What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Hernandez convicted of first-degree murder; found deceased in his cell. (2 Viewers)

It's not about football either. I'm just confused about the guidelines here. Because if we can start posting about Pearl Jam and the upcoming COD release in the Shark Pool, let's do it. I just was under the assumption Joe deemed it all Serious Business when it came to the SP and discussing football.
Here's an article about the Hernandez situation from this week at NFL.com. When NFL.com starts covering Pearl Jam, people may post about it in the Shark Pool.
Here's an article from NFL.com covering Pearl Jam :lol:
Can't wait for that Phish half-time show.

"Just come back and finish the game tomorrow. We're in the middle of a 30 minute long "You Enjoy Myself" jam."

 
Just finished reading the Rolling Stone article. A couple of random thoughts.

The author seemed to take some shots at BB and Meyer. The article lost a little credibility by doing this. Just report the facts and leave the name calling out of it.

They keep mentioning that AH was seen leaving the house with a Glock .45. The exact same caliber as the casing found in the car and the caliber used to kill Lloyd. A lot of handguns are manufactured in multiple calibers. I'm not sure you would be able to discern a 9mm, .40 cal or .45 glock at a distance of over 6 feet. They use very similar parts, it's mainly the barrel and the inner action that is altered.

I will be curious to watch when this goes to trial. With the technology in use today, it will be really interesting to see all the video footage the prosecution has. It will be like the OJ trial X 100
Haven't read the article yet - thanks for the insight on the gun stuff.
I have visions of the defense holding a Glock in their hand 10 feet from the prosecution's firearms expert as he sits on the witness stand. "Tell me sir, which caliber is the gun I am holding in my hand?"

Vincent Gambini would be proud.

 
Like most of Belichick’s recent gestures, this would come back to burn him – he’d lose Gronkowski and Hernandez to injuries. But the seeds of the fiasco were sown years earlier, when Belichick replaced the Pats’ security chief with a tech-smart Brit named Mark Briggs. The NFL and its teams spend millions each year employing a web of former cops and ex-FBI agents to keep an eye on players and their posses. For decades, the Patriots relied on a homegrown crew of retired state troopers to do surveillance. Whenever a player popped up where he didn’t belong – a strip joint in Southie or a weed spot in Brockton – Frank Mendes, the team security chief from 1990 to 2003 and a former state trooper himself, would get a call from his cop or statie friends, whether they were on payroll or not. “I’d have known within a half-hour if Hernandez had gotten in trouble with police,” he says, “and told Belichick and he’d do whatever.” But when Belichick hired Briggs, who’d managed security at London’s Wembley Stadium and had limited street associates in the States, the tips from cops and troopers dried up. “The Patriots aren’t receptive to those kind of calls,” says a law-enforcement official who knows the team and dislikes Briggs. “It’s not a friendly environment to call over.”
 
With all the new stuff coming out, I don't know how anyone can say this is not a football story, as well.

What did BB know? What did the organization know? BB is supposed to be tight with Urban (I think he got recommendations from Urban in the past about players, spends time with him in the offseason) so what, if anything did Urban know about and did he communicate any of it to BB? Any other current/former NFL players going to be involved in the case as witnesses or more?

I think the s**ts about to hit the fan, especially with the history of Meyer and how he's been a bit cocky in the past when asked about his player's behavior.
I believe he knew everything but out of his arrogance believed he could turn him around.

 
would using PCP during or before make ones on field performance better?
At first I laughed at this, and then I thought about my buddy who's a cop and had a guy on PCP exhibit "Incredible Hulk strength" (his words).

I know LT said cocaine helped him get amped up before games.

Any PCP users can chime in? :shock:

 
would using PCP during or before make ones on field performance better?
At first I laughed at this, and then I thought about my buddy who's a cop and had a guy on PCP exhibit "Incredible Hulk strength" (his words).

I know LT said cocaine helped him get amped up before games.

Any PCP users can chime in? :shock:
i had heard some of that super strength was exaggerated, but i am not certain

if it dulls pain and makes you think you are super strong, i dunno, it may actually help

assuming it does not wack you out so much you cannot function

 
would using PCP during or before make ones on field performance better?
At first I laughed at this, and then I thought about my buddy who's a cop and had a guy on PCP exhibit "Incredible Hulk strength" (his words).

I know LT said cocaine helped him get amped up before games.

Any PCP users can chime in? :shock:
i had heard some of that super strength was exaggerated, but i am not certain

if it dulls pain and makes you think you are super strong, i dunno, it may actually help

assuming it does not wack you out so much you cannot function
Yeah, I really don't know either. It was explained to me as that a normal person will stop struggling because, let's say his arm is about to be broken or he's about to snap a ligament, whereas a drugged up guy (like PCP) will ignore the warning signs that his body is giving and keep pushing, straining, etc. He literally will be pushing his body to the limit and sometimes beyond to get away or up. It seems like he's got more strength but he's actually just pushing his body to extremes to escape.

This was a cop telling me this - not a doctor - but it sounds reasonable.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
would using PCP during or before make ones on field performance better?
At first I laughed at this, and then I thought about my buddy who's a cop and had a guy on PCP exhibit "Incredible Hulk strength" (his words).

I know LT said cocaine helped him get amped up before games.

Any PCP users can chime in? :shock:
i had heard some of that super strength was exaggerated, but i am not certain

if it dulls pain and makes you think you are super strong, i dunno, it may actually help

assuming it does not wack you out so much you cannot function
I never get scared watching movies. The one exception was a documentary on PCP I saw when I was about twelve. They showed (probably dramatic recreations of) people on angel dust performing violent feats involving super-human strength. It gave me nightmares for weeks.

Anyway, according to Wikipedia, while PCP may make people stronger by reducing sensations of pain, it also makes people lose their motor coordination and stumble around like drunken fools. So on the whole, I don't think it would enhance performance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
After reading the article, it clears up how something like this could happen.

Hernandez is/was an extremely angry, lost, heartbroken kid after losing his Father. He does not receive the parental or emotional support he needs from his Mother (or anyone else) and as a result, he falls into the wrong crowd. You combine his tragic personal life with the entitled athlete stuff and you create a ticking time tomb.

 
would using PCP during or before make ones on field performance better?
At first I laughed at this, and then I thought about my buddy who's a cop and had a guy on PCP exhibit "Incredible Hulk strength" (his words).

I know LT said cocaine helped him get amped up before games.

Any PCP users can chime in? :shock:
i had heard some of that super strength was exaggerated, but i am not certain

if it dulls pain and makes you think you are super strong, i dunno, it may actually help

assuming it does not wack you out so much you cannot function
I never get scared watching movies. The one exception was a documentary on PCP I saw when I was about twelve. They showed (probably dramatic recreations of) people on angel dust performing violent feats involving super-human strength. It gave me nightmares for weeks.

Anyway, according to Wikipedia, while PCP may make people stronger by reducing sensations of pain, it also makes people lose their motor coordination and stumble around like drunken fools. So on the whole, I don't think it would enhance performance.
Though that could actually explain some plays...

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
If this was a private conversation between AH and BB, then how can we actually believe it took place as Borges claims in the article ?

Are we actually validating this information from gangsters on angel dust ?

 
This thread isn't really about football anymore and should be moved to the FFA.
But on a football related note, given the quote below, why the hell did they give AH the extension in the first place?
All in the same post... Laughable.
Um, me trying to bring it back on topic is laughable? Yeah, ok. :rolleyes:

I guess I'll just get out of your way so you can go back to FFA-ing in the SP.
My bad... I thought you were saying the topic/thread was not about football, so it should be moved. I didn't realize you meant the thread was off topic.

Carry on... :whistle:

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
BB strikes me as the "What happens in Foxborough, stays in Foxborough" type.

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
BB strikes me as the "What happens in Foxborough, stays in Foxborough" type.
No doubt, I'm sure Urban Meyers feels the same. Its still (somewhat) shocking that this stuff can rise to the level of people shooting at each other and gangs hunting people down and anybody feels like its OK to handle it in house. I'm pretty sure the lawyers, if nothing else, would beg to differ.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
After reading the article, it clears up how something like this could happen.

Hernandez is/was an extremely angry, lost, heartbroken kid after losing his Father. He does not receive the parental or emotional support he needs from his Mother (or anyone else) and as a result, he falls into the wrong crowd. You combine his tragic personal life with the entitled athlete stuff and you create a ticking time tomb.
I think the anger control issues were always there but held in check by a very involved father. With him not there he had nobody to stop him from spiraling out of control.

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
I don't think there is any obligation to report that to the police? I should say, there is no LEGAL obligation, although if you care about the kid it probably wouldn't be the worst idea. Protecting the NFL brand is paramount and NOT reporting it goes against the "protect the seal" mindset. Thats what I meant by being in trouble. I'm sure Darth Goodell isn't happy about it.

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
If this was a private conversation between AH and BB, then how can we actually believe it took place as Borges claims in the article ?

Are we actually validating this information from gangsters on angel dust ?
Borges is a pretty well known and well respected journalist. He quotes a 'source close to Hernandez' but I'd be surprised if he didn't at least attempt to independently verify everything. This isn't some slack-###' blog.

Frankly, does anyone think that this doesn't sound like a total BB move?

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
I don't think there is any obligation to report that to the police? I should say, there is no LEGAL obligation, although if you care about the kid it probably wouldn't be the worst idea. Protecting the NFL brand is paramount and NOT reporting it goes against the "protect the seal" mindset. Thats what I meant by being in trouble. I'm sure Darth Goodell isn't happy about it.
Well thats moving the goalposts a bit- there is no legal obligation to do anything, police or NFL. I don't suppose any of us are going to entertain BB considering his moral obligations, so perhaps at best his ethical obligations are to protect his team and league. My point is (as we are apparently finding out) by not going to the police, BB (if this is true) has created a much bigger publicity problem for himself, the Patriots, and the league. Its bad judgement all the way around. And it could have been worse- if Hernandez had been shot and killed after speaking to BB about being in danger, there would almost certainly be litigation (as difficult as it might be to win) against the league (deep pockets).

 
Four takeaways from the Rolling Stone article:

The case against Hernandez isn’t all that strong. There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence against him, but as of yet there’s very little that would mean a certain conviction. The state’s star witness is the “dust-addled [Carlos] Ortiz,” who was with Hernandez on the night Odin Lloyd died, and whose patchy story, according to Rolling Stone, “is probably worthless if he takes the stand.” Hernandez is thought to be paying Ernest Wallace’s legal bills, and Solotaroff and Borges theorize that Hernandez and Wallace might team up to claim that Ortiz shot Lloyd, and that the two of them were merely innocent bystanders. “Without the gun used in the shooting, a persuasive motive or a witness to the crime and its planning, the state’s chances of winning a conviction on murder in the first will depend entirely on circumstantial evidence,” Solotaroff and Borges write. This, of course, doesn't mean that Hernandez is bound to go free. But, as the story notes, would anyone really be surprised if a guy who has allegedly gotten away with so much in his life escaped punishment once again?
 
Borges is a known plagiarist who has had a hard on for the Pats and BB for over a decade now. If he will steal other people's material is it really much of a stretch to think he would also just make things up?

 
elshagon said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
cobalt_27 said:
It's not about football either. I'm just confused about the guidelines here. Because if we can start posting about Pearl Jam and the upcoming COD release in the Shark Pool, let's do it. I just was under the assumption Joe deemed it all Serious Business when it came to the SP and discussing football.
Here's an article about the Hernandez situation from this week at NFL.com. When NFL.com starts covering Pearl Jam, people may post about it in the Shark Pool.
Here's an article from NFL.com covering Pearl Jam :lol:
Bravo

 
Four takeaways from the Rolling Stone article:

The case against Hernandez isn’t all that strong. There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence against him, but as of yet there’s very little that would mean a certain conviction. The state’s star witness is the “dust-addled [Carlos] Ortiz,” who was with Hernandez on the night Odin Lloyd died, and whose patchy story, according to Rolling Stone, “is probably worthless if he takes the stand.” Hernandez is thought to be paying Ernest Wallace’s legal bills, and Solotaroff and Borges theorize that Hernandez and Wallace might team up to claim that Ortiz shot Lloyd, and that the two of them were merely innocent bystanders. “Without the gun used in the shooting, a persuasive motive or a witness to the crime and its planning, the state’s chances of winning a conviction on murder in the first will depend entirely on circumstantial evidence,” Solotaroff and Borges write. This, of course, doesn't mean that Hernandez is bound to go free. But, as the story notes, would anyone really be surprised if a guy who has allegedly gotten away with so much in his life escaped punishment once again?
Again, as has been discussed multiple times in this thread and in the media, it doesn't matter who the shooter was, they can all be tried for murder one. If the prosecution can show that this was not a random act of violence and was premeditated, then they have the option of charging them all with the same crimes or individually. From what I heard discussed by the legal experts on radio and tv, if any of the three wanted to argue that they were completely innocent and along for the ride (so to speak), they would have had to report the crime and fully cooperate with police ASAP from the time of the shooting. Once they failed to do so, it sounded like they would lose the right to argue that after the fact and certainly a year later. Failure to do so makes them all co-conspirators to murder and also accessories to murder.

From what we think we know so far, I agree that there are some holes in the prosecution's case or that they could use some better evidence. However, I am guessing that we have only a partial accounting of what they are going to go to war with and they are saving that for an actual trial.

I still think they will be able to show video evidence that puts AH and the boys at the scene. Similarly, they will be able to show that there was no one else there so it HAD to be the people in the car that perpetrated the crime. As I mentioned probably 40 pages ago, there should be video of the street and parking lots to show that no one else was there for hours. given that Hernandez won't testify, I am not sure how they could introduce the notion that he had nothing to do with the murder and was just an innocent bystander.

I also don't quite understand the fascination with finding the murder weapon. Unless it has AH's fingerprints all over it, even if it were one of his guns, that still would not prove he was the shooter. Having empty casings at the scene and at the car rental return, IMO, will serve the same purpose as recovering the gun.

 
Borges is a known plagiarist who has had a hard on for the Pats and BB for over a decade now. If he will steal other people's material is it really much of a stretch to think he would also just make things up?
the Globe has had plenty of plagiarists working for them over the years but I never heard that about Borges when he was there.

 
Borges is a known plagiarist who has had a hard on for the Pats and BB for over a decade now. If he will steal other people's material is it really much of a stretch to think he would also just make things up?
the Globe has had plenty of plagiarists working for them over the years but I never heard that about Borges when he was there.
On March 4, 2007, Borges was caught in plagiarism allegations after an online reader revealed that there were extensive similarities between a March 4 article by Borges in the Boston Globe and a February 25 article written by sportswriter Mike Santo of the Tacoma News Tribune. On March 5, Borges was suspended for plagiarism by the Globe, without pay, and barred from broadcast appearances for two months

 
Four takeaways from the Rolling Stone article:

The case against Hernandez isn’t all that strong. There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence against him, but as of yet there’s very little that would mean a certain conviction. The state’s star witness is the “dust-addled [Carlos] Ortiz,” who was with Hernandez on the night Odin Lloyd died, and whose patchy story, according to Rolling Stone, “is probably worthless if he takes the stand.” Hernandez is thought to be paying Ernest Wallace’s legal bills, and Solotaroff and Borges theorize that Hernandez and Wallace might team up to claim that Ortiz shot Lloyd, and that the two of them were merely innocent bystanders. “Without the gun used in the shooting, a persuasive motive or a witness to the crime and its planning, the state’s chances of winning a conviction on murder in the first will depend entirely on circumstantial evidence,” Solotaroff and Borges write. This, of course, doesn't mean that Hernandez is bound to go free. But, as the story notes, would anyone really be surprised if a guy who has allegedly gotten away with so much in his life escaped punishment once again?
I wouldn't be shocked if he finds a way out of this. I would be shocked if he plays for an NFL team ever again.

 
I also don't quite understand the fascination with finding the murder weapon.
Under Massachusetts law, it's perfectly legal to kill somebody as long as you dispose of the gun afterwards.

Oh no, wait, I'm thinking of Texas. Never mind.

I agree with you.
Murder weapon may have more evidence?

His prints?

Stashed in his favorite hiding spot?

Left with a friend who can confirm he said he did it?

etc.

 
I also don't quite understand the fascination with finding the murder weapon.
I've never played a lawyer on TV, but from what I've read this is a very circumstantial case (though still apparently strong.) Seems to me if they could find the gun and run ballistics on it, maybe even lift a print that matches Hernandez, that would strengthen their case. If I were the prosecution and I could present that kind of scientific evidence, I'd be pretty fascinated with finding it too.

Also, its been stated numerous times in this thread that he only needs to be there and not necessarily the guy that pulled the trigger, in order for them to convict for murder. However, they quote heavy hitting defense attorney Anthony Cardinale as saying that "“It’s not a crime to be there if you had no reason to expect that someone would be shot.”

Also, in that article, he says that they (prosecution) are overplaying their hand by charging him with murder 1.

A bigger problem for the prosecution is the all-or-nothing charge they’ve levied against Hernandez. In deciding to try him for murder in the first, they’ll be asking jurors to send a young man to prison for the rest of his life, no parole. “In these cases, juries think that reasonable doubt means no doubt at all,” says Cardinale. “If the defense can create even the slightest crack, he may walk like George Zimmerman walked – probably guilty, but the DA overcharged.”
 
Most evidence is circumstantial. Including the murder weapon. Finding a murder weapon, which belonged to Hernandez, missing the number of rounds recovered from the car and the crime scene, with Hernandez's fingerprints all over them is also circumstantial evidence. You still have to make an inference, that Hernandez used the gun or was present when it was used. Unless you have a confession, an eye witness or a video tape of the moment the crime is committed, just about anything else you can have is circumstantial.

There seems to be a pretty overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence. Other than a jury that wants to acquit him, I don't see how Hernandez gets out of this short of getting a lot of the evidence made inadmissible somehow.

 
There seems to be a pretty overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence. Other than a jury that wants to acquit him, I don't see how Hernandez gets out of this short of getting a lot of the evidence made inadmissible somehow.
I hope so, but alas, I don't have a whole lot of faith in our justice system, unfortunately.

 
Borges is a known plagiarist who has had a hard on for the Pats and BB for over a decade now. If he will steal other people's material is it really much of a stretch to think he would also just make things up?
He was interviewed on Dan Patrick's show yesterday and I thought he came across as a bit of a dooosh.

 
From a prosecutor point of view- the murder weapon is a question mark that is certain to occur to the jury... and given the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, you don't want the jury asking itself those kinds of questions. You never know which detail will equate to reasonable doubt in one or more jurors minds (gloves that may or may not fit?). So you ideally always want to have all your i's dotted and t's crossed. Doesn't happen very often in reality. There isn't really anything unusual about this murder case aside from the name of the accused- dubious witnesses turning on each other, missing murder weapon, circumstance evidence and a seeming attempt to subvert justice by destroying evidence. People go to jail every day based on less... but they dont all have multimillion dollar defense teams either.

 
Most evidence is circumstantial. Including the murder weapon. Finding a murder weapon, which belonged to Hernandez, missing the number of rounds recovered from the car and the crime scene, with Hernandez's fingerprints all over them is also circumstantial evidence. You still have to make an inference, that Hernandez used the gun or was present when it was used. Unless you have a confession, an eye witness or a video tape of the moment the crime is committed, just about anything else you can have is circumstantial.

There seems to be a pretty overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence. Other than a jury that wants to acquit him, I don't see how Hernandez gets out of this short of getting a lot of the evidence made inadmissible somehow.

2 words (probably mentioned in here somewhere...) Casey Anthony
 
"Grossly Overcharged"

Aaron Hernandez will be back in the NFL in three or four years.

Possibly.

“I think (the case) is not only beatable, (but) I think he will be back in the NFL within three or four years,” Rolling Stones contributing editor Paul Solotaroff said on The Doug Gottlieb Show. “I think they’ve grossly overcharged him based on the case they’re building – no direct eye witness, no murder weapon (and) no plausible motive.”

Rolling Stone this week released a story, written by Solotaroff, that traces Hernandez’s path from troubled youth to troubled college player to troubled pro – all the way to a troubled man facing murder charges in the death of Odin Lloyd.

“His principle nemesis at this point is likely to be the five gun charges levied against him; I think they got him dead to right on most of those,” Solotaroff said. “But as crazy as it sounds, this is a guy with no priors. So asking a judge to sentence Hernandez to consecutive prison bids – rather than contemporary ones – is going to be a very hard sell for the prosecution. And if in fact he winds up doing three years behind (bars for) those gun charges – which would be a lot in this case – he’s 26, 27, with very low mileage on those legs of his and a lot of time to heal up. My sources tell me there will be more than one NFL team pursuing him hotly when he walks out of jail in four years.”
 
As far as the actual murder weapon goes, a lot depends on what comes along with it. If they find it with AH's fingerprints, GSR, and the victim's blood on it, it's registered to him, and they have a receipt and video of him buying it, that's a good outcome. Or it could have someone else's fingerprints on it, it could be registered to someone else, and it may have nothing at all to tie it back to Hernandez (which obviously would be a bad outcome). If it were something in the middle, like recovering it after drudging a lake and there are no fingerprints, no serial number, and nothing else to really connect it to AH, then I don't see how that does anything to better prove the prosecution's case (and in reality it could hurt them more than help them).

 
Sure, Roger Goodell is gonna welcome back a guy wrapped up in at least one murder and convicted of multiple gun charges as well as tampering with evidence in a murder investigation. Sounds like Goodell...

 
Borges is a known plagiarist who has had a hard on for the Pats and BB for over a decade now. If he will steal other people's material is it really much of a stretch to think he would also just make things up?
This...

Borges is a clown. By the way, how does one smoke three LaGarrette Blounts in a 15-minute drive from Foxboro to North Attleboro? I'm not buying all of the details of that story. I can't see BB telling Hernandez to get a flop house. Maybe he told him to distance himself from his associates and lay low for awhile if he really thought his life was in danger. Maybe BB realized he was being paranoid/had some mental issues and tried to help the kid without going t the police or NFL which would have made matters worse from Hernandez. Who really knows? NOT Borges though.

 
If they find it with AH's fingerprints, GSR, and the victim's blood on it, it's registered to him, and they have a receipt and video of him buying it, that's a good outcome. Or it could have someone else's fingerprints on it, it could be registered to someone else, and it may have nothing at all to tie it back to Hernandez (which obviously would be a bad outcome).
What's this "good outcome", "bad outcome" nonsense? How is it a "bad outcome" if police are able to prove who actually did it, whether or not it's Hernandez? Isn't finding the real killer what's important here, not making sure Hernandez goes to jail no matter what?

 
If they find it with AH's fingerprints, GSR, and the victim's blood on it, it's registered to him, and they have a receipt and video of him buying it, that's a good outcome. Or it could have someone else's fingerprints on it, it could be registered to someone else, and it may have nothing at all to tie it back to Hernandez (which obviously would be a bad outcome).
What's this "good outcome", "bad outcome" nonsense? How is it a "bad outcome" if police are able to prove who actually did it, whether or not it's Hernandez? Isn't finding the real killer what's important here, not making sure Hernandez goes to jail no matter what?
Everyone in that car that walked away alive is a killer. Evidence seems to be pretty convincing that Hernandez was in the car.

 
If they find it with AH's fingerprints, GSR, and the victim's blood on it, it's registered to him, and they have a receipt and video of him buying it, that's a good outcome. Or it could have someone else's fingerprints on it, it could be registered to someone else, and it may have nothing at all to tie it back to Hernandez (which obviously would be a bad outcome).
What's this "good outcome", "bad outcome" nonsense? How is it a "bad outcome" if police are able to prove who actually did it, whether or not it's Hernandez? Isn't finding the real killer what's important here, not making sure Hernandez goes to jail no matter what?
Everyone in that car that walked away alive is a killer. Evidence seems to be pretty convincing that Hernandez was in the car.
:rolleyes:

Standing next to a crazy guy who pulls a gun out of nowhere and kills a guy isn't illegal. Quit :fishing: with your stinky bait.

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
I don't think there is any obligation to report that to the police? I should say, there is no LEGAL obligation, although if you care about the kid it probably wouldn't be the worst idea. Protecting the NFL brand is paramount and NOT reporting it goes against the "protect the seal" mindset. Thats what I meant by being in trouble. I'm sure Darth Goodell isn't happy about it.
Isn't this thinking similar to McQueary/Paterno (except the evidence in this case is more circumstantial)?

 
If what is in that article is true, I think Urban Meyer is in trouble and honestly, so is BB. I would think that if an NFL player goes to their coach and says he fears for his life due to gang relations, that coach would be OBLIGATED to report it to the league; to protect the player and the brand. BB telling him to 'get a safe-house' is not the kind of advice that the NFL wants to be portrayed as giving out.

Just sayin
How about the police?
I don't think there is any obligation to report that to the police? I should say, there is no LEGAL obligation, although if you care about the kid it probably wouldn't be the worst idea. Protecting the NFL brand is paramount and NOT reporting it goes against the "protect the seal" mindset. Thats what I meant by being in trouble. I'm sure Darth Goodell isn't happy about it.
Isn't this thinking similar to McQueary/Paterno (except the evidence in this case is more circumstantial)?
How is this even remotely similar? McQueary witnessed an actual crime: underage rape on School property and reported it to Paterno, who in turn did not report it even though as a state employee working at a university, he was obligated to report it to police.

BB was told by one his players that he was afraid he was being targeted by gangsters? Where is the crime that BB witnessed?

I think he was probably obligated in Goodell's eyes to at least report the issue to Pats security and possibly league officials as well. Beyond that, I don't see how the two are similar at all.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top