Hernandez is going to walk, bank on it. 6

Since they didn’t arrest him for obstruction of justice I hardly believe they will go after that since they believe they have him for homicide. The funny part is, how in the world can he get convicted with out having the murder weapon? Johnnie Cochran says,” if the glove don’t fit you must acquit”, well if you don’t have a murder weapon, and a witness who was “asleep” and heard a gunshot and went back to sleep the odds are you don’t have any kind of case.

Unreliable witness, no murder weapon, you have a piece of gum, cell phone data to triangulate you were in the area (but the gum confirms that so who cares), now you have to prove that Hernandez actually murdered someone. Oh, he was “brandishing” a weapon in his own home. How do you brandish a weapon in your own home? The definition of brandish is,”Wave or flourish (something, esp. a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement” I don’t think he was waving it, or being excited jumping up and down, “oh boy i just shot someone!” ¬†and I highly doubt he was threatening anyone with it because the person that he supposedly wanted dead was dead, so you should be chilling and happy.

The defense gets another layup and should be an easy win for Hernandez. If Hernandez some how loses, then we’ll just have to throw this case in the “if I want you to be guilty, i’ll make you guilty in my courtroom” pile.

Also, I fully expect that Ortiz character to wind up dead in a year or less.

6 thoughts on “Hernandez is going to walk, bank on it.

  1. Reply TheRoadTo90 Jul 11, 2013 2:06 pm

    Interesting analysis.

    If not Hernandez, “who dun it?” (as they say). Just curious.

    Admittedly, I haven’t been following this terribly closely, just close enough to think it looks somewhat bad for him, but your post has made me rethink that stance.

  2. Reply Original6 Jul 11, 2013 3:18 pm

    Not sure who did it, but as a defender all I have to do is deflect the blame, not provide an ulterior motive of someone else. It could have been anyone. It could have been a drive by, it could have been a mob boss or a lead gangster for the New England area. Call me crazy but Hernandez might be a middle man and maybe Lloyd pissed off someone else and Hernandez was in the middle…maybe Hernandez is smart enough to keep his mouth shut so he doesn’t wind up dead like that other cat who snitched on Hernendaz.

    I need real proof, I can’t have this gum, and cell phone pings be enough to convict someone of murder or we are all dead.

    • Reply TheRoadTo90 Jul 12, 2013 3:33 am

      True, as a defender, you just have to instill reasonable doubt. Much tougher road to hoe for the prosecution.

      Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

  3. Reply Original6 Jul 12, 2013 11:27 am

    That’s exactly right. A known liar was asleep in a car & saw nothing. Heard gun shots but saw nothing. What that is, is assumption. I can’t just convict someone because a liar was asleep & assumed you did something. Hernandez spit out his gum, so what?

    So the shell casings are the same caliber, so 100,000,000 other guns also take those same caliber of bullets.

    It’s 100% over. They are using the terminology mob hit because they know they can’t prove anything…so they are hoping to use smoke & mirrors and say Aaron ordered the hit. Prove it. The prosecution has a better shot of proving Santa is real.

  4. Reply TheLongTalk Jul 15, 2013 12:25 pm

    I know next to nothing about this case, but I just went and read an article on ABC news and now I now a little more then nothing.

    It seems they have witnesses (and witnesses of witnesses – which doesn’t really do you any good in court), dirt from the crime scene, tire tracks that match his vehicle, text messages, ammo matches, and a potential motive.

    It doesn’t seem like an air tight case, but it seems like a case.

    I think CSI has destroyed an entire generation of jurors. I think people forget that circumstantial evidence is evidence. It’s not the best evidence but sometimes it’s the only evidence. Everyone is looking for every case to be air tight.

    Most of the time the person that’s most likely to have done it, is the person that has done it. That doesn’t mean that 100% of the time the person most likely to have done it – did it. But probably 80% of the time it’s a horse, not a zebra.

    Occam’s razor plus circumstantial evidence (in great supply) has lead them to believe they have the right person. That doesn’t mean they do, just means they think they do. And this being a high profile case, I’d guess they got mountains of circumstantial evidence or they wouldn’t take a run at a celebrity.

    These prosecutors surely don’t want to end up with a black mark on their records in front of a national audience. (Marcia Clark) So they must have a case.

    That doesn’t mean they have the right guy, but they must have a case. But again, I know next to nothing about this, so… there’s that.

  5. Reply Original6 Jul 15, 2013 4:44 pm

    I agree with you to a point TLT, that shows like CSI have ruined peoples perception of crime scenes. In fact there was/is an effect called the CSI effect because people believe they’ll have all the necessary evidence and they’ll have it very quickly. After all we watched Gil Grissom pull evidence out of thin air to make connections, why don’t our police/forensics teams do this? It’s an unreal expectation that Hollywood has created and that to a point is a problem with potential jurors.

    That being said, Aaron Hernandez is innocent, the US legal system says so. The court of common opinion is the only court where Hernandez is guilty and must prove he is innocent.

    As for the bullet casings, that doesn’t do anything simply because there are literally millions of other guns that are the same caliber, probably thousands within the very county those casings were found in. Luckily, we don’t have to register our firearms so the police can’t come and check them all. That being said, you couldn’t match a bullet casing even if they had the gun. You need a metallurgic match to prove the bullet(s) that killed Lloyd were fired from Hernandez’s gun.

    Having tire tracks, having gum, having cell phone pings is all fantastic evidence. That being said you still cannot prove who killed Lloyd which is why the charges are for ordering the hit, not necessarily pulling the trigger. Even then that’s a stretch. Just because someone may have been somewhere doesn’t mean they ordered it or even partook in it. I take out my firearm every day and night and check it, just because someone finds a 9mm casing down the street that I drive down every day, and spit my gum out on every day, and talk on my cell phone while driving through there every day, does not mean that I a) stopped there b) got out, spit out my gum, c) murdered Lloyd.

    Does the circumstantial evidence look suspicious? It sure does, but as we all hear every day you shouldn’t go after someone just because they look suspicious ie: zimmerman shouldn’t have gone after Martin just because he looked suspicious. Hernandez may have a mound of circumstantial evidence against him, but without a murder weapon, without a witness, without any kind of proof that can leave me 100% guaranteed that Hernandez shot Lloyd or ordered a hit on Lloyd, I don’t believe I could find him guilty of anything.

    We live in a tech driven age where we have no excuses for getting capital crimes cases wrong. We can’t rule a court room the way we did in the 90’s, 80’s, 70’s relying on terrible eye witness accounts (which are usually wrong), and saying circumstantial evidence is all we need…all the defense needs to do is proof a reasonable doubt that maybe it’s all a coincidence. Or maybe he was there when it went down but he didn’t order it and he didn’t pull the trigger. What if Hernandez and another guy flip on the snitch and say the snitch did it, and that Hernandez drove the snitch wherever the shooting took place, and as he waited in the car he spit out his gum. Two stories against one and the other guy goes to jail.

    I’m 95% certain Hernandez did shoot this guy, but i’m about 99% certain that without a murder weapon you can’t prove who did it, and if you can’t prove who did it, how can you just pick Hernandez and charge him. Yeah the shell casings match his gun, they also match my gun.

    The state is going to have a very hard time proving that all this circumstantial evidence is how it took place.

Leave a Reply