It was actually revealed very early in this process about the forensic evidence that Hernandez was in the car. They haven't revealed what that is, but it was enough to execute at least one search warrant.
that is more proof then any of your theories. You are tsk tsking people, throwing out theories, but there is currently one theory that has some proof vs your theories where there is next to none. Logically, people are right to choose the one with more evidence then the others you have presented. In other words you are arguing with people about going with what evidence we do have.
And Shula_Guy, how have you not seen or heard of Lloyd being murdeded execution style? A quick google search of his name pops up how he died in every article. Literally everyone. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ico=ushome^editors_choice_six_of_the_best
Right. It clearly states forensic evidence that he was driving that night. Which means he left something behind to connect him, beyond the obvious car being rented in his name.
If it was lent, the burden is on AH to prove that. Rental agreement most likely prohibits anyone else from driving it. Could be easily verified though. Someone else's DNA would be on steering wheel. There is also video evidence of AH returning home with three guys minutes after neighbors heard gunshots. At this point common sense dictates that AH was part of the murder. Obviously our judicial system has a higher standard, but that doesn't preclude us from forming an opinion. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
"neighbors heard gunshots" Really? Could it have been fireworks? How do we know the two things are related? Once again, this is where trial by media falls down.
We don't know they are related. Up to a jury to decide if they believe the neighbors. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
And the 5th Amendment does not give hime the right to destroy evidence. You keep bring up his destroying of evidence like it is some type of right for him to do so. It's against the law to destroy evidence involved in a crime. If I could destroy evidence I have a list of people that I would have killed by now.
Nope, it has to be "evidence" in the first place, his cellphone and security system were..his private property in the first place, he can do with it what he choose to do with it. It is up to the DA's office to show there was actually evidence on it in the first place. The items were subpeonaed, he turned them over.
Wrong, if property is under subpoena you have to turn it over in the state that it is normally kept. Items under subpoena are considered evidence. Whether it contains pertinent evidence or not is for the courts to decide, but investigators have the right to that evidence. Unless Hernandez can prove that he normally keeps his security systems in a state of bits and pieces, and that for the las X months he's been making calls from a smashed cell phone they've got him on obstruction and probable evidence tampering. They'll throw the book at him based on that alone if they can't get any further on the murder charges.
99% of all criminals are convicted based on circumstantial evidence. I love it when people use that phrase. Do you know what circumstantial evidence is? For example, finger prints are circumstantial evidence.
It would not even have to be under subpoena. As you said, unless he kept that equipment in that condition he is tampering with evidence and the prosecutor would argue he did it to hide guilt. Unless you can make evidence disapear, without a trail, you paint yourself into a corner. If you don't testify you almost admit guilt by those actions.
Nope, he has the perfect right to destroy his own private property, the only conflict can be if first it was subpeonad, then it was destroyed. If that happened then it would destruction of evidence/obstruction of justice etc, if he did it before hand with knowledge that it was being subpeonad then he'd have problems. As I've said..his real problem is not some podunk obstruction of justice charge..he is involved in 2 shootings, one he did himself..OJ charges are jackola compared to that reality. It's all fun and games and legal semantics when it comes to the obstruction charges, when you maybe involved in a ADW and a Murder..things become a bit more serious..as they should be.
DA could make that case, but do keep in mind he also has to show that he actually destroyed them..there is no proof of that, legally speaking he had those items requested, he delivered them, if the DA does not like their condition that is his problem.
Which is why it is beyond a reasonable doubt. If you looked at his last calls and it was a day before the smashed phone was handed in, in my mind that would be a reasonable doubt. There should be a good amount to come and I take the leaks with a grain of salt. It's people manipulating a press that is in a frenzy, loads of speculation from reporters & experts.
Wrong. Obstruction of justices charges can occur prior to an official proceeding, and prior to a subpoena. In the event that a crime occurred and he either A. Knee a crime occurred Or B. knew that an investigation was underway He obstructed justice by destroying his phone, and security system. You can knit pick all day, but the truth of the matter is, AH is likely in deep ****. Unless he has an explanation as to why he keeps a shattered security system in his house, and can prove his cell phone was shattered before the murder he's in trouble. Will they tie him to being the actual trigger man? Who knows, maybe he was just there, maybe he wasn't there at all and he's just covering for some friends, either way he's obstructing justice, and they'll get their teeth into him.
I'm wondering if they received info from someone that they tossed the gun down there? And what a rookie murder move if true. He took the time to break his surveillance footage and kersploded his phone, yet they chuck the gun into a nearby babbling brook like some movie star bad guy. Dummies. Everyone knows you put the murder weapon in the hand of the deceased and claim he went all Kurt Cobain on himself....even if he was shot in the back of the head
Did you hear something or you're guessing based on them searching the water? Because when I saw this today it was the first thing that popped in my head because why would they pick an obscure place to look unless someone said something to the cops.
That goes back to my original thought that he may skate past a murder charge since he presumably acted quickly to get rid of evidence. I imagine his football career is pretty much toast though.
Here is how you solve this mystery - You get Hernandez, and the other two thugs, into separate interrogation rooms. Then you play "good cop, bad cop," with them. You start pressuring the three and saying that the other guy is snitching you out, so "tell us the truth, and cooperate with us, or you are going to see jail time." You just keep the pressure on, and if necessary, you work out a immunity deal for the other two guys to rat out Hernandez. Sooner or later, someone will talk. The cops have plenty of time though, so in the end I think Hernandez is in deep doo. Maybe they won't be able to convict him of first degree murder, but I think his NFL career is pretty much over. Time will tell.
Imagine if it came out that Belichick tried to help him cover up evidence? AH - "Coach, what do I do?" BB - "Destroy the tapes. Always destroy the tapes."
Twitter @TedDanielFOX25 Lawyer for AH just released a statement saying reports of an arrest warrant for obstruction are false #fox25
