| Author | Message | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 866 Registered: 5-2009 |
One word, and he would have died. Two words, and he would have been in danger. But it was thirteen words - so his opponent had a problem. | ||
| Eli (Eli)
New member Username: Eli Post Number: 1729 Registered: 11-2003 |
His opponent = some sort of competition? Politics relevant? All he's and his' the same person? Would the danger dimish by each word that was spoken? were the words spoken? written? thought? If spoken, were they spoken by him? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 867 Registered: 5-2009 |
His opponent = some sort of competition? Yes for svv of "competition Politics relevant? Noish or no. All he's and his' the same person? Yes. Would the danger dimish by each word that was spoken? No. were the words spoken? Yes. written? Only after they were spoken. thought? Yes, before and after they were spoken. If spoken, were they spoken by him? Yes. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4151 Registered: 5-2003 |
Welcome back, Markobr! Was this during a physical fight? Wartime? Are both H/A/M? Relevant? Are nationality, time period, or location relevant? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8702 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the one word part of the two words? Of the thirteen words? True story? From [LTPF list of centuries]? On [LTPF list of continents]? | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 1038 Registered: 9-2009 |
Welcome back Mark Were there indeed 13 words? German? English? Italian? French? Martin Luther relevant? Was the (possible) one word 'yes' or 'no'? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 869 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was this during a physical fight? No, but... Wartime? No. Are both H/A/M? Yes. Relevant? Yes. Are nationality, time period, or location relevant? Time period and location are relevant. Not sure about nationality. Was the one word part of the two words? Yes. Of the thirteen words? Yes, as were the two words. True story? Yes. From [LTPF list of centuries]? 19th century. On [LTPF list of continents]? Europe. Were there indeed 13 words? Yes. German? English? This. Italian? French? Martin Luther relevant? No. Was the (possible) one word 'yes' or 'no'? No, it wasn't. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8713 Registered: 4-2010 |
Science relevant? Any paradox relevant? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 873 Registered: 5-2009 |
Science relevant? Any paradox relevant? No to both. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8734 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was "he" going to be killed? Murdered? Executed? Enemies - the ones going to kill him? H? A? M? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 876 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was "he" going to be killed? Yes. Murdered? Executed? This. Enemies - the ones going to kill him? He had enemies. Irrelevant whether the hangman was one of them. H? A? M? His enemies are H, otherwise mixed. | ||
| Flemsneezy (Flemsneezy)
New member Username: Flemsneezy Post Number: 252 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is it relevant how he got into this situation? Is he a criminal? Is his opponent a criminal? Are either of them government officials? Were the words being spoken before his execution? during the preparation? are these his last words? Method of execution relevant? His 13 words made problems for his opponent, but did they stop him from being executed? postpone the execution? stop it from ever occurring for the original reasons he was to be executed? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 878 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is it relevant how he got into this situation? Yes. Is he a criminal? Probably not. Is his opponent a criminal? No. Are either of them government officials? No. Were the words being spoken before his execution? No, FA. during the preparation? No, FA. are these his last words? No. They are "last words" in another sense. Method of execution relevant? No. His 13 words made problems for his opponent, but did they stop him from being executed? Yes. postpone the execution? So, no. stop it from ever occurring for the original reasons he was to be executed? He was not executed. He would have been executed in the case "one word" and quite probably in the case "two words". | ||
| Flemsneezy (Flemsneezy)
New member Username: Flemsneezy Post Number: 253 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is his own physical body at risk? or is he playing a game? is dying just a synonym for losing? Is his opponent at risk to be executed? After the 13 words give the opponent problems, does competition continue? does it end? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 879 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is his own physical body at risk? Yes. or is he playing a game? No. is dying just a synonym for losing? No. Is his opponent at risk to be executed? No. After the 13 words give the opponent problems, does competition continue? Noish or Yope. "Competition" isn't really a good word. does it end? Yesish or Yope. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8745 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he already in the midst of his execution when he spoke? Did he die? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 880 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was he already in the midst of his execution when he spoke? No. Did he die? He died decades later, AFAIK of natural causes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8747 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were the words spoken on the day of his execution? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 881 Registered: 5-2009 |
Were the words spoken on the day of his execution? No. | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 1040 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he actually speak the 13 words? Write them down? Was he uttering them during a war? Revolution? Was he in danger of being executed during a war? Revolution? Were the words the title of a work of fiction? Was he at any time in any real danger? The "enemy": agents of the state? A rebellious mob? Something else? Did this happen in Britain? If so, England? Scotland? Wales? Ireland? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 887 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he actually speak the 13 words? Yes. Write them down? No. Was he uttering them during a war? No. Revolution? No. Was he in danger of being executed during a war? No. Revolution? No. Were the words the title of a work of fiction? No. Was he at any time in any real danger? Yes. The "enemy": agents of the state? Not that, but some of them may have a very relevant public function. A rebellious mob? Something of this kind, too. Something else? Something more general. Did this happen in Britain? Yes. If so, England? This. Scotland? Wales? Ireland? | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 1041 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he utter the words at a public conference? Other kind of public event? Was he in danger of being executed because of (perceived) treason? The one or two words -- are either of them a proper noun? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 888 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he utter the words at a public conference? No. Other kind of public event? Yes. Was he in danger of being executed because of (perceived) treason? No. The one or two words -- are either of them a proper noun? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8770 Registered: 4-2010 |
Public event - something related to the government? Was he royalty? Were "they" royalty? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 890 Registered: 5-2009 |
Public event - something related to the government? Not the government but the state. Was he royalty? No. Were "they" royalty? No. | ||
| Rbruma (Rbruma)
New member Username: Rbruma Post Number: 1042 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is religion involved? The public event - a religious celebration? If executed, he would have been so by means of a trial? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 891 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is religion involved? Noish. The public event - a religious celebration? No. If executed, he would have been so by means of a trial? Yes. Hint: In fact, the trial *is* the public event. | ||
| Gregoryuconn (Gregoryuconn)
New member Username: Gregoryuconn Post Number: 382 Registered: 9-2010 |
One word = guilty? Two words = Not guilty? (Ie in response to a plea question?) Can we call him Moses? Is Moses's religion relevant? Is he [LTPF list of religions]? Did the thirteen words indicate and prove that he was not guilty? Like "Oh look, the person I supposedly killed is in fact really still alive" Relevant what he was on trial for? Murder? Heresy? Crimes against humanity? Treason? Would what he was on trial for be a crime today in the United States? One that is punishable potentially by death (in USA)? Or was he even the one on trial? Perhaps his family member was? Or maybe he was on the prosecution? Or a witness? WPP relevant? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 892 Registered: 5-2009 |
One word = guilty? Two words = Not guilty? (Ie in response to a plea question?) YES. Can we call him Moses? A good choice. Is Moses's religion relevant? No. Is he [LTPF list of religions]? I don't know, irrelevant. Did the thirteen words indicate and prove that he was not guilty? Indicate: Yes. Prove: No. Like "Oh look, the person I supposedly killed is in fact really still alive" No. Relevant what he was on trial for? Yes. Murder? Yes. Heresy? Crimes against humanity? Treason? No to the others. Would what he was on trial for be a crime today in the United States? So, yes. One that is punishable potentially by death (in USA)? So, yes. Or was he even the one on trial? Yes. Perhaps his family member was? No, it was himself. Or maybe he was on the prosecution? No. Or a witness? No. WPP relevant? What is WPP? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 893 Registered: 5-2009 |
If WPP means "Witness Protection Program": No. | ||
| Gregoryuconn (Gregoryuconn)
New member Username: Gregoryuconn Post Number: 385 Registered: 9-2010 |
Was he accused of a single murder? Multiple murders? [LTPF list of integers] murders? Were they just common murder? Or assassination? Did Moses kill anyone in a legal fashion (such as war, self-defense, accidental, etc.?) Is the means of (alleged) murder relevant? Shooting? Stabbing? Poisoning? Beheading? Was there actually a murder (not committed by Moses)? Was/were the alleged murder victim(s) actually dead? Relevant who the victim(s) was/were? Were the victim(s) people who the public would have known about before the alleged murder? (Like if he was accused of killing a musician/politician/the queen?) Was Moses related to the alleged murder victim(s)? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 895 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was he accused of a single murder? Yes. Multiple murders? [LTPF list of integers] murders? Were they just common murder? Yes. It is unclear, however, whether it really was murder. Or assassination? {No.} Did Moses kill anyone in a legal fashion (such as war, self-defense, accidental, etc.?) Very probably not. He probably killed nobody at all. Is the means of (alleged) murder relevant? No. Shooting? Stabbing? Poisoning? Beheading? Drowning, irrelevant. Was there actually a murder (not committed by Moses)? Nobody knows. Was/were the alleged murder victim(s) actually dead? Yes. Relevant who the victim(s) was/were? No, except maybe to get a general picture. The victim was a young woman, daughter of a gardener and working for her uncle, a farmer. Were the victim(s) people who the public would have known about before the alleged murder? (Like if he was accused of killing a musician/politician/the queen?) So, no. Was Moses related to the alleged murder victim(s)? As in kinship? No. | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 2418 Registered: 3-2006 |
Did the accused understand the charge? Did his 13-word reply translate roughly as 'can you say that in English'? Was it a cryptic statement? Something vaguely Jesus-like? Was it a puzzle statement of sorts? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 896 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did the accused understand the charge? Yes, very well. Did his 13-word reply translate roughly as 'can you say that in English'? No. Was it a cryptic statement? Maybe for some of those who heared it. The really relevant persons understood it well enough or were soon informed about the meaning. Something vaguely Jesus-like? Not at all. Was it a puzzle statement of sorts? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8774 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did the 13 words include "not guilty"? Did they mention the accused crime? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 897 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did the 13 words include "not guilty"? Yes. Did they mention the accused crime? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8784 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he say that he was not guilty of the crime? Did he accuse someone of the crime? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 899 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he say that he was not guilty of the crime? Yes. The words "Not guilty" were the first two words of his plea. Did he accuse someone of the crime? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8791 Registered: 4-2010 |
Not guilty...because of something? By reason of something? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 900 Registered: 5-2009 |
Not guilty...because of something? No. By reason of something? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8794 Registered: 4-2010 |
Not guilty, but... ? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 903 Registered: 5-2009 |
Not guilty, but... ? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8798 Registered: 4-2010 |
Not guilty...and? If? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 904 Registered: 5-2009 |
Not guilty...and? This. If? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8800 Registered: 4-2010 |
Not guilty and guilty? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 905 Registered: 5-2009 |
Not guilty and guilty? No. Guessing the rest of the wording will be difficult, I think. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8813 Registered: 4-2010 |
Were his enemies confused by his statement? Did they realize it would be impossible to convict him? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 908 Registered: 5-2009 |
Were his enemies confused by his statement? For his opponent: No, at this moment he already expected something of that sort. For other enemies: Probably some of them. Did they realize it would be impossible to convict him? Yesish, and there is more to it. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8827 Registered: 4-2010 |
Impossible to kill him? Did they realize that they would be in trouble? Killed? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 913 Registered: 5-2009 |
Impossible to kill him? He didn't become immortal, no. If you want to find out something more specific, ask more specific. Did they realize that they would be in trouble? They? His enemies in general: No, they wouldn't be in trouble. The opponent: Yes, he expected that before, but after the statement he was sure. Killed? His enemies in general didn't risk being killed. For the opponent: It depended on his actions whether he would run any risk being killed. | ||
| Woodworm (Woodworm)
New member Username: Woodworm Post Number: 2442 Registered: 3-2006 |
Was his opponent in the courtroom when he said the 13 words? Was he in a courtroom? Did the 13 words form a statement? A question? A question to his opponents? Were the 13 words factually accurate? Were they a lie? Was the name of his opponent one of the 13 words? Did the 13 words implicate the opponent in the crime of which he had been accused? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 916 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was his opponent in the courtroom when he said the 13 words? Yes. Was he in a courtroom? So, yes. Did the 13 words form a statement? Yes, a plea. A question? No. A question to his opponents? So, no. Were the 13 words factually accurate? Yes. Were they a lie? No. Was the name of his opponent one of the 13 words? No. Did the 13 words implicate the opponent in the crime of which he had been accused? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 8909 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he reference any person in his plea? Himself? His enemies? The judge? The jury? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 940 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he reference any person in his plea? Yes. Himself? Yes. His enemies? The judge? The jury? No to the others. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 9386 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he say that he was not guilty? Did he say why he was not guilty? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 944 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he say that he was not guilty? Yes. "Not guilty" were the first two words of his plea. Did he say why he was not guilty? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 9401 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he say that he could not be proved guilty? That it would be impossible to do so? Could you please recap? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 947 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he say that he could not be proved guilty? No. That it would be impossible to do so? Noish. Could you please recap? In 19th century England, a man was tried for murder (drowning of a young woman). He probably didn't really murder anybody, but was very likely to be convicted and executed had he simply pleaded "Not guilty". The fact that he had enemies is relevant. His real (and somewhat unusual, although not generally unexpected) plea started with "Not guilty, and" but consisted of thirteen words and probably (provided he was really not guilty) formed a true statement. The result was that his opponent (the exact role of which is still unknown) had a problem - and finally that the accused was not executed. Whether the opponent would risk being killed himself depended on his behaviour after the plea. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10254 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he mention something about the specific manner of death? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4306 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he turn his plea into a puzzler? (If so, I may know this one.} | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 5 Registered: 1-2011 |
Let's work out the mysterious opponent. Was the opponent present in court? Was the opponent: judge? prosecutor? witness? jury member? hangman? anyone from public? maybe journalist? other person? Maybe the opponent is connected with other area of our accused's life/activity? By opponent you mean rival? Is the plea somehow famous? Or maybe just a part of it? Is it quoted nowadays? The result of the plea was that: accusation was no longer motivated? execution was impossible? trial continuation was impossible? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 6 Registered: 1-2011 |
Let's work out the mysterious opponent. Was the opponent present in court? Was the opponent: judge? prosecutor? witness? jury member? hangman? anyone from public? maybe journalist? other person? Maybe the opponent is connected with other area of our accused's life/activity? By opponent you mean rival? Is the plea somehow famous? Or maybe just a part of it? Is it quoted nowadays? The result of the plea was that: accusation was no longer motivated? execution was impossible? trial continuation was impossible? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 950 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he mention something about the specific manner of death? No. Did he turn his plea into a puzzler? (If so, I may know this one.} No. I hope you set this as a puzzle some day. Let's work out the mysterious opponent. Was the opponent present in court? Yes. Was the opponent: judge? prosecutor? This is closest. Beware of FA. witness? jury member? hangman? anyone from public? maybe journalist? other person? If not "prosecutor", "other person" would be the only suitable category. Maybe the opponent is connected with other area of our accused's life/activity? No. By opponent you mean rival? Not really. Is the plea somehow famous? Not really. Or maybe just a part of it? No. Well, "Not guilty" alone is famous enough. Is it quoted nowadays? No. The result of the plea was that: accusation was no longer motivated? Someone was no longer motivated (enough). execution was impossible? No. trial continuation was impossible? Not impossible, but... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10758 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the opponent one of the attorneys? A consultant? Bailiff? Did the plea result in the opponent no longer wishing to have Our Hero executed? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10759 Registered: 4-2010 |
Wild thought - did he say that he was already dying? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 955 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was the opponent one of the attorneys? A consultant? Bailiff? No to all. A much more direct opponent. Did the plea result in the opponent no longer wishing to have Our Hero executed? No. Wild thought - did he say that he was already dying? No. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4429 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the opponent a plaintiff? Accuser? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 958 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was the opponent a plaintiff? Yes. Accuser? This would be another term. "Plaintiff" is better I think in pointing in the right direction. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10782 Registered: 4-2010 |
Victim? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 964 Registered: 5-2009 |
Victim? He was not the victim, but... | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10786 Registered: 4-2010 |
Arresting officer? Alleged victim? Someone who knew the (alleged) victim? Witness? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 967 Registered: 5-2009 |
Arresting officer? Alleged victim? Someone who knew the (alleged) victim? b{This.} Witness? No to the rest. Note I already said "yes" to "plaintiff". No -ishly or something like that. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 10788 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the victim relevant to the crime at all (other than in your last post)? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 970 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is the victim relevant to the crime at all (other than in your last post)? Well, there is no murder without a victim, and there is more about the victim which is relevant in a very general way. But I think I already said everything about the victim which might be even remotely relevant. Nothing about her is central to the puzzle. | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 72 Registered: 1-2011 |
If the opponent/plaintiff were to be killed, that would be: murder? suicide? execution? Is, by chance, the plaintiff that uncle farmer for whom the victim worked? The plaintiff will be in trouble, because our man in his last words of the plea: raised accusations against him? proved he lied in court? proved he provided false/fake evidence? Will the plaintiff be in trouble only from the fact that our man is not executed? The enemies - church? state? military? nobles? organisation? Independence fight relevant? Was the plaintiff representative of enemies of some sort? His task was to make our man executed? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4466 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did his statement form a Catch-22, or some other statement that could have two meanings, either one of which would be beneficial? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 975 Registered: 5-2009 |
If the opponent/plaintiff were to be killed, that would be: murder? suicide? execution? Nothing is really appropriate, but "execution" is probably closest. And I see I maybe should issue a BLOOPER ALERT (in this case more of a clarification): To the question} execution was impossible? (about the accused, not the plaintiff) I answered: No. While execution wasn't physically impossible, his death, which still was possible, wouldn't be an execution, but equivalant to the possible death of the plaintiff. This is a hint, too. Is, by chance, the plaintiff that uncle farmer for whom the victim worked? No. It is the brother of the victim. The plaintiff will be in trouble, because our man in his last words of the plea: raised accusations against him? proved he lied in court? proved he provided false/fake evidence? No to all. Will the plaintiff be in trouble only from the fact that our man is not executed? No. The enemies - church? state? military? nobles? organisation? No, much more general. Independence fight relevant? No. Was the plaintiff representative of enemies of some sort? Technically no, but practically yesish. His task was to make our man executed? Yes, that's what he intended. Did his statement form a Catch-22, or some other statement that could have two meanings, either one of which would be beneficial? No, the meaning was quite clear in the relevant context (i.e. it being a plea in a certain kind of criminal lawsuit). | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 211 Registered: 1-2011 |
The plaintiff wanted the accused to be executed on his own behalf or on behalf of the enemies? The enemies: is it the organised body? the whole nation? Can it be described by a common name? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 981 Registered: 5-2009 |
The plaintiff wanted the accused to be executed on his own behalf or on behalf of the enemies? Probably on his own behalf; the existence of more enemies should have been very motivating. The enemies: is it the organised body? No. the whole nation? Not all of them, but... Can it be described by a common name? yes, "public opinion". | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 216 Registered: 1-2011 |
Lynch involved? The public opinion was against our accused because of the murder or there is more reasons to this? Did the public opinion change their mind after the plea? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 983 Registered: 5-2009 |
Lynch involved? No. The public opinion was against our accused because of the murder or there is more reasons to this? There is more reason (although no good reason), but this is quite irrelevant to the puzzle. Did the public opinion change their mind after the plea? Very probably not. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11136 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was public opinion against him because of his: name? Race? Occupation? Looks? Personality? Religion? Sexual orientation? Social class? Wealth (or lack of it)? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 217 Registered: 1-2011 |
Do the ten yet undiscovered words of the plea mention: the accused? the victim? the plaintiff? the public opinion? Is anybody else (besides accused and plaintiff) in danger of death? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 989 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was public opinion against him because of his: name? Race? Occupation? Looks? Personality? Possibly. Religion? Sexual orientation? In a sense. Social class? Possibly. Wealth (or lack of it)? By consequence: Possibly. No to others. | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 990 Registered: 5-2009 |
Do the ten yet undiscovered words of the plea mention: the accused? Yesish. the victim? the plaintiff? the public opinion? No to others. Is anybody else (besides accused and plaintiff) in danger of death? No. | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 229 Registered: 1-2011 |
Did he have an affair with the victim? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 994 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he have an affair with the victim? The accused? Very, very probably yes. He certainly tried to. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11167 Registered: 4-2010 |
Does the plea mention the affair? "Not guilty, because I was doing X"? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 999 Registered: 5-2009 |
Does the plea mention the affair? No. "Not guilty, because I was doing X"? No. Note that a plea is something rather formal which won't contain a lot of explanations. In fact, (this is another hint) the plea made in unnecessary to explain anything. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11193 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was public opinion against him because of the affair? | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 234 Registered: 1-2011 |
You stated before, that the plea was extraordinary yet not so unexpected, correct? so, did the accused made people to expect such a plea by: his behaviour during the whole trial? his behaviour towards plaintiff? his behaviour towards judge? his explanations during the trial? his attitude towards evidence? his attitude towards witnesses? Did the ten words of the plea, which came after: "not guilty, and..." formed a sentence about facts? (if so, was the sentence true?) An expression of his personal views? An expression of emotion? A question? An exclamation? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 1005 Registered: 5-2009 |
Was public opinion against him because of the affair? Yes. The affair is the only reason for any public interest in him. You stated before, that the plea was extraordinary yet not so unexpected, correct? Yes, at least not for the plaintiff. The general public probably didn't expect it. so, did the accused made people to expect such a plea FA. by: his behaviour during the whole trial? his behaviour towards plaintiff? his behaviour towards judge? his explanations during the trial? his attitude towards evidence? his attitude towards witnesses? The accused didn't do anything in particular to make the plaintiff expect it. Did the ten words of the plea, which came after: "not guilty, and..." formed a sentence about facts? Yesish. (if so, was the sentence true? Yes. We can't be absolutely sure whether the "not guilty" part was true, however.) An expression of his personal views? An expression of emotion? Not really an emotion... A question? An exclamation? One might call it an exclamation also. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11301 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is it relevant how the rest of the trial went? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4541 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he threaten to reveal the affair? Or something else about the plaintiff that she didn't want known? Perhaps in an oblique manner? "I'd be glad to explain the case, your honor. You see, the plaintiff had just taken off her --" (hastily) "I withdraw the case, your honor!" | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 1009 Registered: 5-2009 |
Is it relevant how the rest of the trial went? Yes. But even more relevant is how it might have gone. Did he threaten to reveal the affair? No. Up to now I understood "the affair" = "the death of the woman and possibly the following events". Or something else about the plaintiff that she didn't want known? No, and the plaintiff, being the brother of the dead woman, was a "he". Perhaps in an oblique manner? No. "I'd be glad to explain the case, your honor. You see, the plaintiff had just taken off her --" (hastily) "I withdraw the case, your honor!" Not at all. Again: note it was a plea. A plea is quite a formal statement, not everything the accused might want to say about a case. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11332 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he threaten to reveal something at all? Could you please recap? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 1016 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did he threaten to reveal something at all? No. Could you please recap? Incompletely: In 19th century England, a man was tried for murder - the drowning of a young woman. He probably didn't really murder anybody, but was very likely to be convicted and executed had he simply pleaded "Not guilty" - a relevant factor was that he had the public opinion against him. In fact, it is very probable (but not very relevant) that he had sex with the woman but very improbable that he killed her. Interestingly, his opponent in court was not a Crown Prosecutor but a private plaintiff, the brother of the murdered woman. His plea (a plea being a formal statement near the beginning of a criminal trial) started with "Not guilty, and" but consisted of thirteen words and probably (provided he was really not guilty) formed a - yesishly - true statement. The plea didn't come unexpected for the plaintiff, but probably for a great part of the public. The result was that the plaintiff had a problem which included the risk of his death, depending on his reaction to the plea. The accused still couldn't be sure to survive, but his death wouldn't technically be an execution. The final outcome was that neither the plaintiff nor the accused was killed. In a certain sense, the plea could be described as "last words" although they weren't the last words the accused spoke. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 4557 Registered: 5-2003 |
"Not guilty, and may I be struck by lightning if I speak false?" | ||
| Redwine (Redwine)
New member Username: Redwine Post Number: 257 Registered: 1-2011 |
Did the plea included any formal motions which made further trial unlawful? Did the accused state that his case couldn't have been heard by that court? by that jury? Did the state that the plaintiff couldn't raise formal accusations for formal reason? Relevant why Crown Prosecutor didn't accuse the man? | ||
| Sundowner (Sundowner)
New member Username: Sundowner Post Number: 672 Registered: 6-2003 |
Was the plaintiff a private prosecutor? a lawyer? the Crown prosecutor of this district who was by chance personally involved? Was he a prominent person? the king? Did the plea contain something that made the plaintiff drop the case? Did the defendant claim a "trial by combat"? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 1019 Registered: 5-2009 |
"Not guilty, and may I be struck by lightning if I speak false?" No. Did the plea included any formal motions Yes. which made further trial unlawful? Yope. Did the accused state that his case couldn't have been heard by that court? Noish. by that jury? Noish. Did the state that the plaintiff couldn't raise formal accusations for formal reason? No. Relevant why Crown Prosecutor didn't accuse the man? Yes. Was the plaintiff a private prosecutor? a lawyer? The plaintiff was the victim's brother. He was not a lawyer. the Crown prosecutor of this district who was by chance personally involved? No. Was he a prominent person? No. the king? No royalty involved. Did the plea contain something that made the plaintiff drop the case? Yes. Did the defendant claim a "trial by combat"? YES. You got it. ===== SPOILER ===== This is the story of the case of Ashford v Thornton, the last private appeal of murder in the UK, and the last time the thirteen words of "Not guilty, and I am ready to defend the same with my body" were considered a valid plea by a British (or Irish) court (they were famous last words in this sense). This plea would mean that the outcome of the process would depend on the result of a potentially deadly combat between te accused and the plaintiff. Now Thornton, the defendant, appeared to be quite strong, so Ashford, the plaintiff decided not to take the proceedings any further. Thornton had to leave the court building through a side entrance and decided to emigrate to the USA - but he was alive and a free man. Parliament abolished the private appeal of murder altogether with trial by combat about two years after this trial. There were a few people trying to claim trial by battel later, including a man who wanted to fight "a champion nominated by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency" about a £25 fine for a motoring offence, no court in the UK has considered a wager of battle valid snce then. | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 1020 Registered: 5-2009 |
What I forgot to tell you: Detailed information on the trial can be found at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashford_v_Thornton | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 11486 Registered: 4-2010 |
Fascinating! I'd never heard of trial by battle before, and I can see why it was abolished. |
