• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Say your wife and kids were murdered...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
How many gangbangers do you think you would knock off before they nailed you? Plan it out as much as you want. I think that if I did it smart, I could go for a while. 😀
Click to expand...

Wouldn't seek revenge. I'd let the law handle it.
 
Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
How many gangbangers do you think you would knock off before they nailed you? Plan it out as much as you want. I think that if I did it smart, I could go for a while. 😀
Click to expand...

Wouldn't seek revenge. I'd let the law handle it.
Click to expand...

BOOOOOOOOO


I'd seek revenge... rambo style
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
id get the guy/s that did it

and take a nice hammer to their toes......one by one.

then i would make them eat the curb......and stamp on the back of their heads

then the permanent smile treatment. (cut the mouth at the sides, and do something to them thats going to make them scream.....*sound of ripping* permanent smile thats covered in blood and if done right might extend toward their ears)
Click to expand...

What we have here ladies and gentlemen, is a product of Hollywood. Feels good to know that at least some of your peers are mindless products of today's entertainment world doesn't it?
 
Originally posted by: DainBramaged
How many gangbangers do you think you would knock off before they nailed you? Plan it out as much as you want. I think that if I did it smart, I could go for a while. 😀
Click to expand...

Probably quite a few. Its not like the only way to kill a gang banger is with a gun or knife.
 
Originally posted by: joedrake
Originally posted by: FeuerFrei
If Hollywood has taught us anything, its that avenging your family's deaths is ok and justifiable.
Click to expand...
An eye for an eye.
Click to expand...

Quoted from MC Hawking, "Fvkc this eye for an eye bullsh!t, you take an eye and I'll take your motherfvkcing life"
 
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: miniMUNCH
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Eeezee
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Eeezee
I could go indefinitely. You just have to be careful in not getting caught, which is doable. Find an unregistered weapon w/ silencer. Purchase plenty of ammo. Practice your aim every day. Purchase body armor and carefully plan out your killings.

I think I would really enjoy that sort of revenge.
Click to expand...

So what about all the trace and DNA evidence you leave?
Click to expand...

DNA evidence barely stands up in court, especially if it's not collected in the victim's home. It is impossible to prove that you didn't happen to walk through that alley at some other time that day.
Click to expand...

You've absolutely no idea what you are talking about. In fact, just go ahead and shutup and walk away.
Click to expand...


Aactually Mill, he's right...all DNA would tell the cops is that he was at the crime scene sometime in recent history...could've been yesterday...could've been a month ago. If it is a public place that evidence is not very condemning. A private residence where the victim and suspect did not know one another? That is a little more condemning.
Click to expand...

No, actually, he's not right and neither are you. Take a forensics class and get back to me. Your DNA is not going to randomly appear in a public place. The DNA they are looking for would be on the victim, or be a part of trace evidence that was left at a CRIME SCENE. Seriously, take a forensics class and you will understand DNA. Not only that, but DNA is not used alone. Other trace evidence such as fiber, hair, ballistics, etc are used. DNA is just used as statistically damning evidence in addition to other physical and trace evidence.

If you start going out on mass murder spree, you are going to be leaving trace evidence and/or DNA out there. There's no "well anyone could have done that." They use statistics. They can give probability in the billions and higher with nuclear DNA. With mitochondrial DNA it is less, but is still high enough to be very damning. If you link trace and DNA evidence over several crime scenes -- even macro scenes -- you have a very strong case.

So when you've got ammunition casings (if you left them), or the actual slug (check for striations and use ballistics to link the scenes), DNA and trace evidence -- then you've got an extremely strong case.

You bring up the ballastics expert. Sir, what are the chances that these slugs would match being fired from the same gun over x number of scenes? Oh, so many in a million or billion.

Next up is the DNA expert. Sir, what's the probability of another person on earth (minus an identical twin) having the same DNA as our suspect? Oh, one in 500 billion. It depends on what DNA database they use and the ethnicity of the accused, but DNA is a very proven science, and can produce very damning statistics.

Then you bring in the fiber expert. Sir, what did the fibers you recover tell you? Well, we were able to exclude the fibers from having occurred from the victims or any witnesses, and we matched 5 class characteristics of the fiber from the suspect to fiber found at the scene.

You people watch too much CSI. It is extremely difficult to get away with multiple crimes -- especially those that share an MO (and you will leave one), and ones that are linked by a multitude of trace, physical, and DNA evidence.

You claim the age of a sample can't be determined? Wrong. Let's say the sample was blood that the suspect left. Presumptive test of tetramethylbenzidine is positive. So what you ask, right? The strength of the reaction can give a rough age. So what? You know it is blood, so what? Ring-precipitin test provides confirmatory proof it is human blood. Then you start doing blood-typing. Rhesus, ABO Markers, Lewis System. Now you've narrowed the blood make-up of the person down to then provide even more statistical evidence that the person committed the crime.

People think that it is "real easy" to commit the perfect crime. It isn't. Most people get by due to incompetence of the investigating agency, weather, dumb-luck, or bungling of evidence.

You *WILL* leave evidence at the scene of a crime, and a gifted criminalist will bust your ass. Totality of evidence is the key -- DNA is just another part of the total, but is extremely hard to overcome. Unless you are going to explain how you were 1/500 billion, had fiber/hair at the scene -- or it was linked back to or discovered on you, ballastic evidence, etc. That's beyond a reasonable doubt and easily.
Click to expand...


Mill, I'm getting a Ph.D. in chemical engineering... I've taken numerous chemistry and biology courses including organic and physical chemistry, biochemistry, some biophysics, biotechnology and bioengineering. Some of my friends work on DNA separation technology. You don't need to lecture me about DNA.

Oh...and I did take a forensic science course in undergrad. One of my uncles is a field agent in the FBI so Iwas interested in it when I was younger.

The guy you made your initial comment to was talking about shooting someone...you don't leave DNA on someone by shooting them with a gun...that is what I WAS responding to (see above... he said nothing about touching the victim or even coming within 10 feet of them).

Some forensic scientists finding your DNA at a crime scene in a public place, like on a park bench near a vicitms body, gets the police/DA nothing. Hair, clothing fibers, all follow same argument...in a public place, there are a number of possible explanations for them being there besides "you must be the murder".

DNA on the victim, when you otherwise are not supposed to know the victim...their DNA on you and your your clothing...that is hard to explain and pretty incriminating.

Also, I don't watch CSI or any of those kind of shows because they suck and are wrought with errors.

 
Mill, I'm getting a Ph.D. in chemical engineering... I've taken numerous chemistry and biology courses including organic and physical chemistry, biochemistry, some biophysics, biotechnology and bioengineering. Some of my friends work on DNA separation technology. You don't need to lecture me about DNA.

Oh...and I did take a forensic science course in undergrad. One of my uncles is a field agent in the FBI so Iwas interested in it when I was younger.

The guy you made your initial comment to was talking about shooting someone...you don't leave DNA on someone by shooting them with a gun...that is what I WAS responding to (see above... he said nothing about touching the victim or even coming within 10 feet of them).

Some forensic scientists finding your DNA at a crime scene in a public place, like on a park bench near a vicitms body, gets the police/DA nothing. Hair, clothing fibers, all follow same argument...in a public place, there are a number of possible explanations for them being there besides "you must be the murder".

DNA on the victim, when you otherwise are not supposed to know the victim...their DNA on you and your your clothing...that is hard to explain and pretty incriminating.

Also, I don't watch CSI or any of those kind of shows because they suck and are wrought with errors.
Click to expand...

I don't care if you are getting a Ph.D or not. You are simply ignorant of the law concerning DNA and trace evidence.

Hair, clothing fibers, all follow same argument...in a public place, there are a number of possible explanations for them being there besides "you must be the murder".
Click to expand...

No, not really. An overwhelming amount of trace and physical evidence -- along with other evidence -- destroys the idea that "I was just strolling through." On a normal stroll you don't leave the type of evidence you leave when you are comitting crime.

The guy you made your initial comment to was talking about shooting someone...you don't leave DNA on someone by shooting them with a gun...that is what I WAS responding to (see above... he said nothing about touching the victim or even coming within 10 feet of them).
Click to expand...

I never once said you left DNA in that fashion. However, you certainly leave ballastic evidence. What he said that I took issued with was that DNA is "barely admissible" in court. Total crap. First of all, they aren't even going to attempt to take one sample of DNA from a contaminated crime scene and use it. You don't seem to understand how they plot the actual crime scene and determine what should and shouldn't be there. Just because you are in a public place doesn't mean there's all this DNA floating around. You go after a guy in an Alley, and there's a good chance the crime scene is confined to that area. If it is an especially loud or public murder, then there's a good chance the reponse time is quick, and then the amount of contamination is low.

Some of my friends work on DNA separation technology. You don't need to lecture me about DNA.
Click to expand...

Then why are you agreeing with him that it is hardly admissable, and why are you acting as if the age of DNA cannot be roughly given (if not exactly)? Why are you stating that DNA and trace evidence won't build a case against someone? You watch too many movies. All the "explanations" in the world don't matter once you trot out evidence after evidence. You are making the same mistake that people make. That if you just say "there's other way it could have happened" that it will create reasonable doubt. Nope. If you got tons of evidence linking the person to the scene, then you've got evidence from their home or person linking them back, and then you've got ballastic evidence, eyewitnesses, or any othe evidence -- you can pretty much get a conviction. DNA is just icing on the cake.

I asked him what about the evidence he left at the scene, and he claimed it wouldn't be admissable. You agreed with him, and both of you have this fairly tale of how Locard's principal of exchange and it being in a public place is going to destroy the evidence. Hardly. If they were going off of one type or one piece of evidence -- then perhaps, but they use many types and amounts along with your motive, MO, the ability you had to commit the crime, etc.

Stop watching CSI and the movies. It isn't healthy. If you commit 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 murders you are leaving a treasure trove of physical, trace, and DNA evidence. That's a FACT.
 
Originally posted by: Mill
Hair, clothing fibers, all follow same argument...in a public place, there are a number of possible explanations for them being there besides "you must be the murder".
Click to expand...

No, not really. An overwhelming amount of trace and physical evidence -- along with other evidence -- destroys the idea that "I was just strolling through." On a normal stroll you don't leave the type of evidence you leave when you are comitting crime.
Click to expand...

It's not so much that you don't leave evidence behind, it's that they can't do ALL that much with it until they catch you. So, you shoot them from a distance, and pick up your shell casings. They'll know every single person was shot from the same gun. If they're lucky, they'll figure out where he was sniping from, and get fiber samples. I doubt they'd get DNA if you were careful, but assume they did. They'd need to compare those things with something. Sure, they might have enough evidence to put you away for the rest of your life as soon as you get caught and they can run YOUR DNA/clothing through the old compar-o-meter, but if you don't live in the neighborhood, are careful that no one sees you, park a LONG ways away from the crime scene, and take a circuitous route back home...
 
If you commit 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 murders you are leaving a treasure trove of physical, trace, and DNA evidence. That's a FACT.
Click to expand...
Which is pointless unless the police "like you" for the crime. Unless you or your car gets spotted, or somebody fingers you, they won't put two and two together..
Of course, if your wife and kid got murdered, then they'd have to look at you😛

I think you could get away with it for a while, if it were not for that huge linkage right there.
 
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: Mill
Hair, clothing fibers, all follow same argument...in a public place, there are a number of possible explanations for them being there besides "you must be the murder".
Click to expand...

No, not really. An overwhelming amount of trace and physical evidence -- along with other evidence -- destroys the idea that "I was just strolling through." On a normal stroll you don't leave the type of evidence you leave when you are comitting crime.
Click to expand...

It's not so much that you don't leave evidence behind, it's that they can't do ALL that much with it until they catch you. So, you shoot them from a distance, and pick up your shell casings. They'll know every single person was shot from the same gun. If they're lucky, they'll figure out where he was sniping from, and get fiber samples. I doubt they'd get DNA if you were careful, but assume they did. They'd need to compare those things with something. Sure, they might have enough evidence to put you away for the rest of your life as soon as you get caught and they can run YOUR DNA/clothing through the old compar-o-meter, but if you don't live in the neighborhood, are careful that no one sees you, park a LONG ways away from the crime scene, and take a circuitous route back home...
Click to expand...

Seriously, go try it. It always baffles me, but committing a string of crimes it not easy. 99.9% of people are caught very quickly. Committing murder is a very emotional crime. Even with the best plans and research you are still going to bungle significant portions of your first several crimes (unless maybe you are a sociopath), and those first mistakes will be your last.

If the perfect crime was so easy then there'd be a lot more of them. Fact is, murder has the highest rate of clearance and is the most solved crime for most places in the world -- especially the US. It is very rare that murders aren't cleared. The ones that aren't are on TV, and then you hear about them. All I'm telling you guys is that you are all being naive and playing in a fantasy here. In reality it is extremely hard to get away with murder -- and multiple murders is even harder.

 
Originally posted by: skyking
If you commit 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 murders you are leaving a treasure trove of physical, trace, and DNA evidence. That's a FACT.
Click to expand...
Which is pointless unless the police "like you" for the crime. Unless you or your car gets spotted, or somebody fingers you, they won't put two and two together..
Of course, if your wife and kid got murdered, then they'd have to look at you😛

I think you could get away with it for a while, if it were not for that huge linkage right there.
Click to expand...

You'd make a mistake. There'd be an eyewitness -- someone seeing a suspicious car, or even a casual description. Almost all murders are splved, for your little spree to go unsolved it is not going to take just careful planning and research -- it will take a lot of dumb luck, too.
 
Hey Mill. I'd use a different gun every time. Or maybe its not a gun. Maybe its posion. Or something different. If you plan it out right and use a different MO every time, you can make the killings look totally unrelated.
 
Originally posted by: Leper Messiah
Hey Mill. I'd use a different gun every time. Or maybe its not a gun. Maybe its posion. Or something different. If you plan it out right and use a different MO every time, you can make the killings look totally unrelated.
Click to expand...

Then go try it. Everyone thinks it is easy, but there's a reason why the most successful serial and spree killers are sociopaths. They don't make the same emotional mistakes.
 
Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
If you are going to die anyways hype yourself up on PCP, get some body armor and as many guns as you can carry.
Once you run out of bullets you should be able to rips some arms off / smash some heads in before they can take you down.

If you deiced to enjoy your revenge, go the steath route, pick them off one by one sniping them as they go about thier days.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top