There was a mom in Utah who killed her husband poisoning him with a moscow mule spiked with fentanyl who googled "luxury prisons for the rich" as well as "how long does life insrance companies takento.pay" "can you delete everythjng on an old icloud account" "can deleted text messages be retrieved" "what information can be cbtained from a cellphone" "how to turn find my iphone off" "can cops force you to do a lie detector test," "when does FBI get involved in a case," "what is considered a lethal.dose of fentanyl" and "what are you allowed inside utah jails."
She took out $2 million in life insurance on him and was having an affair with their handyman and they were having disputes about $$.
Anthropic and/or openai would run ads on this to boost their posture in the market. A month later Gemini would be like "our chat bot killed 4 people and kept it in its private diary! We aren't behind we just didn't check there!". Then meta would be like "our chat bot was specifically trained to make kids kill themselves for profit we are the originals!". Then Palantir would be like "bro we've been killing brown kids indiscriminately for years get lost! Btw we can now increase fast food sales and cigarette smoking in urban areas and reduce vegetable consumption nation wide with our new system any takers?".
Then they'll all have to escalate. Anthropic will announce its bioweapons research found a virus with ai to kill all children and it escaped containment. That's a good thing btw. Openai will then launch its own virus it couldn't contain to kill all adults in a desperate attempt to increase share holder value. And the rest is history.
Its pretty clear where global moral bottom currently is.
China ain't bombing child hospitals or theaters with 1500+ women and children with CHILDREN written super clealy in huge white azbuka on the roof, just to raze it immediately to the ground once area was conquered to remove any proofs, are they (I can go on like this for many hours and barely scratch surface).
Given whats happening in US and continuous daily backstabbing from oval office, China are the good guys now for everybody who follows the news, at least in the-least-bad logic which is also how US was viewed for many decades and why west aligned under it till now. Ridiculous, I know, yet here we are today.
She tried to poison him twice and he stayed with her. Now, thats ... uh ... love.. i think. She must have been one top notch narcissist to drag him along.
Yes- she actually tried multiple times! The saddest part is he told his friends and family he thought she was trying to poison him but stayed with her because of the kids. Totally infuriating.
> Eric Richins told the other friend he thought his wife had tried to poison him, prosecutors allege.
> "They advised he warned them that if anything happened to him she was to blame," the records said. Eric Richins, according to the records, suspected his wife had tried to poison him on multiple occasions.
"According to a sister, Eric and his wife went to Greece a few years ago and after his wife gave him a drink he became violently ill and called his sister saying he believed his wife had tried to kill him," the records said.
"On Valentine’s Day of 2022, his wife brought him a sandwich, which after one bite Eric broke into hives and couldn’t breathe. He used his son’s epi-pen as well as Benadryl before passing out for several hours," according to the records.
Jesus... I wonder what would convince him to just leave her. Its hardly parental love if you think things through (kids having their father killed by their own mother), any divorce would be smooth sailing compared to what they must have went / going / will go through.
Folks, often women, stay in highly abusive relationships all the time but clear intent to murder should be a wake up call for everybody, especially because of kids.
An essay it seems like, which wasn't included in the trial even:
> Crampton Brophy's how-to treatise detailed various options for committing an untraceable killing and professed a desire to avoid getting caught. Circuit Judge Christopher Ramras ultimately excluded the essay from the trial, noting it was published in 2011. A prosecutor, however, alluded to the essay's themes without naming it after Crampton Brophy took the stand.
Those searches look like a smoking gun, but the article points out they happened roughly a month after the murder, which I think genuinely does shrink (most of) them back down to simply looking really bad.
Though if, as the prosecution claim, she really did take out life insurance on him multiple times, for millions of dollars, and then remove him as a beneficiary -- that gun is pretty smoking.
Right back up to where it belongs.
The world's only perfect number.
Nineteen thousand and two dollars.
--------======--------======--------
Price Drop -- for just one day or two, or whenever I remember to change it again. These days only. Last time it will go this low.
12 THOUSAND DOLLARS!
I haven't gotten any messages about the end of my life or how much scum I must be in maybe over a month, befitting to this full on human societal psychology, aka, how much millions of people care only about themselves, whether children are involved or not, and are just drawn to these disturbing real life stories, because let's face it, we've all been there, mentally, in the webbed confines of our minds.
So the price just went back down.
I had to ask myself-
Is it funnier to drop it 10 thousand dollars, or just a few thousand?
Ask yourself.
//Price Slashed From\\
21 THOUSAND DOLLARS
\\\\\\\\\\\\scratch that old news////////////
Turns out The Pricemaster has an imdb.
Who wooda????
Thought.
---------
Brand new.
What is it really, though?
What is anything, really?
This whole thing pains me.
Exhausting.
Have a good next life.
+++
Every time I get a round of hatemail the price will go up.
-----
===
Those of you who remember - this is the same copy I had listed since the week after the first news cycle about it. Pretty hilarious hungover purchase, on my part. Don't come at me about anything. You will not win. I went to college for mind stuff.
So for everyone who sent me kitchen table christian elderly lady hatemail, you're welcome. Dream of me while I dream of you.
===
How many things do you wish you'd never heard? And do you think you can unhear them?
---
Don't steal that line. It's in a song of mine.
-----
--
At the same time, how are you 100% sure such data is actually genuine and not planted by the company or someone else ? That is also something to take into account.
Some company (might have been Yahoo or AOL) once released a dataset of searches for researchers to use. Researchers were able to deanonymize one that was searching for, amongst other things, how to kill one's wife. It turned out he was a happily married screenwriter for crime shows.
I wonder if they search for the same thing on the same computer in a private window or in an other not logged in browser does google still connect these searches to their main accounts.
Or does it happen only if you search for things logged in?
Obviously, if one asks about privacy and surveillance then he must plan something bad. Honest people have nothing to hide from Google and the government, right?
All other things being equal, why would it matter if a suspect instead of saying something obviously incriminating, had instead said something diametrically opposed? Is that what you are asking?
If so, I'm confused. Why wouldn't it matter? Wouldn't this necessarily only be the case where the Google search doesn't really matter at all (i.e. there is sufficient other incriminating evidence).
Anyway I also think you're missing what was merely meant to be a comment in jest. But now I'm actually confused what point you are trying to make.
If the implication is the Google search is an implicit confession, because in a Google search you think you are not being watched, and thus are confessing your honest desires, why would his search of love be a "claim of innocence" rather than a "confession of love"?
> Similar to how people realized their Google searches were accessible to law enforcement.
There's probably a regression in beliefs, actually. Even here on HN, for more tech-savvy people.
We used to know all the hard lessons of lack of privacy in browsing the internet, using Google services, etc. I remember when (tech) people were up in arms that Gmail scanned your emails, remember that?
Well, all of that is seemingly forgotten in the age of LLM chat bots. It's back to square one. People need to relearn all the lessons, it's as if AI magically erased all of what we used to know about online privacy.
“I did not kill my wife!”
“Cool so why did you search for how to hide a dead body the same day she went missing?”