Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 62 posts

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#21

Post by elil17 »

lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15
kenjackson wrote: post #5

“She declined to say what was on the ill-fated lunch menu, or whether she had eaten it.” Why would she decline this? Did she just not tell the media, but told the police?

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I don't quite agree with this, and I don't think it's what the video is saying. There's never, ever, ever a reason to talk to the police without a lawyer. But, under the advice of counsel and as part of a well planned defense, saying certain things may make sense.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#23

Post by paxys »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

"I did not commit the crime" is a pointless statement even if you repeat it a hundred times. No one is going to believe you. It can't be brought up in court. It is hearsay.

"I committed the crime" on the other hand is an instant confession and conviction.

So the best advice is always – keep your mouth shut.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#24

Post by brianlweiner »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

parent comment roughly paraphrased the advice... the core advice is to never speak to police WITHOUT YOUR LAWYER present.

Certainly providing the menu that might exonerate you is probably fine -- but that's what a lawyer is for.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#25

Post by slimsag »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

If you’re going to make the claim it was an accident, it’s best you do that through a lawyer negotiating on your behalf, or in court - not in an interrogation room full of people who believe it was malice and will leap on any misspoken words to paint you as a murderer. If you’re being accused of multiple homicide, you better bet you shouldn’t just start volunteering random information that you /think/ will exonerate you.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#26

Post by jbottoms »

kevinmchugh wrote: post #4

Foraging is a very cool hobby that I'd like to get into some day, but I'm aware of the potential for it to go wrong. My understanding is that in many places, you cannot determine safe mushrooms from dangerous ones using reference photos, they're just too similar and you need live expertise. What's safe and what's dangerous is also very localized. I worry that social media will cause people to think they can forage sa…

Mushrooms are very forgiving of spores from other mushrooms and easily include them into their structures. So much so that they are considered promiscuous. No book will help you with this in the emergency room. Why take a chance? Go to the gricery store and have a comfortable dinner. And, please keep this in mind: the President of the Boston mycology club died of mushroom poisoning, and he was surounded by "mushroom experts".

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#27

Post by catboybotnet »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

Just because you're telling the truth doesn't mean that they'll present it to the court in a way that makes it seem like the truth. If they want to convict you, witnesses will show up pinning you to the crime. That, or they'll use "interrogation" tactics to get you to "confess" when you're innocent. It's mindgames to close the case early. The U.S. has a worrying amount of wrongful convictions, for many reasons.

To sum it up: never speak to police without a lawyer.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#28

Post by mywittyname »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

Police are trained to get you to incriminate yourself. They will twist your words of innocence into evidence of guilt, i.e., you say, "I went to the kitchen for a knife so he could cut his steak.", but the police write down, "suspect went to kitchen to grab knife."

Despite what popular culture teaches us, the truth isn't going to come out because crack team of investigators using DNA and cool tech to magically solve a case. The police are going to pick an easy target to pin everything on, and trick them into giving enough information for the prosecution to strong arm a plea deal.

It's not about justice, it's about solving cases with the lowest possible effort.

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#29

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

AutumnCurtain wrote: post #13

Ex-husband narrowly survives a sudden and serious GI illness after weeks of intensive care. A year later, his parents and another couple die or nearly die after dinner with his wife, becoming suddenly and violently ill while she and her children are unharmed. Curious.

I definitely think it is curious, and it obviously deserves to be thoroughly investigated (and by all accounts it is), but I just don't understand this need to immediately jump to conclusions in cases like this. The top comments on this article on the WaPo site are basically "It's not rocket science to know she did it."

Why is it so hard to just wait for more information? Yes, it definitely looks very suspicious, but there was no talk of motive in the article, and if someone wanted to murder people, inviting them all over for dinner and then poisoning everyone except you and your family seems like the dumbest way to do it (and I'm not saying that's exculpatory - plenty of murderers are very dumb).

I just wish more of us would say "We just don't know yet, and that's fine. Just give it a teeny bit of time to know more."

Re: She invited four people over for lunch. A week later, three were dead

#30

Post by philwelch »

kenjackson wrote: post #20
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but in the US, there's no reason to talk to the police if you're suspected of murder. It can never help you. It can only hurt you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE edit: the video is a talk a criminal lawyer gave explaining why it's a bad idea to talk to the police. If you want a more detailed explanation, watch it.

I find that absurd. How can giving the police information that can exonerate you always be a bad idea? It seems like people have entered this weird behavior where they follow guidance blindly. EDIT: And after watching some of the video the presenter seems to be making the case that you should never interact with the police. And maybe even moreso -- maybe never communicate at all w/o your lawyer since there are laws y…

Did you watch the video? It’s explained in the video.
Post reply on HN