Which is very like my part of the world, of course, except that the grits in Mississippi are inferior to those in Tennessee.
Forgive me, but that seems silly. The OP is explicit that the police have no idea (or claim not to have any idea) what the motive for the crime is. It seems unlikely that persons who know themselves to be innocent of the crime, but who also know they have motive, would go out of their way to make themselves a suspect. Victims of molestation come forward when a living offender is accused of a crime and they decide to support the first accuser.
Also, you point out that Rutherford worked with thousand of kids. I think that’s right, since he was a Little League coach as well as a teacher. It beggars belief that the police will question all of them. They’ll need some way to narrow the parameters, which is probably part fo the reason Jesse didn’t fly in.
Justin, you don’t care for my hypos, 'tis clear. That’s your right. But it mystifies me that you continue to read them and snark on them. Nonetheless I shan’t complain, as posting hereabouts is your right; rather I’ll assume that you’re under some gypsy curse (like that one that castrated Angelus) that compels you to read things that annoy you, and shake my head in sadness at the injustice of the Roma.
No, I would not turn him in for this. If the police came to me, I would answer any questions honestly, but I wouldn’t take the initiative. However, if Jesse told me about his crime, I would be in a difficult position, and would need to research laws on being a conspirator after the fact or some such. So basically, I would totally avoid the topic with him, keep any suspicions walled in my head as “crazy thoughts” and pretend I didn’t have any suspicions.
If Jesse were a killer of random and/or innocent people, I would have no difficulty turning him in. So, if he kills a prostitute/robs a guy walking by and kills him/shoots up a business/kills his girlfriend over a fight/performs a hit and run/etc, I would go to the police if my suspicions seemed valid.
This all assumes I believe Jesse was molested by this guy. Since Jesse is a very close friend, I think I would be able to get a reasonable sense of his truthfulness.
Yes: you think there’s a chance he’s a murderer. You presumably didn’t think that before. Are you saying that would not affect your opinion of his trustworthiness?
As I’ve explained before, I don’t care for most of them. But the ones that hit the mark and are interesting stick with me even after I step away from the computer. So that’s why I read all of them. And I snark because the ones that miss usually add so many ridiculous details and conditions that there’s often only one answer.
For example, this one. The only way Jesse’s friend could obtain all the information he’s obtained is through a series of wild coincidences and a series of confessions from a suspected murderer who has otherwise been super careful. And because I’m a glutton for punishment, I’ll explain.
You’ve established…
that Jesse lives on one coast and Rutherford lives on the other.
that Jesse’s friend did not grow up with Jesse in his hometown.
that Jesse drove cross-country to his hometown and told his friend his travel plans.
that Jesse had a 9mm and reported it stolen a few days ago and that Jesse told his friend this.
that Jesse was looking up criminal forensics in the library on two separate occasions and that his friend recognized him and that his friend saw what he was looking up.
that Jesse sold the car immediately upon returning home.
That’s too many coincidences. Jesse clearly murdered Rutherford (and for reason filled his friend in on his entire plan except for the part where he says “I KILLED HIM!”). The real question of this hypo is “Do you turn in your friend for murdering the man who molested him?”
You got no witnesses that can identify the shooter. You have no physical evidence placing Jesse at the scene of the crime, you have no ballistics matching Jesse’s gun to the murder weapon, you probably do not have Jesse’s gun to compare to shell casings/bullets from the crime scene, you do not have his car to examine for forensic evidence, and you’ve really got nothing more than a string of coincidences and a hunch. You don’t actually KNOW much of anything. You think a bunch of things might have happened. Maybe.
I would almost certainly tell the cops about my concern, though anonymously. That’s a heck of a lot of coincidences. No way would I ask Jesse any more questions about the subject. I’d probably avoid him for a little while – oh, gee, I can’t get a beer tonight, I’m working late. And if it seems that police lose interest in him as a suspect, I’d move on and hang out with him again, with some guilt that I suspected him.
But if he was later caught, but I hadn’t said anything, I would feel as though I acted in a very, very immoral way. If one of my friends is going to commit murder, that doesn’t obligate me to play dumb.
No, I didn’t establish that. I said absolutely nothing about where the friend grew up, nor about how long the friend and Jesse have known one another. I also stipulated that Jesse’s telling the friend his travel plans was either an amateurish mistake (if he’s guilty) or bad luck (if this is all just a coincidence). And though I wrote the OP with the thought that Jesse was likely guilty, it seems to me that a careful planner wouldn’t tell.
Coincidences happen. Fifteen years or so ago, I flew to meet the family of the girl I was dating. By coincidence they lived in the same metro area of a friend I hadn’t seen since college and had been longing to meet again; I knew that going in and had made plans to see her. I didn’t know that another college acquaintance of mine lived in that city: the person who, on seeing me with a date, was most likely to stop what she was doing to come over and say, “Excuse me, miss, you don’t know me, but I know Skaldie, and he’s a right bastard.” It was just bad luck.
Anyway, you seem to be wrong about their being only one possible answer, as there are people saying “Yeah, clearly Jesse’s guilty, and I’m dropping a dime on him ASAP”; people saying “Yeah, Jesse’s guilty, but he killed a fucking child molester so the most I’ll do is buy him a beer without saying why”; and people saying “God, I hope he’s not guilty, I have to get more information before I do anything.”
Incidentally, if Jesse is guilty AND has ever read a Mike Hammer novel, that gun literally no longer exists. He’d have disassembled it and ditched the barrel separately from the rest of it.
He’s never lied to me before, as far as the hypothetical tells me. He also told me about the molestation a decade earlier. I hardly think he was setting up an alibi.
I’d have to at least submit an anonymous tip. As much as I loathe child molesters (my father was a pedophile), premeditated vigilante murder a decade or more after the event in question is not something I can be comfortable with IRL (and I like “Dexter”. No, I’m not always completely consistent). I’d also have to consider “OK, if this guy IS a killer, he knows I have enough information and reasoning ability to at least suspect him, especially since close friends of mine would know about my fondness for true-crime stories. I’m now a threat to him, and if he’s killed once, he won’t have as much, if any, problem killing again, so my family and I are now at physical risk”. Then there’s the “could I be tagged as an accomplice or accessory and wind up in prison myself for not speaking up?” part.
Gee, Marley…17, going on 18 years of practicing law, and it never even occurred to me that the cops might solve a crime. Guess I’m really lucky to have a layman that moderates a message board point that out to me. Want to consult on my next trial? I’m sure you have all sorts of valuable insight.
That’s the other thing. All the knowledge that Jesse’s friend has would have to be gleaned from conversations spanning a decade (albeit, most of it confined to the last two months). Unless you’re actively looking for the pattern, a good portion of that info would just evaporate over time.
[QUOTE=Skald the Rhymer]
Coincidences happen. Fifteen years or so ago, I flew to meet the family of the girl I was dating. By coincidence they lived in the same metro area of a friend I hadn’t seen since college and had been longing to meet again; I knew that going in and had made plans to see her. I didn’t know that another college acquaintance of mine lived in that city: the person who, on seeing me with a date, was most likely to stop what she was doing to come over and say, “Excuse me, miss, you don’t know me, but I know Skaldie, and he’s a right bastard.” It was just bad luck.
[/QUOTE]
How is this that weird? I think everyone’s got at least one story of being far from home and running into someone you know. Your story requires Jesse’s friend to be visiting Jesse’s hometown AND see a news report about Rutherford AND remember Rutherford from a drunk conversation over a decade ago AND put all the pieces of Jesse’s recent weird behavior together.
You, winsome signora, are marvelously consistent. Remind me to [del]buy[/del] steal you a beer.
Three things:
I don’t think Jesse actually knows that you can connect him to this crime. Partly because it’s not clear that Jesse committed the crime, but mostly because even if he did, there’s no reason to think that he know Rutherford’s pedophilia has been cured with a nice neat lead injection. It’s been a decade since the drunken confession, and a year since the murder on the other side of the country; he’d have to be clairvoyant to know you know that Rutherford’s dead.
I don’t think you can tagged an accomplice for not sharing a hunch, and hunches are all you have to share. You’d probably be guilty of something if you lied to any police inquiry, but there hasn’t been one.
The problem with going to the police with your hunch is that it destroys the friendship. I can maybe see doing so anonymously as April suggested, but if you’re willing to do that, the friendship’s already toast. I think if you value the friendship and have no real evidence, you have to keep your mouth shut. There’s no investigation you can reasonably do that will not throw a grenade into the weekly poker game.
The hypothetical “you” and Jesse are best friends; it doesn’t seem unlikely that a shocking story told in confidence would stick. It’s not like he was drunk and rambling on about the first car he ever bought.
Anyway you hit my essential point. The big coincidence in the story (there’s always a big coincidence) is that “you” saw the local news report. I don’t see how that’s any different than me running into Tracy Johnson in another state and her still holding a grudge.
I know nothing. If my suspicions are true Jesse isn’t a psycho killer, he’s doing some revenge (which, username notwithstanding, I find distasteful, but I also don’t much care for molesters). It’s a wash in the universal scales of justice.
Besides, if the cops are feeling pressure to solve the case and Jesse DIDN’T do it, I’ve just lost a friend, fed them a patsy with lots of yummy circumstantial evidence, and let a murderer get away. Cops need to do their own work.
On the other hand, maybe Jesse is a psychokiller with a bunch of bodies in his past. But with the info given in the OP who’d know for sure, right?
I don’t tell the cops anything. I’m more loyal to my friends than the law, and if I have no reason to question if he was really molested, I’d consider it justice. Sucks to be the guy’s family, but either he was going to get away with it or he was going to be caught by the police, so even in the best case scenario the family will be hurt. Jesse’s just doing the law’s job.
Do I at least Jesse what to be suspicious?
I’d continue the friendship, cause its kinda cool to know a murderer and maybe I can ask him about it someday.
I choose that way because ultimately, if the law cannot serve justice its up to the rest of us to do so. I usually don’t condone vigilante justice, not because its against the law but because I have little reason to believe the vigilantes are factually correct, but if I trust Jesse then I would trust that he’s doing the right thing
You know about it, you can connect Goold Old Jesse™ to the crime, he knows you can connect him to the crime, you may be the next to die, you wanna have Jesse’s girl, and don’t know where you can find a woman like that.
Post if you get the joke, I like to talk with old people.
Earlier I said that I would have to say something to Jesse about Rutherford’s death. I would probably start by saying something like, ‘I hear Rutherford got suspiciously murdered a while ago.’ Of course this would be during an alcohol fueled conversation.
[QUOTE=Skald the Rhymer]
2) I don’t think you can tagged an accomplice for not sharing a hunch, and hunches are all you have to share. You’d probably be guilty of something if you lied to any police inquiry, but there hasn’t been one.
[/QUOTE]
I thought of this after my first post, but I know a criminal defense lawyer who I would trust with my life, even without lawyer-client confidentiality. I would definitely ask him for advice.
The way I see it is that if Jesse was a psycho killer, I would know. I mean, the guy’s one of my best buddies, I would have at least some inkling if he had to hide multiple bodies. Going by the information given in the OP he’s either not a killer or such a good killer that I’d never know if he killed Rutherford.
This is pretty much how I feel.
ETA: I get the joke, Bosda, but I’m also young enough to like dubstep, so I’m not sure if you’d like to talk to me.
Never in a million years, and I would absolutely remain his friend. I wouldn’t mention I knew to Jesse, but if he told me himself, I’d bake him a Happy Dead Molester cake.
