IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Angelika Graswald , kayaking , murder cases , New York cases

Reply
Old 14th May 2015, 06:51 AM   #1
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Angelika Graswald

This might be interesting.

Angelika Graswald told New York police that she tampered with her fiance's kayak before his death on the Hudson River and that it "felt good knowing he was going to die", prosecutors have told a bail hearing in Orange County.

Ms Graswald, 35, stands accused of intentionally drowning fiance Vincent Viafore while the couple were kayaking together last month. She made a desperate emergency call from the river, saying Mr Viafore, 46, had capsized and she could not find him in the cold, choppy water.

In the days after the kayak trip, she created a flurry of Facebook posts that made her seem less grieving than liberated.


So, we have weird behaviour (guilty) a confession (guilty) and a motive i.e. insurance money and maybe freedom from unwanted relationship (guilty). Does it pass the smell test? No. Because:

1 tampering with a kayak is not a sure way of killing a person
2 if you fail, you may not fail safe
3 nothing in the article about a recovered kayak showing evidence of tampering
4 the tampering would have to be of a kind that was not obvious to investigators (basically, what else is there apart from knocking a hole in it?)
5 English not first language so 'confession' may not be all it seems

Man, you guys (in the US) need to move to 100% taped interviews with lawyer present. Does Poughkeepsie have the DP?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 07:26 AM   #2
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,812
6. Gorgeous (not guilty)
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 09:07 AM   #3
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
7. Latvian (guilty)
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 09:33 AM   #4
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 11,311
let's hear it for the idea that interrogations should be recorded

I would like to hear a recording of the putative confession.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 09:39 AM   #5
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,581
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
6. Gorgeous (not guilty)
I'm not seeing gorgeous. At all. Moderately attractive at best.
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 10:23 AM   #6
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
3 nothing in the article about a recovered kayak showing evidence of tampering
Could that not be a fault of the article, rather than the case? They mention inconsistencies in her statements, but don't say what they were. Lots of stuff is clearly left out.

From a related link, she says that:
"She also said that the police thought she had tampered with Mr Viafore's kayak, which has been recovered."
http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-kayak-...13-gh0hmu.html
Which makes it sound like they thought this independently rather than because she had told them she had.

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
4 the tampering would have to be of a kind that was not obvious to investigators (basically, what else is there apart from knocking a hole in it?)
What kind of kayak is it? Did the kayak sink, and he failed to get out of it, or did he drown swimming to shore? The water was apparently dangerously cold.

I am no expert, but it's definitely possible to sink some types of them without knocking any holes. You just need to get enough water inside. Some of them have drain plugs that can be removed. A bit of googling indicates that that can cause them to take on significant amounts of water. Apparently some kind of plug had been removed:

"The kayak, he said, had been missing a plug in its stern for some time, which did not affect its buoyancy"
http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-kayak-...13-gh0hmu.html

Hard to know what to make of that without knowing more.

Incidentally, she apparently posted pictures of herself doing cartwheels. I'm told that is significant.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 10:32 AM   #7
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Her English doesn't sound bad at all to me (26 seconds and again at 1:57):
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Apparently he capsized and wasn't wearing a life jacket in freezing choppy water.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 11:24 AM   #8
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Her English doesn't sound bad at all to me (26 seconds and again at 1:57):
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Apparently he capsized and wasn't wearing a life jacket in freezing choppy water.
Suicide, then.

Could she be certain or nearly certain he would die in those circs?

ETA I agree - her English sounds fine. Why, if you go to all the trouble of bumping off your b/f, would you give your relief and happiness away so publicly? Surely, the thing to do is adopt the manner of a bereaved person. I attach very little weight to her behaviour, post-drowning.

Last edited by anglolawyer; 14th May 2015 at 11:30 AM.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 11:42 AM   #9
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Could that not be a fault of the article, rather than the case? They mention inconsistencies in her statements, but don't say what they were. Lots of stuff is clearly left out.

From a related link, she says that:
"She also said that the police thought she had tampered with Mr Viafore's kayak, which has been recovered."
http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-kayak-...13-gh0hmu.html
Which makes it sound like they thought this independently rather than because she had told them she had.


What kind of kayak is it? Did the kayak sink, and he failed to get out of it, or did he drown swimming to shore? The water was apparently dangerously cold.

I am no expert, but it's definitely possible to sink some types of them without knocking any holes. You just need to get enough water inside. Some of them have drain plugs that can be removed. A bit of googling indicates that that can cause them to take on significant amounts of water. Apparently some kind of plug had been removed:

"The kayak, he said, had been missing a plug in its stern for some time, which did not affect its buoyancy"
http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-kayak-...13-gh0hmu.html

Hard to know what to make of that without knowing more.

Incidentally, she apparently posted pictures of herself doing cartwheels. I'm told that is significant.
Thanks shuttit. Interesting article. In particular, he had been bankrupt and was not loaded and she was not thought to be a beneficiary of his life insurance. So where's her motive? Two previous boyfriends or husbands had escaped with their lives. Also, she wrote in her diary she wished he was dead. Moral: people should not keep diaries.

There is a link in the article to an interview she gave to Channel 12. Unfortunately, it's behind a wall.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 11:43 AM   #10
NotJesus
Unsaviory
 
NotJesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,629
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
From a related link, she says that:
"She also said that the police thought she had tampered with Mr Viafore's kayak, which has been recovered."
http://www.smh.com.au/world/a-kayak-...13-gh0hmu.html
Also from that link:

"Some of the couple's closest friends say they cannot fathom how Ms Graswald, who is about five feet tall, could have killed Mr Viafore, who was 187 centimetres."

By tampering with his kayak, obviously. How else does a woman who's just over 1500 millimeters tall kill a man who stands 1/108th of a furlong?
NotJesus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 12:04 PM   #11
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,571
Originally Posted by NotJesus View Post
Also from that link:

"Some of the couple's closest friends say they cannot fathom how Ms Graswald, who is about five feet tall, could have killed Mr Viafore, who was 187 centimetres."

By tampering with his kayak, obviously. How else does a woman who's just over 1500 millimeters tall kill a man who stands 1/108th of a furlong?
While on the river side near rapids, Push him in the freezing water of a rapid while smiling at him, then push the kayak in the rapid, and pretend he capsized. If there is nothing to hold on he would have been falling into the freezing water, with no life jacket and there is no need for excessive force, tampering, or even being tall , bulky or anything. heck it does not even need to be planned and she simply did not tell the truth of the accident once she realized he was dead. And that pretty much explain the absence of life jacket.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 12:47 PM   #12
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
While on the river side near rapids, Push him in the freezing water of a rapid while smiling at him, then push the kayak in the rapid, and pretend he capsized. If there is nothing to hold on he would have been falling into the freezing water, with no life jacket and there is no need for excessive force, tampering, or even being tall , bulky or anything. heck it does not even need to be planned and she simply did not tell the truth of the accident once she realized he was dead. And that pretty much explain the absence of life jacket.
Are there rapids in that stretch of the Hudson?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 12:52 PM   #13
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,571
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Are there rapids in that stretch of the Hudson?
*shrug* I am not sure the scenario needs rapid really. If the water are freezing enough, that could be enough to make it difficult for an adult to swim.

The point is : we can make up multiple scenario of innocence and culpability, but it all depends on what the investigation shows and what a prosecutor can present and what would be accepted.

Over which we have no idea or influence.

So speculating is as good as it goes.

Last edited by Aepervius; 14th May 2015 at 12:53 PM.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 01:14 PM   #14
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
So far as I can see, there is clearly not enough reliable evidence in these articles and YouTube videos to form an opinion. There seem to be some weak arguments being put forward by her lawyer - the poor English, maybe she misunderstood, one in particular. The plug not impacting buoyancy is something that they are presumably going to have to back up. Those plugs being missing certainly can cause the kayak to slowly fill with water to the point where it sinks if the water is choppy. Maybe on the model of kayak in this case, it's different.

A few posts ago it was said that apparently she isn't a recipient on the life insurance. Says who?
Quote:
Graswald is facing a second degree murder charge with attorneys saying she stood to receive $250,000 from life insurance policies.
http://metro.co.uk/2015/05/14/killer...e-die-5196495/

Honestly, I don't see why one would be particularly disposed to see this as a miscarriage of justice. If he drowned, it looks as if it may well have been through going out without a lifejacket in freezing water in a kayak that had a hole in it. It doesn't seem like a great stretch for her to engineer those circumstances if she put her mind to it. We'll have to see what evidence they have. For her sake, I hope she has stronger arguments than it all being down to her poor English.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 01:41 PM   #15
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
So far as I can see, there is clearly not enough reliable evidence in these articles and YouTube videos to form an opinion. There seem to be some weak arguments being put forward by her lawyer - the poor English, maybe she misunderstood, one in particular. The plug not impacting buoyancy is something that they are presumably going to have to back up. Those plugs being missing certainly can cause the kayak to slowly fill with water to the point where it sinks if the water is choppy. Maybe on the model of kayak in this case, it's different.

A few posts ago it was said that apparently she isn't a recipient on the life insurance. Says who?

http://metro.co.uk/2015/05/14/killer...e-die-5196495/

Honestly, I don't see why one would be particularly disposed to see this as a miscarriage of justice. If he drowned, it looks as if it may well have been through going out without a lifejacket in freezing water in a kayak that had a hole in it. It doesn't seem like a great stretch for her to engineer those circumstances if she put her mind to it. We'll have to see what evidence they have. For her sake, I hope she has stronger arguments than it all being down to her poor English.
We could use a look at the text of her 'confession'. Since they weren't married, she would not inherit the insurance proceeds unless he had made a will or nominated her as the beneficiary in the policy. Well, that's English law anyway.

How would she engineer his non-use of a life jacket. Also, if you put to sea in a kayak with the plug out, how long before you notice? If you were still close to shore, the plan wouldn't work.

It's obviously too early to dub this case a miscarriage of justice. For one thing, there hasn't been a trial yet. But that's no reason not to mark it as a candidate. It has some features which turn up in such cases, one of them being a tendency to assign excessive weight to supposedly suspicious behaviour (see Knox, Dewani, Routier - all innocent, albeit one of them is on Death Row so not everyone agrees, obviously). There is a thread on that very topic right here.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 01:41 PM   #16
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
This might be interesting.

Angelika Graswald told New York police that she tampered with her fiance's kayak before his death on the Hudson River and that it "felt good knowing he was going to die", prosecutors have told a bail hearing in Orange County.

Ms Graswald, 35, stands accused of intentionally drowning fiance Vincent Viafore while the couple were kayaking together last month. She made a desperate emergency call from the river, saying Mr Viafore, 46, had capsized and she could not find him in the cold, choppy water.

In the days after the kayak trip, she created a flurry of Facebook posts that made her seem less grieving than liberated.


So, we have weird behaviour (guilty) a confession (guilty) and a motive i.e. insurance money and maybe freedom from unwanted relationship (guilty). Does it pass the smell test? No. Because:

1 tampering with a kayak is not a sure way of killing a person
2 if you fail, you may not fail safe
3 nothing in the article about a recovered kayak showing evidence of tampering
4 the tampering would have to be of a kind that was not obvious to investigators (basically, what else is there apart from knocking a hole in it?)
5 English not first language so 'confession' may not be all it seems

Man, you guys (in the US) need to move to 100% taped interviews with lawyer present. Does Poughkeepsie have the DP?
The bolded confuses me, as the guy was in the kayak, somehow got out of the kayak and drowned.

I have no opinion on the case as described, but I'm interested in your comment.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 01:51 PM   #17
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
The bolded confuses me, as the guy was in the kayak, somehow got out of the kayak and drowned.

I have no opinion on the case as described, but I'm interested in your comment.
First, I know next to nothing about kayaking, which is why discussing these cases here is useful, because someone who does will generally show up and explain, to the benefit of all. In fact, the online knowledge pool may well be a more powerful analytical machine than the investigative authorities of the state - but that's another story.

What I meant was: if I tamper with your parachute (and the reserve), you will almost certainly die but pulling the plug out of a kayak seems far less certain. The guy might push off from the shingle, notice water coming in straightaway and turn back. Being still alive, he might also wonder what happened to the plug. Presumably, they aren't designed to come out by accident. He might be the careful type who checks such things and might know very well what has happened. He might go to the police. IOW if you are going to pull something like this you want a high chance of success because you don't want the victim to be around to ask awkward questions.

But, maybe that's all wrong and no kayaker would thing a missing plug surprising. Maybe it happens all the time. We need some kayakers to wade in.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:00 PM   #18
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Does it pass the smell test? No. Because:

1 tampering with a kayak is not a sure way of killing a person
2 if you fail, you may not fail safe

3 nothing in the article about a recovered kayak showing evidence of tampering
4 the tampering would have to be of a kind that was not obvious to investigators (basically, what else is there apart from knocking a hole in it?)
5 English not first language so 'confession' may not be all it seems

Man, you guys (in the US) need to move to 100% taped interviews with lawyer present. Does Poughkeepsie have the DP?
I'm not sure how the bolded points are meaningful. Criminals carry out risky, stupid, and implausible plans all the time.

Point three also has me scratching my head. Media articles often omit the details we are most interested in, or get them wrong, etc. I would never try to parse a media report of a criminal investigation for any subtle nuances about what did or did not happen.

And the parenthetical question in point 4 is actually the heart of the matter, isn't it? What kind of tampering could it be? Placing it as a strike against the claim is just appealing to ignorance.

Finally, point 5 is neither here nor there. I really don't think any of these points have a place in a "smell test" of the claim.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:07 PM   #19
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
We could use a look at the text of her 'confession'.
Are we likely to see that any time soon?

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Since they weren't married, she would not inherit the insurance proceeds unless he had made a will or nominated her as the beneficiary in the policy. Well, that's English law anyway.
I don't know. Either she inherits, or she doesn't. There doesn't seem to be any way for us to check. Presumably its fairly easy for the lawyers etc... to find this out.

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
How would she engineer his non-use of a life jacket.
I don't know. Honestly, it seems like your imagination only works in one direction. Maybe she made sure one of the lifejackets was left at home. "Gosh darn it, I was sure I packed it, and I was so looking forward to this...".

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Also, if you put to sea in a kayak with the plug out, how long before you notice? If you were still close to shore, the plan wouldn't work.
Are you putting any effort into finding this out at all? One Google search and I found this:
http://www.fishingfury.com/20130726/...angerous-turn/
In 10 minutes he took on 4 gallons of water and claims to have been unaware he had a serious problem. He estimates he would have sunk in less than half an hour.

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
It's obviously too early to dub this case a miscarriage of justice. For one thing, there hasn't been a trial yet. But that's no reason not to mark it as a candidate. It has some features which turn up in such cases, one of them being a tendency to assign excessive weight to supposedly suspicious behaviour (see Knox, Dewani, Routier - all innocent, albeit one of them is on Death Row so not everyone agrees, obviously). There is a thread on that very topic right here.
I haven't seen the case against her. I have no idea how much of it is down to behaviour. I wouldn't be surprised if her lawyer says that, along with her bad English possibly being the cause of her mistakenly saying she had killed her husband.

Last edited by shuttlt; 14th May 2015 at 02:08 PM.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:26 PM   #20
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
What I meant was: if I tamper with your parachute (and the reserve), you will almost certainly die but pulling the plug out of a kayak seems far less certain.

The guy might push off from the shingle, notice water coming in straightaway and turn back. Being still alive, he might also wonder what happened to the plug. Presumably, they aren't designed to come out by accident. He might be the careful type who checks such things and might know very well what has happened. He might go to the police. IOW if you are going to pull something like this you want a high chance of success because you don't want the victim to be around to ask awkward questions.
For one thing, the water would come in fairly slowly at first. For another, there is often water sloshing about in a kayak. I'm not sure that it is necessarily too easy to estimate how much when you are in it (I kayak, but not very often, so I am prepared to be corrected). You site lower in the water. Sitting lower in the water, it is progressively harder to make progress and you take on water faster.

The plug is removed to drain the kayak of water. If you believe her story, then surely you are claiming that saying that through some accident the plug wasn't replaced, or fell out, and was lost is a plausible story? He might be the careful type and checks, or he might not. Presumably, she knows/knew which type he was. We don't. Presumably she would be able to make a judgement about whether she would be able to style her way out of it afterwards if it didn't work out, we clearly aren't in such a position.

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
But, maybe that's all wrong and no kayaker would thing a missing plug surprising. Maybe it happens all the time. We need some kayakers to wade in.
I'm not a sufficiently experienced kayaker to act as an authority here.

It hardly matters though unless you think that a problem with his kayak causing his death is so implausible that that is a central plank of why you think this is another Knox case.

Last edited by shuttlt; 14th May 2015 at 02:29 PM.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:44 PM   #21
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Quote:
After Mr Viafore’s kayak filled with water, he held on for five to 10 minutes, and witnesses have said she intentionally capsized her own kayak.
http://metro.co.uk/2015/05/14/killer...e-die-5196495/

Quote:
Mohl added that Graswald knew she was the first name on Viafore's two insurance policies and 'talked about what she could do with the money', estimated to be around $250,000.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-policies.html
Apologies for quoting the mail. I really want to know now what the source of the "she wasn't on the insurance" claim is.

And from the same Mail article:
Quote:
But according to detectives, her story became inconsistent - and witnesses said they saw her push him in.
I can only find that claim in the Mail.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:48 PM   #22
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,051
Quote:
....There were initial photos of the couple together and inspirational bits of poetry, then selfies in which she is practically beaming, a video clip of her doing a cartwheel, a racy cartoon depicting an old married couple. Less than a week after he died, she turned up at a local pub with their friends and taking the stage to sing Hotel California.
I do hope that they have more than this.

What's practically beaming? Doing a cartwheel-shades of Amanda? Singing Hotel California! Scandalous!!!
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:54 PM   #23
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
First, I know next to nothing about kayaking, which is why discussing these cases here is useful, because someone who does will generally show up and explain, to the benefit of all. In fact, the online knowledge pool may well be a more powerful analytical machine than the investigative authorities of the state - but that's another story.

What I meant was: if I tamper with your parachute (and the reserve), you will almost certainly die but pulling the plug out of a kayak seems far less certain. The guy might push off from the shingle, notice water coming in straightaway and turn back. Being still alive, he might also wonder what happened to the plug. Presumably, they aren't designed to come out by accident. He might be the careful type who checks such things and might know very well what has happened. He might go to the police. IOW if you are going to pull something like this you want a high chance of success because you don't want the victim to be around to ask awkward questions.

But, maybe that's all wrong and no kayaker would thing a missing plug surprising. Maybe it happens all the time. We need some kayakers to wade in.
Murder-by-sabotage-of-the-kayak is a new one on me, I have no kayaking (is that a word?) experience, but I know that the old eggshell skull rule is still in effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull

So a criminal case where somebody did something to a party that led to the death of that other party, even if it might not sound like murder on the face of it could still end up being a murder case.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 02:57 PM   #24
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
I do hope that they have more than this.

What's practically beaming? Doing a cartwheel-shades of Amanda? Singing Hotel California! Scandalous!!!
The defence say it's pretty much just that and her bad English.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 03:26 PM   #25
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm not sure how the bolded points are meaningful. Criminals carry out risky, stupid, and implausible plans all the time.
They do? Tell us more. You can leave out risky if you like, since murder is intrinsically risky. Stupid comes in many flavours. This type of stupid includes a method of killing which seems to be highly uncertain and might if unsuccessful attract suspicion. Please focus on that type with one of two illustrative examples.

Quote:
Point three also has me scratching my head. Media articles often omit the details we are most interested in, or get them wrong, etc. I would never try to parse a media report of a criminal investigation for any subtle nuances about what did or did not happen.
That is very skeptical of you. People here seem to have difficulty forming provisional opinions and holding onto the fact that they are provisional. The case is new. There may be damning, conclusive evidence against her, I don't know. I'm open to the possibility. But you have to admit, it's an unusual crime. That, by itself, should get a proper skeptic thinking.

Quote:
And the parenthetical question in point 4 is actually the heart of the matter, isn't it? What kind of tampering could it be? Placing it as a strike against the claim is just appealing to ignorance.
Well, we have been told there's a plug. And that it takes hours to sink a kayak with the plug out. That does not sound to me like a great way of bumping someone off. And how will they ever prove it (absent the confession of which we need more info)?8

Quote:
Finally, point 5 is neither here nor there. I really don't think any of these points have a place in a "smell test" of the claim.
Heh, you obviously haven't followed the Amanda Knox case. Anyway, that point has been covered in the course of this discussion (which is what it's for) - her English seems fine.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 03:28 PM   #26
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Murder-by-sabotage-of-the-kayak is a new one on me, I have no kayaking (is that a word?) experience, but I know that the old eggshell skull rule is still in effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggshell_skull

So a criminal case where somebody did something to a party that led to the death of that other party, even if it might not sound like murder on the face of it could still end up being a murder case.
The egg shell skull principle does not seem to have any obvious applicability here. Can you explain what you mean?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 03:57 PM   #27
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
That is very skeptical of you. People here seem to have difficulty forming provisional opinions and holding onto the fact that they are provisional. The case is new. There may be damning, conclusive evidence against her, I don't know. I'm open to the possibility. But you have to admit, it's an unusual crime. That, by itself, should get a proper skeptic thinking.
Where is the need to come to a decision, provisional or otherwise here? I wouldn't be particularly surprised if she turned out innocent, or guilty. One might as well ask a magic 8 ball for an opinion.

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Well, we have been told there's a plug. And that it takes hours to sink a kayak with the plug out.
Where are you getting "hours" to sink from? The quote I found had the man guessing he'd have sunk in 40 minutes. I'd have thought you would have stopped making any headway long before you sank though.

One thing that mildly puzzles me. Supposedly it was on the return trip that he sank. If the cause of the sinking was taking on water, why didn't that happen on the way out? Even if he was just lucky on the way out, you'd have thought he would have still taken on a lot of water... I don't understand how he would fail to notice that.

If the police think he sank because of the plug had been removed, maybe they think it needed to have happened after the trip out?

Last edited by shuttlt; 14th May 2015 at 04:00 PM.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 04:20 PM   #28
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
Where is the need to come to a decision, provisional or otherwise here? I wouldn't be particularly surprised if she turned out innocent, or guilty. One might as well ask a magic 8 ball for an opinion.
There isn't any need and I haven't suggested there was.


Quote:
Where are you getting "hours" to sink from? The quote I found had the man guessing he'd have sunk in 40 minutes. I'd have thought you would have stopped making any headway long before you sank though.

One thing that mildly puzzles me. Supposedly it was on the return trip that he sank. If the cause of the sinking was taking on water, why didn't that happen on the way out? Even if he was just lucky on the way out, you'd have thought he would have still taken on a lot of water... I don't understand how he would fail to notice that.

If the police think he sank because of the plug had been removed, maybe they think it needed to have happened after the trip out?
I am sorry, but I don't follow. Where are you getting this trip out and trip back from? Oh wait, I get it. Is your idea that she maybe pulled the plug after they were already way out on the water? Is that actually possible? Presumably the plug is right in the bottom of the boat. Or is it at one end and you empty it by tipping the boat up? I guess in that case the plug could be out of the water or accessible anyway. So she pulls the plug and he slowly fills up on the way back and sinks. Neat.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 04:33 PM   #29
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
I am sorry, but I don't follow. Where are you getting this trip out and trip back from? Oh wait, I get it. Is your idea that she maybe pulled the plug after they were already way out on the water?
It's on a bunch of the reports:
Quote:
The couple set off in separate kayaks about 4:15 p.m. and came ashore at Banneman's Island, where they spent about two hours, authorities said. On the return voyage, Viafore's kayak began taking on water and capsized.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2221200

Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Is that actually possible? Presumably the plug is right in the bottom of the boat. Or is it at one end and you empty it by tipping the boat up?
On the end in all the ones I've seen. Google has pictures. The boat would fill up pretty damn fast if there was an open hole below the water line.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2015, 05:35 PM   #30
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
The egg shell skull principle does not seem to have any obvious applicability here. Can you explain what you mean?
Pretty clear - Joe blow non-professional fighter gets in a beef with someone and throws a half-ass punch at a guy that kills him is still on the hook for the homicide no matter what his intention was at the time he threw the punch or whether or not he believed the punch might kill the victim.

If Ms. Graswald screwed with the kayak in question and that fact is proven, even if she had no intention to kill the victim and didn't think for a moment that screwing with the kayak could cause his death, she could still be held culpable for his death.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 12:10 AM   #31
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Pretty clear - Joe blow non-professional fighter gets in a beef with someone and throws a half-ass punch at a guy that kills him is still on the hook for the homicide no matter what his intention was at the time he threw the punch or whether or not he believed the punch might kill the victim.

If Ms. Graswald screwed with the kayak in question and that fact is proven, even if she had no intention to kill the victim and didn't think for a moment that screwing with the kayak could cause his death, she could still be held culpable for his death.
Ah, OK. I don't think that's an egg shell skull situation TBH. In your first case, an assault is elevated to manslaughter by the principle but in the second it is (possibly) reduced from murder by her lack of intent. Your first example works better without an intent to kill, which confuses the issue. In ESS cases there is usually no such intent.

Getting back to our case, suppose she removed the plug intending to 'teach him a lesson' or some such but with no subjective intent to kill or cause serious harm. But suppose also that on the evidence of all experts, the inevitable result of what she did was to condemn him to death. There is a doctrine in criminal law in which the accused is presumed to intend the ordinary and natural consequences of their acts. She might go down for murder because of that.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 12:13 AM   #32
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
It's on a bunch of the reports:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2221200


On the end in all the ones I've seen. Google has pictures. The boat would fill up pretty damn fast if there was an open hole below the water line.
Ah, thanks. So the idea, presumably, is that she took the plug out when they were on the island. That is starting to make more sense. Since the waters were cold and choppy she may have figured there was a good likelihood he would fill up on the way back and, if not, so what? The plug came out. **** happens. Don't look at me.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 01:25 AM   #33
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Ah, thanks. So the idea, presumably, is that she took the plug out when they were on the island. That is starting to make more sense. Since the waters were cold and choppy she may have figured there was a good likelihood he would fill up on the way back and, if not, so what? The plug came out. **** happens. Don't look at me.
That's my guess on the police theory.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 01:58 AM   #34
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
That's my guess on the police theory.
It's gonna be tough to prove without that confession. Almost the perfect murder I would say. So what did she say, and why - Jeez, how hard can it be to stick to your story?
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 02:29 AM   #35
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
It's gonna be tough to prove without that confession. Almost the perfect murder I would say. So what did she say, and why - Jeez, how hard can it be to stick to your story?
I guess it may depend on things like what exactly the witnesses saw, and how bad her confession is. There also seems to be a Knox like issue of a delayed 911 call.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 02:29 AM   #36
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
One more thing about egg shell skull cases. They depend on the perp not knowing about the vulnerability. It's a different ball game if the perp does know. Here, there is nothing our suspect does not know about the victim's vulnerability to death by drowning and/or hypothermia (or whatever you die from in cold water) and, what's more, there is nothing special about that vulnerability.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 02:33 AM   #37
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
I guess it may depend on things like what exactly the witnesses saw, and how bad her confession is. There also seems to be a Knox like issue of a delayed 911 call.
I guess she couldn't call until she made dry land and found a phone. Was there coverage in the area, or a red telephone box like this one?

anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 03:15 AM   #38
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11,941
From the thread so far, she is a feisty smooth talking and very articulate young woman. I am amazed any one could have suggested her language fluency was a factor.
However, her behaviour afterwards suggests innocence not guilt. Very remniscent of Knox, Lundy, Casey Anthony*, unless double bluffing all the way.
I think 50/50 is a good call so far.

* Casey Anthony comes into orbit because her child's death was almost certainly accidental, so behaviour is difficult to parse.

Last edited by Samson; 15th May 2015 at 03:21 AM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 05:05 AM   #39
anglolawyer
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Guilford
Posts: 13,037
On the question of the confession, I would be surprised if she were guilty and confessed. If you have what it takes to plan and execute a murder and recover yourself so much afterwards as to be happy about it, I can't see what a few hours in police custody could do to penetrate the defences. She isnt young and vulnerable, nor is she in an overly alien environment. I want to see the terms and circumstances in which she supposedly confessed and the text itself of course.
anglolawyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2015, 05:23 AM   #40
shuttlt
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,096
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
I guess she couldn't call until she made dry land and found a phone. Was there coverage in the area, or a red telephone box like this one?
If I understand it correctly, she watched him drown, waited 20 minutes, called 911 on her mobile and ended the call by throwing herself into the water.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.