[Quanticles]

The background to this case seems a little one-sided, is there anything that explains how he was convicted?

It's supposed to be "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". Supposedly the only evidence was another person's testimony, who was going to get the death penalty if they didn't (i.e., they were compelled). Even without being compelled, it's still reasonable to believe that the person may be lying. There must be more to this....

[ellyagg]

I read this yesterday and it was useful:

http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/10/10-6244.pdf

[MichaelGG]

Wow. No one understands how to judge probability. The prosecution brings up the lack of fingerprints at the crime scene as evidence of guilt. One can only imagine if there were fingerprints, they'd also contribute to guilt.

Later on, the prosecution notes the lack of violence while in jail as evidence for guilt because "he knows we've listed ... that he will be violent. He's not stupid." So his violence or lack thereof while imprisoned both count towards his guilt. That's just wrong.

On the other side, his story doesn't seem to hold up to much. Not that this is good enough to deal death to him, but one can see where the prosecutor is coming from. The guy admitted to covering up the murder, and there doesn't appear to be any plausible excuse.

[vfrogger]

Thanks for the link. There's some VERY suspect behavior by this guy. Is it beyond a shadow of a doubt? I don't know, but lying that the boss was running an errand to another employee the morning after he was murdered certainly seems to align closer to the "hitman's" side of the story. Now couple that with another employee being told by the boss that he was going to run the hotel if this guy got fired for embezzlement, and you have a motive, the guy lying about his boss's whereabouts after the murder, and the hitman stating that they split $4000 taken from the bosses car, and they both had well over $1000 in cash their possession when they were arrested. Honestly, it sounds like the only evidence that this guy is innocent is that another convict said that the hitman bragged about "setting the guy up". That is one heck of a setup if true.

[MichaelGG]

It's entirely possible that the one that actually did the murder (Justin Sneed) came up with the idea, proposed it, and Glossip just went along with it or sanctioned it ("great idea, here's how we can do it"). Their actions would be basically identical on the outside right?

[vfrogger]

excellent point. I do suppose that being an accomplice to murder probably carries a less severe punishment than hiring a hitman and being the mastermind behind it. I'm not a big fan of the death penalty in general, and wish it wouldn't be used in today's society. But claiming that this guy is "innocent" seems to be a bit of a stretch to me. It's amazing how one-sided the articles I've read about this have been.

[waterlesscloud]

Thanks for that! The narrative recounting of facts at the start is indeed very useful.

[achr2]

"Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in the eyes of a jury"

[monochromatic]

pg seems to have read one side of the story and been completely convinced. :-/

edit: Downvote all you like, but his discussion doesn't even mention any dissenting views. Nothing is one-sided.

[BinaryIdiot]

I think you're being downvoted because you're assuming PG has only read one side. Perhaps he already read the court papers making its way around the internet or possibly other sources? As far as I could tell he never said what source(s) he read, etc.

[monochromatic]

Fair enough, he never said what exactly he'd read. But if you're trying to write a persuasive piece, you address the other side's arguments/positions. It's just polemic otherwise.

[BinaryIdiot]

> But if you're trying to write a persuasive piece, you address the other side's arguments/positions

Twitter's 140 characters don't really give you the space to do to really any of that. It's a great place to blast opinions and occasionally be heard but it's awful for debate or persuasion so most don't try and when you do try...it's just painful.

[monochromatic]

I was referring to this[1], discussed here[2].

[1] http://pg.posthaven.com/the-case-of-richard-glossip

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10293793

[elektromekatron]

I think you are underestimating polemic.

[elektromekatron]

A Mobius strip is, and it seems in this story you whichever direction you take, you end up back at a single mans testimony for a plea.

[monochromatic]

> Mobius strip

Cute. But it's by no means clear that this is some miscarriage of justice.

https://www.readfrontier.com/investigation/two-truths-and-a-...

[waterlesscloud]

I'd appreciate a link to that myself. All the stories now seem to be extremely one-sided, and I seriously doubt it's that simple. It never is.

[hyperliner]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/courts/richard-glossip-case-h...

The victim and family's side