YoloinOhio Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 @AlbertBreer: Per @PetesWire, judge in the Aaron Hernandez case denied a motion to pare down witness list, which includes Bill Belichick and Robert Kraft. @AlbertBreer: ... And @ESPNMichele says that Bills LB Brandon Spikes, Dolphins C Mike Pouncey, and Pats strength coach Harold Nash are also on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clockwork Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 When is the trial set to happen? Offseason, I hope? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 When is the trial set to happen? Offseason, I hope? I think I read its in January CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 1, 2014 Author Share Posted December 1, 2014 Trial is January 9th http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2014/12/belichick_kraft_and_brandon_spikes_on_hernandez Funny comment under the Globe article regarding Belichik being on the stand-- Wow Bill will need some coaching on this one; he's not used to answering every question put to him without disdain and mumbling. I'll pay to see this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 I wonder if parts of it will be televised CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 we're on to Appellate court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted December 1, 2014 Author Share Posted December 1, 2014 @Ethanhamm: RE: #lrt - Spikes and Hernandez often hung around Providence together. Makes sense Brandon would be potentially called to testify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not at the table Karlos Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Trial is January 9th http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2014/12/belichick_kraft_and_brandon_spikes_on_hernandez Funny comment under the Globe article regarding Belichik being on the stand-- Wow Bill will need some coaching on this one; he's not used to answering every question put to him without disdain and mumbling. I'll pay to see this. lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 @Ethanhamm: RE: #lrt - Spikes and Hernandez often hung around Providence together. Makes sense Brandon would be potentially called to testify. No offense to the Rhode Islanders out there, but why on earth would anyone choose to hang out in Providence if you didn't have to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Trial is January 9thhttp://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/herald_bulldog/2014/12/belichick_kraft_and_brandon_spikes_on_hernandezFunny comment under the Globe article regarding Belichik being on the stand-- Wow Bill will need some coaching on this one; he's not used to answering every question put to him without disdain and mumbling. I'll pay to see this. Can we get a NYJ or Buffalo Bulls fan as a lawyer on either the defense or prosecution or maybe both so no one will object to questions about spygate. He is under oath … "Mr Bellicheat, is it true that you tape recorded opposing teams closed practices?" "Mr Kraft is it true that you have directly or indirectly made payments to NFL referees for favorable penalty calls?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 (edited) I haven't been following this... Who would Spikes and those others be testifying on behalf of? The prosecution or defense? Against Hernandez I hope. Anyway... Nice to see that he is getting a speedy trial according to the US 6th. Please don't interpret this as pro-scumbag Hernandez though. Edited December 2, 2014 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 (edited) I haven't been following this... Who would Spikes and those others be testifying on behalf of? The prosecution or defense? Against Hernandez I hope. Anyway... Nice to see that he is getting a speedy trial according to the US 6th. Please don't interpret this as pro-scumbag Hernandez though. Spikes would be testifying on behalf of Spikes. The prosecution and defense will ask him questions and he will answer them truthfully. Spikes won National Championships with Hernandez then was drafted by the same NFL team. It shouldn't matter if Spikes is called as a witness for the defense or prosecution, Spikes doesn't have a choice in the matter. Edited December 2, 2014 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sig1Hunter Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 I haven't been following this... Who would Spikes and those others be testifying on behalf of? The prosecution or defense? Against Hernandez I hope. Anyway... Nice to see that he is getting a speedy trial according to the US 6th. Please don't interpret this as pro-scumbag Hernandez though. I'm pretty sure it was Hernandez's decision to waive his right to speedy trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Spikes would be testifying on behalf of Spikes. The prosecution and defense will ask him questions and he will answer them truthfully. Spikes won National Championships with Hernandez then was drafted by the same NFL team. It shouldn't matter if Spikes is called as a witness for the defense or prosecution, Spikes doesn't have a choice in the matter. i think its a fair curiosity about which side is calling him. of course all hes supposed to do is be honest and there is no indication hes done anything wrong -- but id still be curious if the topics are good or bad for the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumblefish Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 we have visualized Billy B on the stand, if he testifies anything like he handles press conferences it could be a classic performance that would rival Nicholson's in a few good men Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 (edited) i think its a fair curiosity about which side is calling him. of course all hes supposed to do is be honest and there is no indication hes done anything wrong -- but id still be curious if the topics are good or bad for the case. Notice: . . . Against Hernandez I hope . . . It is not fair to judge Spikes if he is called as a witness for the defense. He does not have a say in it. He is being compelled to testify. The Neighbor of every serial killer says "Gosh, who would have known, he was a great neighbor quiet and kept to himself." Spikes testimony will likely be "He was a swell guy, we had lots of fun together. I didn't know he was killing people in his free time." Edited December 2, 2014 by Why So Serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BisonMan Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Spikes would be testifying on behalf of Spikes. The prosecution and defense will ask him questions and he will answer them truthfully. Spikes won National Championships with Hernandez then was drafted by the same NFL team. It shouldn't matter if Spikes is called as a witness for the defense or prosecution, Spikes doesn't have a choice in the matter. Every witness is called by one side or the other to bolster their case. It's fair to categorize Spikes' testimony as "for" a particular side even if he's called as a hostile witness. He's obviously not on the witness list because he volunteered or there for entertainment purposes. One side or the other wants him to testify and being curious which side called him is reasonable. From all reports, he was not present during the shooting and is not likely an alibi witness. You normally wouldn't call a character witness until after a conviction so I'm guessing it's the prosecution that is calling Spikes. Perhaps he has some first-hand knowledge of Hernandez owning the type of weapon used in the crime or was privy to a conversation that speaks to the relationship between Hernandez and the victim. Either way, he's there to help one side or the other. Of course, being on the witness list doesn't mean he'll even be called to testify. He may be there as a rebuttal witness that won't be needed during the trial. I think you'll tend to see a lot of "potential" witnesses in a big trial because neither side wants to be accused of calling someone without prior notification, particularly the prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Trial is January 9th http://www.bostonher...es_on_hernandez Funny comment under the Globe article regarding Belichik being on the stand-- Wow Bill will need some coaching on this one; he's not used to answering every question put to him without disdain and mumbling. I'll pay to see this. "Mr. Belichick, do you recall the conversation you had with the defendant the night of the 13th of October, 2012?" "I'm just looking forward to the Denver game." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1B4IDie Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Every witness is called by one side or the other to bolster their case. It's fair to categorize Spikes' testimony as "for" a particular side even if he's called as a hostile witness. He's obviously not on the witness list because he volunteered or there for entertainment purposes. One side or the other wants him to testify and being curious which side called him is reasonable. From all reports, he was not present during the shooting and is not likely an alibi witness. You normally wouldn't call a character witness until after a conviction so I'm guessing it's the prosecution that is calling Spikes. Perhaps he has some first-hand knowledge of Hernandez owning the type of weapon used in the crime or was privy to a conversation that speaks to the relationship between Hernandez and the victim. Either way, he's there to help one side or the other. Of course, being on the witness list doesn't mean he'll even be called to testify. He may be there as a rebuttal witness that won't be needed during the trial. I think you'll tend to see a lot of "potential" witnesses in a big trial because neither side wants to be accused of calling someone without prior notification, particularly the prosecution. Focus your attention here: . . . Against Hernandez I hope . . . Now comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Notice: It is not fair to judge Spikes if he is called as a witness for the defense. He does not have a say in it. He is being compelled to testify. The Neighbor of every serial killer says "Gosh, who would have known, he was a great neighbor quiet and kept to himself." Spikes testimony will likely be "He was a swell guy, we had lots of fun together. I didn't know he was killing people in his free time." im well aware the situation - and I know EII was silly in his wording.... but that doesnt mean that its a silly question to ask who's witness list he appears on. Every witness is called by one side or the other to bolster their case. It's fair to categorize Spikes' testimony as "for" a particular side even if he's called as a hostile witness. He's obviously not on the witness list because he volunteered or there for entertainment purposes. One side or the other wants him to testify and being curious which side called him is reasonable. From all reports, he was not present during the shooting and is not likely an alibi witness. You normally wouldn't call a character witness until after a conviction so I'm guessing it's the prosecution that is calling Spikes. Perhaps he has some first-hand knowledge of Hernandez owning the type of weapon used in the crime or was privy to a conversation that speaks to the relationship between Hernandez and the victim. Either way, he's there to help one side or the other. Of course, being on the witness list doesn't mean he'll even be called to testify. He may be there as a rebuttal witness that won't be needed during the trial. I think you'll tend to see a lot of "potential" witnesses in a big trial because neither side wants to be accused of calling someone without prior notification, particularly the prosecution. yup - id assume all the things you say are probably accurate, but was curious if we had any type of confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts