What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

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

Greg Russell said:
Heard on the radio the double murder stemmed from one of the victims spilling a drink on Hernandez and smiling or smirking after.

If the Lloyd murder was part of covering up the double murder, that would make three people dead over a spilled drink. Unreal.
Click to expand...
Plus the guy he shot in the face (the presumed witness who will probably prove his eventual undoing in this case).

 
I've said several times already not having the murder weapon won't be that big a deal. Lloyd didn't suddenly get holes in him without a gun. IMO, it would be worse if they found the gun somewhere but could not link it to AH. With the prosecution seemingly going the joint venture route, proving who actually shot him is likely less important anyway. The burden of proof is also different. They have to show that the co-defendants all conspired to plan and carry out a murder. So they have to prove premeditation and that the murder was carried out. Who the trigger man actually was is nowhere near as important.

 
Greg Russell said:
Heard on the radio the double murder stemmed from one of the victims spilling a drink on Hernandez and smiling or smirking after.

If the Lloyd murder was part of covering up the double murder, that would make three people dead over a spilled drink. Unreal.
Click to expand...
He was never taught not to murder over spilt drinks.

 
Small win for Hernandez. Evidence from a few cell phones and tablets was ruled inadmissible as it wasn't covered in the search warrant paperwork properly. The surveillance system and a phone specifically listed on the warrant are still admissible.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/08/26/judge-tosses-out-electronics-evidence-aaron-hernandez/OmPqZCaAFiJb4wxqNPeXpK/story.html

A Bristol Superior Court judge has tossed out evidence from several cellphones and tablets that were seized during a search of former New England Patriots star Aaron Hernandez’s North Attleborough home.

The electronics were seized as investigators probed the slaying of Odin L. Lloyd, which was allegedly committed by Hernandez.

Judge E. Susan Garsh said evidence from an Apple iPhone 5 cellphone, a Blackberry Bold cellphone, an Apple iPad 16GB tablet, and two Apple iPad mini tablets could not be introduced

at Hernandez’s trial on murder charges.

Garsh had previously ruled, however, that prosecutors could bring evidence they had gathered from Hernandez’s surveillance system and from another Blackberry cellphone that investigators had specifically identified as belonging to Hernandez.

Garsh said the search warrant obtained by State Police investigators correctly listed the surveillance system equipment and the cellphone that investigators believed to belong to Hernandez.

But in what appeared to be a paperwork error, she said, the warrant did not list the other devices, even though investigators wanted them.

“The Court attributes the omission to carelessness on the part of [state Police] and not to any loss of interest by law enforcement in seizing the items,” Garsh wrote.

She said that if a sworn statement by a State Police detective had been attached to the warrant specifying the items investigators were looking for — and that affidavit had been present when the search was executed — that could have cured the paperwork problem. But, she said, the affidavit was not attached and there was no evidence it was brought into Hernandez’s home.

“Accordingly, unless the seizure of the cellular phones and iPads can be justified on some other ground, the defendant is entitled to their suppression as well as all fruits of their seizure,” she ruled.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only thing that piece of garbage should be allowed to do is rot in his cell.

He should be hanging upside down in his cell, ala Ben in Life Of Brian.......Quite the jailors pet are we?

 
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/12/key-hernandez-witness-failed-polygraph-test-regarding-shooting/

Key Hernandez witness failed polygraph test regarding shootingPosted by Mike Florio on November 12, 2014, 1:15 PM EST
ortiz.jpg
APThe Odin Lloyd murder trial commences in January. A recent report suggests that the man once believed to be the prosecution’s key witness against former Patriots tight end Aaron Hernandez failed a lie-detector test regarding the question of whether the witness saw Hernandez shoot Lloyd.

Via WVDH.com, Carlos Ortiz showed deceptionwhen denying that he observed the June 2013 shooting in an industrial park near Hernandez’s home.

“I didn’t see what happened,” Ortiz said in the transcript of the polygraph test, after the administrator told Ortiz was lying when he claimed not to see the shooting. “I mean, I seen when everybody got out you know. I was opening the door and that’s when I heard the gunshot.”

The transcript was released in connection with an effort to charge Hernandez’s cousin, Tanya Singleton, with being an accessory to the murder. Singleton is served two years of probation after pleading guilty to contempt of court charges arising from her refusal to testify against Hernandez at a grand jury. She suffers from cancer, and it’s possible that prosecutors have decided to charge her with a more serious crime to persuade Hernandez to strike a plea deal.

Hernandez also is used of killing two men in July 2012. He has been held without bail for more than 15 months.

Early on, it appeared that Ortiz would be the key witness against Hernandez. Concerns regarding drug use and other reasons for unreliability resulted in Ortiz’s relevance to the prosecution of Hernandez fading. It’s unclear why he’s regarded as a reliable witness in the case against Singleton.
Click to expand...
 
NE_REVIVAL said:
The only thing that piece of garbage should be allowed to do is rot in his cell.

He should be hanging upside down in his cell, ala Ben in Life Of Brian.......Quite the jailors pet are we?
Click to expand...
PinkydaPimp said:
Why has this not gone to trial yet?
Click to expand...
Why does it need to go to trial, NE_Revival doesnt need the justice system. He is already locked up anyways and isnt going anywhere so just leave him. The rate he is going he will serve a full murder sentence before he is even convicted of the crime.

 
Guilty or not, he should be privileged to a speedy and fair trial.

I know the overwhelming consensus is he did it and he deserves everything he gets but I say that from the perspective of what should be for everyone. Families of the victims need closure and these things weigh like balls and chains.

IF (IF..BIG IF) he or anyone else who gets arrested happens to be innocent, they should get a speedy and fair trial so that they don't lose years of their lives that they can never get back. I can't imagine if I were innocent and went to jail for 3 years waiting for someone to say "my bad". You can't get that back.

 
Shutout said:
Guilty or not, he should be privileged to a speedy and fair trial.

I know the overwhelming consensus is he did it and he deserves everything he gets but I say that from the perspective of what should be for everyone. Families of the victims need closure and these things weigh like balls and chains.

IF (IF..BIG IF) he or anyone else who gets arrested happens to be innocent, they should get a speedy and fair trial so that they don't lose years of their lives that they can never get back. I can't imagine if I were innocent and went to jail for 3 years waiting for someone to say "my bad". You can't get that back.
Click to expand...
I agree with a speedy trial for the innocents but this isn't some soccer mom who accidentally was in a bizarre situation. I kind of don't mind if the pretend gangsters spend three years in jail even if innocent. It's not like they would be out in the world doing any good, so just rot IMO. Yeah, it isn't a terribly constitutional alignment but I just prefer a better world. Flame away!

 
biju said:
Shutout said:
Guilty or not, he should be privileged to a speedy and fair trial.

I know the overwhelming consensus is he did it and he deserves everything he gets but I say that from the perspective of what should be for everyone. Families of the victims need closure and these things weigh like balls and chains.

IF (IF..BIG IF) he or anyone else who gets arrested happens to be innocent, they should get a speedy and fair trial so that they don't lose years of their lives that they can never get back. I can't imagine if I were innocent and went to jail for 3 years waiting for someone to say "my bad". You can't get that back.
Click to expand...
I agree with a speedy trial for the innocents but this isn't some soccer mom who accidentally was in a bizarre situation. I kind of don't mind if the pretend gangsters spend three years in jail even if innocent. It's not like they would be out in the world doing any good, so just rot IMO. Yeah, it isn't a terribly constitutional alignment but I just prefer a better world. Flame away!
Click to expand...
I hope at some point you have a chance (as I have) to befriend or at least have a serious conversation with someone who was wrongly accused, arrested, and languished for an extended time in prison because, well, the D.A.'s office had more important things to do.

I suspect you would quickly and wholeheartedly change your tune.

 
biju said:
Shutout said:
Guilty or not, he should be privileged to a speedy and fair trial.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The right to a speedy trial is a fallacy. In cases like Hernandez, there's a ton of evidence to gather and he also has to assert his right to a speedy trial.

For non-headline cases, delay is used by prosecutors and police to extract plea bargains. If you impose bail of say $5,000 on someone with little or no money, they will sit in jail until trial, which can be months or years. You can sit in jail for years waiting for trial, or you can plea.

See below article about a 17 year old accused of stealing a backpack who spent 3 years - in jail - waiting for trial.

[SIZE=13.63636302948px]http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/law-3[/SIZE]

Browder’s family could not afford to hire an attorney, so the judge appointed a lawyer named Brendan O’Meara to represent him. Browder told O’Meara that he was innocent and assumed that his case would conclude quickly. Even the assistant district attorney handling the prosecution later acknowledged in court papers that it was a “relatively straightforward case.” There weren’t hours of wiretaps or piles of complicated evidence to sift through; there was just the memory of one alleged victim. But Browder had entered the legal system through the Bronx criminal courts, which are chronically overwhelmed. Last year, the Times, in an extended exposé, described them as “crippled” and among the most backlogged in the country. One reason is budgetary. There are not nearly enough judges and court staff to handle the workload; in 2010, Browder’s case was one of five thousand six hundred and ninety-five felonies that the Bronx District Attorney’s office prosecuted. The problem is compounded by defense attorneys who drag out cases to improve their odds of winning, judges who permit endless adjournments, prosecutors who are perpetually unprepared. Although the Sixth Amendment guarantees “the right to a speedy and public trial,” in the Bronx the concept of speedy justice barely exists.
Click to expand...
In order for a trial to start, both the defense attorney and the prosecutor have to declare that they are ready; the court clerk then searches for a trial judge who is free and transfers the case, and jury selection can begin. Not long after Browder was indicted, an assistant district attorney sent the court a “Notice of Readiness,” stating that “the People are ready for trial.” The case was put on the calendar for possible trial on December 10th, but it did not start that day. On January 28, 2011, Browder’s two-hundred-and-fifty-eighth day in jail, he was brought back to the courthouse once again. This time, the prosecutor said, “The People are not ready. We are requesting one week.” The next court date set by the judge—March 9th—was not one week away but six. As it happened, Browder didn’t go to trial anytime that year. An index card in the court file explains:



June 23, 2011: People not ready, request 1 week.

August 24, 2011: People not ready, request 1 day.

November 4, 2011: People not ready, prosecutor on trial, request 2 weeks.

December 2, 2011: Prosecutor on trial, request January 3rd.
Click to expand...
.... it goes on:

With every trip Browder made to the courthouse, another line was added to a growing stack of index cards kept in the court file:

June 29, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

September 28, 2012: People not ready, request two weeks.

November 2, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

December 14, 2012: People not ready, request one week.
Click to expand...
Judge DiMango explained to Browder, “If you go to trial and lose, you could get up to fifteen.” Then she offered him an even more tempting deal: plead guilty to two misdemeanors—the equivalent of sixteen months in jail—and go home now, on the time already served. “If you want that, I will do that today,” DiMango said. “I could sentence you today. . . . It’s up to you.”
Click to expand...
If he takes a plea, the DA can count the case as "win" and boost his conviction rate for the next election/appointment. He didn't do that and maintained his innocence.

Three years after it began...

On May 29th, the thirty-first court date on Browder’s case, there was another development. DiMango peered down from the bench. “The District Attorney is really in a position right now where they cannot proceed,” she said. “It is their intention to dismiss the case.” She explained that this could not officially happen until the next court date, which ended up being a week later.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Irrelevant said:
biju said:
I agree with a speedy trial for the innocents but this isn't some soccer mom who accidentally was in a bizarre situation. I kind of don't mind if the pretend gangsters spend three years in jail even if innocent. It's not like they would be out in the world doing any good, so just rot IMO. Yeah, it isn't a terribly constitutional alignment but I just prefer a better world. Flame away!
Click to expand...
I hope at some point you have a chance (as I have) to befriend or at least have a serious conversation with someone who was wrongly accused, arrested, and languished for an extended time in prison because, well, the D.A.'s office had more important things to do.

I suspect you would quickly and wholeheartedly change your tune.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, you win the worst person I will encounter today award.

To be fair, the 17 year old in the new yorker article does kinda look like a "pretend" gangster, amirite? And probably would not be doing anything good out in the world like graduating from high school or growing up outside of Rikers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
biju said:
Shutout said:
Guilty or not, he should be privileged to a speedy and fair trial.

I know the overwhelming consensus is he did it and he deserves everything he gets but I say that from the perspective of what should be for everyone. Families of the victims need closure and these things weigh like balls and chains.

IF (IF..BIG IF) he or anyone else who gets arrested happens to be innocent, they should get a speedy and fair trial so that they don't lose years of their lives that they can never get back. I can't imagine if I were innocent and went to jail for 3 years waiting for someone to say "my bad". You can't get that back.
Click to expand...
I agree with a speedy trial for the innocents but this isn't some soccer mom who accidentally was in a bizarre situation. I kind of don't mind if the pretend gangsters spend three years in jail even if innocent. It's not like they would be out in the world doing any good, so just rot IMO. Yeah, it isn't a terribly constitutional alignment but I just prefer a better world. Flame away!
Click to expand...
Just because you think someone looks guilty or looks like a bad person doesn't mean they don't deserve the same rights as anyone else. Its sad that people think like you because that doesnt help make this a "better world."

 
Why are people talking as if Hernandez is languishing in jail while being denied a speedy trial?

His own lawyers supported moving the trial date back because they needed more time to prepare.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Could someone refresh my memory regarding the details of this case? Is this the one where a former NFL player beat Odin Lloyd to death with a switch in an elevator and the whole thing was caught on camera?

 
Raider Nation said:
Just let the guy play, already. Who among us hasn't murdered anyone?
Click to expand...
You know I and I'm sure we really really want to see AH fry for this heinous act, but hypothetically it would be really fun to see how Roger grades this one in his self-invented, ad hoc, made up that day version of a personal conduct policy.

Roger:

"Let's see, I gave Ray Rice two.... no six!.... no a full season!... no, I lied on the stand so.... 12 games suspension for battering his wife and embarrassing me.... annnnnddd I gave Adrian Peterson suspension with pay..... no six games!.... no 15 games!.... for abusing his child. Now what do I give for murder? Hmm, 2 games? No, a season? Yeah, maybe 8 games."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mystery Achiever said:
I can see the argument to exclude other incidents, but what would be rationale for excluding the texts?
Click to expand...
I don't get that at all. Makes no sense, why not let the jury have all of the info. Isn't it fairly important that the murder victim texted his sister that he was with an NFL player when AH is a known associate? I can understand instructing the jury that it may not mean he was afraid for his life, but it is part of the proof that AH was with the victim, which seems important.

Bad argument in my mind. The other incidents I get as if he hasn't been convicted of anything you could argue that the presumption of guilt could sway the jury. The texts? I don't get that at all.

 
stbugs said:
unckeyherb said:
Mystery Achiever said:
I can see the argument to exclude other incidents, but what would be rationale for excluding the texts?
Click to expand...
probably that the texts don't specifically reference Hernandez. Common sense is that they refer to him, but probably too vague to admit as evidence.
Click to expand...
Why? Was the victim know to hang out with other NFLers? Seems like it would be pretty easy to connect him.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Odin Lloyd was a football player, not sure he ever made it in the NFL but I remember reading he bounced around practice squads or something, maybe he assisted players practicing Idk.

 
stbugs said:
unckeyherb said:
Mystery Achiever said:
I can see the argument to exclude other incidents, but what would be rationale for excluding the texts?
Click to expand...
probably that the texts don't specifically reference Hernandez. Common sense is that they refer to him, but probably too vague to admit as evidence.
Click to expand...
Why? Was the victim know to hang out with other NFLers? Seems like it would be pretty easy to connect him.
Click to expand...
Even if the texts said "I'm with Aaron Hernandez," they would not be admissible for the purpose of showing that Lloyd was with Aaron Hernandez. After all, Lloyd could have been lying or mistaken, and he's not available for cross-examination on the subject.

The texts would be admissible in most states, but Massachusetts is a real stickler about hearsay.

Good explanation here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
LittlePhatty said:
PinkydaPimp said:
Raider Nation said:
Winning!
Click to expand...
wow. Going to be tough to convict without that
Click to expand...
Sarcasm?
Click to expand...
Nope. I have said for a while now that i could see him getting off on the murder charges. If i recall there is still no gun. Now no test to place him there. I think there was another person who had info that mysteriously died... Plus he has great lawyers and noone will go on the stand and point the finger at him because he will kill them. Its like all those mob bosses. The gun charge will stick. But at that point he might get time served since its his first criminal offense. It is what it is. Rich people get off for stuff with great lawyers. :unsure:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Faust
Ex-Browns rookie Ausar Walcott charged with attempted murder in N.J.
Replies
24
Views
1K
Donnybrook
Donnybrook
Bracie Smathers
Updated 2014 NFL mocks of the week
Replies
33
Views
2K
Bracie Smathers
Bracie Smathers
Mark Wimer
  • Locked
2012 Preseason Injury Report: 8/29 Final update and revision
Replies
43
Views
11K
Mark Wimer
Mark Wimer

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top