Intel's Ronler Acres Plant

Silicon Forest
If the type is too small, Ctrl+ is your friend

Friday, November 23, 2012

Persistance of Legends

Darling daughter sent me copy of this story. It's an oldie but a goodie, so I'm posting it. Besides, it saves me having to think up my own story to tell.

Murder or Suicide?
    At the 1994 annual awards dinner given for Forensic Science, AAFS, President Dr. Don Harper Mills astounded his audience with the legal complications of a bizarre death. Here is the story:
    On March 23,1994 the medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a shotgun wound to the head. Mr. Opus had jumped from the top of a ten story building intending to commit suicide. He left a note to that effect, indicating his despondency. As he fell past the ninth floor his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast passing through a window which killed him instantly.
    Neither the shooter nor the descender was aware that a safety net had been installed just below at the eighth floor level to protect some building workers and that Ronald Opus would not have been able to complete his suicide the way he had planned.
    "Ordinarily," Dr. Mills continued, "a person who sets out to commit suicide and ultimately succeeds, even though the mechanism might not be what he intended, is still defined as committing suicide."
    That Mr. Opus was shot on the way to certain death, but probably would not have been successful because of the safety net, caused the medical examiner to feel that he had a homicide on his hands. The room on the ninth floor, whence the shotgun blast emanated, was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. They were arguing vigorously and he was threatening her with a shotgun. The man was so upset that when he pulled the trigger he completely missed his wife and the pellets went through the window, striking Mr. Opus.
    When one intends to kill subject A but kills subject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject B. When confronted with the murder charge the old man and his wife were both adamant. They both said they thought the shotgun was unloaded. The old man said it was his long-standing habit to threaten his wife with the unloaded shotgun. He had no intention to murder her. Therefore the killing of Mr. Opus appeared to be an accident; that is, the gun had been accidentally loaded.
    The continuing investigation turned up a witness who saw the old couple's son loading the shotgun about six weeks prior to the fatal accident. It transpired that the old lady had cut off her son's financial support and the son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that his father would shoot his mother.
    Since the loader of the gun was aware of this, he was guilty of murder even though he didn't actually pull the trigger. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.
    Now comes the exquisite twist.
    Further investigation revealed that the son was, in fact, Ronald Opus. He had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to engineer his mother's murder. This led him to jump off the ten story building on March 23rd, only to be killed by a shotgun blast passing through the ninth story window. The son had actually murdered himself so the medical examiner closed the case as a suicide.
The copy daring daughter sent me was a low contrast Jpeg image, so I decided to look for a text version, and surprise, surprise, there are a zillion copies out there and half of them are tagged "urban legend", so I have to dig a little more and when I do I find this on About.com:
As you might imagine, Don Harper Mills has been queried thoroughly and frequently regarding the Opus case since the story broke on the Internet in 1994. In a March 1997 statement to the press he came clean about it: 
"I made up the story in 1987 to present at the meeting," he told Sunday Telegraph reporter James Gallivan, "for entertainment and to illustrate how if you alter a few small facts you greatly alter the legal consequences. In 1994 someone copied it onto the Internet."
Evidently the story was also repeated in the opening to Magnolia, but that was made in 1999, which makes it a repeater, not an originator.

No comments: