Just Can't Quit While She's Ahead

Wow. Some people just don't know how to quit when they're ahead. I mean, seriously, if you barely escaped being convicted of killing your infant daughter (which everyone knows that you did) and getting the death penalty and instead were only convicted of four counts of lying to the police, wouldn't you just take it and run? Well, run as soon as they let you out of jail, of course. You would. I would. I think most everyone would. Then again, most everyone (I think) isn't capable of actually killing their daughter and getting away with it in the way that Casey Anthony (allegedly) did. Thus, is it going to surprise you when I tell you that she's appealing her convictions for lying to the police? Of course it isn't.

According to the fine folks over there at ABC News, Casey Anthony "...filed an appeal (today) of her conviction that she lied to law enforcement officers." Why in the world would someone in her position do that? Is it just because she can? Is it because she already got away with the biggest crime of them all, the alleged murder of her little girl, and now she just wants to see if she can get off totally scot free? I mean, it's pretty obvious that she did a lot of things that were so wrong in so many different ways. Whether or not those things were "proven" might be in question, but what is not in question is that she lied. What else would you call it if you took police officers to your office in Universal Studios, only to stop them after you led them down various hallways and tell them that you lied about working there? It's right there in the description! You lied!


This girl will find herself in legal trouble again quite soon I predict. And I also predict that her convictions for lying will not be overturned because it's quite obvious that she lied. Then again, I also predicted that she would be convicted for killing her daughter because it's quite obvious that she did. Huh. No wonder she appealed.

Sphere: Related Content

Ready, Aim, Fire! Finally.

In what appears to be quite possibly the lamest, last ditch effort to save oneself from having their death penalty carried out, a one Ronnie Lee Gardner has asked the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole for clemency. His rationale? Oh, he's sorry. And he's different. And he's changed. Oh, and he thinks that he has plans (that may or may not involve Oprah Winfrey) "...to develop 160 acres in northern Utah for an organic farm and residential program for children...so he can help troubled kids avoid the kind of problems that landed him on death row." Uh-huh. Wait. What?

Correct. Meet Ronnie Lee Gardner. Ronnie's name is all too familiar to Utahns. Gardner was in a courtroom about to be tried for one murder and in an escape attempt, ended up killing an attorney. Oh, whoops! Gardner received the death penalty back in, oh, 1985. That's right. 1985. 25 years ago. How, exactly, is that a "penalty"? Should it really take twenty five freaking years to off this guy? It's not like there's a lot to argue here. He killed both of them. It's completely obvious. He did it. He's guilty. Why has he not been dead for a long time at this point? Who knows? I don't get it.

And another thing that I don't get is his latest attempt to spare his own life. Mind you, when this guy was asked what method he would prefer his execution to be, when given the choice between lethal injection and firing squad, this nutjob chose the firing squad. His reasoning? He's been shot several times before. He knows what that feels like. He doesn't know what lethal injection feels like, so he figured that he'd just go with what he was familiar with. Being shot. If you're that familiar with being shot, I certainly hope that you're not surprised that your ass ended up on death row.

But in this latest stunt (which seems like it's probably more for his own amusement and a good way to pass the time), he's trying to convince folks that he's a changed guy. Now, never mind that he "...had long been a problem inmate – instigating a riot, stabbing another prisoner and attempting multiple escapes, one of which was successful." Sure, that happened. But that was in the past. It's not the past anymore. It's the present and he's sorry. He even explains those things, according to an article over there at The Huffington Post, by telling the Board, "I was a nasty little bugger, I admit to it...I'm not changing to save my life. I've changed because I needed to change." A nasty little bugger? Um, sir, when you kill a couple of people for no reason what so ever, you're a little bit more than "a nasty little bugger". No, you, sir, are an a-hole. That's a little different.

But he has a plan! Here's the deal: Commute his sentence and he, along with the help of his brother, will get to work "...on his idea for the "Back to Basics" program" because he "...wants to help prevent kids from traveling down a path to violence and criminal activity." Hmmm. I think that this idea might have been more well received had he not already murdered two people. Now maybe that's just me, but I don't think so. After all, he apparently contacted The Oprah a couple of years ago to see if she would help him get this off the ground. I'm guessing that she declined.

And he's clearly thought this through. See, "He said he's earned about $1,300 selling prison artwork and crafts – handmade baby booties and handkerchiefs – to start the project." Yeah, um, no. How is $1,300 going to develop "...160 acres in northern Utah for an organic farm and residential program"? Oh, that's right. It's not. It's not now. It never will. And how sweet that he earned his money by handmaking baby booties! Who in the world is buying prison made baby booties?! Have y'all never heard of Baby Gap?!

I find these last minute pleas for clemency to be insulting to the memories of those who died needlessly at the hands of people like Mr. Gardner. I find it insulting for the relatives of those who died. I find it insulting all the way around. I understand that this is the way that our system works and that it's what makes our system the greatest in the world, but when it comes to pieces of trash like Ronnie Lee Gardner, I kind of wish that there was some sort of an out clause in the system.

You don't want kids to grow up and turn out like you did, Mr. Gardner? Tell you what. How about you pipe down and let those fine marksmen over there at the prison shoot a bunch of holes in you until you're good and dead? And then after they've placed your body in a Hefty bag and set it by the curb (seems like a proper burial), how about then if we tell kids about how things ended up for you? That seems a little bit more reasonable than letting you live. Fortunately, the last time that a death sentence was commuted in Utah was in 1962. And if that sort of reason prevails here, that will continue to stand as the last commutation in Utah. Then they can get down to business and execute this "nasty little bugger". Finally.

Sphere: Related Content

Welcome back, Hans!

Hans Reiser, you A-hole, what have you been doing with yourself? What have you been up to? It's been a while, hasn't it? What...like...six...seven months now? How's tricks? Oh! That's right! You're serving 15 years to life for killing your wife, Nina and then blaming it on the " former KGB, "Russian mafia groups in California" - or, more likely, 'the techno-geek S&M crowd of Silicon Valley.' " That's right! It's all coming back to me now! Man, that was one of the more amusing trials I've followed in a while. And the sketch artist that provided illustrations throughout the trial? He was brilliant in his depictions! Yeah, that's right. Good times....

Oh! And then didn't your lawyer have his closing arguments revolve around the assertion that you, you murderous, lying, weasel you, that you could be compared to the oddest of all odd ducks, the platypus? Wasn't that coined the "Duck-Billed Defense" by some? OK, by me? Yes, I believe it was! Yeah, that didn't work out so well for you, did it? Nah, it sure didn't. How's that cell treating you? Plenty of time to think? And to file appeals. Wait. What?

The folks over there at SFGate tell us that Hans, with plenty of time on his hans (sorry. Hands. Plenty of time on his hands!), " is trying to appeal his conviction and sentence on the grounds of ineffective assistance from his lead attorney." All of this, of course, comes after his being convicted in April of the murder of his wife, Nina. It also comes after when he led authorities to Nina Reiser's remains in July, and it comes after August when he admitted that he had strangled her at his Oakland hills home in September 2006 before burying her body a half a mile away near Redwood Regional Park. Appeal away, you psychotic platypus, you. Appeal away.

One would think that coming up with grounds for an appeal for something that you've not only been convicted of, but that you've admitted to and produced a body, well, would be difficult. Right up until he produced the body, I'd say his best chances might have been 50-50. But coming up with grounds for an appeal after producing the body? Those grounds I'd say would be right around slim to none, and slim just left the building.

The grounds for appeal that Hans has concocted seem to center around the effectiveness (and the sanity) of his attorney, Mr. William duBois. Mr. duBois and Hans did not exactly become BFFs during the trial. To quote from closing arguments when he was questioning why Hans' wife would marry him, he stated, "It couldn't have been out of love that she married Hans Reiser. I can't see anybody loving Hans Reiser." He also debunked physical attraction by saying, "He has to be one of the least attractive people you can imagine."

Hans has apparently decided that the only logical explanation for remarks such as those (among other things) is that Mr. duBois suffers from "oxytocin excess as described in an article in the Scientific American this year." Oh, really?

Really! "I gave him the article, and he seemed to agree that it was a bit. He mentioned resisting an addiction to revenge novels consistent with the article and seemed to feel it was a fit. Persons with oxytocin excess enjoy betraying others." (Translation: Persons convicted of murder who don't like being in jail very much enjoy filing appeals.)

Hans rambled on with, "Mr. duBois has an extraordinary facility for engendering trust in others and extraordinary people skills. (This is consistent with high oxytocin.) He also very apparently gets a charge from duping and betraying juries who trust him. In this case, I believe that the attraction of duping and betraying me exceeded the attraction of duping and betraying a jury, due to my unique personal characteristics." Once again, there is Hans' ego shining bright enough to light up an entire room cell! Because Hans is so different, that means everything is different. Up is down. Black is white. (Too bad jailed wasn't free, eh?) I guess you shouldn't have made yourself all dupe-a-licious there, Hans.

"I ask that his oxytocin levels be tested, and if they are consistent with the article, that he be found to have provided ineffective assistance of counsel that has permanently and irremediably destroyed my ability to obtain a fair trial and negotiate post conviction." Hans, sweetie, your inability to negotiate post conviction is largely due, in part, to your admitting to killing your wife and leading authorities to her body that you buried in a hillside not far from your home! I'd say that takes a bit of precedence over any imaginary conditions you'd like to believe that Mr. duBois is suffering from.

"One of my flaws is that I seem to attract people like him. He has much in common with persons I was in conflict with during my divorce and identified with them to an extent that I biased him against me enough that he wanted to betray me. He hates me. He is delusional in his insistence on believing what he wants to believe, and I needed an attorney who was objective enough for me to trust him. He biased his jury selection in part on Chinese astrology."

If you didn't follow his trial, trust me when I say that the above composition is classic Hans Reiser prose. It amazes me how he can phrase it so that it appears that he is the one who is the victim to all of these horrible people that he lets into his life, only to see them dupe and betray, time and time again. ::::sigh:::: And wouldn't you think that the "Chinese astrology" comment would warrant more than just that sentence. It comes out of nowhere and that is exactly where his explanation of it is. Nowhere.

"Mr. duBois claims in his most recent letter to me that I am delusional. I believe I have a right to have both of us examined in that regard. It is a logical necessity that either I am delusional, or he is delusional. Either one is grounds for a new trial. Mr. duBois is not being light hearted in his remark that I am delusional. In matters pertaining to me, he is not sane." Finally! Something I agree with! That is correct, either Mr. duBois OR Hans is delusional. Yep, one of them most certainly is. But in matters pertaining to you, Hans? You're sane as can be. And while killing your wife is a crazy thing to do, there's a whole lot of different kinds of crazy out there and the sane kind of crazy is your kind.

Hans then goes on to say that he wishes to hold the State of California to the offer it made of a 3 year sentence. He neglects to mention that the offer was made to him in the form of a plea bargain that was contingent upon his pleading guilty. He also neglects to mention that he rejected that plea bargain because he felt he would be able to be found not guilty by a jury. Too bad that all of the duping and betraying was going on, otherwise I'm sure that would have worked out just like he had thought it would! Shame.

The judge promptly rejected his appeal, basically stating that Hans was all appealed out. He also stated that his appeal was filed too late. (The untimely filing notation might seem a bit unnecessary. But given how frustrating Hans was during the trial, it's completely justifiable.) Yep, it's all just a bit too late. And from here on out, anything filed between now and 2018 (the earliest he would be able to be paroled) will be just a little bit early. That seems like some pretty just irony right there.

Below is a video of Hans making a statement during his sentencing. Mr. duBois is seated next to Hans, who has the look of a shackled mad scientist. Upon being asked if Hans would like to make a statement, Mr. duBois replied, "Probably." He then advises Hans that it would be in his best interest to "be brief" and "succinct".

Sphere: Related Content

Maybe Next Time Go Greyhound?

Well, I did not see this coming. Brace yourself. That's right. According to the Associated Press, OJ Simpson "...feels hopeful he will win a new trial on appeal." Of course he does. And why would that be? Oh, right. "...because he believes jury interviews show "he was absolutely railroaded." Railroaded? Is that what they're calling it in prison these days? Railroading? (I don't know what your other options would be there, OJ. What's the alternative? Going Greyhound?)

Is anyone surprised, anyone, that OJ Simpson, OJ "I Vow To Find The Real Killers Because They Must Be Somewhere Over Here On This Golf Course" Simpson, feels that his egotistic, narcissistic, self-important ass got a raw deal? (Oh, he's in prison, huh? In that case, pun intended.) No. The single most surprised person that OJ was actually convicted of anything is, in fact, OJ! Of course he can't believe it and believes the system is screwed up. (He is SOOOO missing Johnnie Cochran right about now!) Let me tell you, if anyone on this planet should be hailing the basic principles that make up the justice system in this country, it is none other than OJ Simpson. He should be a huge fan of our justice system. HUGE. (Although, I'm guessing that, up until about a week ago, he probably was.)

OJ seems to feel "...very hopeful now, especially after the jury interviews. He knows that he was absolutely railroaded." This coming from his laughing-all-the-way-to-the-bank attorney Yale Galanter. Both OJ and his lawyer believe that the jury foreman, a one Paul Connelly, should not have been on the jury because he "intimated that he thought Simpson should have been imprisoned 13 years ago" for that little to-do down in LA that he was miraculously acquitted of. OK, find me one person other than those that were on that jury 13 years ago that does NOT believe that he did it. ONE sane person. There aren't any. None. I checked. There are none. So that they think that the jury foreman "intimated" that he believed Simpson was guilty 13 years ago (and, technically, still is guilty) is not a shocker. They, of course, don't say how he "intimated" this, but just that he did. (I hope they're not counting the eyeball rolling and head shaking that everyone does whenever they hear OJs name. That's just a natural reaction, not an intimation. If everyone does it, it's not like you're so special if you do it too.)

Galanter goes as far as to say "He should not have been on that jury." Um, dude...little secret here I want to let you in on....YOU helped CHOOSE the jury! YOU agreed to having this guy on the jury! YOU! That was YOU! Actually, ALL of those jurors, YOU had to agree to have them serve! If he shouldn't have been on the jury, why'd you let him on?! It's not like they spin the Wheel of Jurors and whoever it lands on, you get. Doesn't work like that. Not usually.

The part that just kills me is how Galanter says that "...it was surprising that jurors said they were most influenced by surreptitious audio recordings made by collectibles dealer Tom Riccio during the six-minute hotel room confrontation." It was? Surprising, you say? Here's a guy who, made a tape recording of the whole ordeal. (So that he could sell it later, of course. Don't get me wrong. OJ was totally set up by these morons who wanted to profit off of him. I don't doubt that for a minute. It doesn't change the reasons why OJ went along with them. It doesn't change that he did what he did. He could have believed that they knew of people who had OJ's belongings and then done something that normal people would have done, like file a police report. But for the many, many shady and sneaky reasons that ARE OJ Simpson, he didn't and instead chose to go busting into a hotel room with a bunch of felons with guns. Makes for a good audio recording for sale, doesn't it?) This guy's recording has OJ clearly saying "Nobody leaves this room." That, under Nevada law, is enough to constitute kidnapping. Yes, how surprising that the jurors would focus on what OJ actually did and said. A shock to say the very least. Please.

Galanter had hoped that the jury was going to focus on other things. Things like "Anything that's not mine, give it back." Riiiiight. To show how honest he is, correct? He had also hoped they would have heard OJ say "You can't lie. You can't lie. You've got to tell the truth.'" OK, look, if I'm on that jury, that is the last thing I want to hear anyone, especially OJ, say in that situation. You can't lie?! Really?? So it's lying where you're drawing the line in this situation? Busting into the hotel room, people with guns, not letting people leave, taking things by force, all of that is OK with you, but lying is simply out of the question?! Yes, it is perplexing as to how on earth the jury overlooked that detail. Amazing.

They are also focusing in on the testimony that people had guns. OJ and his folks are trying to say that there wasn't a gun because no one mentioned a gun being shown. Other than in testimony. Testimony says "We had guns". But according to Galanter, "If I'm in a room and somebody pulled a gun, the first thing I would expect to hear is, 'Put that thing away,' or 'No need for that.' But in the six minutes, there is nothing said to indicate a gun was present." Nothing was said? See, that's not going to help you much. Because if there was a gun, the people who went in there with the guns knew it and they wouldn't say anything. And the people who are having a gun pointed at them? They're not going to say much either. They're just going to start rounding up all of their OJ Simpson trading cards and putting them in the pillowcases like it's Halloween and they're getting rid of all of their candy as quick as they can so that they can turn off the porch light.

I have no idea whether there were guns or not. I mean, seriously, just look at them up there. Can you trust any of them any farther than you can throw them? With or without their guns? The jury says that on the audio recording, there is mention of a "piece". And the guys who had all of their charges dropped in exchange for their testimony against OJ said that there were guns, for whatever that's worth. But I'm with the jury as far as how they went about their deliberations. They said that, basically, they couldn't trust ANY of those people that took the stand because they're all convicted felons and liars. So they went strictly by the evidence. If the evidence has someone talking about a "piece", I'm not guessing it's a piece of pie.

And in the desperation angle, Galanter is blaming the judge, a one Jackie Glass, for unreasonable time constraints during which to file an appeal, according for the sunny folks over there at the Las Vegas Sun. "She didn't give us the time we need to do a full-fledged motion." Whining is soooo unbecoming when it's coming out of the mouths of lawyers. Didn't give you enough time? Were you the only two people who did not see this coming? You probably should have planned ahead a little bit better.

So in the meantime, OJ sits in his itty bitty cell over there in Nevada with moods that alternate between "melancholy and hopeful." Perhaps once, just once, his mood could alternate between "accepting responsibility for what he's done and shutting the hell up." While that would be a welcome mood change for everyone who is sick of hearing about this guy, the one who it could and would ultimately help the most in the end is OJ himself. And considering that at this point, there isn't a whole lot else out there that IS going to be able to help him any more, he might want to think about it. Then again, he might not want to. After all, who knows what else he has to think about?

Sphere: Related Content