A verdict in the Aaron Hernandez double murder case may come as soon as today, and there are conflicting reports about the direction the jury will take. Will the former New England Patriots player be found not guilty of the 2012 shooting deaths of Daniel de Abreu and Safiro Furtado, or will his superstar attorney, Jose Baez, lose the case that would add more years to Hernandez’s life sentence?
On Friday, after putting in close to seven hours, the Boston Globe reports that jurors asked Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Locke a question about an immunized witness that has many thinking a guilty verdict will be served upon the former New England Patriots player. However, there is an equal amount of speculation that the question could lead to his acquittal.
What is the question, and how important is the judges’ answer to the outcome of this case? Here’s the latest on the Aaron Hernandez double murder trial.
Hernandez, who is currently serving a life sentence for the 2013 murder of Odin Lloyd, has, at times, appeared bored with the whole courtroom scene. Photos of the Hernandez posted on Twitter often caught him closing his eyes, smirking, or mid-yawn during the trial that started in early March.
Now that deliberations are underway for the second day, Hernandez may be a bit more attentive. After all, if he is convicted in the double murder case, the chance that he will ever leave prison is grim.
Although the Boston Herald reports the first-degree murder conviction in the Lloyd case is currently under appeal, if jurors find him guilty in the Abreu-Furtado case, all signs point to Hernandez being a lifetime member at the Souza-Baranowski prison in Shirley, Massachusetts.
According to the Boston Globe, the question the jury asked Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Locke during Friday’s deliberations is as follows.
“If an immunized witness provides specific testimony that we believe would give enough evidence for a conviction, do we have to have corroborating evidence for that specific piece of testimony?”
The report indicates that the word “specific” was underlined. The Globe notes that one of the immunized witnesses who testified in the Boston double murder trial was Alexander Bradley, known at one point as Aaron Hernandez’s friend as well as the person who reportedly supplied the former NFL player with marijuana.
Locke answered the jurors’ question before they left for the day, stating that Hernandez could not be convicted “solely on the word of an immunized witness” — more evidence must be present to “corroborate at least one element of the charged offense.”
Yahoo Sports writer Dan Wetzel states that the question from the jury “doesn’t bode well for Hernandez,” especially if the immunized witness they are talking about is Alexander Bradley.
“What this means for Hernandez is, again, not 100 percent certain, however, the state gave immunity deals to six witnesses, including its star, Alexander Bradley, who is the lone person that says Hernandez was the triggerman in the shooting.”
However, NBC Sports writer Jared Florio states that the question “could be good for Hernandez.” He goes on to say that it’s possible that the jury “can’t accept the testimony of Bradley without something else to confirm his version,” and if that’s the case, they would have to acquit Aaron Hernandez.
The Aaron Hernandez double murder trial aired live online on FOX Sports, WCVB, and the Wild About Trial livestream. Expect all three sites to offer the latest updates and information on the verdict as soon as it is reached. Follow the hashtag #AaronHernandez on Twitter as well for the latest updates on the case.
[Featured Image by Jared Wickerham/Getty Images]