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!

Why don't we discuss Aaron Hernandez here? (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
T Bell said:
PatsWillWin said:
He can be there and still not be guilty of murder via the felony murder rule or whatever it is. I think the suggested "theory" is that his two friends randomly (or maybe while crazed on PCP or something) killed Lloyd and Hernandez had no idea it was going to happen. Not very believable, but as others have said, they couldn't really deny he was there, so might as well admit that and still try and squeeze in some reasonable doubt.

Kinda reminds me of when George Costanza is called out for banging a cleaning lady on a desk at work. He considers his options for a second, and then just goes with "Should I not have done that? I gotta claim ignorance on that one."
Click to expand...
I know what you're trying to argue, but felony murder operates almost the opposite of what you seem to think. Felony murder works as follows: if you are participating in any "violent felony"* and someone dies as part of that (even one of your cohort who's helping to commit the violent felony), you are guilty of murder just as if you'd pulled trigger (or did whatever else brought about the person's death). Felony murder is not a defense to a criminal charge; it IS the criminal charge.

I agree with you otherwise, though. admitting he was present is a major concession and a last ditch effort to get reasonable doubt. It's far more convincing (if you can carry it off) to say you were never there and weren't involved. The defense team obviously felt they couldn't argue that convincingly anymore and they've taken a fall-back position.

*Traditionally, "violent felonies" have included murder, robbery, rape, arson, kidnapping, assault and perhaps one or two others; the common thread is either a physical confrontation of some kind or out and out dangerous conduct. It doesn't include, for example, fraud.
Click to expand...
This was undeniable... The prosecution has basically proven he was there beyond any reasonable doubt. To ignore this was to concede he was a participant. They didn't have much of a choice in admitting he was there.

 
Fat Nick said:
T Bell said:
Felony murder works as follows: if you are participating in any "violent felony"* and someone dies as part of that (even one of your cohort who's helping to commit the violent felony), you are guilty of murder just as if you'd pulled trigger (or did whatever else brought about the person's death).
Click to expand...
So I have a serious question on the above...two scenarios I'm hoping someone can help me understand...I'll use Hernandez's name, but I'm not really speculating as to whether either of these may have happened, I'm more interested in the legal view...assuming they did.

Scenario 1 - Hernandez, Lloyd, and his buddies drive out to this industrial park to hang out. Nobody went against their will. While there, randomly, AH's buddies just pull out a gun and shoot Lloyd. Hernandez had no clue. Under this scenario, there was no participation by AH in a violent felony. He was just there. They didn't kidnap Lloyd or anything. Is AH guilty of murder here?

Scenario 2 - If scenario 1's answer is "no," then I guess my next question is whether the commission of a "violent felony" includes the cover-up...i.e. if Hernandez had no clue they were going to shoot Lloyd, and he didn't participate, he didn't play a role in any violent felony...until afterwards, when perhaps his "role" was to help with the cover-up. Does simply participating in the cover-up count? Consider a different case if it makes it easier to grasp...for those of you familiar with the Serial podcasts...Assume Adnand killed Hae by himself. Assume Jay helped Adnand bury her. Could Jay's participation in the cover-up after the fact make him eligible for a murder charge even though he had no role in her death?
Click to expand...
In both scenarios he's not guilty of murder. In scenario 2 he's an "accessory after the fact" - a felony, but not nearly as serious as murder
 
T Bell said:
PatsWillWin said:
He can be there and still not be guilty of murder via the felony murder rule or whatever it is. I think the suggested "theory" is that his two friends randomly (or maybe while crazed on PCP or something) killed Lloyd and Hernandez had no idea it was going to happen. Not very believable, but as others have said, they couldn't really deny he was there, so might as well admit that and still try and squeeze in some reasonable doubt.

Kinda reminds me of when George Costanza is called out for banging a cleaning lady on a desk at work. He considers his options for a second, and then just goes with "Should I not have done that? I gotta claim ignorance on that one."
Click to expand...
I know what you're trying to argue, but felony murder operates almost the opposite of what you seem to think. Felony murder works as follows: if you are participating in any "violent felony"* and someone dies as part of that (even one of your cohort who's helping to commit the violent felony), you are guilty of murder just as if you'd pulled trigger (or did whatever else brought about the person's death). Felony murder is not a defense to a criminal charge; it IS the criminal charge.

I agree with you otherwise, though. admitting he was present is a major concession and a last ditch effort to get reasonable doubt. It's far more convincing (if you can carry it off) to say you were never there and weren't involved. The defense team obviously felt they couldn't argue that convincingly anymore and they've taken a fall-back position.

*Traditionally, "violent felonies" have included murder, robbery, rape, arson, kidnapping, assault and perhaps one or two others; the common thread is either a physical confrontation of some kind or out and out dangerous conduct. It doesn't include, for example, fraud.
Click to expand...
Felony murder wasn't the right term - it's the joint venture law that MA has. Basically if he was there, participated in some way, and had the intent required for the crime, he's guilty under the joint venture rule.

By admitting he was there (which was pretty much irrefutable anyways), in order to have reasonable doubt, the defense really has to give some kind of possible explanation as to how one of two of Hernandez's crew could've/would've executed one of his best friends a mile from his house while he's there when Hernandez had no idea it was going to happen. Pretty hard to imagine how that could be. I know the burden of proof isn't on the defense, but it's almost like it kinda is now since there has to be an explanation for him being there for the murder but not participating/knowing about it in any way.

 
TheIronSheik said:
Here's a good article on what he faces.

He may be promising money to people to stay quiet, but dude is broke.
Click to expand...
Promising money does not necessarily mean he has the money. Besides given how stupid he's been, I would not be surprised if he seriously thinks he can beat this and get signed by a team before training camp.

 
Rayderr said:
TheIronSheik said:
Here's a good article on what he faces.

He may be promising money to people to stay quiet, but dude is broke.
Click to expand...
Promising money does not necessarily mean he has the money. Besides given how stupid he's been, I would not be surprised if he seriously thinks he can beat this and get signed by a team before training camp.
Click to expand...
Oh, yeah, sure. I get that. But if he was promising money to me, I'd be thinking, "What money?" Of course, that's assuming his friends are brighter than he is.

 
TheIronSheik said:
Rayderr said:
TheIronSheik said:
Here's a good article on what he faces.

He may be promising money to people to stay quiet, but dude is broke.
Click to expand...
Promising money does not necessarily mean he has the money. Besides given how stupid he's been, I would not be surprised if he seriously thinks he can beat this and get signed by a team before training camp.
Click to expand...
Oh, yeah, sure. I get that. But if he was promising money to me, I'd be thinking, "What money?" Of course, that's assuming his friends are brighter than he is.
Click to expand...
His friends might be as guilty as he is, which is reason enough for them to keep their mouths shut.

 
Then there is Bradley, who alleges Hernandez shot him in the face in February 2013, as they drove back from a night of partying at a South Florida strip club. In a civil suit, Bradley, who now has just one eye due to the alleged attack, said he and Hernandez were arguing over how the drink bill should be split before Hernandez pulled over, shot him and dumped him in a field on the side of the road. He may have died if not for being discovered by workers at a nearby John Deere dealership. Bradley refused to cooperate with Florida police, so no criminal charges were filed.
Click to expand...
:shock:

 
Aaron Hernandez judge threatens to ban TV station
FALL RIVER, Mass. -- The judge in the murder trial of former New England Patriots player Aaron Hernandez said Thursday that a TV station would be banned from the courthouse unless someone testifies under oath about what happened when a station worker allegedly followed two jurors.

The jurors told Superior Court Judge Susan Garsh on Thursday morning that they were followed by employees of Boston station WHDH-TV the previous day, their second day of deliberations.

Garsh said it was a serious matter and a felony and could have resulted in a mistrial. Currently there are 12 jurors and three alternates; a mistrial could be declared if the jury pool falls below 12 due to potential dismissals.

The station said in a statement that it "did not approach any juror or talk to any juror. We also did not videotape or take pictures of any juror.''

The judge gave the station until 12:15 p.m. to have the driver or a higher-up testify about what happened.

"I'd like the person in the van to tell me whether anyone in the company directed him,'' Garsh said.

If the driver wants to assert his Fifth Amendment right not to testify, "At a minimum I want someone from the company to say what investigation they've done,'' she said.

She said if that did not happen, she had no choice but to draw the inference that he was directed by the station to follow the jurors.

Garsh also banned the driver, who has not been identified, from being anywhere near the courthouse, and said she was issuing a written order that no one shall approach, follow, contact, harass, photograph or take down the license plates of jurors.

Hernandez is charged with the June 2013 shooting death of Odin Lloyd, who was dating his fiancee's sister.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hung jury is pretty much a done deal now, isn't it? If you can hold out five days, you can hold out 105 days :shrug:

No stats, but it sure seems like murder cases with high media profiles favor the defendant tremendously. Almost like some jurors don't want to hand down a "famous" conviction.

 
TheIronSheik said:
Here's a good article on what he faces.

He may be promising money to people to stay quiet, but dude is broke.
Click to expand...
If you are in jail facing the kind of time he has, why still have a 7100 foot house. honestly, either sell it or walk away so you can preserve capital. i guess these are not the sharpest tools in the shed to begin with.

 
McGarnicle said:
How is he not guilty beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt?
Click to expand...
I didn't pay a lot of attention to the evidence that was introduced at trial. But as far as I understand things, there are two ways to convict Hernandez of murder.

1. Prove that he pulled the trigger. There's some evidence of this, but it may not be beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Joint venture liability. He's culpable even if he didn't pull the trigger as long as he took part in the overall plan. The difficulty here, though, is proving intent. If Hernandez didn't pull the trigger, how do we prove that he intended that Lloyd be killed? (Especially without testimony from Wallace or Ortiz.) There may be pretty good evidence on this point -- as I said, I didn't really pay attention -- but it seems like an inherently difficult thing to prove without testimony from the alleged co-conspirators.

 
Doug B said:
Hung jury is pretty much a done deal now, isn't it? If you can hold out five days, you can hold out 105 days :shrug:

No stats, but it sure seems like murder cases with high media profiles favor the defendant tremendously. Almost like some jurors don't want to hand down a "famous" conviction.
Click to expand...
I've had juries go 2-3 weeks in patent infringement cases and come to consensus. A high profile murder case? Definitely ain't over yet.

 
Otis said:
Doug B said:
Hung jury is pretty much a done deal now, isn't it? If you can hold out five days, you can hold out 105 days :shrug:

No stats, but it sure seems like murder cases with high media profiles favor the defendant tremendously. Almost like some jurors don't want to hand down a "famous" conviction.
Click to expand...
I've had juries go 2-3 weeks in patent infringement cases and come to consensus. A high profile murder case? Definitely ain't over yet.
Click to expand...
Especially for one that went 2 months. That's a lot of notes to sift through. I do find it interesting that the jury has not asked the judge any questions related to the murder charge.

 
They said life in prison with no chance of parole. Does Mass do it differently than other states? I thought first they did the guilty/not guilty thing. Then went on to the sentencing.

And, again, as I typed that, I know that's wrong. Because the Boston Marathon Bomber was convicted and now they are in the sentencing phase. I'm a little confused here. :confused:

 
TheIronSheik said:
They said life in prison with no chance of parole. Does Mass do it differently than other states? I thought first they did the guilty/not guilty thing. Then went on to the sentencing.

And, again, as I typed that, I know that's wrong. Because the Boston Marathon Bomber was convicted and now they are in the sentencing phase. I'm a little confused here. :confused:
Click to expand...
Guessing certain charges have mandatory sentencing.

 
I think he really was expecting to get off until the very, very end. Watching a man like him when that kind if verdict is read aloud is really something. He seemed surprised but not like a guy who had just been wrongly convicted.

 
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
They said life in prison with no chance of parole. Does Mass do it differently than other states? I thought first they did the guilty/not guilty thing. Then went on to the sentencing.

And, again, as I typed that, I know that's wrong. Because the Boston Marathon Bomber was convicted and now they are in the sentencing phase. I'm a little confused here. :confused:
Click to expand...
Guessing certain charges have mandatory sentencing.
Click to expand...
Was the BMB case a federal case? Would that have made a difference? I don't think Mass has the death penalty, do they?

 
In light of this news, I won't let anyone draft him on their fantasy team next year. He is officially banned from our league.

 
TheIronSheik said:
RUSF18 said:
TheIronSheik said:
They said life in prison with no chance of parole. Does Mass do it differently than other states? I thought first they did the guilty/not guilty thing. Then went on to the sentencing.

And, again, as I typed that, I know that's wrong. Because the Boston Marathon Bomber was convicted and now they are in the sentencing phase. I'm a little confused here. :confused:
Click to expand...
Guessing certain charges have mandatory sentencing.
Click to expand...
Was the BMB case a federal case?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure this is it because the ####er on trial is accused of using a WMD.

 
Going to need an updated valuation on my 2014 Florida Gators calendar, still sealed. Pawn Stars, to the white courtesy phone.

 
I am going to the Shark Pool now to see if anyone is cryig foul at the verdict. A few people had been beating the "no motive, no weapon, no case" drum for a while, predicting an acquital.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
Still a few Footballguys Magazines left! - Something Fun Announcing Monday. Would Love Your Support
3 4 5
Replies
218
Views
7K
Mjolnirs
Mjolnirs
NCCommish
So how's it going?
2
Replies
71
Views
1K
NCCommish
NCCommish
offdee
The new Aaron Hernandez miniseries (lol)
Replies
12
Views
825
offdee
offdee

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top