Support NeoGAF

[Usobuko]

He seems to be telling people from that picture the police took

" Big deal ? "

 

[HawksWinStanley]

Gonna be hard to defend him if you're his lawyer. Yes, he may have hammered this mannequin, but he definitely did not hammer the other two homeless people sleeping at the same intersection that were also killed with hammer attacks, your honor. Not guilty!

Yeah I mean come on, if we had to put money on it who wouldn't bet it was this guy or someone else in his circle?

And I'm going to go out on a long fucking limb here and guess that the killings will stop for now, and the some time after this totes innocent guy has been released more homeless people will die in the exact same fashion at a different location but still in the same general area.

 

[Dusk Golem]

Actually I think you can, I remember in law class at college there was a case where somebody thought he was smuggling heroin but it was just harmless leaves, and the House of Lords ruled you can still be considered to be attempting a crime even if the facts means it's impossible to actually do it.

Also no if you do something that you think is illegal but it isn't that's not a crime.

You can be charged with the attempt to pull out a crime. IE, it's like how they try to charge child predators with bait of people who pretend they're a young teen or something. While the fact may be they're not a young teen and just posing as one, it demonstrate that the person would pull off the crime if given the chance. The same thing with the heroin sell you just mention, and the same thing in the case of the man here destroying the mannequin poised to look like a person. But I also believe until it can be proven that the person who committed the 'fake' crime without knowing it was fake with actual crime, the penalty is minor at best. The main point of these ploys is to lure out criminals and then gather more evidence against them.

Anyways the main point is that they have a major suspect now they can dig a lot more into, I think was the main purpose of the ploy.

 

[Senoculum]

What a dispicable lawyer, suggesting his bail is too much. Dude is not clearly healthy in the head -- he's a frigging psycho.

 

[TS-08]

Actually I think you can, I remember in law class at college there was a case where somebody thought he was smuggling heroin but it was just harmless leaves, and the House of Lords ruled you can still be considered to be attempting a crime even if the facts means it's impossible to actually do it.

Also no if you do something that you think is illegal but it isn't that's not a crime.

EDIT: that's just the case in the UK, like I said I don't know if that's the case in the US

I'm speaking from the U.S. perspective.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Gonna be hard to defend him if you're his lawyer. Yes, he may have hammered this mannequin, but he definitely did not hammer the other two homeless people sleeping at the same intersection that were also killed with hammer attacks, your honor. Not guilty!

yeah it will be hard to prove because of the amount of people who carry heavy duty hammers and put their hoods up so as to hide their identity to bash random sleeping humanoid looking objects with said hammers in the area where all those hammer based murders took place its just to hard to pin anyone down

That's not how it works. This takes place in North America where people are innocents until proven guilty, not the other way around. They will need more evidence directly connecting him to the other two murders or his lawyer will have a very easy case.

 

[HazySaiyan]

I'm speaking from the U.S. perspective.

OK gotcha

 

[RedRum]

Don't quote that first post guys. Shit is disgusting.

I hope they at least had cameras so that proof of not being able to tell it was a mannequin can be brought forward.

 

[mackattk]

Hopefully he doesn't get off with just a slap on the wrist.

 

[GitarooMan]

Now that they know who it is they can probably backtrack and construct evidence for the other two

 

[FyreWulff]

I'm assuming at this point they have other evidence but aren't publicizing it to weed out any false confessions that could cloud their case

Also if he stored the hammer in the bag each time, very likely they could find DNA of the other victims inside of there.

 

[Palmer_v1]

Not sure how a jury can stay blind to the connection though, even if the prosecution flubs the case or the facts aren't a slam dunk.

It's circumstantial at best. I wouldn't convict this guy if I was on the jury based on JUST what we know right now.

 

[Skellig Gra]

Not sure what this accomplishes other than deterring him from doing it again maybe.

It's circumstantial at best. I wouldn't convict this guy if I was on the jury based on JUST what we know right now.

Me either I mean fucking hell, is the burden of proof that low?

 

[Dusk Golem]

I'm assuming at this point they have other evidence but aren't publicizing it to weed out any false confessions that could cloud their case

This is also a strong possibility.

I kind of doubt the guy killed two people with a hammer at the same general spot and left zero evidence behind, and with him in custody they can narrow down connections, as well as search his home, etc. They might just be holding onto their cards to let more circumstantial evidence pile up and not let anything interrupt the main investigation.

 

[haxan7]

What a useless piece of shit.

Can't wait for him to rot in prison.

 

[RedRum]

Not sure what this accomplishes other than deterring him from doing it again maybe.

Killers like this don't stoo, they just move on to other areas once they have been compromised in another one.

 

[norm9]

That's not how it works. This takes place in North America where people are innocents until proven guilty, not the other way around. They will need more evidence directly connecting him to the other two murders or his lawyer will have a very easy case.

Of course innocent until proven guilty. But dude's actions are very suspect and will color peoples' perceptions of him before the prosecution even gets a go at him. If I was a jury member, I would think guilty from the start, and hopefully the defense lawyer will not keep me in the jury pool.

 

[FyreWulff]

This is also a strong possibility.

I kind of doubt the guy killed two people with a hammer at the same general spot and left zero evidence behind, and with him in custody they can narrow down connections, as well as search his home, etc. They might just be holding onto their cards to let more circumstantial evidence pile up.

Also they'd have a narrow enough warrant a judge would be comfortable issuing now where they could go through his cell phone tower history, etc etc.

If he lives far away but there was enough evidence that he was in the area each time a victim was killed, well...

 

[TAJ]

It's circumstantial at best. I wouldn't convict this guy if I was on the jury based on JUST what we know right now.

There's not enough evidence but I would convict him anyway, because of course he's the killer. And even if by some infinitesimally small chance chance he's not he didn't know that was a mannequin before he hit it. Come the fuck on. So maybe he's only a copycat killer.

 

[TS-08]

Of course innocent until proven guilty. But dude's actions are very suspect and will color peoples' perceptions of him before the prosecution even gets a go at him. If I was a jury member, I would think guilty from the start, and hopefully the defense lawyer will not keep me in the jury pool.

I'm not sure how much of this incident a jury would even be allowed to hear, as I'm sure any lawyer defending this guy will fight to keep it out.

 

[Pyramid head]

The police probably have the murder weapon now, right? This guy doesn't seem like the sharpest tool in the box (no pun intended) so there's likely a decent chance there's evidence to be found there to link him to the murders.

 

[Paskil]

This guy will be fed and sheltered in prison. Meanwhile the homeless will continue to suffer
Isn't it better to execute him, then use the liberated resources to feed and shelter the homeless? We treat monsters and murderers better than regular people

Execution costs more than life in prison.

 

[kirblar]

This guy will be fed and sheltered in prison. Meanwhile the homeless will continue to suffer
Isn't it better to execute him, then use the liberated resources to feed and shelter the homeless? We treat monsters and murderers better than regular people

The legal costs w/ the death penalty far outweigh the cost to just imprison someone.

 

[jay]

This guy will be fed and sheltered in prison. Meanwhile the homeless will continue to suffer
Isn't it better to execute him, then use the liberated resources to feed and shelter the homeless? We treat monsters and murderers better than regular people

There are enough resources to both feed the homeless and not execute prisoners.

 

[Palmer_v1]

There's not enough evidence but I would convict him anyway, because of course he's the killer.

Than I hope to god the defense attorney/judge do their jobs and have you removed from jury selection.

 

[jonezer4]

Dexter Season 1 spoiler.

Spoiler

 

[ReAxion]

Isn't it better to execute him

isn't killing people wrong.

 

[FyreWulff]

The police probably have the murder weapon now, right? This guy doesn't seem like the sharpest tool in the box (no pun intended) so there's likely a decent chance there's evidence to be found there to link him to the murders.

armchairing here, but an interesting thing about serial killers is they tend to stick to a consistent method in how they murder, even if it easily leads to their capture. 3 victims in the same spot? (even if the third was fake) ? All with a hammer? And he just happened to randomly be a guy that wanted to vandalize a mannequin with a hammer in the same location?..

 

[Alavard]

Sure this isn't enough to charge him with the murders, but wouldn't it be enough to get a warrant to search his place for more evidence?

 

[Skellig Gra]

armchairing here, but an interesting thing about serial killers is they tend to stick to a consistent method in how they murder, even if it easily leads to their capture. 3 victims in the same spot? (even if the third was fake) ? All with a hammer? And he just happened to randomly be a guy that wanted to vandalize a mannequin with a hammer in the same location?..

Get out of here with that shit. I need to be damn sure someone committed a crime before I make the decision to lock them in jail the rest of their life.

 

[RobotVM]

Test the hammer for DNA and the hoodie.

 

[Knuckle Sandwich]

They either got the guy or that's one a heck of a coincidence. Shouldn't be hard to link him with DNA.

 

[FyreWulff]

Get out of here with that shit. I need to be damn sure someone committed a crime before I make the decision to lock them in jail the rest of their life.

Yes.. hence why we'll hold a trial and we'll see all the evidence they have.

I've been on a jury twice, I know to not pre-convict people, jesus.

 

[Skellig Gra]

Yes.. hence why we'll hold a trial and we'll see all the evidence they have.

I've been on a jury twice, I know to not pre-convict people, jesus.

No offense but your last post does not indicate that at all.

 

[typist]

Execution costs more than life in prison.

The legal costs w/ the death penalty far outweigh the cost to just imprison someone.

I've heard this before. To me that's a separate problem with the justice system itself, the costs need to be reduced.

I'm aware that my intuition is not the most reliable source of information, but my intuition tells me that in 100 cases like this, the guy who hammers the head of a mannequin is the same guy who hammered the heads of homeless people 99% of the time, if not more. 99% certainty that you're executing a murderer is an acceptable level of certainty, the process of execution should be fairly low cost after 99% certainty is established

There are enough resources to both feed the homeless and not execute prisoners.

This may very well be true. But people don't want to stop eating hamburgers, so we keep giving resources to livestock. Maybe capital punishment is more palatable than vegetarianism

isn't killing people wrong.

Oh my sweet summer child

 

[NekoFever]

Even if he gets off, they've hopefully dissuaded any more of these killings and know to keep a close eye on this guy in future. But fingers crossed they can connect his weapon to the first two murders or find some other evidence connecting him to them.

There's not enough evidence but I would convict him anyway, because of course he's the killer. And even if by some infinitesimally small chance chance he's not he didn't know that was a mannequin before he hit it. Come the fuck on. So maybe he's only a copycat killer.

Good thing you're not on a jury, then.

 

[Arkeband]

It's ironic that they caught him red handed but he's going to get away with it.

I have a sneaking suspicion that if he was black he would have a much harder time getting the benefit of the doubt from a jury.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

Hope they find proof he murdered the others. What a fucking insane story.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Whenever I see a Mannequin lying on the streets dressed like a homeless man I also always take out my hammer, which I carry around all the time, and bash them in the head. Seems like they got the wrong guy

 

[Ninja Scooter]

There's not enough evidence but I would convict him anyway, because of course he's the killer. And even if by some infinitesimally small chance chance he's not he didn't know that was a mannequin before he hit it. Come the fuck on. So maybe he's only a copycat killer.

Please don't ever be on a jury.

 

[FyreWulff]

No offense but your last post does not indicate that at all.

Probably because this is a discussion forum. Where people can discuss. Since I'll never be selected to be on a jury since I'm not in the same state, my opinion has fuck all influence on the process of this trial.

So, to re-iterate, my non binding armchair opinion on all the evidence thus far is that he's very likely to be the killer.

- it's not a heavily trafficed area, meaning he had to have a specific reason to go back there.
- He used the same or similar weapon as they seemed to have on the last two victims.
- he had an "4lb engineer's hammer". Know what most people call that? A sledgehammer:

- The hammer was being kept in a pizza bag.. which I've never seen anyone keep a sledgehammer in, and almost certainly was to disguise it in transit. Hammers don't need protective carrying cases, because they're goddamn hammers.
- His attack on the mannequin was consistent with the attacks on the victims (went for the head first, aka he was trying to kill)

So we have a typical serial killer MO, an item that people usually don't have casually laying around in a vehicle, especially concealed, and not only that, the attack was in even in the same location as two previous.

My guess is once the warrant comes back,

-they'll likely have tower telemetry showing he was in the area at the times of the murders
- or he'll have recently bought 3 new hammers
- or they'll find the victim's DNA in the bag, in his car, or on some of his clothes.

 

[Parahan]

Is it difficult to prove his guilt? It will be only if he used new hammers everytime he killed or thoroughly washed it off with peroxide.

I am sure they can get a warrant to search his house & vehicle and they may just find some DNA matching the homeless dudes.

First post is in such poor taste I am not quoting that shit but reasses your sense of humor dude. Also shame on that lawyer of his, I get she is just doing her job but isn't there a thing called conscience? The lady should desperately need money or probably a psycho too.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Is it difficult to prove his guilt? It will be only if he used new hammers everytime he killed or thoroughly washed it off with peroxide.

I am sure they can get a warrant to search his house & vehicle and they may just find some DNA matching the homeless dudes.

First post is in such poor taste I am not quoting that shit but reasses your sense of humor dude. Also shame on that lawyer of his, I get she is just doing her job but isn't there a thing called conscience? The lady should desperately need money or probably a psycho too.

A lawyer has a duty to their client, who is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Meatfist]

Is it difficult to prove his guilt? It will be only if he used new hammers everytime he killed or thoroughly washed it off with peroxide.

I am sure they can get a warrant to search his house & vehicle and they may just find some DNA matching the homeless dudes.

First post is in such poor taste I am not quoting that shit but reasses your sense of humor dude. Also shame on that lawyer of his, I get she is just doing her job but isn't there a thing called conscience? The lady should desperately need money or probably a psycho too.

Everyone deserves due process, regardless of how shitty they may be. I doubt this dude is smart enough to get rid of DNA evidence, and once the prosecution has that it jumps pretty quickly from reasonable doubt to an open-and-shut case

 

[TAJ]

Please don't ever be on a jury.

Please be less smug about being willfully ignorant.

 

[Dusk Golem]

Is it difficult to prove his guilt? It will be only if he used new hammers everytime he killed or thoroughly washed it off with peroxide.

I am sure they can get a warrant to search his house & vehicle and they may just find some DNA matching the homeless dudes.

First post is in such poor taste I am not quoting that shit but reasses your sense of humor dude. Also shame on that lawyer of his, I get she is just doing her job but isn't there a thing called conscience? The lady should desperately need money or probably a psycho too.

I feel they may have found more than they're letting on but holding onto their cards until the time is right as they do their investigation.

On the last bit, there's a reason so many 'comedic' works joke that all lawyers go to hell and lawyers is one of the most evil positions you can be in. While that's not true of all lawyers, their job is to defend their client, and that does mean even if their client is literally a deranged psychotic murderer who's done the most vile of vile acts. Some lawyers won't do it, but many would. It's their job to form a defense case for their client after all.

 

[FyreWulff]

Is it difficult to prove his guilt? It will be only if he used new hammers everytime he killed or thoroughly washed it off with peroxide.

I am sure they can get a warrant to search his house & vehicle and they may just find some DNA matching the homeless dudes.

First post is in such poor taste I am not quoting that shit but reasses your sense of humor dude. Also shame on that lawyer of his, I get she is just doing her job but isn't there a thing called conscience? The lady should desperately need money or probably a psycho too.

Innocent until proven guilty. It's her job to defend him in court, because everyone deserves and is guaranteed legal representation when tried by the state. It's not a reflection on her character or opinion.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Please be less smug about being willfully ignorant.

"I'd convict anyway because I just know he did it" is probably a line uttered in the jury boxes as many innocent people were convicted. It's gross and a complete bastardization of the criminal justice system.

 

[Damaniel]

But there was no way for him to know it was a mannequin. This was clearly intend to kill. So they can at least prove he is dangerous.

Isn't this a similar trap like the ones set in "to catch a predator" where an adult woman posed as a little girl to trap pedos? Did these people walk because she wasn't really a child in the end?

In this case, since he's been charged with a crime, they can collect DNA evidence from him and use it to possibly establish his presence in the vicinity of the victims, or they could potentially link the blows from the hammer to the type of hammer the suspect was using. A hit on either of these would likely be sufficient to obtain a warrant to search other places (like his property) for potential forensic evidence.

Proving his guilt from attacking a mannequin alone would be impossible, but catching him in the act of doing that will offer new investigative opportunities which could be used to prove guilt.

 

[typist]

A lawyer has a duty to their client, who is innocent until proven guilty.

Just want to start this post by saying it's not meant to come across as aggressive, it's just my thought process. I think he proved himself guilty beyond reasonable doubt the moment he:

a) Smashed the head of a mannequin disguised to be similar to previous victims
b) At the scene of previous crimes
c) With the same weapon used in the previous crimes

He might argue that smashing mannequin heads with hammers is just his niche entertainment activity, and he was just exercising his rights to entertain himself. But if you had the local population answer a questionnaire you would probably find less than 1% of people would list smashing mannequin heads with hammers to be their hobby. The chance that this man was truly just participating in this activity for entertainment purposes at the exact scene of the previous crimes is below 1% and probably below 0.01%. People who enjoy smashing mannequin heads probably tend to do so in the privacy of their own home. Believing the hypothetical reality which has a 1% chance of matching the real reality is not being reasonably doubtful, not by my definition of reasonable anyway.

Besides garnering entertainment from smashing mannequin heads with hammers, is there any other semi-plausible reason he would be smashing the mannequin head? Genuine question, maybe he thought it was dangerous (but why?) but I can't think of any other motives.. except for the obvious (and criminal) "I hate homeless people" mentality