PATRIOTS NEWS Explosive New Hernandez Details

[DaBruinz]

Too much stuff going on with hernandez. It's clear the guy has a temper issue. Evn if he didn't pull the trigger, he is facing jail time with conspiracy. His career might be over. Pats will cut him in a few weeks - time to move onto ballard.

How do you know that he is facing jail time for conspiracy? Could you please show us the evidence that the police have that proves this??

 

[Deus Irae]

As was pointed out this is a messageboard not a courtroom. I admit that I could be wrong but the rate and volume of disturbing details is overriding my fanbot hopes that AH had no involvment.

Is it possible that all these reports are wrong? Yes

Is it probable that enough of them are accurate relative to formulating a reasonable belief as to his involvement? Yes

While the issuance of a search warrant does not imply guilt a judge has to sign off after reviewing the MSP affadavidt, IIRC 2 warrants have been issued so far. I'm leaning toward the info not being a bunch of coincidences being falsely reported by the media.

So what you're saying is that you'll never learn. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the wisdom in that approach. What happened with Sunil Tripathi should have served as a stronger warning to people than it seems to have done.

Then again, Richard Jewell's situation never taught us a damned thing, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[belichick010405]

Really? Please provide said code that says that a surveillance system that was broken days or even weeks before a felony means that the owner of the equipment is guilty of obstruction?? Or if someone else broke the equipment that Hernandez is guilty of Obstruction.. If that was the case, then there would be a lot more store owners paying fines for broken surveillance equipment.

Bruinz - I am not going to get in a pissing match but if you cannot do a search on the US Code for the titles covering Obstruction of Justice as well as the Massachusetts precedents regarding the spoliation of evidence then I don't know what to tell you.

Spoliation of evidence occurs when there is an intent to willfully destruct evidence or there is an intent in failing to preserve potential evidence for another's use in pending or future litigation. This has been marked in precedent in Massachusetts codification for quite sometime.

Stop reaching. I get your position but to make remarks about the destruction of potential evidence is not only ridiculous from a statutory and legal precedent perspective but it doesn't make any common sense.

With that said - I hope that Aaron did not willfully destruct evidence.

 

[DaBruinz]

Anyone catch the Fox25 video of the reporters harassing Hernandez at the Gas Station? All they did was throw questions at him that he ignored. One of the questions was "Are you going to turn yourself in"? As if they'd already decided he was guilty or that the news of the arrest warrant was somehow factual..

http://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer...&p[0]=10202050892772953&sharer_type=all_modes

 

[PATRlOT]

Doesn't look good at all

I hope I'm wrong but I think he's definitely guilty of doing something wrong and won't be on the field for part, or all of the season.

I've never had such a bad feeling about a season since the day Brady got hurt Week 1 in 2008.

"Bad feeling" as in, not much confidence in winning a SuperBowl


Just being honest about how I feel about this whole thing...not pessimistic or anything

 

[DaBruinz]

Bruinz - I am not going to get in a pissing match but if you cannot do a search on the US Code for the titles covering Obstruction of Justice as well as the Massachusetts precedents regarding the spoliation of evidence then I don't know what to tell you.

Spoliation of evidence cannot occur when there is an intent to willfully destruct evidence or there is an intent in failing to preserve potential evidence for another's use in pending or future litigation. This has been marked in precedent in Massachusetts codification for quite sometime.

Stop reaching. I get your position but to make remarks about the destruction of potential evidence is not only ridiculous from a statutory and legal precedent perspective but it doesn't make any common sense.

With that said - I hope that Aaron did not willfully destruct evidence.

EDIT: You are the one who brought up the US Code about Obstruction claiming that it debunked what I said. Yet, you then refuse to provide the particular code as your source. That's on you. Not me. It puts a hole in your argument, not mine, when you can't be bothered to back up your statements.

You are the one reaching here. You are taking as fact a "anonymous source" that claims to be repeating something from the police. Fact is that you don't know when the system was destroyed. For all we know, Ty Warren destroyed the system when he was cut by the Patriots and Hernandez never got the system fixed.

So please stop jumping to conclusions about what I am saying because your over-reactions are the issue.

 

[Claremonster]

Doesn't look good at all

I hope I'm wrong but I think he's definitely guilty of doing something wrong and won't be on the field for part, or all of the season.

I've never had such a bad feeling about a season since the day Brady got hurt Week 1 in 2008.

"Bad feeling" as in, not much confidence in winning a SuperBowl


Just being honest about how I feel about this whole thing...not pessimistic or anything

I didn't realize that one player made the season...sans Brady.

 

[mgcolby]

O.J. was aquitted, yet you agree that he did it.

Yup....if I were on the jury I would have voted guilty. Because all of the known facts, results of the police investigation and tests, all of the expert witness testimony and all of the witnesses testimony were revealed. After all of that, and I watched most of it if not all of the trial, I believed he was guilty.

None of that has played out in this situation....yet. So again, I ask you the relevance.... You are smarter than this...were you just trying to get me to type out a coherent distinction regarding the differences between the two situations?

 

[Banjo]

Looks like we have a lot of lurkers at the moment. Nothing like a scandal to bring in the page views!

 

[Deus Irae]

Yup....if I were on the jury I would have voted guilty. Because all of the known facts, results of the police investigation and tests, all of the expert witness testimony and all of the witnesses provided testimony were revealed. After all of that and I watched most of it if not all of the trial I believed he was guilty.

None of that has played out in this situation....yet. So again, I ask you the relevance.... You are smarter than this...were you just trying to get me to type out a coherent distinction regarding the differences between the two situations?

As I said, I agree with your principle here. However, O.J. was aquitted. Under the "innocent until proven guilty" standard, you've got no business agreeing with me that he's guilty. It's one thing to demand the standard in court. It's another to expect individuals not to make such decisions for themselves outside the legal framework. The best that we can ask (and I'm with you on this, and am discussing it with Brick Pat) is that they wait for the evidence to be in, verfied and/or conceded.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

As was pointed out, this is a messageboard not a courtroom. I admit that I could be wrong but the rate and volume of disturbing details is overriding my fanbot hopes that AH had no involvment.

Is it possible that all these reports are wrong? Yes

Is it probable that enough of them are accurate relative to formulating a reasonable belief as to his involvement? Yes

While the issuance of a search warrant does not imply guilt a judge has to sign off after reviewing the MSP affadavidt, IIRC 2 warrants have been issued so far. I'm leaning toward the info not being a bunch of coincidences being falsely reported by the media.

None of us know squat beyond what the media are reporting. As a result, since the media could well be biased, incompetent or lazy (or some combination of those three), we can have no idea at this time how things might or might not add up in the end.

Let's just wait and see the results of the investigation at such time as when the police and prosecutors have a more complete picture and are ready to release their findings to the public.

 

[SB39]

Yet it is private citizens that sit in jury boxes....

And I agree OJ did it but I'm really not seeing the relevance here to OJ.....OJ ran, had a trial where the facts from the police investigation were brought in front of a jury and the nation....Right now all we have is a ton of media reports speculating and reporting whatever bone they are thrown.

Again, I'm not seeing the comparison at this point.

The comparison is that everytime someone declares they believe in "innocent until proven guilty" then that person must either believe OJ is innocent, or they are a hypocrite.

Simple fact is that "innocent until proven guilty" is the rule in a court of law, but out here we can all talk and speculate all we want because nothing that anyone in here says will result in anyone going to jail.

Would I say Hernandez has right now been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Of course not. But I am perfectly comfortable at this point saying I think he is guilty. (Not necessarily guilty of being the triggerman, but of being involved in some way)

 

[Bella*chick]

I have to laugh at the notion that the cleaning crew was "scrubbing" anything. Having hired cleaning crews myself, the only time they scrub anything is on their initial visit. After that you're lucky if they remember to run a dustcloth over anything.

 

[A.C Vegas]

Anyone catch the Fox25 video of the reporters harassing Hernandez at the Gas Station? All they did was throw questions at him that he ignored. One of the questions was "Are you going to turn yourself in"? As if they'd already decided he was guilty or that the news of the arrest warrant was somehow factual..

http://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer...&p[0]=10202050892772953&sharer_type=all_modes

I saw it on the fox 25 site and frankly i loved the way he handled it he didn't get angry he didn't answer anything just went about his business and that was it. The reporters looked foolish as all hell all but begging for something from him.

It is a sad state of our country when this is what we see now

 

[QB12]

^^ well-said.

 

[SB39]

To be fair a star TE with a huge contract and a huge house isn't going to be spending his off time cleaning his own home, and that goes for his wife as well.

Pretty much everyone in that situation will hire others to take care of that stuff. I can guarantee he doesn't mow his own lawn or trim his own hedges either. Hiring house cleanings by itself isn't a red flag

Actually, someone who has suddenly and out of the blue decided to have their house scrubbed clean from basement to attic does raise red flags. It's not the sort of thing that would be admissible in a court of law, but it is the sort of thing that would make a detective go "hmmmmmmmmmmmmm"

 

[SB39]

Too much stuff going on with hernandez. It's clear the guy has a temper issue. Evn if he didn't pull the trigger, he is facing jail time with conspiracy. His career might be over. Pats will cut him in a few weeks - time to move onto ballard.

I don't think they'll cut him. I may be mistaken, but I think their wisest play is to keep him as declare him as not having reported to camp.

 

[A.C Vegas]

The comparison is that everytime someone declares they believe in "innocent until proven guilty" then that person must either believe OJ is innocent, or they are a hypocrite.

Simple fact is that "innocent until proven guilty" is the rule in a court of law, but out here we can all talk and speculate all we want because nothing that anyone in here says will result in anyone going to jail.

Would I say Hernandez has right now been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Of course not. But I am perfectly comfortable at this point saying I think he is guilty. (Not necessarily guilty of being the triggerman, but of being involved in some way)

I am not even comfortable with him being "involved" is some way outside of knowing who the victim was. There are way too many conflicting reports out there too many "news" organization trying to scoop one another. Why are there so many leaks I thought the police were supposed to "not comment on an open investagation" we hear that all the time yet in this case we know way more details then in most other high profile cases

 

[upstater1]

Actually, someone who has suddenly and out of the blue decided to have their house scrubbed clean from basement to attic does raise red flags. It's not the sort of thing that would be admissible in a court of law, but it is the sort of thing that would make a detective go "hmmmmmmmmmmmmm"

"Hi, Mrs. Johnson, we heard you were at Aaron Hernandez's house scrubbing away."

"Yes, he asked me to come on a Monday instead of my usual Tuesday."

"Uh-huh. And what were you scrubbing."

"There was a whole pool of blood all over the floor in the kitchen."

"You don't say."

 

[Zeus]

The comparison is that everytime someone declares they believe in "innocent until proven guilty" then that person must either believe OJ is innocent, or they are a hypocrite.

The fact that OJ was found "not guilty" means that the prosecutors did not prove their case in a manner sufficient to convince the jury. It does not mean he is innocent.