Hans Reiser Interview on ABC's 20/20 482

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the murder-makes-linux-mainstream dept.
baegucb_18706 noted that ABCs 20/20 has a lengthy article on the saga of the Hans Reiser murder trial. I'm not sure if this article provided any information that you might not have known if you read the earlier wired interview, but it's still a really strange story.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hans Reiser Interview on ABC's 20/20

Comments Filter:
  • I see! (Score:5, Funny)

    by gowen (141411) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:23AM (#21231377) Homepage Journal
    Interviewing Hans Reiser about the Hans Resier murder, eh? Clever.
    How about interviewing Harry Buttle about that known terrorist Harry Tuttle?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by doom (14564)

      gowen wrote:

      Interviewing Hans Reiser about the Hans Resier murder, eh? Clever.

      Actually, that's what they've got here that's new. Previously we haven't had Hans Reiser's side of the story, just the case the police were making against him in the media. And I have to say, it's nice to see a story that more-or-less takes Reiser's side on this, everyone else seems anxious to convict him before the trial... including "Wired", slashdot, etc.

      By the way: How would you feel if you were on a jury and found out

      • Re:I see! (Score:5, Funny)

        by liquidpele (663430) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @12:48PM (#21232105) Journal
        Hans should use the perfect defense!

        Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, Reiser's attorney would certainly want you to believe that his client is innocent. And they make a good case. Hell, I almost felt pity myself! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

        Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, [approaches and softens] does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
      • Whoosh! (Score:4, Informative)

        by A nonymous Coward (7548) * on Sunday November 04, 2007 @02:38PM (#21233409)
        Hint: check the spellings ... carefully ... very carefully ...
      • Re:I see! (Score:4, Funny)

        by Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) on Monday November 05, 2007 @01:54PM (#21243581) Homepage
        Anyway, I'm typing this up on a machine running Reiser FS

        Any of your files gone missing?

    • by Bazman (4849)
      I think the allegation against Reiser is a bit more than a spot of rogue plumbing...

      [I'm only writing this so that you can see that at least ONE person laughed at the reference!]
  • She's in Russia (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FunkyELF (609131) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:25AM (#21231397)
    She hated him. She staged it and went back to Russia. Aren't their kids over there now? Go interrogate her parents...she can't be too far from them.
    • Re:She's in Russia (Score:4, Interesting)

      by imsabbel (611519) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:51AM (#21231581)
      Of course she also removed his car-seat, and put that "how to dispose a body" book into his stuff, too...
      • Re:She's in Russia (Score:4, Informative)

        by Serge_Tomiko (1178965) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @12:04PM (#21231677)
        1) As the article says, he was living out of his car. Strange, but not unheard of - especially for someone who likely has few friends and is of limited financial means. 2) He didn't have a book on how to dispose a body, he had a book on murder investigations. As he was the target of one and didn't have a lot of money, this seems pretty reasonable. I'd probably do the same thing.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          The article also says he was walking around with 9000 cash in his pocket and he was running some kind of business out of Russia. He also has a commercial lawyer not a court appointed one. I am sure the police will find out exactly what his finances are, but thus far he does not seem destitute at all.

          Sorry, but I do not believe the living out of his car story one bit. People that do that do it as a last resort. Nobody lives in their car and walks around with 9000k in their pockets and runs a business. Being
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by AVee (557523)
            Being homeless is very very dangerous. Well, actually driving a car may well prove to be far more dangerous then living in one. And sleeping in a home containing a very visible expensive TV set may well be far more dangerous than being homeless.
            I know I could survive pretty fine on my own in a car, certainly when I still have a bank account and the ability to eat in a restaurant every day. That pretty much makes it trivial to do. And if that is what it takes to see your kids sometimes, I might just do the
  • by bl8n8r (649187) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:26AM (#21231405)
    "Hans Reiser, left, and his attorney, William Dubois"

    I think the pic caption is wrong - isn't that Hans on the right side?
  • by bryanp (160522) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:42AM (#21231525)
    Reiser, whose work kept him overseas in Russia for months at a time, wanted more children and did not want Nina returning to work as a doctor.

    "I ran the business and I expected my wife to take care of the kids," he said.


    Wow. Wotta guy. Let's see, I want to marry an intelligent, highly educated doctor and then turn her into a brood mare who stays in the kitchen making cookies. Yeah, that'll work.
    • I dunno. Honestly, if I could find an intelligent, highly educated doctor who would take care of her practice and leave me home to cruise Slashdot (ahem!) raise the kids ... I'd marry her in a split femtosecond.

      But, yeah. If a woman decides that her career choice is one of raising a family, that's one thing. If she already has a career, one which took her many years of schooling to achieve and which her husband wants her to just forget about ... well. I can see where the conflict came in.

      Reiser always
    • by Plutonite (999141) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @03:04PM (#21233673)
      Bullshit. She seems to be one hell of a bitch, obviously married him only for the money and the oh-so-prized citizenship.

      "She divorced me the day she became a citizen. I don't know whether it was the exact day but same month"

      And from TFA she also was cleaning out his money. He introduced her to his best friend, to take care of her while he was away, but this highly intelligent, educated doctor you speak of let the man introduce her to drugs and fuck her while reiser wasn't there. Sounds like some Russian skank who wanted to escape being a translator for a dating service in KGB land. And beautiful? She looks barely average.

      As for your blood-mare comment, I'm sure the governments of Sweden and similar nations who pay women to stay at home and care for their children several YEARS have something to say to you. I have the utmost respect for stay-at-home moms who are helping to build solid families for this country.. definitely more than your favorite juknie/ho "doctor".

      Reiser could've had so much better for a wife, no matter how "weird" he is. Reiser also doesn't have the nicest of friends, unfortunately. Kind of tough when you're best friend is a homosexual serial killer who wanted to sleep with you then decided to give it to your Russian wife when you said no. Jesus fucking Christ, Hans, are there no other people in the world to make friends with?
      • by kv9 (697238) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @04:19PM (#21234365) Homepage

        Kind of tough when you're best friend is a homosexual serial killer who wanted to sleep with you then decided to give it to your Russian wife when you said no. Jesus fucking Christ, Hans, are there no other people in the world to make friends with?
        this story is so badass (especially if he killed her, manages not to get convicted then kills his buddy by bashing his head in with an oversized dildo) that Tarantino should consider it for one of his next movies.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by arth1 (260657)

      Wow. Wotta guy. Let's see, I want to marry an intelligent, highly educated doctor and then turn her into a brood mare who stays in the kitchen making cookies. Yeah, that'll work.

      She wasn't a doctor. She was something that lacks a counterpart in the US -- a mix between a paediatrician and obstetrician without an MD's qualifications. This Russian profession doesn't translate to an doctor, but more like a midwife in that they have limited practitioner's privileges in their specific field only.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Teancum (67324)
        On this, you got it wrong. Nina was a doctor with full credentials that she could practice medicine in the USA...at least from an educational point of view. And she did have the equivalent of an M.D. in gynecology and obstetrics.

        The reason she didn't practice in the USA was mainly an issue of her trying to pass the medical board tests that are required when any foreign-educated physician tries to practice medicine in the USA. From what I understand, Nina passed all of the knowledge-based sections of the
  • No body (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hey (83763) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:42AM (#21231529) Journal
    In a reasonable system there is no way somebody can be convicted of murder without a body.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by schnikies79 (788746)
      No, that would just make an unreasonable system where anyone with the skill to properly dispose or hide the body would never be found guilty.
      • Besides, circumstantial evidence has always been used to convict. It's more difficult from a prosecutorial perspective, of course, but it's still a viable way to get a conviction. "Reasonable doubt" doesn't mean they have to find you standing over a dead body with a smoking gun in your hands (hey, I watch CSI.)
    • Re:No body (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Ossifer (703813) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:59AM (#21231643)
      The problem for the prosecution is that in the absence of any real evidence suggesting murder (pool of blood, scene of an altercation, etc.), any conceivable theory by the defense trumps a murder story.

      The cops/prosecution decided Reiser must be guilty since he's really weird, despite no real evidence that a crime was committed at all. Having followed the case locally (from across the bay), I and many others were surprised the case even passed basic plausibility by the judge holding the preliminary hearing.

      The reality is, in fact, that she may very well be alive and well in Russia...
      • by doom (14564)

        The cops/prosecution decided Reiser must be guilty since he's really weird, despite no real evidence that a crime was committed at all. Having followed the case locally (from across the bay), I and many others were surprised the case even passed basic plausibility by the judge holding the preliminary hearing.

        One of the Great Mysteries in the case is the behavior of the police. Do they always try to convict people in the media when they know that they don't have any evidence that's worth a damn? Isn't th

        • by ewieling (90662)
          I don't know about convicting them in the media, but I do know that DAs in the USA can be real scum. One of my former clients is a law firm that provides legal defense for poor people on death row. They discovered (and proved) that the police and DA knew the accused could not have committed the murder because he was caught on a security camera miles away. He could not have physically been present near the time of the victim's death. They hid the evidence and continued to try the case. The accused had a
      • by kithrup (778358)

        They don't have a body; they do have evidence of a crime.

        What has been disclosed to the media so far -- and that doesn't need to be all of the evidence, mind you -- includes her car, with groceries still in it, left abandoned somewhere, in a bit of disarray; a statement (by a child, who later recanted, and then disappeared) that Hans and Nina argued on the last day anyone saw her alive; and drops of her blood in the house, and in his car.

        It's not a lot of evidence, and it's very circumstantial, and some o

        • by Ossifer (703813)
          > They don't have a body; they do have evidence of a crime.

          What's the evidence of a crime? And which crime? Arguing with his wife -- something the child strenuously denies *ever* having said? Groceries in disarray in the car? If that's a crime then my wife deserves a lethal injection...

          You can find drops of my blood in my house, I'm sure, but that doesn't mean my wife is a murder (yet)...

          None of this alleged evidence suggests murder, let alone definitively. And *all* of this easily supports a defens
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by kithrup (778358)

            Evidence has to be disclosed to the defense. Not to the media. The defense should (by this time) know all the evidence, and all the witnesses, that the prosecution is going to present (and vice-versa).

            That does not mean that we, the public, already know all that evidence.

            You can argue against what they've presented in support of their case so far -- I even said that it was refutable -- but that doesn't mean it's not evidence of a crime. It's just not strong evidence.

        • by doom (14564)

          We watched the show. Before, I thought he was probably innocent, and she thought he was probably guilty. After watching it, we've each changed our minds. (Although I think it more likely he paid someone to get rid of her.)

          If he paid someone to get rid of her, than you wouldn't expect his own car was used in any way, and if so, a good half of the circumstantial evidence in the case just fades away -- e.g. the missing car seat, the supposed concealment of the car, all of that has nothing to do with the cas

    • by ari_j (90255)

      In a reasonable system there is no way somebody can be convicted of murder without a body.

      I'd like you to take a moment to think about that, and then try again.

    • Re:No body (Score:5, Funny)

      by risk one (1013529) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @01:10PM (#21232377)

      Indeed, people without a body have enough to worry about without being convicted of all sorts of crimes.

      Simple discrimination against being unable to manifest on the corporeal plane, that's what it is.

      (I have nothing of value to add to this discussion)

  • Soo... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DustyShadow (691635) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @11:57AM (#21231631) Homepage
    So Reiser's best friend had sex with Reiser's wife, confessed to the cops that he is a serial killer, but conveniently says he didn't kill Nina...and yet the cops don't arrest him. Sounds like we got the smart ones on that force.
    • by kithrup (778358)

      The implication by the narrator was that the "confessions" so lacked credence that the cops don't feel a need to do anything. (For example, if they checked on one of the alleged victims, and found that he's still alive -- or died in a different manner than the wannabe-killer described -- then he's just a nut.)

      Don't get me wrong -- I read about the confessions when Wired reported it, and thought it would be immediate reasonable doubt. But this show pointed out that the judge has barred them being mentione

      • So if I'm ever accused of a crime I admit to killing 40 people, name names, and when those people turn up alive or having died in a different way than I have described I'm let go and all suspicion is dropped?
  • I RTFA: This just doesn't add up. Why did the children get sent to Russia?!? I assume that Hans is capable of taking care of them, how did the kid's grand parents get custody of their natural father is still alive and kicking? The kids were growing up here and how they were transplanted to a culture remarkably different?

    I don't believe that Hans showing up at the school to see the kids and give them a telephone number is 'suspect'..like come on. Did Nina orchestrate these events? Or was Hans so upset ab
    • It's kind of hard to give the natural father custody of the kids if said father is in custody himself.
    • Now I probably won't get updates for my ReiserFS....damnit.

      Don't give up too quickly. Last I heard NameSys still had programmers working on both ReiserFS 3 and 4. And even if NameSys goes under, it's at least possible that some other people will step in and pick up the ball on ReiserFS 4, which despite the competition for "mindshare" in file systems, sounds like it's got some technically neat features...

      (And I hate to kick Hans when he's down, but all accounts agree he's not the easiest guy in the wo

  • What is going on? (Score:4, Informative)

    by realdodgeman (1113225) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @04:22PM (#21234395) Homepage
    What the hell happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Yes he is an insane motherfucker, yes he bought books about murder trails, but that still doesn't prove anything.

    Also, knowing that he is a programmer, he doesn't think like must people do. That makes him look crazy. But it still doesn't prove anything.

    The US legal system seems more and more broken, and if he is sentenced to jail without further evidence, it just proves to me what I thought all along.

    I am not saying that he is innocent, but I am saying he should be treated like he is until he is proven guilty!
  • Even if innocent (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nurb432 (527695) on Sunday November 04, 2007 @09:38PM (#21236787) Homepage Journal
    Even if he is innocent, and proven as such during the trial, his life is ruined. Rather effective if you believe this was orchestrated by the wife to get back at him in revenge.

    Revenge is common in bad divorces, and this smells like revenge to me.

You will lose an important disk file.

Working...