Aaron Hernandez’ New Indictment: Suffolk DA Running Scared?

AAron smilingOn February 13, 2013, according to the Suffolk DA Dan Conley, Alexander Brady was left “to die on the side of the road in Riviera Beach,” Florida after being shot by Aaron Hernandez. The reason behind the shooting, according to the DA, is that on July 16, 2012, on Shawmut Avenue Brady was a “percipient witness to the homicides of Daniel de Abreu and Safiro Furtado” for which Aaron Hernandez stands indicted and Aaron wanted to make sure there was one less witness.

What is strange about all this is that Hernandez has not been charged with a crime in Florida for shooting Brady? How is it he can shoot a guy in Florida, leave him for dead, and not be charged? That’s one question that has me trying to figure the answer to; but there is another one.

How is it that a DA in Massachusetts can charge for a crime committed in Florida? The answer to that last one is simple to answer. He can’t.

The DA says he can do it because the state law that makes it illegal to injure a witness with the intent to impede a criminal investigation. That’s true but there are also other matters that must be considered when charging a defendant. Why do you think there is no Massachusetts law that reads: “anyone who murders a Massachusetts resident anywhere in the world can be indicted and tried in Massachusetts.”  It’s because the jurisdiction for crimes is limited to those which are committed within the state; which is the same for all the other states.

Which makes me wonder what is behind the DA doing something that should not stand up in court. (I say should because judges make the laws and they can make them apply anyway they want.)

Chapter 268, section 13B of the MA General Laws concerns intimidation of a witness.  It reads: (1) Whoever, directly or indirectly, willfully (a) threatens, or attempts or causes physical injury, emotional injury, economic injury or property damage to; . . . (i) a witness or potential witness at any stage of a criminal investigation, . . . shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than 2 and one-half years or by imprisonment in a state prison for not more than 10 years, . . . “

The last paragraph in the statute reads: A prosecution under this section may be brought in the county in which the criminal investigation, grand jury proceeding, trial or other criminal proceeding is being conducted or took place, or in the county in which the alleged conduct constituting an offense occurred.”

The DA is suggesting because the investigation took place in Suffolk county therefore he can prosecute it even though the conduct constituting the offense took place in Florida.

There’s a little thing that seems to stand in his way. It is the Massachusetts Constitution. The Bill of Rights in our Constitution states: Article XIII. In criminal prosecutions, the verification of facts in the vicinity where they happen, is one of the greatest securities of the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.”  It seems if something happened in Riviera Beach, Florida, the Suffolk DA is going to be hard put suggesting that Suffolk County, Massachusetts is in that vicinity.

There’s more. Chapter I, the Legislature Power, Section 1, Article III reads: “The general court shall forever have full power and authority to erect and constitute judicatories and courts of record, or other courts, to be held in the name of the commonwealth, for the hearing, trying, and determining of all manner of crimes, offences, . . . causes and things, whatsoever, arising or happening within the commonwealth, or between or concerning persons inhabiting, or residing, or brought within the same, whether the same be criminal or civil, or whether the said crimes be capital or not capital, and whether the said pleas be real, personal, or mixed; and for the awarding and making out of execution thereupon. . . .” (Emphasis added)

This seems so elementary to me that a criminal act in Florida cannot be tried in Massachusetts that I have to wonder what’s behind it. Even more so do I wonder when I know the DA has charged Hernandez with a double homicide. If he’s got a strong homicide case why would he be charging a guy already doing a first degree life with a ten-year felony?

I’ve suggested earlier that if Hernandez was acquitted in the Odin Llyod case he would have a good chance of beating the double homicide charge in Boston (Suffolk County.) What seems to be going on now is Hernandez has every intention of going to trial on the double murders in Boston and the DA is worried. Therefore, he’s piling this charge hoping it will make Hernandez change his mind. He is trying to force him to plead guilty and not go to trial on the murders. I have to say he seems to be playing with a losing hand.

I would suggest that if he’s interested in murders he could look at some committed by the people who were friends of the witnesses in the Whitey Bulger case. Those were certainly in his jurisdiction.

4 thoughts on “Aaron Hernandez’ New Indictment: Suffolk DA Running Scared?

  1. Ahh Matt, you know Dan Conley is clueless, don’t you? A little man so in love with himself and his power yet extremely pissed nobody likes him. He still cannot understand how he lost the mayor’s race.
    How about his stunt in capturing the DNA for the Boston Strangler phony press conference.
    How about never ever going after cops.
    Snelgrove killer. The cop that killed the young girl when he shot through the rear window of a stolen car that was not an immediate danger to anyone.
    Many other examples.
    Conley needs to go. Like yesterday

    1. Ernie:

      The man who would be mayor, is that what you think? Indicting a guy for a ten year felony is a stunt when you have him charged on a double murder even if he committed the act in the state. All this show boating will catch up with him if the media ever pays attention to his actions. During my time there were reporters in the court all the time. That no longer happens. In Norfolk Superior every day the Globe, Herald and Patriot Ledger had a reporter sitting there watching the events. We were friendly but you knew you had to toe the mark all the time. Aside from that they had columnists who were sniffing around looking for stories. Now none of that exists. The crime reports we get are second hand or passed on through cops or on the federal side by the DOJ or FBI which controls how they are written.

      Things have changed an not for the good when a DA can charge a guy for a crime committed in Florida and no one raises and eyebrow. Keep up the good work on your side.

  2. Does the DA file a motion to join the two cases thus allowing the Florida evidence and the Boston homicide evidence admitted in the same trial? Does he force the defense to ask for severance? If he loses the murder he has a second bite of the apple on the Bradley matter. Or is this charge an effort to force Florida’s hand? Will the Florida shooting be admitted in the Boston murders as pattern of behavior evidence? 2. The DA can prove that the two victims were murdered in a drive by shooting. Proving who did it is the harder part. It may all come down to Bradley’s credibility. With his background he may be a less than compelling witness.

    1. NC:

      1. The case will be thrown out. You can’t charge a man for a criminal act committed in another state. I agree that he will seek to join the cases or at least get the Florida evidence into the Boston double homicide but that’s for another day. If he loses the double murder he’d look pretty stupid settling for the intimidation of a witness case; it would have been as if the Fall River DA lost the murder and got a guilty on the illegal possession of .22 caliber bullets.
      As for forcing Florida’s hand, that’s unlikely. It comes down to the Suffolk DA never should have indicted on the evidence he had in the double homicide and he’s trying to hide behind that fact. Remember that guy who jumped off the bridge after killing his wife and blaming a black guy (Stewart). Suffolk back then after going after the black guy asked us to indict him for something else when they realized they had screwed up. This is another curve ball that the DA is throwing out to obfuscate and delay. Why not bring Hernandez to trial ASAP on the murders and stop the “running a red light” type charges.
      2. I have to think the Florida has interviewed Bradley and found him not to be too credible. I think that is one of the DA’s problems. Bradley has probably told ten different stories and Florida looked upon him implicating Hernandez as a type of stick up. Remember how the Boston media gave his story little credence when it came out. When the fat in on the fire the rouges come out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *