Hernandez Questioned in Homicide?!?!? WTF

Share this page

tommysgirl said:
Oh, I totally understand the process. I am just saying I'm not sure I'd be capable of seperating emotion

I've been called to jury duty once and was released because I knew the victim. I never want to do it again.
Click to expand...

I was stunned as to what people were saying, and reading into things that didn't happen. I was in my early 20's and wished I was more vocal. To say it was an eye opening to me is an understatement.
I'd do it again, but I would certainly do things differently.
 
PatsFanLisa said:
Well, of course it's not going to work out fine. It was a metaphorical statement. The point I was trying to make is that with all of its flaws, just usually works. It doesn't work in the event a guilty man is found not guilty and an innocent man is found guilty. I would rather see the flaws of the system weight in favor of assuring that an innocent man not be found guilty.

You know, the scales of justice and all...
Click to expand...

Agreed and I understand. I just don't think it's necessarily a one size fits all type of thing.
 
tehrick67 said:
I was stunned as to what people were saying, and reading into things that didn't happen. I was in my early 20's and wished I was more vocal. To say it was an eye opening to me is an understatement.
I'd do it again, but I would certainly do things differently.
Click to expand...
Mine was a family I had waited on for years, wonderful people. Their 19 year old daughter was killed when she was hit head on by a guy who had an epileptic seizure while driving.

They found him not guilty. I'm not sure I could have looked at that family and done that.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
You've got a beautiful baby girl.

If your wife went nuts and went the same exact route as Casey with the same exact trail and evidence left in her wake and the same outcome how would you feel WRT logic?
Click to expand...

You're assuming facts not in evidence there, I think.

I thought they overcharged Anthony, which was the problem. The facts and evidence didn't support the charge and the conclusions made by the public were made based on emotion and gut. I can't say that the evidence doesn't also support the alternative theories, which instills reasonable doubt.
 
tommysgirl said:
Mine was a family I had waited on for years, wonderful people. Their 19 year old daughter was killed when she was hit head on by a guy who had an epileptic seizure while driving.

They found him not guilty. I'm not sure I could have looked at that family and done that.
Click to expand...

With that medical condition, he shouldn't be allowed to drive. But, I'm sure he didn't intentionally have the seizure.

Tehrick, I only worked in law for five years, but I disagree on the emotional aspect. Jurors are not supposed to be swayed by tears or whatever. Each side presents their case. Then the jury examines everything to determine if they reached their goal. Now, I've seen juries that were seriously not competent for the job. They don't understand the rules. Which is why I'd be scared shitless to have one decide my fate. That alone keeps me from committing a crime.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
tommysgirl said:
I understand the complete cluster that case became, it just popped into my head because MD asked how anyone can know it. I think the only 12 people who didn't know it sat on that jury.
Click to expand...

I read the transcripts of that case a few years ago and can't say that the jury erred in the verdict. It was horribly investigated, the prosecution botched it and the judge ran his courtroom like a circus.
 
tommysgirl said:
Mine was a family I had waited on for years, wonderful people. Their 19 year old daughter was killed when she was hit head on by a guy who had an epileptic seizure while driving.

They found him not guilty. I'm not sure I could have looked at that family and done that.
Click to expand...

The family and the age/nature of the victim should have no bearing on determining the guilt of a defendant based on the sum of the evidence. Why would you risk ruining another life/family just to give false closure to someone else if the underlying act wasn't really unlawful based on the evidence?
 
Pyxis said:
With that medical condition, he shouldn't be allowed to drive. But, I'm sure he didn't intentionally have the seizure.

Tehrick, I only worked in law for five years, but I disagree on the emotional aspect. Jurors are not supposed to be swayed by tears or whatever. Each side presents their case. Then the jury examines everything to determine if they reached their goal. Now, I've seen juries that were seriously not competent for the job. They don't understand the rules. Which is why I'd be scared shitless to have one decide my fate. That alone keeps me from committing a crime.
Posted via Mobile Device
Click to expand...

I agree emotion shouldn't be part of it, but I witnessed it with my eyes and ears.
 
tehrick67 said:
I've sat on a jury, emotion has everything to do with it. i was shocked at some of the things I heard, that had nothing to do with the evidence..
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is true. Luckily I deal only in corporate, civil matters, but some of the mock jury behavior studies I've watched have been fascinating (and scary, from my perspective.) I've seen juries deliberating who acknowledged no merit to the plaintiff's case and literally found no fault, but responded with an adverse verdict and a large award because "the company can afford it." The logical fallacies in reaching those decisions were nauseating.

When combining that with someone's liberty rather than money, it's an awful position to be in should emotion and cowboy justice prevail over rational consideration of the facts.
 
Michigan Dave said:
You're assuming facts not in evidence there, I think.

I thought they overcharged Anthony, which was the problem. The facts and evidence didn't support the charge and the conclusions made by the public were made based on emotion and gut. I can't say that the evidence doesn't also support the alternative theories, which instills reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

Wow.

The mere fact a search was done on chloroform on our own computer and then one of my children is murdered in the trunk of our own car and chloroform is found would be enough for me to drive out to the swamps, chum the waters with chicken carcasses until I had enough gators present to walk across to the other side on their backs, and then toss my wife in to learn to swim real fast.
 
Dwight Schrute said:
Wow.

The mere fact a search was done on chloroform on our own computer and then one of my children is murdered in the trunk of our own car and chloroform is found would be enough for me to drive out to the swamps, chum the waters with chicken carcasses until I had enough gators present to walk across to the other side on their backs, and then toss my wife in to learn to swim real fast.
Click to expand...

Interesting reaction. It's been a while since I read much about that case, so the details are fuzzy. I remember that the prosecution did a great job of proving Anthony to be a slut, and a liar. Which sucks for her, but unfortunately aren't elements of murder. What they struggled with, was something like "cause of death" and then shot themselves in the foot by proffering multiple ways that the defendant could have killed the victim. It was like "hey, guys, here's some reasonable doubt for you!"

Basically, if it was a 45 year old drunk vagrant who had been killed rather than a cute little girl, no one would've batted an eye at such an unsurprising verdict from the legal point of view.
 
Michigan Dave said:
You're assuming facts not in evidence there, I think.

I thought they overcharged Anthony, which was the problem. The facts and evidence didn't support the charge and the conclusions made by the public were made based on emotion and gut. I can't say that the evidence doesn't also support the alternative theories, which instills reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...


I concur. Their shot went high and wide on Anthony.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
PatsFanLisa said:
Well, of course it's not going to work out fine. It was a metaphorical statement. The point I was trying to make is that with all of its flaws, just usually works. It doesn't work in the event a guilty man is found not guilty and an innocent man is found guilty. I would rather see the flaws of the system weight in favor of assuring that an innocent man not be found guilty.

You know, the scales of justice and all...
Click to expand...

This.
 
Pounceys in "Free Hernandez" hats. That's gonna go over big with Miami and Pitt.

 
Dwight Schrute said:
Wow.

The mere fact a search was done on chloroform on our own computer and then one of my children is murdered in the trunk of our own car and chloroform is found would be enough for me to drive out to the swamps, chum the waters with chicken carcasses until I had enough gators present to walk across to the other side on their backs, and then toss my wife in to learn to swim real fast.
Click to expand...

You been planning huh?

Cheers
 
Peter King discusses 3 AHern/Pats items in his MMQB feature.

1. Where was the Pats' security the last 3 yrs and what did they know. (I'd like that answer, too.)
2. Pioli was the character watch dog and Pioli is gone. (I thought it was Myra)
3. Urban Meyer's guys haven't worked out so well. (Idk, they're fulfilling the hopes and dreams Urban Blight set them up for.)

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nf...l-aaron-hernandez-monday-morning-quarterback/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top