wu :: forums - Print Page


    
      
        wu :: forums
        (http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        riddles >> what happened >> WEDDING RING FINGER
        
(Message started by: Macduff472y on Apr 26^th, 2003, 11:42am)

Title: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Macduff472y on Apr 26^th, 2003, 11:42am

A woman with her wedding ring finger missing and a man step off of a train and are met by a man they haven't seen for thirty years. The man pulls a gun and shoots the woman dead. However, the police take no action.

The big question is:
Why?

Title: Re: IF SOMEONE KNOWS THE ANSWER, PLEASE TELL ME!
Post by Kitty on Apr 26^th, 2003, 1:09pm

Write meaningful titles.
:P
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=riddles_easy;action=display;num=1036468244
;D

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Macduff472y on Apr 26^th, 2003, 4:30pm

Thanks for the advice Kitty, but do you have a solution?

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by maryl on Apr 26^th, 2003, 4:52pm

I seem to remember hearing this one before, but I can't remember exactly. I think the man they met was her husband from years before; and she had told him she wanted to leave him but he would only agree if they would fake her kidnapping. They cut her finger off and told the police the kidnappers had killed her.
I hope I'm not too far off here.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Macduff472y on Apr 26^th, 2003, 5:01pm

I don't know the answer myself, but why would the police not arrest the guy?...I don't know. :-/

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by jon_G on Apr 26^th, 2003, 7:37pm

I have seen this situation in a movie before, so my guess is that the man was arrested for the kidnapping and murder of his wife. So 30 years later the husband gets out of jail and finds the wife that framed him and decides to kill her since he already did the time in jail. That is why the police didn't do anything to the man. I don't know why he didn't kill the other man also, maybe he didn't want to go back to jail for another 30. heh in this case, do the time then do the crime. ;)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Macduff472y on Apr 27^th, 2003, 6:08am

;D This has been bothering for a while, thanks a bunch.
:-* 8)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Kitty on Apr 27^th, 2003, 10:14am

on 04/27/03 at 06:08:33, Macduff472y wrote:

;D This has been bothering for a while, thanks a bunch.

Your welcome! (even though i did not do anything ;D)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Sir Col on May 28^th, 2003, 6:13pm

Argh! I heard this problem nearly two years ago now and I've never found the answer that the person who asked me the puzzle expected. I have made countless suggestions, but they've all failed so far, including the idea of the woman being married to the killer and the 'double jeopardy' principle.

Other ideas I've tried: the killer was a soldier and the train was arriving at a concentration camp; the woman was a clone (clones are products of replication and not procreation and so they are not protected by human laws); the killer was a siamese twin and it is not possible to send both to prison when one insisted that they had no part in the crime; and many more!

I have been reliably informed that the woman did not know the killer.

I am absolutely desperate to find the answer to this! In fact, I'd do anything to find the answer. Even if it meant giving my wedding ring finger, having a sex change and at some point in the future being be met by some mysterious man on a train platform and getting shot by him. Aha! :)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by pedronunezmd on Jun 20^th, 2004, 6:38pm

To resurrect an old riddle here: is the double jeopardy answer the "correct" one?

A sidebar question: Would double jeopardy rules actually prevent someone from being arrested and convicted of a murder like this one? There was a movie like this recently as well, I think it was called "Double Jeopardy" where the wife is convicted of murder and later goes after her actually-alive ex-husband.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Speaker on Jul 21^st, 2004, 7:04pm

I do not think that double jeopardy would hold in this case. The first case is tried for the murder on such and such a date in such and such a place (how they convict without a body is another question).

The second murder takes place at a different time and location, so it is a different crime.

In the first case, he was falsely convicted, and should get some form of recompense from the state (maybe $1 a day for time served).

I think the two crimes are different, so no double jeopardy. But, I think the riddle is asking for the double jeopary answer.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by alien on Jul 22^nd, 2004, 3:50am

[hide]Police did nothing because they weren't there.[/hide]

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by EZ Lonny on Jul 27^th, 2004, 5:46am

Couldnt it just be so, that the woman is the criminal, the man in the train was the hostage and the man at the station was a member of the SWAT-team?

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by DeMark on Aug 2^nd, 2004, 10:23am

No, the jon_G's answer is the right one. This is one of my favourite riddles.

Hey, Alien, don't you think the other man would call the police? :)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Three Hands on Aug 3^rd, 2004, 9:08am

Well, DeMark, I imagine it depends on whether the man believed he should. For instance, the other man, apparantly an old friend from 30 years ago, may well have just done what the man himself was longing to do, and so they both agree to dispose of the body in a location where it wouldn't be found - I'd say where, but I haven't found it yet :P - and then kept quiet about the incident. The woman having no surviving family or sufficiently inquisitive friends is forgotten about, and so no report is ever made to the police. For some reason, no-one was at the station when the woman stepped off the train to witness the event either...

However, I agree that jon_G's answer is the more plausible (although I'm sure King_T can provide some suitable explanation involving government conspiracies, corrupt police forces which were told not to get involved by the CIA who were covering everything up due to some Colombian drug baron being involved in setting up the hit, and blackmailing the FBI with stolen evidence of UFO's having infiltrated NATO, or something like that ;D)

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by DeMark on Aug 3^rd, 2004, 10:39am

Well, I must admit that the other man does not appear in my version. So, I don't know how he reacted. :P

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Grimbal on Aug 3^rd, 2004, 2:21pm

OK. Next time I need to kill someone, I just tell the police it is a case of double jeopardy. So they won't bother arresting me. ;D

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by John G on Aug 4^th, 2004, 6:21am

The woman had faked her death earlier and her husband was prosecuted for her faked murder. So when her husband got out of jail 30 years later, he kills her for real. But the law says you cannot be prosecuted twice for the same crime. (Double Jeopardy) Since the husband had already done time for killing his wife, he cannot be arrested twice for it.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Three Hands on Aug 4^th, 2004, 9:01am

Of course, if it was a case of double jeopardy, I would imagine that the police would get involved, but the man would not be convicted a second time for the murder. The police would still, I imagine, investigate appropriately, and then, after receiving the confession of the murderer and identification of all involved, as well as uncovering the criminal record for the man, be satisfied with the conclusion of the investigation.

However, the police didn't get involved, so I guess either a cover-up happened, meaning no report was made to the police, or the investigation was immediately taken up by the CIA, FBI or Army, or some other similar organisation which could claim jurisdiction over the police - thus not involving the police.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by uhhhhh on Jul 20^th, 2005, 12:00pm

It's a play on words.
The riddle says "shoots the woman dead".
In other words he shoots her while she's dead.
This is the only other solution I can come up with other than the double jeopardy one.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by River_Phoenix on Jul 21^st, 2005, 7:58am

As written, I don't think it's a play on words, I doubt that this was the original wording of the puzzle.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by SWF on Oct 9^th, 2006, 7:44pm

This took place a while ago in Iraq. The woman was picked as a baby by Saddam Hussein for the secret Iraqi Women's Olympic track team based on the premise that ring finger length is linked to running ablility of women (http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/09/28/tech-finger-length.html). When she accidently lost her ring finger and never did become an outstanding athlete, Uday Hussein, known for his brutal treatment of Iraqi athletes brought her by train to Saddam, who had last seen her 30 years ago, and she was executed. Saddam wanted to make sure she was killed to prevent anyone knowing that he was secretly considering allowing women in the Olympics. Of course, no police would dare arrest the Husseins.

Another very plausable explanation: The woman was a fugitive assassin who came to town by train with her associate, but her old nemesis from 30 years ago happened to be at the station. He is a federal agent. The agent pulled a gun and asked her to surrender, but she went for her weapon and was shot. Being a federal matter, the police were not involved in this case. The woman was a member of the Yakuza- the Japanese organized crime group known for cutting off fingers of their left hands.

Title: Re: WEDDING RING FINGER
Post by Michael_Dagg on Oct 9^th, 2006, 9:04pm

Obviously there is some irony to be found here -- interesting about the ring finger length.