NoSaint Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 I said "allegations" but I'm betting it's more than just that. Given recent events. 4 months later and a victim changing their story and requesting cash.... Another one of those tough to prove spots, potentially. Might still go the way of Big Ben and suspend him just because there's so much smoke.
mead107 Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 First and last game of the season would be ok with me.
Doc Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 4 months later and a victim changing their story and requesting cash.... Another one of those tough to prove spots, potentially. Might still go the way of Big Ben and suspend him just because there's so much smoke. If he wants cash, and I'm sure he and his lawyer do, he'll have to cooperate with police. And I think they will now. But we'll see how dumb that guy is.
Prickly Pete Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 If the people involved have loyalties beyond their own interpersonal relationships, that might be adding to their resistance. I don't know if there is any organized crime involvement, but if the guys have to answer to someone else, they would be way less forthcoming. And if that is the case, there are lots of other facets to what is happening.
Doc Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 Theoretically, maybe. But practically, they have nothing, and probably wouldnt even bother making that case unless they had something to suggest that the video, phone, and house had evidence of the crime. I think they are using it as leverage to squeeze him for info. There's nothing theoretical about it. He'll be arrested tomorrow, unless they're waiting on forensics to see what they can recover from the phone, system, contents of the bags, and whatever else they may have found from the search of his house.
Mr. WEO Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) If he wants cash, and I'm sure he and his lawyer do, he'll have to cooperate with police. And I think they will now. But we'll see how dumb that guy is. Cooperate with police? That ship sailed long ago. Anyway, he doesnt need to in order to file a civil suit. Edited June 23, 2013 by Mr. WEO
Doc Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 Cooperate with police? That ship sailed long ago. Anyway, he doesnt need to in order to file a civil suit. He can still cooperate with police. And he can proceed with the case, but it has a far better chance of succeeding I would think with a criminal complaint.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted June 23, 2013 Posted June 23, 2013 Cooperate with police? That ship sailed long ago. Anyway, he doesnt need to in order to file a civil suit. He can still cooperate with police. And he can proceed with the case, but it has a far better chance of succeeding I would think with a criminal complaint. Without knowing the law, it seems like the guy who Hernandez allegedly shot in the face could use this latest homicide as leverage against Hernandez.
NoSaint Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Without knowing the law, it seems like the guy who Hernandez allegedly shot in the face could use this latest homicide as leverage against Hernandez. I'm sure Hernandez might like him to shut up and disappear. In fact it likely just got real valuable to him.
Doc Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 He can still cooperate with police. And he can proceed with the case, but it has a far better chance of succeeding I would think with a criminal complaint. Nevermind. Reportedly there is a sworn statement by AH stating he was the shooter. I guess we'll find out shortly.
NoSaint Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Nevermind. Reportedly there is a sworn statement by AH stating he was the shooter. I guess we'll find out shortly. Say what?
Thurmal34 Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 I'm hoping Hernandez gets screwed to the wall but like many others here have said never ever talk to the police. They will never help you. Any time they approach you, whip out ur phone, set it to video, inform them they are being recorded, and ask them what crime they suspect you if committing. If they cannot name one, ask if your being detained. If they say no, stop talking and walk.
vincec Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Nevermind. Reportedly there is a sworn statement by AH stating he was the shooter. I guess we'll find out shortly. Reported by whom?
MattM Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 Say what? In the February civil case, not last week's shooting....
Fingon Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 The problem that I see is that the cops have to prove there was evidence on his phone or in the security system. It's not illegal to destroy your own stuff.
NoSaint Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 In the February civil case, not last week's shooting.... That I understood. Still a strange fact to hear without context. Why he signed, when he signed etc are pretty obvious questions that would follow.
Prickly Pete Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 So it's possible to ride around in a car, hang around in clubs etc, all night with 3 other guys, shoot one of them, and as long as nobody says "I did it" or "he did it", everything is fine, and nobody can be held accountable legally?
ganesh Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 So it's possible to ride around in a car, hang around in clubs etc, all night with 3 other guys, shoot one of them, and as long as nobody says "I did it" or "he did it", everything is fine, and nobody can be held accountable legally? I guess if the Police don't have the facts to back it up, what you said would be true. In today's age, people are not found as guilty if there is no factual evidence of committing a crime. I don't know if criminals are getting better at wiping out evidence or Police/Crime Investigators are simply not good at beating the Criminals at their own games. We see so many shows on TV like CSI, Dexter etc and yet it appears the local police don't have any solid evidence against him.
Prickly Pete Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 (edited) I guess if the Police don't have the facts to back it up, what you said would be true. In today's age, people are not found as guilty if there is no factual evidence of committing a crime. I don't know if criminals are getting better at wiping out evidence or Police/Crime Investigators are simply not good at beating the Criminals at their own games. We see so many shows on TV like CSI, Dexter etc and yet it appears the local police don't have any solid evidence against him. "Yeah, so he says to us, uh "let me get out of the car in this field for a second", We let him out, we hear a few shots, run over, and there he is, looking dead". "We weren't sure if we should get the police, cuz we thought he might just be playin' around. He was real funny like that. So we just went over to Aaron's house". Case closed. Edited June 24, 2013 by Marauder'sMicro
Mr. WEO Posted June 24, 2013 Posted June 24, 2013 He can still cooperate with police. And he can proceed with the case, but it has a far better chance of succeeding I would think with a criminal complaint. Really? The first time he was questioned, he said he didn't know who did it. 4 months later, he files a civil suit claiming it was Hernandez. When he first filed the suit, he said there were plates and screws needed to fix his arm. Then he refiled and said there were no plates and screws. And he's a convited drug dealer. Without knowing the law, it seems like the guy who Hernandez allegedly shot in the face could use this latest homicide as leverage against Hernandez. How? Even if Hernandez is convicted of murder, it may not come in as evidence in the Bradley's shooting. And AH hasn't even been charged yet. Nevermind. Reportedly there is a sworn statement by AH stating he was the shooter. I guess we'll find out shortly. Hmmmmm.....link?
Recommended Posts