Aaron Hernandez

Aaron Hernandez

Aaron Hernandez was a football player who participated in the national football league. He is also widely known based on a murder case that faced him in 2013. Hernandez was accused, arrested and put behind bars as the main suspect of the murder of his former friend, Odin Lloyd. Lloyd was murdered in Massachusetts, USA, on the 17^th of June, 2013 (Gallagher, 2017). His death attracted international attention, mainly because of the link of his murder to his friend, who happened to be a tight end for the National Football League. Hernandez was then arrested and questioned in this case as a suspect on the 26^th of June,2013.

Other suspects questioned alongside Hernandez were Ernest Wallace and Carlos Ortiz, who were said to have been with the main suspect, Hernandez, in the time of the crime (Gallagher, 2017). In August 2013, he was given an indictment for the murder of Odin Lloyd. Later on, he was found guilty of murder, rated as first-degree murder. According to Brenner (1953), first-degree crime is one that is said to have been deliberate, such as death by strangulation or poisoning. He was also found guilty of five other weapon charges, which made it mandatory for him to serve a life in prison sentence without parole (Gallagher, 2017). This paper looks into the murder case Hernandez was charged with, focusing mainly on the critical aspects of the case throughout the time of trial.

What investigative tools and clues did law enforcement use to solve the murder reviewed?

Cell phone tracking was one of the methods used. Detectives managed to track two other suspects, who happen to be Hernandez’s friends and arrest them in connection to the murder. They also conducted a series of interviews on people, surveillance, as well as search warrant preparation and execution. Such combined mechanisms in preparing this case helped in the determination of the case in which Hernandez was jailed.

What made this a high profile case and what was the offender’s defense to beat the murder charges

Hernandez had a history that was recorded in the past by the police. He is said to have had another case similar to the current one. This drew the interest of the criminal justice system, making it a high profile case. Media widely covered examination of the legal aspects such as; likely grounds, incidental evidence, bail terms, the nature of criminal charges, pleas, and other relevant matters to the case. An examination of his criminal records was done upon the accusation of the murder of Lloyd. Law officers also said they were probing the alleged role of Hernandez in a double murder in Boston in 2012. Hernandez is now facing a criminal case arising with a supposed shooting incident in South Florida in February 2013 in which a man, you might say, lost his eye. The prosecutor will try to create in the history of Hernandez a propensity for violence and illegal acts (Gallagher, 2017).

Discuss any crime scene evidence (including witness statements and digital proof (if applicable) and describe the methodology used and its impact on the investigation.

Lloyd is said to have texted her sister before he met his death, in which he told her who he was with and indicated that she should know. This was one of the evidence presented to the court against Hernandez.  Gunshot sounds around an industrial park near Hernandez’s home, followed. However, this was blocked as the judge claimed it had no proof of the victim fearing for his life. It affected the prosecutor as they were not allowed to discuss it and derive a meaning out of them. Hernandez is said to have sent messages to the victim, where he invited him over.

Home surveillance video was also submitted, which shows Hernandez walking towards his basement door, holding what is said to have been a gun. This video was recorded on his return home after the gunshots were heard. The case was supposed to be a joint one with several active participants, and hence any of the three could be accused of murder regardless of who pulled the trigger. Prosecutors allegedly claimed Lloyd and Hernandez had been in touch over a package of cannabis barely 10 hours before his death. Besides, keys to a vehicle that Hernandez had leased were supposedly found in Lloyd’s pocket. Prosecutors allege that Lloyd lately said something to Hernandez, which shattered his faith and gave Hernandez a reason for killing.

Discuss how the management of the crime scene impacts the potential admissibility in the criminal proceeding of the case.

The scene of the crime management skills is indeed an incredible aspect of the investigation process because the information that stems out of the scene of the crime can describe the circumstances that ensued, which can, in turn, be viewed by the court for consideration during its proceedings. The image will be made up of witness statements, crime scene photos, actual exhibits, and the interpretation of those items, along with the understanding of the scene of the crime itself (Gehl & Plecas, 2016). First, note-taking is an essential aspect of crime scene management. While the investigator will create additional documentation to handle the scene of the crime, none of the other records will be as relevant to the investigation team as the journal. The document is a personal guide for the investigator to documenting the investigation in detail. All times, dates, including descriptions of people, locations, and cars as they emerge that accrues from the scene of the crime are essential and should not be forgotten and hence the need for recording.

If the integrity of the scene of the crime was impaired, any information collected or presented would not be admissible in the court of law. As a part of the management of the crime scene, integrity preservation of the scene of the crime includes a variety of different procedures. These are duties that the investigating officer must undertake to locate, obtain, preserve, and safeguard evidence to guarantee that it is approved and accepted as evidence by the court. First, locking down the scene of the crime and setting up a perimeter around the scene of crime. Then, identifying any exposure route that can ultimately result in contamination and setting up the path of corruption where officers can enter and study the crime scene adequately. Finally, setting up the scene of crime protection detail will enhance the admissibility of evidence collected in a court of law. For instance, failing to lock down the crime scene may result in destruction and contamination of vital evidence that would have held the ground in a court of law, thereby rendering it inadmissible.

In every scene of the crime, pollution and lack of consistency are the two main barriers to forensic evidence (Gehl & Plecas, 2016). Contamination is just an unintentional modification of proof that may harm the credibility of the original item or the scene of the crime. This undesirable modification of evidence may wipe out the initial transfer of evidence, water down a sample, or put deceptive new materials on the stand. Such acts render the evidence inadmissible in a court of law. Like preventing contamination, ensuring and preserving the continuity of proof is a procedure that protects the integrity of the data collected. For the testimony to be admitted in a court, the judge and the jury must be confident that the objects produced were the same item taken from the scene of the crime. Proof must be shown to illustrate the chain of continuity that records every detail from the scene of the crime to the courtroom stand.

Discuss any defense challenges of the evidence ( if applicable) made during the prosecution.

Throughout the four-month trial, Hernandez’s defense lawyers questioned DNA testimony on a shell casing discovered in a car he is said to have rented, the shoe print prosecution claimed belonged to Hernandez in addition to visual evidence and smartphone records. They also accused police officers of mishandling evidence and also as acting biased and unpresidential. During his closing argument, however,  defense lawyer James Sultan admitted His presence at the scene. He, however, claimed that he was there as a witness to the killing.

References

Brenner, F. (1953). The impulsive murder and the degree device. Fordham L. Rev., 22, 274.

Gallagher, P. H. (2017). The Aaron Hernandez Case: The Inconsistencies Plaguing the Application of the Abatement Doctrine. Gonz. L. Rev., 53, 263.

Gehl, R., & Plecas, D. (2016). Introduction to Criminal Investigation: Processes, Practices and Thinking. Justice Institute of British Columbia.