|
Kitfox88 posted:Or when half their brain is obliterated, like that one father who's son killed him and his wife. But yeah, hopefully that dude's gonna be alright, parents outliving their children is a sad thing. Welcome to the future, where we have all of the moral and societal decay of a cyberpunk setting, with none of the cool cyborg parts.
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
Grand Gigas posted:Read the article. 800 then 8000 by day two.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
Moving on from my previous, terrible, inexcusable post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/08/16/it-is-taking-people-out-more-than-70-people-overdose-on-k2-in-a-single-day-in-new-haven/?utm_term=.36c6f44fc93 A couple of weeks ago, around 100 people overdosed on K2 on the town green in New Haven, CT. The green is known as a place where homeless people gather. The numbers are plus/minus 20 (I think the official count is 84) because the heat index was so high that heat exhaustion and heatstroke were also factors. Initial tests indicated that it was contaminated with fentanyl, but later tests ruled that out and field tests for drugs administered by police are designed to err on the side of false positives.0 Further tests found no evidence of opiates and suggested that the overdoses were entirely due to synthetic cannabinoids. More local rumors that I can't substantiate but am inclined to believe suggest that local police used undercover officers and informants to distribute high potency versions of K2 to the local homeless and drug user populations to clear downtown in preparation for Yale orientation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Moving on from my previous, terrible, inexcusable post, If they were going to do that why not just use fentanyl? Then nobody would care because it would be one blip on the radar. Or, they could just beat people until they leave or die. Then nobody would care because it would also be one blip on the radar
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
xtal posted:If they were going to do that why not just use fentanyl? Then nobody would care because it would be one blip on the radar. Or, they could just beat people until they leave or die. Then nobody would care because it would also be one blip on the radar Q What do animal cruelty police brutality and your posts in this thread all have in common A They’re all bad and should go away
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
e: on second thought, no
xtal has a new favorite as of 02:46 on Sep 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
After reading the article about Rack Man being identified, can someone explain to me why identifying victims/corpses with DNA is cool and good, but identifying criminals, murderers, etc. with DNA is dumb and bad? The latter comes up in this thread from time to time and there's never any good explanation of why it only works correctly for victims.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
Because the justice system in America is hosed up and DNA's been falsely used to get convictions on innocent people before, both due to errors in the science with genuine mistakes, or because of corrupt justice system officials faking it to get convictions. Whereas there's generally not that sort of push and reward for the system if you fake a victim's identification with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
Mammal Sauce posted:After reading the article about Rack Man being identified, can someone explain to me why identifying victims/corpses with DNA is cool and good, but identifying criminals, murderers, etc. with DNA is dumb and bad? The latter comes up in this thread from time to time and there's never any good explanation of why it only works correctly for victims. If you can get a DNA sample from a body it isn't all that difficult to identify them. Like if a family reports somebody missing, their body never turns up, then later you find one and, what would you know, they're within a certain % match of the family it's probably that person. Forensics can tell you all sorts of things about a body; like "this person went missing 8 months ago. The body is in a state it would be in after about 8 months of decay. The DNA matches the gene pool of people who were related to the missing person" is good enough. DNA evidence at a crime scene though...well that's more complex. Like was already said America's justice system is turbo hosed. DNA evidence might be fabricated for one but for the other DNA evidence by itself just isn't enough. If your DNA matches something found at a crime scene all it really proves is that your DNA was there. It's murky because something could have happened like a hair fell off of you while you were walking around, it got stuck to the killer's shoe, then the killer washed his shoes nearby to get the blood off. Now your hair is there. It makes a good slice of evidence for something like a serial killer. If the DNA on random biological detritus left at the scene of 12 crimes all matches and one person is a very close match for all of them that person is now very, very suspicious. Of course in reality it could be a weird coincidence; maybe all of that was just all 12 victims happened to all hire the same cleaning lady. The burden of proof for identifying a victim is lower than for getting a conviction. It's a real problem as TV shows view DNA evidence as absolutely damning so now juries want it. It can be very easy to convince somebody "we found X person's DNA at the crime scene. Therefore X person must be guilty!" Well, no. All that really proves is that that person's DNA was there. Let's say you were scouring a gas station for DNA to figure out who robbed it and murdered the cashier that one night. Take a guess how many different peoples' DNA you'd find. Of course the other side of it is that DNA can conversely prove pretty solidly that somebody had nothing to do with a crime. The Innocence Project has been all over that; apparently there are a lot of cases where nobody even bothered to consider testing the DNA. Somebody goes to jail and the appelate courts finally hear it, the DNA gets tested, and the guy in jail has a 0% chance of being the person who committed the crime. Whoops!
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 04:21
|
|
|
Mammal Sauce posted:After reading the article about Rack Man being identified, can someone explain to me why identifying victims/corpses with DNA is cool and good, but identifying criminals, murderers, etc. with DNA is dumb and bad? Because the victim is a huge lump of dna, whereas the relatively small bits of other dna on/near the victim could be from the perp or could be from someone unrelated to the crime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Tbh Im waiting for the first lawsuit to hit one of the social media websites for aiding and abetting some poo poo. Thats going to be what makes them take it seriously. To be clear, its going to have to be one of the things where the prosecution shows that the site knew about it the poo poo and didnt take action.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
Mammal Sauce posted:After reading the article about Rack Man being identified, can someone explain to me why identifying victims/corpses with DNA is cool and good, but identifying criminals, murderers, etc. with DNA is dumb and bad? The latter comes up in this thread from time to time and there's never any good explanation of why it only works correctly for victims. When you've got DNA from a crime scene you don't always have some pure and unadulterated sample. You've got some that's contaminated with other DNA. Sussing out which is which involves some degree of subjectivity. I believe I linked to the PCAST report from a couple years ago, but here it is again: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_forensic_science_report_final.pdf quote:DNA analysis of a sample from a single individual is an objective method. In addition to the laboratory protocols being precisely defined, the interpretation also involves little or no human judgment. That said, DNA analysis is a hugely useful tool, but certain aspects of it can really be overstated in terms of the whole "reasonable doubt" thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
Thanks for all the answers. It makes more sense, now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
Aren’t there also human rights laws that apply to living people but not dead bodies, vis a vis the idea of walking up to somebody and being like “your body, give me a piece of your body”
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:Aren’t there also human rights laws that apply to living people but not dead bodies, vis a vis the idea of walking up to somebody and being like “your body, give me a piece of your body” I'm not a lawyer but I think DNA can be acquired with a proper warrant. They obviously aren't going to take a biopsy but they don't need that; you can get enough DNA out of a vial of spit. The Golden State Killer I think they got the DNA from a tissue in his garbage or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I'm not a lawyer but I think DNA can be acquired with a proper warrant. They obviously aren't going to take a biopsy but they don't need that; you can get enough DNA out of a vial of spit. The Golden State Killer I think they got the DNA from a tissue in his garbage or something. Anyone can acquire DNA easily: that garbage tissue is public property. Testing it also doesn't require a warrant unless you're LE and need a clean chain of custody. But at testing-time is when it starts to matter, in any case. xtal has a new favorite as of 09:45 on Sep 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
quite stretched out posted:thats awful, poor bloke I got a similar call last year when my son unexpectedly passed away, and yeah, you just go into autopilot and do the normal things you always do for awhile until it really sinks in. I know movies and TV and so forth always show complete hysteria at such a time, but obviously reactions vary from person to person. That’s why it’s kinda hosed up when there’s been a crime committed and people are all ‘XXX must have done it, look, they’re not even freaked out by the news, blah blah blah’. They very well might be innocent and in complete shock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 23:17
|
|
hopefully he made it home before the shock wore off, or someone insisted on giving him a lift
|
JnnyThndrs posted:I got a similar call last year when my son unexpectedly passed away, and yeah, you just go into autopilot and do the normal things you always do for awhile until it really sinks in. I know movies and TV and so forth always show complete hysteria at such a time, but obviously reactions vary from person to person. My condolences over your loss.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:That’s why it’s kinda hosed up when there’s been a crime committed and people are all ‘XXX must have done it, look, they’re not even freaked out by the news, blah blah blah’. They very well might be innocent and in complete shock. This is part of what got Cameron Todd Willingham convicted and executed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 02:01
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:I got a similar call last year when my son unexpectedly passed away, and yeah, you just go into autopilot and do the normal things you always do for awhile until it really sinks in. I know movies and TV and so forth always show complete hysteria at such a time, but obviously reactions vary from person to person. I reacted a lot like that when my mom passed away suddenly. I was also notified at work by my boss. He told me to go and call my sister right away. After I got the news I started to finish up my work when the boss was like, "We got this man, just get out of here". It took me a few days of shuffling around dumbfounded until the grieving and sadness took hold. I reacted very differently when my dad passed. He was sick for a long time so I had prepared for it. When I got the news the emotional process went much quicker. Losing someone you love is never easy but when it's so sudden it just sucker punches your psyche. You just don't know how to deal with it, especially at first.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 04:36
|
|
|
1stGear posted:This is part of what got Cameron Todd Willingham convicted and executed. gently caress. That’s like my third time reading that article, and each time I get so furious at the hubris and ego of those loving “fire investigators”. It’s really hard to accept that people who really should know better are so full of their own bullshit that they believe they can “speak” to fires, that there’s no scientific method in arson investigation, and that it’s impossible for them to be wrong about an arson case. To me, that is the perfect article to summarize the failings of humans to understand their place in the scheme of things. We like to think we’re miniature gods, infallible and omniscient, but if left unchecked, we ruin ourselves and the ones around us with the most gleeful of spite.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Update on the woman from the surveillance cam footage: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/mystery-woman-texas-ringing-doorbell-defends-alleged-assailant/story%3fid=57569892 She was being attacked, he had a prior history of sexual assault, and his suicide was at least partially due to the story blowing up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
In the end, the saddest part is a woman having to come out and explain how her rapist was a "really nice guy".
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
This is a weird one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:This is a weird one. Turn on your monitor
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 15:07
|
|
|
Pick posted:In the end, the saddest part is a woman having to come out and explain how her rapist was a "really nice guy". Not emptyquoting, but not Pickquoting, but also emptyPickquoting. Again, the details will probably come out over time, but her issue with "I abused substances" vs. "I probably escaped being murdered" is... a thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
lighthugger posted:gently caress. That’s like my third time reading that article, and each time I get so furious at the hubris and ego of those loving “fire investigators”. Considering it's Texas if the counsel for the defense called them out for their bullshit they'd probably get lambasted by the judge
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
Sad and unnerving story locally here in the Bay Area. A woman reported her two year old had been kidnapped and triggered a statewide Amber Alert looking for him and the supposed kidnapper "Antwan". Unfortunately he was found dead in a wooded area near to his home and it turns out his mother killed him and made the whole thing up. Apparently she didn't want to care for him and neither did his father, who had a history of abusing the mother. It's just a sad story all the way around.ABC News posted:The mother of a 2-year-old Largo boy, who was the center of a statewide Amber Alert, has been charged with murder in the death of her son. Officers arrested 21-year-old Charisse Stinson and charged her with First Degree Murder in the death of Jordan Belliveau. On Wednesday, a judge ordered her to be held without bond. Stinson will also be appointed a public defender. Jordan was found dead in the wooded area of Lake Avenue and McMullen Road in Largo on Tuesday afternoon. https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/...ing-son-s-death
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
That poor kid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
She had DCFS in speedial. They didn't want the kid and there was an organization RIGHT THERE that was jumping at the chance to take the kid back. How hosed in the head do you have to be to kill a kid instead of giving him back to the Foster family that desperately wanted to adopt him? just kidding. she wanted him back because "that's MY baby" and she was damned if she'd let someone else take her "property".
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
https://jezebel.com/life-before-roe-the-story-of-a-back-alley-abortionist-1827863376 Come for the awful glimpse into trying to get an abortion before it was legal, stay for the gross, gross perspective of a dude who made it his business and wants to cut a book deal. e: Also, have listened to a ton of podcasts now with horrible, horrible true crimes, but this is the first one that actually made me cry (in a sort of good way). Only about 15 minutes long. Thanks to whoever recommended They Walk Among Us. https://www.podbean.com/site/EpisodeDownload/DIR3560DAARIBEQ RNG has a new favorite as of 04:35 on Sep 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
Stairs posted:She had DCFS in speedial. They didn't want the kid and there was an organization RIGHT THERE that was jumping at the chance to take the kid back. How hosed in the head do you have to be to kill a kid instead of giving him back to the Foster family that desperately wanted to adopt him? It's easy to tell when someone doesn't read the article, and just wants to rant about breeders/females/poc/etc. It's pretty clear that she hit the kid and hurt him more than she thought, so when he had seizures and was in even worse health she panicked. I'm definitely not saying she's mother of the year, but it isn't like she just went 'oh nevermind' and stabbed the kid. It's a messed up thing, but it wasn't exactly 'oh this is way easier than dialing a number!'
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 07:33
|
|
|
Yeah looks like she lashed out in a moment of anger and then panicked, tried to hide it. Not a premeditated oh I don’t want this kid anymore sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 08:31
|
|
|
Varkk posted:Yeah looks like she lashed out in a moment of anger and then panicked, tried to hide it. Not a premeditated oh I don’t want this kid anymore sort of thing. Yeah, they even said the evidence is consistent with this. The reason they are charging her with first degree murder instead of second is because they believe he was alive when she dumped him in the woods. 😓 Stairs is 100% correct though, there was a foster family who desperately wanted to adopt him and the mother refused, and yes she did have DFCS on speed-dial and they were very familiar with her. Gynocentric Regime has a new favorite as of 11:29 on Sep 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 11:22
|
|
|
Gynocentric Regime posted:Yeah, they even said the evidence is consistent with this. The reason they are charging her with first degree murder instead of second is because they believe he was alive when she dumped him in the woods. 😓 Christ.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 11:26
|
|
|
Captain Monkey posted:It's easy to tell when someone doesn't read the article, and just wants to rant about breeders/females/poc/etc. Hi. I'm a mother of 5 and also female. I'm not ranting about "breeders/females/poc" but nice projecting anyway. I'm ranting over people who hit their kids hard enough to kill them and why the hell they wanted them back in the first place if they were just going to hit them hard enough to kill them. That's not an unreasonable stance. Most people wouldn't take it that far, and if she was prone to that, she should have put her kid above her perceived wants and had him removed before she... You know... Killed him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 12:49
|
|
|
I think that hitting your child hard enough to give him seizures, then abandoning him in the woods to die, and then fabricating an abduction story so you don't get in trouble is wrong. I'd go so far as to say that's "bad parenting."
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 13:45
|
|
|
Stairs posted:Hi. I'm a mother of 5 and also female. I'm not ranting about "breeders/females" Captain Monkey posted:breeders/females/poc/etc. hmmm bet we can figure out which one you are ranting about then, buddy. Solice Kirsk posted:I think that hitting your child hard enough to give him seizures, then abandoning him in the woods to die, and then fabricating an abduction story so you don't get in trouble is wrong. I don't disagree with you at all, I'm not defending the mother. I'm rolling my eyes at the way that stairs tried to twist the conversation into 'well she didn't want him anymore so she hit the off switch!!' The situation is hosed up, none of what the mother did is right, but it's not as cut and dry as stairs wanted to pretend. A moment of anger followed by panic that leads to bad decision making is incredibly different than the level of sociopathy that stairs tried to paint onto her. A thing is allowed to be bad, and a mother is allowed to be a 'bad parent' without inventing a mustache-twirling scenario where they're gleefully murdering their kid to deny them to an adoptive family because 'mah kids!' Don't misconstrue my rolling my eyes at stairs as me condoning the behavior of the mother, that's lazy and reductive. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 14:39
|
|
|
Captain Monkey posted:hmmm bet we can figure out which one you are ranting about then, buddy. Oh, for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
Stairs posted:Hi. I'm a mother of 5 so, Catholic then?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 14:45
|
|
