After more than six hours of deliberations, jurors in Boston were left questioning a few specifics in the double murder trial of Ex-NFL Star Aaron Hernandez.
Set to resume deliberations on Monday after no verdict was reached Friday. Jurors asked for clarity on the law of testimony of a witness given immunity from prosecution. Hernandez is already serving a life sentence for a previous 2013 conviction , in the shooting death of Odin Lloyd that case is still under appeal.
Now accused of murdering two men, Daniel Abreu and Safiro Furtado after leaving a bar with former friend Alexander Bradley. Bradley is the prosecution’s star witness and Hernandez former friend was given immunity, for his participation in the trial. His testimony states that he was the driver of the vehicle the night of the murders.
Prosecutors say that a Toyota 4Runner and a .38 handgun that forensically ties Hernandez to the murders were found at a house in Connecticut belonging to his uncle.
Via Dan Wetzel of Yahoo! Sports, the jury asked ”If an immunized witness provides specific testimony that we would believe give enough evidence… do we have to have corroborating evidence.” The judge stated that corroborating evidence was not required.
Although the jury has yet to reach a verdict, that question could be seen as they believe Alexander Bradley and if that is true, it is game over for Hernandez.
