Knowing

[David Orsam]

Yes, it is a problem, isnīt it? But now the damage is done.

Oh yes, my dear boy, the damage is certainly done for me, I am doomed to be reported to the police and will have to take my chances that there isn't enough evidence to charge or convict me.

You, however, are in the clear. So for you, it's problem solved.

[Pierre]

Oh my dear boy, you have, in your own charming fashion, if I may say so, hit the nail very squarely upon the head.

That is precisely why I would not have been so foolhardy as to have told you that I was the killer in the first place, thus avoiding all of this nonsense.

Yes, it is a problem, isnīt it? But now the damage is done.

[David Orsam]

Why would you create a situation with such an unfavourable outcome for yourself?

Oh my dear boy, you have, in your own charming fashion, if I may say so, hit the nail very squarely upon the head.

That is precisely why I would not have been so foolhardy as to have told you that I was the killer in the first place, thus avoiding all of this nonsense.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;415328]

My dear boy, there are two possible consequences of notifying the police:

1. You notify the police, who arrest and charge me, and you are free from arrest yourself.

Why would you create a situation with such an unfavourable outcome for yourself?

2. You notify the police, who do not arrest and charge me due to lack of evidence, and you are free from arrest yourself.

And since you managed to solve the problem by taking a very high risk, point 1 never happened. How did you do that?

[David Orsam]

If you think before you speak instead of reacting with your old strategy, which for you is safe but not intellectually fruitful, you will perhaps manage to understand the problems and the questions.

In this case you did not see the word "consequences". Apply that word to your text above.

My dear boy, there are two possible consequences of notifying the police:

1. You notify the police, who arrest and charge me, and you are free from arrest yourself.

2. You notify the police, who do not arrest and charge me due to lack of evidence, and you are free from arrest yourself.

So notifying the police would appear to be a win-win strategy for you here my dear boy.

And there you have the line between cat and rat and sure and not sure.

Of course such a situation is very problematic, so how do you solve it?

It's not problematic at all my dear boy and I believe I have already solved it.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;415314]

Oh my dear boy, I see so clearly why nothing makes sense in your charming little scenario. It's this:

"sufficient evidence for me to know that you are the murderer but not sufficient for me to notify the authorities"

One does not need sufficient evidence to notify the authorities. One could notify the authorities on the basis of suspicion alone, certainly if one knows something about the crime, which would be the sensible thing to do if one was so worried about being charged for the relatively minor crime of misprision of felony.

If you think before you speak instead of reacting with your old strategy, which for you is safe but not intellectually fruitful, you will perhaps manage to understand the problems and the questions.

In this case you did not see the word "consequences". Apply that word to your text above.

But, at the same time, if one does not have sufficient knowledge of the crime even to warrant notifying the authorities then one can hardly be charged with knowledge of that crime.

And there you have the line between cat and rat and sure and not sure.

Of course such a situation is very problematic, so how do you solve it?

[DJA]

Didn't deter D'Onston.

[David Orsam]

No, you are the one creating pieces of evidence for my knowledge, sufficient evidence for me to know that you are the murderer but not sufficient for me to notify the authorities, using the evidence as proof against you. This is the situation you have created. You did want it to have a specific effect and when there was no such effect you tried again, and again, and again.

Indeed. And if I acknowledge you as the murderer formally and officially, I worry that I could be charged, but I am not sure. And there are many other problems with such a strategy. And you do not give me any proof that I could use in court against you.

You are, since you know the terrible consequences of such a strategy. But as I said, you can not be totally sure. So you can not preceed with all matters just as you wish. And considering this, you always measure everything you do and you plan the consequences. Yes, you are always one step ahead. That is what you are really good at.

That is what you believe. There is another way but since you believe that I am the cat you do not think it is likely. There was a time when you thought all of this would be very easy but now you realize that what you are looking at is the choice between life or death. The cat has come for you.

So the question now is: Given your very complex situation: How can you manage this terrible situation and at the same time avoid to get caught?

You must put pressure on me. How do you do it without revealing to others who you are and what you are doing?

Oh my dear boy, I see so clearly why nothing makes sense in your charming little scenario. It's this:

"sufficient evidence for me to know that you are the murderer but not sufficient for me to notify the authorities"

One does not need sufficient evidence to notify the authorities. One could notify the authorities on the basis of suspicion alone, certainly if one knows something about the crime, which would be the sensible thing to do if one was so worried about being charged for the relatively minor crime of misprision of felony.

But, at the same time, if one does not have sufficient knowledge of the crime even to warrant notifying the authorities then one can hardly be charged with knowledge of that crime.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;415205]

Now look, Abby, it's all quite simple.

He is the cat and I am the rat. Or is it the other way round?

I believe that you are the cat and I am the rat. You, on the other hand, think that I am the cat and you are the rat.

As soon as he creates pieces of evidence for my knowledge with sufficient information (or is it me creating it for him?) and sees to it that other people could see it but not understand it and he believes that I have proof that he knew about every murder,

No, you are the one creating pieces of evidence for my knowledge, sufficient evidence for me to know that you are the murderer but not sufficient for me to notify the authorities, using the evidence as proof against you. This is the situation you have created. You did want it to have a specific effect and when there was no such effect you tried again, and again, and again.

and I do give him proof for each murder but I do it because he refuses to acknowledge me as the murderer

Indeed. And if I acknowledge you as the murderer formally and officially, I worry that I could be charged, but I am not sure. And there are many other problems with such a strategy. And if I use the evidence you have given, will I be able to use it against you? Or will it be used against myself?

and I am rather sure that he will not go to the police

You are, since you know the terrible consequences of such a strategy. But as I said, you can not be totally sure. So you can not preceed with all matters just as you wish. And considering this, you always measure everything you do and you plan the consequences. Yes, you are always one step ahead. That is what you are really good at.

but at the same time I am not sure of this and he is a big problem for me and the only way I can solve that problem is by murdering others and letting him know about it.

That is what you believe. There is another way but since you believe that I am the cat you do not think it is an option. There was a time when you thought all of this would be very easy but now you realize that what you are looking at is the choice between life or death. The cat has come for you. And I am higher up than you are.

So the question now is: Given your very complex situation: How can you manage this terrible situation and at the same time avoid to get caught?

You must put pressure on me. How do you do it without revealing to others who you are and what you are doing?

[GUT]

Abby, I am playing, quite brilliantly you might think, the role of the urbane but evil psychopathic serial killer, while Pierre is, rather poorly I regret to say, playing the role of the innocent dimwit sidekick.

Actually, if that's his role he seems to be doing it well.

[Abby Normal]

Now look, Abby, it's all quite simple. He is the cat and I am the rat. Or is it the other way round? As soon as he creates pieces of evidence for my knowledge with sufficient information (or is it me creating it for him?) and sees to it that other people could see it but not understand it and he believes that I have proof that he knew about every murder, and I do give him proof for each murder but I do it because he refuses to acknowledge me as the murderer and I am rather sure that he will not go to the police but at the same time I am not sure of this and he is a big problem for me and the only way I can solve that problem is by murdering others and letting him know about it.

Now what is it about this that you are having difficulty understanding?

I don't know

[David Orsam]

and whats the whole point of this role playing???what are we trying to establish?

Now look, Abby, it's all quite simple. He is the cat and I am the rat. Or is it the other way round? As soon as he creates pieces of evidence for my knowledge with sufficient information (or is it me creating it for him?) and sees to it that other people could see it but not understand it and he believes that I have proof that he knew about every murder, and I do give him proof for each murder but I do it because he refuses to acknowledge me as the murderer and I am rather sure that he will not go to the police but at the same time I am not sure of this and he is a big problem for me and the only way I can solve that problem is by murdering others and letting him know about it.

Now what is it about this that you are having difficulty understanding?

[David Orsam]

this has my head spinning. OK whos the murderer and whos the other person?lol.

Abby, I am playing, quite brilliantly you might think, the role of the urbane but evil psychopathic serial killer, while Pierre is, rather poorly I regret to say, playing the role of the innocent dimwit sidekick.

[Pierre]

this has my head spinning. OK whos the murderer and whos the other person?lol.

and whats the whole point of this role playing???what are we trying to establish?

David is the murderer and I am the other person.

We are trying to establish the perfection of the sources.

[Abby Normal]

this has my head spinning. OK whos the murderer and whos the other person?lol.

and whats the whole point of this role playing???what are we trying to establish?