Hacker News Reader

Comment by jessaustin | Hacker News Reader

He's a weird guy, which means certain jurors will be biased against him. He's also an asshole, which also means certain jurors will be biased against him. Also he killed someone, even if out of negligence rather than spite. This doesn't seem like a giant miscarriage of justice.

View on HN

“He's a weird guy”

He was building a series of tunnels beneath a bomb shelter to protect himself from an impending nuclear war with North Korea.

He’s not weird, he’s crazy.

If I had enough money I would definitely be building weird shit which could include tunnels. I already like caves. I don't particularly care about DPRK, but I'm sure normals would find something wanting in my motivations.

The problem is not that he built some tunnels. The problem is that he lethally endangered his employee. Rich people make tasteless decisions all the time (for proof, drive through any tony suburb). It is important that their tastelessness not be negligent.

he didn't testify

OK, if they didn't hear him talk they might not have picked up the "asshole" vibe, although they might have made some assumptions in that vein about any BTC millionaire. Any testimony about his actions or public statements would have transmitted the "weird" vibe loud and clear.

Let's put some corporate officer in trial and see how jurors react to it! but we never do that!

Corporate officers of companies go on trial all the time. In the UK it even happens for manslaughter - you can be held responsible if someone working for you dies if you didn't take the right precautions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com