Aaron Hernandez Trial (Odin Lloyd)

Status
Not open for further replies.

bosoxsue

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 16, 2001
1,785
Special thanks to RR for explaining joint venture so well, as it wasn't brought up in the media's daily recaps that I've been reading. I found this thread, like so many on SOSH, to be a cut-to-the-chase go-to filled with people who are experts in the topic. Thanks to all of you!
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,022
I also want to thank RR for all the very informative contributions to this thread. Made following this trial much more interesting and easier to understand
 

GregHarris

beware my sexy helmet/overall ensemble
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2008
3,461
20 minutes?  That is fast.
 
"The justice system works swiftly in 2015 now that they've abolished all lawyers."
-- Doc Brown
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
It's an automatic sentence of life without parole. So sentencing is immediate. If there were some wiggle room and the judge had issues to consider, it would be some time between verdict and sentencing to get a report prepared and witnesses lined up for a sentencing hearing. But nothing is going to move the needle on it, so its immediate.
 

Norm loves Vera

Joe wants Trump to burn
SoSH Member
Dec 25, 2003
5,676
Peace Dale, RI
Boston Brawler said:
Is this true?
reading that the Lloyd family will be given an opportunity to speak before sentence is announced.. judge also was meeting with jury post trail.. so I think the 20 minutes out announcement was a bit premature.. but they are saying it will happen in minutes .. not hours or even days.
 
Wild About Trial ‏@WildAboutTrial 7m7 minutes ago
Sentencing has been delayed from 10:50 (obviously), waiting for a final member of the Lloyd family. Stay tuned. #AaronHernandez -RK
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
45,933
Here
Victim impact statements should not be allowed, but that's a whole different topic.
 
God, this is awful. I can't watch.
 

Bierman9

New Member
Jul 19, 2005
108
Nashua NH
Thnx to RR, and others, for their insights into the legal proceedings!!
 
Does this verdict automatically go through the appeals process, or does the defense have to formally request it?
How does this verdict affect the trials of Ortiz/Wallace?
 
Thnx!!
 

I am an Idiot

"Duke"
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2007
5,116
NortheasternPJ said:
Thanks, I didn't see him but missed the first part. 
 
On second view, no, he's not there. I thought he was between Sultan and Fee but it was a third lawyer. 
 

GregHarris

beware my sexy helmet/overall ensemble
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2008
3,461
I've only really listened to the arraignment, and I was pretty convinced of his guilt there.  However, with an all star lawyer team, you still have to give the prosecution their due here.  Justice wins over money, at least today.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,461
Ed Hillel said:
Victim impact statements should not be allowed, but that's a whole different topic.
 
 
I'm with you there.
 
 
 
And also a well done to RR, who did the profession proud.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,022
@ScottIsaacs: Aaron Hernandez sentenced to life without parole at MCI-Cedar Junction (aka Walpole) #wcvb
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,022
@MarkDanielsPJ: Hernandez will spend the rest of his life close to Gillette Stadium - about 3.5 miles away.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The tweeted reactions of several NFL players, most notably Spikes, are something to behold. "Wow" indeed.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,632
jsinger121 said:
 
they can't. she was granted immunity.
 
Very unlikely immunity would cover knowingly false testimony, though defer to RR on the specifics of what was negotiated here 
 

Boston Brawler

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2011
9,898
PedroKsBambino said:
 
Very unlikely immunity would cover knowingly false testimony, though defer to RR on the specifics of what was negotiated here 
Yeah I would imagine perjury would negate the immunity deal.  Or maybe they could charge her with perjury but not with the charge covered by the immunity deal.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
I think people are jumping on Shayanna too quickly.  From an objective sense, she looks pretty bad, but protection of your loved ones is a natural reaction and isn't evil.  She could have a fully realized construction in her mind of AH's innocence despite evidence, on top of a desire to protect him even if she is certain he was guilty.  Is this is a disservice to justice and more importantly to Odin Lloyd, sure, but it is also a pretty natural part of human psychology and sociology.  
 
Now, of course there is an alternate story where SJ was an active participant in this (suggested that OL needed to die or something, volunteered to destroy evidence to cover his guilt (an important distinction from destroying evidence that she didn't know was evidence or destroying evidence because she thought he was innocent and the evidence would implicate him improperly).  Or where she saw him as a meal ticket and was just trying to protect that.  
 
I think it's unfair to leap to that second conclusion and demand even further justice without knowing more.
 
I'm also not sure where the perjury charge comes from?  Are you guys calling back to the grand jury testimony?  Did she perjure on the stand in this trial?  I didn't watch her entire testimony, but what specifically did she "knowingly" lie about?  
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,593
Southwestern CT
smastroyin said:
I think people are jumping on Shayanna too quick.  From an objective sense, she looks pretty bad, but protection your loved ones is a natural reaction and isn't evil.  She could have a fully realized construction in her mind of AH's innocence despite evidence, on top of a desire to protect him even if she is certain he was guilty.  Is this is a disservice to justice and more importantly to Odin Lloyd, sure, but it is also a pretty natural part of human psychology and sociology.  
 
Now, of course there is an alternate story where SJ was an active participant in this (suggested that OL needed to die or something, volunteered to destroy evidence to cover his guilt (an important distinction from destroying evidence that she didn't know was evidence or destroying evidence because she thought he was innocent and the evidence would implicate him improperly).  Or where she saw him as a meal ticket and was just trying to protect that.  
 
The evidence at trial indicates clearly that she made a conscious choice after the murder to back AH no matter the consequences.  Whether this is a case of willful blindness or unbridled ignorance is something others can worry about. 
 
AH killed her sister's boyfriend over nothing and she chose the sociopath over her own blood.  'eff her.
 

bosoxsue

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 16, 2001
1,785
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
An absolutely obscene gigglefest going on there. Confirmation once again that you hope you never get dragged into court where your fate is in such hands.
I don't know if that's fair. They are relieved that they are done. All I can think of is the Sandy Hook hoaxer contingent who go back to the video of the father who was laughing as some sort of proof that he was an actor playing a role. You just never know how you'll react under the spotlight when you're not used to the scrutiny.
 

Joshv02

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,633
Brookline
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
An absolutely obscene gigglefest going on there. Confirmation once again that you hope you never get dragged into court where your fate is in such hands.
They took it very seriously, which is pretty obvious from what they've said.  I think the opposite.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,739
bosoxsue said:
I don't know if that's fair. They are relieved that they are done. All I can think of is the Sandy Hook hoaxer contingent who go back to the video of the father who was laughing as some sort of proof that he was an actor playing a role. You just never know how you'll react under the spotlight when you're not used to the scrutiny.
 
 
I understand and forgive nervous laughter, but it's gone on way too long here. Plus, the more they talk the more likely they'll step on a landmine and provide an angle for a mistrial/appeal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.