Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

menlindorn t1_j20o7t1 wrote

>Hall's legal team is now arguing that footage from the special was later used to sentence their client to death.

>On October 10, 2011, Hall entered a Brazos County residence where he fatally stabbed and shot a 68-year-old male; he also stabbed the victim's 69-year-old wife, who survived the attack.

Hm. I'm no lawyer, but I think probably the murder conviction was what was principally used to sentence him to death.

104

TwilitSky t1_j20rnz5 wrote

This is just the usual legal wrangling that drags out death penalty cases for a long length of time.

I don't believe in the death penalty, but its use here is clearly not negated by showing a jury what a county jail looks like. I'm kind of surprised the attorneys aren't embarrassed by pulling this chicanery, but then again, I'm not.

30

BunchaCreeps t1_j21rg0b wrote

When you read the article, you learn it’s about what was heard on the video and the resulting arguments and not about what the inside of the jail looks like

24

euph_22 t1_j22kzn2 wrote

And the main issue is that the murder had filed a order with the jail that he was declining any outside contact without his lawyer presence. The jail ignored that for this interview, and it's at best questionable that the interview was shown under those circumstances.

11

MetricVeil t1_j21l5t4 wrote

>Hall's legal team is now arguing that footage from the special was later used to sentence their client to death...
>
>​... However, Hall's legal team is claiming that additional footage, outside that segment, was later presented to the Brazos County Jury before they voted to sentence him to death.

Who selected this footage and where, when and why was it shown to the jurors prior to sentencing?

24

RandomComputerFellow t1_j242hod wrote

It was probably part of the approved evidence. My guess is that the approval was for a specific time frame but when they played the video they fucked up and showed a few seconds more.

1

MetricVeil t1_j243yan wrote

>... but when they played the video they fucked up and showed a few seconds more.

Either way, it could be interpreted as a form of 'jury tampering' and, consequently, leading to a biased and unsafe verdict.

4

RandomComputerFellow t1_j244har wrote

Well, not arguing against or for it. Just saying this is how I interpreted the situation. I think that it heavily depends on what the actual clip showed. If this was just some random video which has nothing to do with the case I do not see any grounds. But if the video made any suggestions regarding the case then I see how this may be a problem.

1

[deleted] t1_j235m43 wrote

[deleted]

−2

Spezia-ShwiffMMA t1_j23i6q8 wrote

The best thing for him that could come from this is a re-sentencing. The dude is not getting out of jail.

2

DocSpit t1_j23iti1 wrote

Getting off? No. None of the footage influenced his conviction. A new sentence? Almost certainly. Most likely his death sentence will be commuted back down to life without parole.

2