News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not suicide", claims friend. Parent comment

Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by withinboredom on Friday March 15, 2024 @05:11AM (#39713559)
They can tell whether you fired A gun, not necessarily that you fired that specific gun into your specific body. It's circumstantial evidence at best.

Better evidence would be signs of a struggle or calculating bullet velocity to see if it came from the gun in that position. However, there are ways of doing this without actually causing a struggle. Wait for them to go to sleep; you could even give them some melatonin or something to make them drowsy. If it's in a car, put some nitrogen canisters on the A/C intake to make them pass out.

If it is nefarious, there will be evidence somewhere. Whether you care to look for that evidence, know where to look for it or have the technology to find it ... that's another matter altogether.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by sfn42 on Friday March 15, 2024 @06:13AM (#39713934)
I think you got my point backwards. If you are found with a gunshot wound in your head, holding a gun, but you don't have gunpowder residue on your hand, it's pretty safe to say you didn't shoot yourself.

Of course there are ways to get around that but the killer has to actually perform that workaround.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by withinboredom on Friday March 15, 2024 @06:17AM (#39713954)
I got your point, but I was making that point that even then, it doesn’t mean anything. Maybe they went to a shooting range that afternoon. Maybe the killer does something to ensure the residue is there. Maybe the killer manipulates them in their sleep. Who knows.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by sfn42 on Friday March 15, 2024 @06:25AM (#39713991)
No you still don't seem to get the point. I'm saying the *absence* of gunpowder residue means something, I'm not saying the presence of it means anything.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by thaumasiotes on Friday March 15, 2024 @06:52AM (#39714139)
withinboredom seems to be making the similar but tangential point that, in the same way that absence of gunpowder is evidence [of something] while presence of gunpowder isn't evidence of anything, it's possible to demonstrate that a death was not by suicide, but it isn't possible to demonstrate that a death was by suicide. Same idea, but reversing "which part of the sentence is the variable".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by sfn42 on Friday March 15, 2024 @07:38AM (#39714389)
I understand what they're saying, I just don't know why they keep explaining it when its irrelevant to what I'm saying.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by vasco on Friday March 15, 2024 @08:04AM (#39714611)
If you fire a gun inside a car, both people and the car would be full of gun powder residue, not just the hand that shot - I think.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by dolmen on Friday March 15, 2024 @11:10AM (#39716629)
... and that should be the same residue.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:John Barnett before death "if anything happens, it's not ... by withinboredom on Friday March 15, 2024 @08:43AM (#39714886)
I'm not "keeping explaining." I made a counter-point, and you redirected me to your point; I acknowledged that I got your point and explained I was making a counter-point, and you reiterated your point. I upvoted your final reiteration to ack that the conversation was over.
[ Parent | on HN ]