7 ms·

Was he convincted of murder, or are you acting as the judge and jury based on third hand media reports?

anigbrowl 5y ago
There was a whole civil case about it in the US. So while that doesn't prove he committed murder beyond a reasonable doubt, it means the preponderance of the evidence suggests he did.
dfsegoat 5y ago
It is a very small community where this happened (San Pedro, BZ). I'm all for due process, but it was basically an open secret. source: my parents live in the town where it happened.
- symlinkk 5y ago
  > I’m all for due process, but… Then you’re not for due process
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    This is HN, not a criminal court. One can be all for due process, and propose one's opinion here that someone is guilty. "Due process" does not apply here.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
duskwuff 5y ago
He was never tried, because he fled to Guatemala to avoid prosecution, then faked a heart attack to delay his extradition.
- colordrops 5y ago
  Is your assertion that authority figures are to be trusted and fleeing them proves guilt? Is this deference to authority provided to China and Russia as well?
babypuncher 5y ago
People aren't automatically innocent in the eyes of the public just because they successfully avoid seeing a trial for nearly a decade by fleeing the country they are wanted in. McAfee's behavior surrounding the charges does absolutely nothing to help his perception. "Innocent until proven guilty" is really only applicable in the context of formal judicial punishment. Absent formal judicial proceedings, it is completely fair for people to draw their own conclusions from the available evidence. Even when a court of law does come to a conclusion, it does not mean public opinion is required to agree with that finding (i.e. that time OJ Simpson killed a person)
- jmkni 5y ago
  > People aren't automatically innocent in the eyes of the public just because they successfully avoid seeing a trial for nearly a decade by fleeing the country they are wanted in It's weird how many on HN have this attitude to McAfee, but not to Assange.
  - breakfastduck 5y ago
    I don't think Assange is a fair comparison. He has influenced the world in much more significant ways.
  - babypuncher 5y ago
    That is strange, I always saw both figures as being popular among the *ahem* politicized conspiracy theorist crowd that has become so prevalent online in the last 5-6 years.
    - xtracto 5y ago
      All these pro/against witch-hunts remind me of Hans Reiser [short] episode. When the Reiser saga was unfolding, there was a lot of support from people that identified with the "nerd" group. I remember reading so many theories on why "he couldn't have done it", how "it is completely normal to remove the passenger sit form your car", or to buy books on how to clean a crime scene... Not saying I sway one way or another with Assange or McCafee... just that, as in Reiser's case, I am sure there's so much information we don't know that running to make an armchair judgement is most likely bound to get you to the wrong conclusion.

There was a whole civil case about it in the US. So while that doesn't prove he committed murder beyond a reasonable doubt, it means the preponderance of the evidence suggests he did.

dfsegoat 5y ago

It is a very small community where this happened (San Pedro, BZ). I'm all for due process, but it was basically an open secret. source: my parents live in the town where it happened.

symlinkk 5y ago
> I’m all for due process, but… Then you’re not for due process
- CRConrad 5y ago
  This is HN, not a criminal court. One can be all for due process, and propose one's opinion here that someone is guilty. "Due process" does not apply here.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

duskwuff 5y ago

He was never tried, because he fled to Guatemala to avoid prosecution, then faked a heart attack to delay his extradition.

colordrops 5y ago
Is your assertion that authority figures are to be trusted and fleeing them proves guilt? Is this deference to authority provided to China and Russia as well?

babypuncher 5y ago

People aren't automatically innocent in the eyes of the public just because they successfully avoid seeing a trial for nearly a decade by fleeing the country they are wanted in. McAfee's behavior surrounding the charges does absolutely nothing to help his perception. "Innocent until proven guilty" is really only applicable in the context of formal judicial punishment. Absent formal judicial proceedings, it is completely fair for people to draw their own conclusions from the available evidence. Even when a court of law does come to a conclusion, it does not mean public opinion is required to agree with that finding (i.e. that time OJ Simpson killed a person)

jmkni 5y ago
> People aren't automatically innocent in the eyes of the public just because they successfully avoid seeing a trial for nearly a decade by fleeing the country they are wanted in It's weird how many on HN have this attitude to McAfee, but not to Assange.
- breakfastduck 5y ago
  I don't think Assange is a fair comparison. He has influenced the world in much more significant ways.
- babypuncher 5y ago
  That is strange, I always saw both figures as being popular among the *ahem* politicized conspiracy theorist crowd that has become so prevalent online in the last 5-6 years.
  - xtracto 5y ago
    All these pro/against witch-hunts remind me of Hans Reiser [short] episode. When the Reiser saga was unfolding, there was a lot of support from people that identified with the "nerd" group. I remember reading so many theories on why "he couldn't have done it", how "it is completely normal to remove the passenger sit form your car", or to buy books on how to clean a crime scene... Not saying I sway one way or another with Assange or McCafee... just that, as in Reiser's case, I am sure there's so much information we don't know that running to make an armchair judgement is most likely bound to get you to the wrong conclusion.