History Main / ConvictionByCounterfactualClue

12th Jun '17 7:47:25 PM felinecritic
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In a Slylock Fox Mystery puzzle, Slylock investigates some stolen roses. Another character has some roses in a vase that she claims were a gift from her boyfriend. He deduces that she is lying, and that she is actually the flower thief. The reason? Well, aside from the fact that she is one of the recurring "villan of the week" characters, the roses still have thorns on them, and a florist would have removed them before selling the roses. Never mind the fact that many florists don't remove thorns from flowers because doing so makes them wilt faster (as does excessive handling of cut flowers, so thorns shouldn't be too much of an issue). Nor the fact that her boyfriend could have picked them from his own garden and given them to her, or that 'he' might have been the flower thief, and her story about receiving the flowers as a gift could still be true.

to:

* In a an old Slylock Fox Mystery puzzle, Slylock investigates some stolen roses. Another character has some roses in a vase that she claims were a gift from her boyfriend. He deduces that she is lying, and that she is actually the flower thief. The reason? Well, aside from the fact that she is one of the recurring "villan "villain of the week" characters, the roses still have thorns on them, and a florist would have removed them before selling the roses. Never mind the fact that many florists don't remove thorns from flowers because doing so makes them wilt faster (as does excessive handling of cut flowers, so thorns shouldn't be too much of an issue). Nor the fact that her boyfriend could have picked them from his own garden and given them to her, or that 'he' ''he'' might have been the flower thief, and her story about receiving the flowers as a gift could still be true.
12th Jun '17 7:44:44 PM felinecritic
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Comic Strips]]
* In a Slylock Fox Mystery puzzle, Slylock investigates some stolen roses. Another character has some roses in a vase that she claims were a gift from her boyfriend. He deduces that she is lying, and that she is actually the flower thief. The reason? Well, aside from the fact that she is one of the recurring "villan of the week" characters, the roses still have thorns on them, and a florist would have removed them before selling the roses. Never mind the fact that many florists don't remove thorns from flowers because doing so makes them wilt faster (as does excessive handling of cut flowers, so thorns shouldn't be too much of an issue). Nor the fact that her boyfriend could have picked them from his own garden and given them to her, or that 'he' might have been the flower thief, and her story about receiving the flowers as a gift could still be true.
[[/folder]]
27th May '17 5:18:47 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The British "Adult" comic ''{{Viz}}'' ran several parodies of this:

to:

* The British "Adult" comic ''{{Viz}}'' ''ComicBook/{{Viz}}'' ran several parodies of this:
17th May '17 1:12:35 PM john_e
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The solution in Dorothy Sayers’s non-Peter-Wimsey mystery ''The Documents in the Case'', co-written with a physician, depends on a fact in organic chemistry: naturally occurring compounds are randomly oriented, both “right-handed” and “left-handed”, while the synthetic version of the same compound all has the same orientation. [[spoiler: Conclusion: the victim didn’t pick the wrong mushrooms. He was poisoned.]] Unfortunately, the book’s version of facts is precisely backward.
17th Apr '17 5:52:14 PM esq263
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In an episode of ''Series/JudgeJudy'', a man is trying to collect money owed to him by a woman who rented a room from him. He says he provided her with an invoice each month and brought '''copies''' showing how much the woman owed him. The invoices had the invoice date on each of them, but they also had a date in the header or footer showing the date they were printed. Judge Judy points out that these invoices are fake because they all have the same date. The guy made the argument that the invoices were created when he said they were, pointing to the invoice dates, but the other date was the current date, the date he printed them. Judy said something like, "I'm not stupid, you know," and ruled in favor of the woman who owed him the money, because apparently to her it's impossible that anyone printing a copy of something would record the date the copy was printed.

to:

* In an episode of ''Series/JudgeJudy'', a man is trying to collect money owed to him by a woman who rented a room from him. He says he provided her with an invoice each month and brought '''copies''' showing how much the woman owed him. The invoices had the invoice date on each of them, but they also had a date in the header or footer showing the date they were printed. Judge Judy points out that these invoices are fake because they all have the same date. The guy made the argument that the invoices were created when he said they were, pointing to the invoice dates, but the other date was the current date, the date he printed them. Judy said something like, "I'm not stupid, you know," and ruled in favor of the woman who owed him the money, because apparently to her it's impossible that anyone printing a copy of something would record the date the copy was printed. Never mind the fact that Microsoft Word has a feature where a date within the document can automatically update itself each time the file is accessed.
12th Apr '17 2:00:01 PM DrOO7
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** One episode of ''Series/{{NCIS}}'' has Cate determining a suspect is lying by the same logic. He looks to his left, so he's obviously recalling a concocted story. Had he been telling the truth, he would have looked to the right.

to:

*** * One episode of ''Series/{{NCIS}}'' has Cate determining a suspect is lying by the same logic. He looks to his left, so he's obviously recalling a concocted story. Had he been telling the truth, he would have looked to the right.



* ''Series/UnsolvedMysteries'': A segment featured a missing woman whose husband claimed that she had walked out on him, citing that several of her things and her suitcase were missing. When her suitcase was found, it contained ''exactly'' what he said it would, peaking the cops' suspicions, as they found it highly unlikely that any man could know exactly what was in his wife's suitcase, as he himself had no idea what was in his own wife's purse.

to:

* ''Series/UnsolvedMysteries'': A segment featured a missing woman whose husband claimed that she had walked out on him, citing that several of her things and her suitcase were missing. When her suitcase was found, it contained ''exactly'' what he said it would, peaking the cops' suspicions, as they found it highly unlikely that any man could know exactly what was in his wife's suitcase, as he himself had no idea what was in his own wife's purse. (It's actually a very sad aversion, as to this day, the woman remains missing, and despite the cops strong suspicions that he killed her, they have zero evidence to support this, meaning he remains a free man.
18th Mar '17 11:00:45 AM CurledUpWithDakka
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ASeriesofUnfortunateEvents...unfortunately falls into this trap in the very first book. While it is very nice to see the Baudelaire children outsmart their much stronger adversary despite never being taken seriously by the adults... any legal scholar worth their salt would tell you that signing a document in your off hand does not render it void.

to:

* ASeriesofUnfortunateEvents...ASeriesOfUnfortunateEvents...unfortunately falls into this trap in the very first book. While it is very nice to see the Baudelaire children outsmart their much stronger adversary despite never being taken seriously by the adults... any legal scholar worth their salt would tell you that signing a document in your off hand does not render it void.
17th Mar '17 7:36:12 AM DrOO7
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Conversely, people ''having'' receipts that verify that they were elsewhere when a crime was committed seems to somehow indicate their ''guilt'' both for TV and real cops (as seen on numerous programs that profile real murders), most of whom say something like, "''Nobody'' saves receipts! He/she is trying too hard to create an alibi!" This is cited on an episode of ''Series/ForensicFiles'', "Yes, in Deed", where the prime suspect saving a movie ticket stub to establish an alibi was one of the reasons the police, and one of the prosecutors, believed that he was the culprit of a murder and arson. One of the detectives interviewed remarked that nobody ever keeps their movie stubs, eliminating all who might do so for any number of reasons.

to:

** CP Alesha Phillips gets leery of a defendant's claim that she acted in self-defense--killing the victim after he raped her--when the girl is completely blase about having to testify, citing that most rape victims are usually terrified at the prospect, as she was.
** In another episode, a murder suspect claims to have left his job at "5 o'clock. On the button." When the detectives question his boss, DS Matt Devlin gets suspicious when the man uses the exact same phrase. While he's correct in suspecting that the two are lying and rehearsed their stories, the thought that either man could have simply picked up the phrase from the other after years of working together never occurs to him.
* Conversely, Related to the above ''LOUK'' post, conversely, people ''having'' receipts that verify that they were elsewhere when a crime was committed seems to somehow indicate their ''guilt'' both for TV and real cops (as seen on numerous programs that profile real murders), most of whom say something like, "''Nobody'' saves receipts! He/she is trying too hard to create an alibi!" This is cited on an episode of ''Series/ForensicFiles'', "Yes, in Deed", where the prime suspect saving a movie ticket stub to establish an alibi was one of the reasons the police, and one of the prosecutors, believed that he was the culprit of a murder and arson. One of the detectives interviewed remarked that nobody ever keeps their movie stubs, eliminating all who might do so for any number of reasons.reasons.
** It also comes up in an episode of ''Series/{{Dateline}}'', where​ a man suspected of killing his parents produced a receipt from a supermarket to prove he was elsewhere. Security camera footage confirmed this. However, the cops were still suspicious, as the store was very near his parent's home. Forensic evidence soon determined that he ''was'' in fact the killer and that he had gone shopping either before or afterwards to try and create an alibi.
10th Mar '17 8:53:16 AM bobthesnail
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** However, there are many indicators that this series does not exist in the normal world. And the children learn this fact from a book in-universe, so it could be a different legal standard.
7th Mar '17 4:32:10 PM ShaggySparrow
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The "mule" clue was used in "The Case of Molly's Mule."

to:

** The "mule" clue was used in "The Case of Molly's Mule."" Sobol would later reuse this clue in an Encyclopedia Brown mystery called "The Case of the Gold Rush". The first time can be excused as a common mistake, but the second time less so.


Added DiffLines:

* ASeriesofUnfortunateEvents...unfortunately falls into this trap in the very first book. While it is very nice to see the Baudelaire children outsmart their much stronger adversary despite never being taken seriously by the adults... any legal scholar worth their salt would tell you that signing a document in your off hand does not render it void.
This list shows the last 10 events of 439. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.ConvictionByCounterfactualClue