6 ms·

If what is reported is true, then that is really sad. Saleh's assistant Tyrese Haspil stole tens of thousands of dollars from him and instead of reporting him,

by colmvp 6y ago

If what is reported is true, then that is really sad. Saleh's assistant Tyrese Haspil stole tens of thousands of dollars from him and instead of reporting him, he instead created a payment plan to be repaid. Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end.

injb 6y ago
> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. Yes, that's exactly what happened. Lesson: report the crime to the police first. If you want to show compassion and keep the law out of your business, you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges. But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you.
- kazagistar 6y ago
  You can be held in contempt and face jail time for not participating in an investigation. The fifth only applies to self incrimiation, not to incriminating others. Instead, just tell your friends and family.
  - mcny 6y ago
    > You can be held in contempt and face jail time for not participating in an investigation. I anal but isn’t that a pretty slippery slope? Like someone rapes me or tries to kill me and the law will throw me in prison for refusing to relive those moments? Also I’m pretty sure jstor didn’t want to press charges but the overzealous prosecutors did horrible things to Aaron Swartz anyways.
    - JKCalhoun 6y ago
      Bad, spell checker!
    - voxic11 6y ago
      Yes that is exactly the case. Often judges do order witnesses who express reluctance to testify into custody so that they can be sure that they will show up for the trial.
      - bb611 6y ago
        This is extremely rare in the US judicial system, and prosectors tend not to like take cases where the victim or a key witness is no longer willing to testify. Yes, judges and lawyers for both parties in a case can legally compel witnesses to show up and testify, but doing so tends to damage the credibility of the witness, which can be fatal for their testimony.
        kazagistar 6y ago
        https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/05/16/chelsea-manning-sent-back-to-jail-for-refusing-to-testify-in-wikileaks-investigation/ https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/05/16/chelsea-... Its also used to hold political prisoners the government doesn't like in order to punish them.
    - tehwebguy 6y ago
      It's awful but it's real. The district attorney for New Orleans, Leon Cannizzaro, has come under fire for not only issuing "fake subpoenas" that threaten jail time, he's actually arrested the victims and kept them incarcerated until trial in some cases. He's still DA there, somehow.
      - selimthegrim 6y ago
        He’s announced he’s not running for re-election
      - jedberg 6y ago
        It's important to note that the state of Louisiana uses a completely different system of law than the rest of the United States, based off the French civil code. It gives judges and prosecutors a lot of leeway in how they handle cases.
    - braythwayt 6y ago
      It’s complicated. Consider this situation: Alan assaults his partner Beth. He is reported by a neighbour, and Beth cooperates. But Alan is an abuser who knows all of the tricks for exerting mental, emotional, and physical control over Beth. He convinces her to say nothing in court. Some people argue—correctly—that threatening Beth with consequences for failing toi testify truthfully about the events she recounted to police when questioned is hurting the victim. Others argue—also correctly—that without being able to compel victims like Alice to follow-through with the prosecution, we enable and even encourage domestic abusers to witness-tamper. I don’t know that there is one easy works-in-all-circumstances approach.
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    > > But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you > just tell your friends and family But then the dangerous person won't know that they know? Or one would tell him "btw I've told my partner and parents about this"? -- hmm I'd be worried I then created risk for them
- redisman 6y ago
  How do you know he wouldn't have killed the guy in retaliation for reporting him to the police? I doubt he would be in prison.
  - injb 6y ago
    Well how would that have helped the perpetrator? He'd be the first person the police would look at. In most cases, retaliating for this kind of thing is not the rational thing to do. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it's unlikely. When people retaliate against victims for reporting them, it's generally because there's a long game that they're concerned about. It could be an organized crime outfit that's concerned about it's future, it's reputation etc. Or an abusive partner who expects to be able to continue the abuse long term, so they want to "nip it in the bud" when someone talks to the police. So even though they may get in more trouble for the retaliation, they think it's worth it in the long term. The victims in these cases are usually captive in some sense. Imo, generally when you're the victim of an unexpected crime, you're safer reporting to the authorities than you would be keeping quiet about it.
- JadeNB 6y ago
  > Lesson: report the crime to the police first. If you want to show compassion and keep the law out of your business, you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges. But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you. I hope we still live in a world where "have fallback measures in case other people are going to murder you" doesn't need to be at the top of our contingency planning. Obviously it was here, and that's tragic, but I think and hope that most of us shouldn't need to learn to anticipate this as a likely, or even plausible, response.
  - C1sc0cat 6y ago
    For a lot of HNW individuals from the middle east this is part of their contingency planning. I worked at a Lebanese company in London and a lot of directors had the special versions of their cars, the ones with runflat tires and up armoured. I recall we had someone kidnaped in Beirut and they got him back quickly.
    - cutemonster 6y ago
      They had those cars in London? Or only in the middle east? Why do they need those cars in London? (HNW = High-net-worth individual, I didn't know)
      - C1sc0cat 6y ago
        Yes in London as well there are companies that do these sort of modifications. I suspect Mark Zukerberg and Jeff Bezos have similar mods done.
  - injb 6y ago
    > I hope we still live in a world where "have fallback measures in case other people are going to murder you" doesn't need to be at the top of our contingency planning. Obviously it was here, and that's tragic, but I think and hope that most of us shouldn't need to learn to anticipate this as a likely, or even plausible, response. Sure, if you only consider murder, then it's unlikely (in America at least). But this same pattern happens for lesser things. Someone hits your car, and says "can we just settle this privately, I don't want my premium to go up", and you agree out of kindness, and a few days later you get a letter saying that they're making a claim against your insurance. You've missed your chance to get yourself on record as the victim. In this case, or similar cases, the guy might have done other things like accuse him of blackmail, or accuse him of being involved in the crime etc. Notwithstanding the risk of being compelled to testify, I would still take the route I mentioned above (report it but refuse to cooperate any further). I'd be surprised if the prosecutor decided to press ahead and grant you immunity to make you testify if you're not willing. You could retract your statement, which would signify that they cannot predict what you'll say at trial. Much more likely they'd just drop the case if the victim is unwilling...but I'm not a lawyer, I could be wrong.
- throw7 6y ago
  > you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later I wish we had an option for restorative justice. This is exactly what the victim would have wanted.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  It's not like a white collar criminal who embezzled money wouldn't be out on bail. Considering the level of detail that didn't go into planning this murder I don't think involving the police would have afforded the victim any extra protection. The police are just men with guns that anybody can call. They're only really useful in any other situation where men with guns are useful, like breaking up a brawl.
  - Zanni 6y ago
    They're men with guns and notebooks. Which makes them much more useful than men with guns in creating a paper trail. If the suspect had known he'd been reported to the police, he probably would have guessed he'd be the cops first interview when his boss turned up dead.
- Voloskaya 6y ago
  > you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges This is completly false at least in the US where this story is happening. You don't decide to press or not to press charges. The presecution can decide to go ahead or not, no matter if you cooperate or not and no matter what you desire, they have no obligation whatsoever.
  - d883kd8 6y ago
    This is true but in a case where the bulk of the evidence is the victim's testimony, if the victim doesn't cooperate, the state will focus prosecution efforts on cases they have a better chance of winning
    - Voloskaya 6y ago
      I'm going on a limb by saying that in a case of accounting fraud, witness/victims testimony is not really key.
      - haram_masala 6y ago
        If I were the defense attorney for an accused embezzler, I’d make a big deal about the fact that the victim refuses to testify.
cryptica 6y ago
>> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. The real lesson is that nobody should take the law into their own hands. Putting a criminal on a repayment program is a terrible idea especially with covid-19 economic crisis and so many people struggling to survive. During tough times, you should expect the worst of human nature.
- smt88 6y ago
  Lots of people are forgiving of criminals and don't end up dead. Don't try to make an axiom out if a single, extreme data point.
throw_m239339 6y ago
> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. This. He wanted to give that guy a second chance by not involving the authorities, which shows how good hearted Saleh was. The murderer needs to spend the rest of his life in prison, for a crime he obviously premeditated.
- dmos62 6y ago
  Innocent until proven guilty.
  - braythwayt 6y ago
    Well let’s agree that there is a murderer, and that having committed murder, the murder needs to receive the sharp end of the justice stick. depending upon your Ideas around morality, that means one or more of punishment because “an eye for an eye,” punishment because of some debatable ideas around deterrence, removal from society because the murder is a threat to commit more crimes, and/or rehabilitation because life in prison does nothing except enrich prison contractors at the expense of taxpayers.... Or because civilized societies try to rehabilitate wrongdoers wherever it is a realistic possibility. All that being said, this particular person is innocent until proven guilty. But ideally the murderer—whoever they are—will end up with one or more of these consequences, administered in a fair and transparent manner.
  - loeg 6y ago
    GP said "the murderer," not "the suspect."
    - justincredible 6y ago
      The implied assumption of his comment is that the two are one in the same.
  - lelanthran 6y ago
    > Innocent until proven guilty. Surely the murderer, by definition, isn't innocent? The suspect they have might be though.
bdowling 6y ago
> Saleh showed compassion Or Salah thought that he probably wouldn't get his money back if Haspil was arrested, so he made a deal with him.

by colmvp 6y ago

injb 6y ago

> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. Yes, that's exactly what happened. Lesson: report the crime to the police first. If you want to show compassion and keep the law out of your business, you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges. But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you.

kazagistar 6y ago
You can be held in contempt and face jail time for not participating in an investigation. The fifth only applies to self incrimiation, not to incriminating others. Instead, just tell your friends and family.
- mcny 6y ago
  > You can be held in contempt and face jail time for not participating in an investigation. I anal but isn’t that a pretty slippery slope? Like someone rapes me or tries to kill me and the law will throw me in prison for refusing to relive those moments? Also I’m pretty sure jstor didn’t want to press charges but the overzealous prosecutors did horrible things to Aaron Swartz anyways.
  - JKCalhoun 6y ago
    Bad, spell checker!
  - voxic11 6y ago
    Yes that is exactly the case. Often judges do order witnesses who express reluctance to testify into custody so that they can be sure that they will show up for the trial.
    - bb611 6y ago
      This is extremely rare in the US judicial system, and prosectors tend not to like take cases where the victim or a key witness is no longer willing to testify. Yes, judges and lawyers for both parties in a case can legally compel witnesses to show up and testify, but doing so tends to damage the credibility of the witness, which can be fatal for their testimony.
      - kazagistar 6y ago
        https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/05/16/chelsea-manning-sent-back-to-jail-for-refusing-to-testify-in-wikileaks-investigation/ https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/05/16/chelsea-... Its also used to hold political prisoners the government doesn't like in order to punish them.
  - tehwebguy 6y ago
    It's awful but it's real. The district attorney for New Orleans, Leon Cannizzaro, has come under fire for not only issuing "fake subpoenas" that threaten jail time, he's actually arrested the victims and kept them incarcerated until trial in some cases. He's still DA there, somehow.
    - selimthegrim 6y ago
      He’s announced he’s not running for re-election
    - jedberg 6y ago
      It's important to note that the state of Louisiana uses a completely different system of law than the rest of the United States, based off the French civil code. It gives judges and prosecutors a lot of leeway in how they handle cases.
  - braythwayt 6y ago
    It’s complicated. Consider this situation: Alan assaults his partner Beth. He is reported by a neighbour, and Beth cooperates. But Alan is an abuser who knows all of the tricks for exerting mental, emotional, and physical control over Beth. He convinces her to say nothing in court. Some people argue—correctly—that threatening Beth with consequences for failing toi testify truthfully about the events she recounted to police when questioned is hurting the victim. Others argue—also correctly—that without being able to compel victims like Alice to follow-through with the prosecution, we enable and even encourage domestic abusers to witness-tamper. I don’t know that there is one easy works-in-all-circumstances approach.
- cutemonster 6y ago
  > > But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you > just tell your friends and family But then the dangerous person won't know that they know? Or one would tell him "btw I've told my partner and parents about this"? -- hmm I'd be worried I then created risk for them
redisman 6y ago
How do you know he wouldn't have killed the guy in retaliation for reporting him to the police? I doubt he would be in prison.
- injb 6y ago
  Well how would that have helped the perpetrator? He'd be the first person the police would look at. In most cases, retaliating for this kind of thing is not the rational thing to do. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but it's unlikely. When people retaliate against victims for reporting them, it's generally because there's a long game that they're concerned about. It could be an organized crime outfit that's concerned about it's future, it's reputation etc. Or an abusive partner who expects to be able to continue the abuse long term, so they want to "nip it in the bud" when someone talks to the police. So even though they may get in more trouble for the retaliation, they think it's worth it in the long term. The victims in these cases are usually captive in some sense. Imo, generally when you're the victim of an unexpected crime, you're safer reporting to the authorities than you would be keeping quiet about it.
JadeNB 6y ago
> Lesson: report the crime to the police first. If you want to show compassion and keep the law out of your business, you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges. But the perpetrator will know that they'll be at the top of the list if anything happens to you. I hope we still live in a world where "have fallback measures in case other people are going to murder you" doesn't need to be at the top of our contingency planning. Obviously it was here, and that's tragic, but I think and hope that most of us shouldn't need to learn to anticipate this as a likely, or even plausible, response.
- C1sc0cat 6y ago
  For a lot of HNW individuals from the middle east this is part of their contingency planning. I worked at a Lebanese company in London and a lot of directors had the special versions of their cars, the ones with runflat tires and up armoured. I recall we had someone kidnaped in Beirut and they got him back quickly.
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    They had those cars in London? Or only in the middle east? Why do they need those cars in London? (HNW = High-net-worth individual, I didn't know)
    - C1sc0cat 6y ago
      Yes in London as well there are companies that do these sort of modifications. I suspect Mark Zukerberg and Jeff Bezos have similar mods done.
- injb 6y ago
  > I hope we still live in a world where "have fallback measures in case other people are going to murder you" doesn't need to be at the top of our contingency planning. Obviously it was here, and that's tragic, but I think and hope that most of us shouldn't need to learn to anticipate this as a likely, or even plausible, response. Sure, if you only consider murder, then it's unlikely (in America at least). But this same pattern happens for lesser things. Someone hits your car, and says "can we just settle this privately, I don't want my premium to go up", and you agree out of kindness, and a few days later you get a letter saying that they're making a claim against your insurance. You've missed your chance to get yourself on record as the victim. In this case, or similar cases, the guy might have done other things like accuse him of blackmail, or accuse him of being involved in the crime etc. Notwithstanding the risk of being compelled to testify, I would still take the route I mentioned above (report it but refuse to cooperate any further). I'd be surprised if the prosecutor decided to press ahead and grant you immunity to make you testify if you're not willing. You could retract your statement, which would signify that they cannot predict what you'll say at trial. Much more likely they'd just drop the case if the victim is unwilling...but I'm not a lawyer, I could be wrong.
throw7 6y ago
> you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later I wish we had an option for restorative justice. This is exactly what the victim would have wanted.
throwaway0a5e 6y ago
It's not like a white collar criminal who embezzled money wouldn't be out on bail. Considering the level of detail that didn't go into planning this murder I don't think involving the police would have afforded the victim any extra protection. The police are just men with guns that anybody can call. They're only really useful in any other situation where men with guns are useful, like breaking up a brawl.
- Zanni 6y ago
  They're men with guns and notebooks. Which makes them much more useful than men with guns in creating a paper trail. If the suspect had known he'd been reported to the police, he probably would have guessed he'd be the cops first interview when his boss turned up dead.
Voloskaya 6y ago
> you can always refuse to cooperate with the investigation later, and they'll be obliged to drop the charges This is completly false at least in the US where this story is happening. You don't decide to press or not to press charges. The presecution can decide to go ahead or not, no matter if you cooperate or not and no matter what you desire, they have no obligation whatsoever.
- d883kd8 6y ago
  This is true but in a case where the bulk of the evidence is the victim's testimony, if the victim doesn't cooperate, the state will focus prosecution efforts on cases they have a better chance of winning
  - Voloskaya 6y ago
    I'm going on a limb by saying that in a case of accounting fraud, witness/victims testimony is not really key.
    - haram_masala 6y ago
      If I were the defense attorney for an accused embezzler, I’d make a big deal about the fact that the victim refuses to testify.

cryptica 6y ago

>> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. The real lesson is that nobody should take the law into their own hands. Putting a criminal on a repayment program is a terrible idea especially with covid-19 economic crisis and so many people struggling to survive. During tough times, you should expect the worst of human nature.

smt88 6y ago
Lots of people are forgiving of criminals and don't end up dead. Don't try to make an axiom out if a single, extreme data point.

throw_m239339 6y ago

> Saleh showed compassion and that may have been a reason why he ended up dying in the end. This. He wanted to give that guy a second chance by not involving the authorities, which shows how good hearted Saleh was. The murderer needs to spend the rest of his life in prison, for a crime he obviously premeditated.

dmos62 6y ago
Innocent until proven guilty.
- braythwayt 6y ago
  Well let’s agree that there is a murderer, and that having committed murder, the murder needs to receive the sharp end of the justice stick. depending upon your Ideas around morality, that means one or more of punishment because “an eye for an eye,” punishment because of some debatable ideas around deterrence, removal from society because the murder is a threat to commit more crimes, and/or rehabilitation because life in prison does nothing except enrich prison contractors at the expense of taxpayers.... Or because civilized societies try to rehabilitate wrongdoers wherever it is a realistic possibility. All that being said, this particular person is innocent until proven guilty. But ideally the murderer—whoever they are—will end up with one or more of these consequences, administered in a fair and transparent manner.
- loeg 6y ago
  GP said "the murderer," not "the suspect."
  - justincredible 6y ago
    The implied assumption of his comment is that the two are one in the same.
- lelanthran 6y ago
  > Innocent until proven guilty. Surely the murderer, by definition, isn't innocent? The suspect they have might be though.

bdowling 6y ago

> Saleh showed compassion Or Salah thought that he probably wouldn't get his money back if Haspil was arrested, so he made a deal with him.