ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


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 roswell , deathbed , conspiracy theory , aliens

Reply
Old 2nd July 2007, 09:03 AM   #41
JonnyFive
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,459
Originally Posted by Rasmus55 View Post
(snip)

Also, the exception, under the FRE, is called "dying declarations", not death confession. For this to apply, a person would have to believe that death was imminent; a matter of seconds away. Whether he died is actually irrelevant, it is his belief he will die that controls; more the merrier if he actually does die.

(snip)
It's been a few years since I took "law and evidence," and I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I recall as well about the Federal rules, and I would imagine state rules are similar. I'm not familiar with any laws that regards deathbed confessions as any being equivalent to sworn testimony, unless they actually do happen to be sworn testimony.

But, according to the FRE themselves, that only appears to apply to "causes or circumstances" surrounding the death:

Originally Posted by Federal Rules of Evidence - Rule 804(b)
(2) Statement under belief of impending death. In a prosecution for homicide or in a civil action or proceeding, a statement made by a declarant while believing that the declarant's death was imminent, concerning the cause or circumstances of what the declarant believed to be impending death.
(ETA: Emphasis mine)

So it wouldn't even apply if it were deathbed confession, because it has nothing to do with causes of death (IIRC, this rule is to allow in court statements to the effect of "Mr. X just shot me" made by the dying party to someone else). I wonder if there are other statutes regarding this.

And it wasn't even a deathbed confession, so I suppose the issue is moot anyway.
JonnyFive 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 2nd July 2007, 09:30 AM   #42
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
If the affidavit is submitted by a leading citizen of a town, as was the case with the affidavit submitted by Professor Charles Dietrich regarding the cure Edgar Cayce effected regarding Dietrich's daughter Aime, do you think that has the same credibility as an affidavit submitted by the town drunk?
What Beady said.

What sort of pieces of evidence are backing the affidavits?

That was an easy catch...
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto 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 2nd July 2007, 09:56 AM   #43
JonnyFive
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,459
Originally Posted by Correa Neto View Post
What Beady said.

What sort of pieces of evidence are backing the affidavits?

(snip)
Well, in this case I think there's two main pieces of evidence:

-Jack
-Squat
JonnyFive 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 2nd July 2007, 10:10 AM   #44
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by Correa Neto View Post
What Beady said.

What sort of pieces of evidence are backing the affidavits?

That was an easy catch...
So I guess no one has ever been acquitted or convicted based on the credibility of witnesses. Hard evidence is always available, and prosecutors and defense attorneys who round up credible witnesses are just wasting their time.
Rodney 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 2nd July 2007, 10:18 AM   #45
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,578
Strawman...
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto 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 2nd July 2007, 10:39 AM   #46
Beady
Philosopher
 
Beady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 42d 45'23.3"N, 84d 35' 10.8'W, 840'>MSL
Posts: 6,882
Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger View Post
It may not seem like a big distinction to everyone, but from a legal/evidenciary sense, the difference is quite substantial.
Not that great, really. If it could be treated as primary evidence (a statement given under oath, for example), the affidavit could stand alone. As secondary evidence it would need to be corroborated, but that's only a matter of finding at least one more affidavit, an independently-sourced media account, or whatever.
__________________
I don't care what you do to the women and children,
leave me alone!
Beady 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 2nd July 2007, 03:40 PM   #47
Rasmus55
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger View Post
There is a big distinction (legally, at least) between a dying declaration being admissible versus being either assumed as true or "considered true in the absence of contradictory evidence."

That was the point I think he was trying to make. It may not seem like a big distinction to everyone, but from a legal/evidenciary sense, the difference is quite substantial.
Yes, that's right. I am an attorney. The dying declarations exception to the rule against hearsay is one of the most bitterly contested exceptions there is, and for good reason. Even if allowed in, the other side always points out that it is not the same as evidence given under oath. The reason is because it wasn't given under oath. It can be very difficult to get this in as an exception. I've seen attorneys fight tooth and nail over it; you would not believe the power that a dying declaration can have in court. In any case, I wasn't trying to be offensive. It's just that this particular exception always gets my blood running. I think that what you're really getting at with "assumed true" unless proven otherwise is the technique called a rebuttable presumption.
Rasmus55 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 2nd July 2007, 03:44 PM   #48
Rasmus55
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 111
Originally Posted by JonnyFive View Post
It's been a few years since I took "law and evidence," and I'm not a lawyer, but that's what I recall as well about the Federal rules, and I would imagine state rules are similar. I'm not familiar with any laws that regards deathbed confessions as any being equivalent to sworn testimony, unless they actually do happen to be sworn testimony.

But, according to the FRE themselves, that only appears to apply to "causes or circumstances" surrounding the death:

(ETA: Emphasis mine)

So it wouldn't even apply if it were deathbed confession, because it has nothing to do with causes of death (IIRC, this rule is to allow in court statements to the effect of "Mr. X just shot me" made by the dying party to someone else). I wonder if there are other statutes regarding this.

And it wasn't even a deathbed confession, so I suppose the issue is moot anyway.
Yes, that's right. I re-read my post and see that I ommitted that element. It must be about the cause or purpose of the declarant's death. The point being is that it is a very specific exception and is not given under oath; it will be attacked as such.
Rasmus55 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 3rd July 2007, 08:04 AM   #49
JonnyFive
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,459
Originally Posted by Rasmus55 View Post
Yes, that's right. I re-read my post and see that I ommitted that element. It must be about the cause or purpose of the declarant's death. The point being is that it is a very specific exception and is not given under oath; it will be attacked as such.
Definitely. In general, from what I remember, the various exceptions to the FRE pretty much just get the evidence in the door. I don't recall any that elevate that evidence to any status above regular testimony.
JonnyFive 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 3rd July 2007, 09:07 PM   #50
NoZed Avenger
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 11,286
Originally Posted by Beady View Post
Not that great, really. If it could be treated as primary evidence (a statement given under oath, for example), the affidavit could stand alone. As secondary evidence it would need to be corroborated, but that's only a matter of finding at least one more affidavit, an independently-sourced media account, or whatever.

I have to disagree. There is a big difference between saying that a statement is admissible -- meaning the jury can hear it, but is not required to give the statement any particular weight -- and saying that a statement is presumed true, and must be taken as true without a rebuttal.
NoZed Avenger 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 4th July 2007, 02:50 PM   #51
trvlr2
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 832
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
So I guess no one has ever been acquitted or convicted based on the credibility of witnesses. Hard evidence is always available, and prosecutors and defense attorneys who round up credible witnesses are just wasting their time.
Rodney-I am certain persons have been tried based on the credibility of witnesses.
I am just as certain that miscarriage of justice has been done, by the same means.
A court of law does not necessarily seek "truth". Evidence accepted by the court , may not be rigorously extracted
" truth".

If you ever sit on a jury, please remember what I have said.
__________________
Conservatives: Proud Major Supplier of turds to the National Punch Bowl since 1969.
Some people are living legends; Republicans are living lies...
trvlr2 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 8th July 2007, 11:15 AM   #52
Tricky
Briefly immortal
 
Tricky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 44,369
Hey, I didn't realize we had an anniversary coming up. Looks like a big ol' party. Boy, the woo density in Roswell must be pegging the meters.
Quote:
ROSWELL, N.M. — If you truly believe a UFO and its crew of bug-eyed aliens came crashing down here 60 years ago, rest assured: You're not alone.
At least 35,000 people have descended on Roswell this weekend for the 2007 Amazing Roswell UFO Festival to commemorate a purported flying saucer crash on a nearby ranch in July 1947.
They've even got a band with an alian drummer... um... computer generated. But here is the greatest quote. It is so well defines the prototypical UFO believer, and indeed most woo-woos.
Quote:
Guy Malone is one of the official organizers of the weekend event. "There are a lot of views expressed here and I share them all," he says. "Angels, fairies, demons, succubus, ETs and aliens. They might all be the same phenomena."
Yup. They are. Just not the kind of phenomena he's thinking of.
Tricky 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 8th July 2007, 11:46 AM   #53
Warge
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
Hey, I didn't realize we had an anniversary coming up. Looks like a big ol' party. Boy, the woo density in Roswell must be pegging the meters.


They've even got a band with an alian drummer... um... computer generated. But here is the greatest quote. It is so well defines the prototypical UFO believer, and indeed most woo-woos.


Yup. They are. Just not the kind of phenomena he's thinking of.
I'd say it's called schizophrenia or drug-induced hallucinations and/or psychosis.
Warge 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 8th July 2007, 02:38 PM   #54
Astrophotographer
Graduate Poster
 
Astrophotographer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,843
I enjoy where they compare it to a "trekkie" convention. Like "trekkies", some seem to have a problem differentiating between myth and reality.
Astrophotographer 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 8th July 2007, 03:14 PM   #55
delphi_ote
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
Okay. Let me get this straight. For this Super Top Ultra Secret operation, the military ordered coffins from the local undertaker instead of building a few wooden boxes themselves. "They" are capable of detecting our alien overlords and keeping them hidden from everyone, but "they" can't make wooden boxes without expert help?
delphi_ote 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 8th July 2007, 04:07 PM   #56
Warge
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 159
Originally Posted by delphi_ote View Post
Okay. Let me get this straight. For this Super Top Ultra Secret operation, the military ordered coffins from the local undertaker instead of building a few wooden boxes themselves. "They" are capable of detecting our alien overlords and keeping them hidden from everyone, but "they" can't make wooden boxes without expert help?
Well, you can't bury aliens without some kind of standard - I mean, it's not like they were burying dead cattle...
Warge 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 8th July 2007, 04:28 PM   #57
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,260
Originally Posted by Jalbietz View Post
Sounds like this guy either wanted to secure his place in UFO history or he has a wicked sense of humor... or both.
I'll buy that, it was certainly the way my mind went when I read the piece.

"Hmm. How can I ensure my name goes down in history, revered for all time?" Works for me; smart bloke, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
(Of course my theory is that the saucer collided with the Mogul balloon.)
You realise "they" will come and get you now.

Originally Posted by pchams View Post
This will evolve into a fine religion some day.
Hasn't it already? When people are being abducted and probed anally, I think those traditions are right up with censers and large, lowercase "T"s.

Originally Posted by JonnyFive View Post
Well, in this case I think there's two main pieces of evidence:

-Jack
-Squat
That is, after all, the requirement of every conspiracy theory, from god to 9/11 to Roswell, the complete absence of evidence.

If it pleases people to think there are a species of beings, outside of humans themselves, who are stupid enough to be able to cross trillions of kilometres of uncharted space to crash in New Mexico; let them.

That's why UFOs will always endure - easiest to fake, impossible to prove wrong, highly attractive proposition.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist 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 8th July 2007, 07:19 PM   #58
Pope130
Illuminator
 
Pope130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,211
Originally Posted by delphi_ote View Post
Okay. Let me get this straight. For this Super Top Ultra Secret operation, the military ordered coffins from the local undertaker instead of building a few wooden boxes themselves. "They" are capable of detecting our alien overlords and keeping them hidden from everyone, but "they" can't make wooden boxes without expert help?
This is one of the aspects of the story that has bothered me a bit (there are other aspects that have bothered me a whole lot). Not just: "Why couldn't they nail together some boxes?", but "Why couldn't they use a normal coffin?". Were the dead aliens too small to fit? Now, if it was a nine foot tall Kinnamett on the other hand they have a problem.

Robert

Last edited by Pope130; 8th July 2007 at 07:20 PM. Reason: Because I didn't proof read.
Pope130 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 8th July 2007, 08:30 PM   #59
delphi_ote
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by Pope130 View Post
This is one of the aspects of the story that has bothered me a bit (there are other aspects that have bothered me a whole lot). Not just: "Why couldn't they nail together some boxes?", but "Why couldn't they use a normal coffin?". Were the dead aliens too small to fit? Now, if it was a nine foot tall Kinnamett on the other hand they have a problem.

Robert
Good point. Apparently "they" get a little Goldilocks when it comes to transporting alien corpses.
delphi_ote 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 9th July 2007, 10:35 AM   #60
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by pchams View Post
This will evolve into a fine religion some day.
What do you mean "someday"?

I could have sworn there were several already.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

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 03:28 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.