Posted on 04/20/2017 3:15:04 PM PDT by Trump20162020
Disgraced NFL star and convicted murderer Aaron Hernandez died Wednesday “an innocent man” — according to a little-known legal doctrine in Massachusetts that traces its origins to English common law, one outside expert tells PEOPLE.
Martin Healy, the chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Bar Association, explains that the state observes abatement ab initio, which in criminal proceedings is applied if a defendant dies before all of their appeals have been resolved.
Under abatement ab initio (the latter phrase meaning “from the beginning”), the defendant’s case returns to its initial phase and the slate is wiped clean.
“It’s as if the trial has never happened, and it’s as if the indictment has never happened,” says Healy, who is unconnected to the case.
So “under the eyes of the law, Hernandez has died an innocent man,” Healy continues. “He has not been convicted of any crime in Massachusetts.”
(Excerpt) Read more at people.com ...
He still had guaranteed money on his $40 million, 5 year contract, signed in 2012.
Typically, the first two years of the contract, plus the signing bonus (which is often spread out over several years), are guaranteed.
So, he is owed at least for 2013, plus a $3.25 million bonus due in 2014, plus the Patriots tried to recoup all the upfront bonus money they gave him in 2012, but I don’t know if they got it.
NFL guaranteed money means you get paid - injured, released, dead, or alive.
After his murder conviction, his entire contract was voided for “conduct detrimental.”
As of today, his conviction was voided, so there was no “conduct detrimental.”
He's still alive. Hernandez isn't, and he was still in the appeals stage. Big difference.
If the state appeal overturned the conviction, which means a new trial most of the time, and Hernandez died the next day, are you saying Hernandez is still guilty?
How is that possible since Hernandez is dead and can't be re-tried?
Or, if the state appeal confirms the guilty verdict, and Hernandez dies the next day, most likely his case would have gone to the federal level, which might have thrown out the conviction.
This the first time I've thought about this issue, but it looks to me like Hernandez has caught the game winning legal touchdown pass against the Patriots and against the people who might have sued him for civil damages.
That obscure state law is actually a fairly well-established legal principle in (I think) every state and in federal court.
there is a simple solution to this.
the NFL could decide the AH’s money
does not count against the Pat’s salary cap
When he was cut from the Patriots it wasn’t linked to his arrest. His contract was most likely not guaranteed (most in NFL aren’t). I doubt the veracity of the whole story
I agree. The comparison to Ken Lay of Enron fame doesn’t wash. Ken Lay was never tried, hence the “innocent by death”
“Anyone trying to launch a civil suit against his estate is screwed now. They can no longer point to a murder conviction.”
They have to prove that he was guilty in Civil Court first-—IIRC Nicole Brown Simpson’s family did that.
.
Boo! Bad idea; bad law. Is this mandatory?
It's easy to check.
There are at least 3 sports websites, including the NFL website, that give detailed numbers on all player contracts.
In 2012, Hernandez signed a 5 year contract extension. He was initially drafted in 2010.
In 2012, he got the largest bonus ever paid to a tight end at that time - $12.5 million.
In 2012, he got the second largest total contract ever paid to a tight end - $40 million.
Contract extensions and free agent contracts for the top 150 NFL players are always guaranteed for the first two years, plus the signing bonus.
Elite free agents, like Ndamukong Suh, get three years guaranteed. Older elite free agents, like Peyton Manning, got two years, but much higher guaranteed bonuses.
Re: “When he was cut from the Patriots it wasn’t linked to his arrest.”
Sorry, that's incorrect.
Hernandez had guaranteed money due in both 2013 and 2014.
The Patriots cut him for “detrimental conduct.”
Stop being silly. His conviction is not voided because he died. This is a floater probably by the Hernandez’s family/estate.
It’s not unique to Mass and it’s not rare, it’s an established law of the common law system for Fs sake.
I suggest you read the link.
The person who says that the conviction is void is Martin Healy, the chief legal counsel for the Massachusetts Bar Association.
The "big difference" is criminal vs civil, "beyond a reasonable doubt" vs "preponderance of the evidence".
Hernandez not being convicted of murder has no bearing on whether his conduct against Odin Lloyd was tortious. His being not guilty doesn't mean he didn't kill Mr. Lloyd. That question is for a future civil jury to decide.
Yea, well then he’s probably related to the family attorney. It’s just not going to happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.