Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by liquidify 1834 days ago
The first thing that comes to mind after reading this article is that they don't have enough evidence to conclude that the fact that there were sperm in the victim that weren't from her boyfriend actually means that they were murdered by the creator of said sperm.

It seems likely, but calling the case 'solved' just based on that is a bit of a stretch to me. Maybe the article is leaving out some important details.
1 comments
thaumasiotes 1834 days ago
Come on, we all know that any woman who cheats on her boyfriend is immediately murdered by the same guy she cheated with.
link
vmception 1834 days ago
Just like we know that the spouse that has a life insurance policy opened on them is immediately murdered by the surviving spouse, instead of the life insurance agent

We don't! We just assume!

link
geoduck14 1833 days ago
I watch a lot of Forensic Files, and one of the tropes is "the spouse had a $30k life insurance policy, therefore he/she had motive".

I've always wondered who is motivated to murder by as little as $30k. Sure you can murder for NON financial reasons, but if money is top of mind - $30k, really?

link