Telekinetic on trial for murder

[Umbran]

But the starting process was a declaration that the death was suspicious.

"Man's head implodes!" Sounds suspicious to me!

Here, we have a head being crushed/collapsing in synch with someone making a gesture. In order to sustain a conviction, the prosecution would have to prove to the court that such a gesture could cause death.

Yes. But, given the witnesses, and the dearth of skulls spontaneously staving themselves in without so much as contact with a solid surface, I'm not sure it'd be so hard to convince a jury.

This is not trivial- most American jurisdictions have "junk science" laws dictating a standard of proof for putting forth scientific evidence. And unless you can show some peer reviewed documentation, or current experiments that are capable of being replicated by other scientists, you simply won't be able to sustain a conviction, because your theory of the crime will not even be allowed to be presented in court.

I noted that earlier - the prosecutor will probably avoid explicitly suggesting the suspect is telekinetic. But, as an example, if the suspect was seen making gestures like he was beating someone with a baseball bat, and the victim was seen at the same time and place acting like he was being beaten with a baseball bat, I don't think the jury would be hard to convince (modulo the character of the witnesses, character of the victim and suspect, the nature of the motives, and such). I don't think the jury will care that much about not knowing the mechanism, if the correlation is strongly demonstrated.

I think the question of whether the case ever gets to trial, and whether the jury would convict, are pretty separate. I would never expect such a thing to come to trial, for the reasons you mention. But if it did, I would not be too surprised by a conviction.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yes. But, given the witnesses, and the dearth of skulls spontaneously staving themselves in without so much as contact with a solid surface, I'm not sure it'd be so hard to convince a jury.

Yes, but in order to even get to a jury, you'd have to pass the court's junk science hurdles. So, first, before talking to the jury, you'd have to provide evidence proving the existence of psychokinesis. Either peer reviewed publications or reproduceable experiments if the field/theory is new.

No proof, no jury hears it.

THEN you'd have to talk about it being voluntary or involuntary- if the guy on trial had never manifested psychokinesis ever before, then he did the gesture just as his talents awaken, killing the victim, that isn't murder, that's an accident. That's akin to pulling an imaginary trigger, only to find a hairtrigger Colt 45 materializing in your hand as you completed the gesture...

 

[Umbran]

Yes, but in order to even get to a jury, you'd have to pass the court's junk science hurdles. So, first, before talking to the jury, you'd have to provide evidence proving the existence of psychokinesis. Either peer reviewed publications or reproduceable experiments if the field/theory is new.

No proof, no jury hears it.

Well, here's a question: Do cases ever go to court where the murder weapon was never found? Why do I have to prove psychokinesis if I am never going to bring up psychokinesis in court?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yes, cases go to trial with the murder weapon not being found.

But in those cases:

1) the means of death are known- the person was shot by a bullet of X caliber fired by Z kind of gun

OR

2) the body is found in such a way that rules out purely natural causes, such as being found dimembered in a vat of lye

OR

3) there is a pattern that speaks for itself- typical in cases of serial poisoning. Forensic pathologists compare known possible symptoms to those of the deceased, show access & motive, etc.

In this case, the third method is the one people are thinking of: every time the defendant gestured a particular way at someone, that person's head imploded, so he must be guilty. In those cases, though, the same junk science hurdles still have to get cleared. Remember, the burden of proof is on the prosecution- they'll have to rule out all known or theorized possibilities besides murder.

That's how many serial poisoners got away with murder...at least at first. Succinylcholine poisoning was damn hard to prove for a long time- virtually undetectable, mimicing natural causes- so it was a favored means of killing by those with access to it. It still isn't easy. And some of the tests to detect it are being re-evaluated for their evidentiary value.

So, even if patients are always dying- and I mean daily- on Nurse Mengele's shift within minutes of just having been checked up on, you still have to prove that those patients died due to human action, not natural causes or complications from their affliction or treatment.

 

[GSHamster]

Well, here's a question: Do cases ever go to court where the murder weapon was never found? Why do I have to prove psychokinesis if I am never going to bring up psychokinesis in court?

The prosecutor still has to give some theory of how the death occurred. Otherwise this is the medical examiner on the stand:

Defense attorney: Why did the victim die?
ME: His head exploded.
Defense attorney: What caused his head to explode?
ME: The defendant's telekinetic abilities.
Defense: You mean the defendant used his "magic psychic powers" to kill the victim?

That right there is an acquittal.

Second, assuming a fair trial, there is no way this gets past reasonable doubt. It is utterly reasonable to doubt the existence of TK, and if you doubt that, there's no way you can convict beyond a reasonable doubt.

Finally, the traditional way to kill people with TK is to close or block a valve in the heart. Victim has a heart attack in public which looks totally natural.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Actually, the exploding head thing goes back to Scanners, so it isn't exactly new. I think the method you're talking about originated in one of Larry Niven's short stories about Gil "The Arm" Hamilton.

 

[Janx]

Actually, the exploding head thing goes back to Scanners, so it isn't exactly new. I think the method you're talking about originated in one of Larry Niven's short stories about Gil "The Arm" Hamilton.

JMS also used it in the graphic novel Stars. One of his characters had a weak TK power where she could only move small objects. The CIA hired her to be an assassin by holding the carotid artery closed in the victim's neck. left no significant sign.

I think before the DA gets involved, the cops would be going over the evidence. Sure, there's a bunch of witnesses fingering your guy, but there's no weapon, possibly no motive (I don't recall the OT saying the motive). the coroner may not even be able to explain the cause of death. There's no blunt trauma signs indicating what weapon was used. no trace materials on the skull to to lead back to a murder weapon. Any blood splatter may not even be directional like a traditional attack (the TK may squash his head in a general fashion, rather than as a wave of directional force as if the victim was hit by something).

My wife has now asked, "why am I posting online about killing somebody?" I really hate it when people read my screen and lack context as to its contents.