YoloinOhio Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 @ProFootballTalk: Tom Curran explained that there was anecdotal evidence about Aaron Hernandez that Patriots security should have known about and acted upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 i guess the veer that i took off that sentiment was the difference between "having his back" and "IM CONFUSED ABOUT THE JUSTICE SYSTEM THESE DAYS!!!!" tweet. there are a lot of ways to have his back, and that really is just not a productive one for anybody. any GM has to think to themselves that if hes signed this week that the PR is going to be 50% aaron hernandez questions. end of the world? surely not. Smart move? likewise not. I"m with NS--Spikes clearly doesn't his boy should have been convicted. That's miles from just being a supportive friend in a tough time. Inconsequential in the end, however. It's a cultural thing, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 @ProFootballTalk: Tom Curran explained that there was anecdotal evidence about Aaron Hernandez that Patriots security should have known about and acted upon.who is he? And where did he discuss it? Will the NFL do anything about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 (edited) who is he? And where did he discuss it? Will the NFL do anything about it?he is a Pats reporter - I think Boston Globe Edit - Pats Insider for CSN New England Edited April 15, 2015 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Too bad they can't give this animal the chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Wheels Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I bet all the air was let out of the courtroom CBF I saw what you did there. who is he? And where did he discuss it? Will the NFL do anything about it? Curran works for ComcastNet Sports New England (CSNNE). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I haven't followed exactly who said what, but maybe Spikes was simply thinking how can you possibly be convicted of "first degree" murder and life in prison without a chance for parole without one witness and with no weapon. There is an argument to be made for that. I believe you should be able to be, and that is what happened, but it's not an unreasonable stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I haven't followed exactly who said what, but maybe Spikes was simply thinking how can you possibly be convicted of "first degree" murder and life in prison without a chance for parole without one witness and with no weapon. There is an argument to be made for that. I believe you should be able to be, and that is what happened, but it's not an unreasonable stance. People are convicted all the time without any witness evidence, murder weapon OR even a body of the murder victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 People are convicted all the time without any witness evidence, murder weapon OR even a body of the murder victim. Of course. That doesn't happen to have anything to do with my post or the point though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Agreed. It's normal for his closest friends/family to actually believe him. It's dumb. But it's still normal. Doesn't even have to be closest friends. You know someone, what you've seen is he's a big friendly goofball, always joking around, it's hard to believe otherwise, especially when you don't have the evidence and haven't experienced another side for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 (edited) Of course. That doesn't happen to have anything to do with my post or the point though. Your points about the murder weapon or witnesses has nothing to with the degree of the charge or the fact they he shouldn't be found guilty that that charge. What this trial is an example of is how strong circumstantial evidence plays out in the court of the law. It can actually be stronger evidence than witness testimony or even direct evidence of a murder weapon. Edited April 15, 2015 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 There is nothing "great" about the killing of a man, obviously. But how great is this? "Hernandez will be sent to the Massachusetts Correctional Institution-Cedar Junction in Walpole, Mass., which is around a mile away from the place he used to play." He should be able to hear the cheers on gameday for the next few decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Your points about the murder weapon or witnesses has nothing to with the degree of the charge or the fact they he shouldn't be found guilty that that charge. What this trial is an example of is how strong circumstantial evidence plays out in the court of the law. It can actually be stronger evidence than witness testimony or even a murder weapon. That wasn't his point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted April 15, 2015 Author Share Posted April 15, 2015 There is nothing "great" about the killing of a man, obviously. But how great is this? "Hernandez will be sent to the Massachusetts Correctional Institution-Cedar Junction in Walpole, Mass., which is around a mile away from the place he used to play." He should be able to hear the cheers on gameday for the next few decades. Poetic justice CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Your points about the murder weapon or witnesses has nothing to with the degree of the charge or the fact they he shouldn't be found guilty that that charge. What this trial is an example of is how strong circumstantial evidence plays out in the court of the law. It can actually be stronger evidence than witness testimony or even a murder weapon. Because I wasn't talking about that whatsoever. I was talking about Brandon Spikes, and it's not unreasonable for a citizen to think that there should not be a conviction with no witness or weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 That wasn't his point. Yes it was. It was the rational he was using in the spikes example. Because I wasn't talking about that whatsoever. I was talking about Brandon Spikes, and it's not unreasonable for a citizen to think that there should not be a conviction with no witness or weapon. Exactly. It is totally unreasonable because that rational has no idea how the courts system and evidence works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Yes it was. It was the rational he was using in the spikes example. Exactly. It is totally unreasonable because that rational has no idea how the courts system and evidence works. That's nonsense. Just because it works a certain way does not make it unreasonable whatsoever to believe that it's unreasonable. It does not make it correct. The tax system in the US is completely unreasonable. You don't have to understand how it works to know that it could be unreasonable. You are not wrong to think it is unreasonable whether you know how it works or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 That's nonsense. Just because it works a certain way does not make it unreasonable whatsoever to believe that it's unreasonable. It does not make it correct. The tax system in the US is completely unreasonable. You don't have to understand how it works to know that it could be unreasonable. You are not wrong to think it is unreasonable whether you know how it works or not. Right. Simplify the tax system = flat tax. Simplify the justice system, guilty of murder = off with their head. kidding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 (edited) That's nonsense. Just because it works a certain way does not make it unreasonable whatsoever to believe that it's unreasonable. It does not make it correct. The tax system in the US is completely unreasonable. You don't have to understand how it works to know that it could be unreasonable. You are not wrong to think it is unreasonable whether you know how it works or not. If you look at the evidence in this case, yes without question it is unreasonable even without a murder weapon or witness. The cirumstantial evidence was overwhelming. I think we can all agree though Brandon Spikes is an idiot. Edited April 15, 2015 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Yes it was. It was the rational he was using in the spikes example. No. It wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts