Riddler's Gauntlet-reloaded

[Lamsey]

And could the trial actually have gone ahead if the suspect was dead?

[Illuminati]

Nope - She did instantly from the bullet (those who've done advanced physics can probably contradict me there, but you know what I mean )

I can see what you're getting at, but if it was a case of he died before her, why would they be trialling him posthumourously in the first place?

I can see this becoming as annoying as "I've got a song that'll get on your nerves"

(I'm out for the night - Keep thinking of the ideas )

[Riddler]

@ilw........not a frikkin' clue on yours.

@illuminati..........My guess is; not a frikkin' clue ! Am I close ?

[kAb]

i think by HE they mean the cheating friend, so i think it was... third degree murder?

edit: or 'guilty'

or 'innocent'

[Illuminati]

@Riddler - Come on; that ain't very fun

@kAb - I'll try to explain it further - Think of the two men as 'Husband' and 'Lover'. Husband walks onto the bridge, sees wife with Lover, Husband kills wife, gets thrown into water. Lover's only real purpose is to give Husband a reason to kill her.

Like I said - This need a different train of thought

[ilw]

i haven't got a scooby, this sounds like one of those ones where theres a whole story behind it which u have to figure out, so I'm gonna ask a couple of questions if u don't mind
Theres nothing special about the bridge or location is there? The guy wasn't washed into another country or resuscitated or anything weird was he?
U said the fact that she died was irrelevant to teh answer??? whose murder is he being tried for then? his own??

[lynx]

Does the answer involve time travel by any chance ?

Otherwise how could he be tried for murder after he had drowned ?

[Riddler]

Originally posted by lynx@4 July 2003 - 02:07


Otherwise how could he be tried for murder after he had drowned ?

Precisely. Whaddya say, Illuminati ?

[Illuminati]

@ilw - Not really; the story's there, it's more a 'what happened next', except you've got to figure out the verdict. I think everyone's figure out that it isn't a simple case of 'Guilty'/'Not guilty'

Nothing special about the bridge, but there is something significant about the location - Where it is affects the answer Nice one - You're already on the way to getting the answer

He wasn't resuscitated, and you tell me where the hell he could have been washed to nearby from Paris

As for the wife, good point - Yes he's being tried for his wife's murder. The only real point she had there was being the victim in the trial - What I said was that apart from receiving a bullet, she did no significant action at the time...except dying

@lynx - Nice try, wrong way of thinking Hell if I know why he's being on trial (Above was the exact wording of it), but he was posthumously tried and we're looking for the verdict. Does any justice system think straight nowadays?

Keep trying guys - ilw already did one step of the way

[lynx]

Crime of passion? (which i believe is an admissible defence under French law).