9 ms·

Sure, we should kill everyone who makes an honest, human mistake. Especially if it's so hard to catch that at least 3 people missed it (someone from the police,

by srdjanr 2mo ago

Sure, we should kill everyone who makes an honest, human mistake. Especially if it's so hard to catch that at least 3 people missed it (someone from the police, prosecutor, and defense lawyer).

illliillll 2mo ago
That’s absurd. The standard in Canada is “beyond a reasonable doubt”, a standard which does not leave much room for “honest, human mistakes” if you actually take it seriously. If the judge bothered to review the evidence, he’d presumably have been baffled by the fact that nothing has been recovered from the defendant connecting him to the crime. This judge chose to not do that and chose not to be baffled, that wasn’t an honest mistake.
- tomhow 2mo ago
  Could you please stop posting ragey comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. It's not okay to assert that anyone “deserves a bullet in the head” here, for any reason. In the case in question, clearly the system, and multiple people within it, failed to notice the issue. On HN we expect people to be thoughtful and curious, and ”bullet in the head” is a barbaric, medieval reaction to a modern scenario. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
  - illliillll 2mo ago
    Tom, you live in a democratic country where the death penalty is codified in law as a legitimate punishment for certain crimes. What is it in the guidelines that should keep me from arguing in favour of expanding the scope of such penalties to also cover other, perhaps more harmful behaviour? > is a barbaric, medieval reaction to a modern scenario. You are inherently calling US voters at large barbarians and medieval here. You may not share my views on how misconduct by judicial officials should be treated, but you can hardly condemn my opinion as illegitimate given the country you choose to live and pay taxes in. Taxes which fund executions carried out by your government.
    - tomhow 2mo ago
      Please don’t make assumptions about where I’m a citizen, voter or resident. Even if you're right it’s irrelevant. The guidelines require us to converse curiously, to be kind, and to avoid ideological battle and flamebait. To write “A judge making a “mistake” like this deserves a bullet in the head, nothing less” is obviously in breach of all those expectations. If you want to mount a case for ways judges and other actors in the legal system should be held accountable for errors that lead to illegitimate convictions, sure, you can do so thoughtfully. This isn’t difficult.
      - illliillll 2mo ago
        You publicly work for a SF based company, the first google result for Tom Howard Ycombinator is a public profile maintained by you which claims that you are based in San Francisco. It's also noteworthy that you choose to live in one of the 27 states that still has the death penalty. >Even if you're right it’s irrelevant I think you made it relevant with personal attacks like "barbaric". There's really nothing wrong with me calling out your hypocricy, given that you presumably pay quite a bit of taxes to a government that uses some of them to carry out legal and illegal executions. I bet your tax dollars have killed far more innocent people than mine have, so if I'm barbaric, what does that make you? Or is this simply a case of words being less palatable than the actions, where talking about the killing is viewed as worse than the actual killing? If you honestly considered the death penalty barbaric, you would presumably not be working for a California-based company. Otherwise your objection seems rather performative, especially for a rich man who could easily relocate. >If you want to mount a case for ways judges and other actors in the legal system should be held accountable for errors that lead to illegitimate convictions, sure, you can do so thoughtfully. This isn’t difficult. This is simply not a case where the specific details leave much room for thoughtful analysis, I suspect that if you take the time to actually read and reflect on the courts decision you will perhaps see my comment in a different light. As indicated by the scare quotes, this clearly wasn't a mistake. The judge repeatedly claims things that were not in the evidence presented to him, his misconduct has absolutely nothing to do with the typo that may have mislead the police and prosecutors. This judge made a deliberate decision to not do his job.

by srdjanr 2mo ago

Sure, we should kill everyone who makes an honest, human mistake. Especially if it's so hard to catch that at least 3 people missed it (someone from the police, prosecutor, and defense lawyer).

illliillll 2mo ago

That’s absurd. The standard in Canada is “beyond a reasonable doubt”, a standard which does not leave much room for “honest, human mistakes” if you actually take it seriously. If the judge bothered to review the evidence, he’d presumably have been baffled by the fact that nothing has been recovered from the defendant connecting him to the crime. This judge chose to not do that and chose not to be baffled, that wasn’t an honest mistake.

tomhow 2mo ago
Could you please stop posting ragey comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. It's not okay to assert that anyone “deserves a bullet in the head” here, for any reason. In the case in question, clearly the system, and multiple people within it, failed to notice the issue. On HN we expect people to be thoughtful and curious, and ”bullet in the head” is a barbaric, medieval reaction to a modern scenario. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- illliillll 2mo ago
  Tom, you live in a democratic country where the death penalty is codified in law as a legitimate punishment for certain crimes. What is it in the guidelines that should keep me from arguing in favour of expanding the scope of such penalties to also cover other, perhaps more harmful behaviour? > is a barbaric, medieval reaction to a modern scenario. You are inherently calling US voters at large barbarians and medieval here. You may not share my views on how misconduct by judicial officials should be treated, but you can hardly condemn my opinion as illegitimate given the country you choose to live and pay taxes in. Taxes which fund executions carried out by your government.
  - tomhow 2mo ago
    Please don’t make assumptions about where I’m a citizen, voter or resident. Even if you're right it’s irrelevant. The guidelines require us to converse curiously, to be kind, and to avoid ideological battle and flamebait. To write “A judge making a “mistake” like this deserves a bullet in the head, nothing less” is obviously in breach of all those expectations. If you want to mount a case for ways judges and other actors in the legal system should be held accountable for errors that lead to illegitimate convictions, sure, you can do so thoughtfully. This isn’t difficult.
    - illliillll 2mo ago
      You publicly work for a SF based company, the first google result for Tom Howard Ycombinator is a public profile maintained by you which claims that you are based in San Francisco. It's also noteworthy that you choose to live in one of the 27 states that still has the death penalty. >Even if you're right it’s irrelevant I think you made it relevant with personal attacks like "barbaric". There's really nothing wrong with me calling out your hypocricy, given that you presumably pay quite a bit of taxes to a government that uses some of them to carry out legal and illegal executions. I bet your tax dollars have killed far more innocent people than mine have, so if I'm barbaric, what does that make you? Or is this simply a case of words being less palatable than the actions, where talking about the killing is viewed as worse than the actual killing? If you honestly considered the death penalty barbaric, you would presumably not be working for a California-based company. Otherwise your objection seems rather performative, especially for a rich man who could easily relocate. >If you want to mount a case for ways judges and other actors in the legal system should be held accountable for errors that lead to illegitimate convictions, sure, you can do so thoughtfully. This isn’t difficult. This is simply not a case where the specific details leave much room for thoughtful analysis, I suspect that if you take the time to actually read and reflect on the courts decision you will perhaps see my comment in a different light. As indicated by the scare quotes, this clearly wasn't a mistake. The judge repeatedly claims things that were not in the evidence presented to him, his misconduct has absolutely nothing to do with the typo that may have mislead the police and prosecutors. This judge made a deliberate decision to not do his job.