|
?:reviewBody
|
-
If you or someone you know is experiencing a mental health, suicide or substance use crisis or emotional distress, reach out 24/7 to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline (formerly known as the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline) by dialing or texting 988 or using chat services at suicidepreventionlifeline.org to connect to a trained crisis counselor. The death of former New England Patriots tight end Aaron Hernandez, who was found hanged in his prison cell on 19 April 2017, was followed by rumors and questions that including speculation he intended his suicide to benefit his young daughter: This speculation was followed from news reports suggesting that because Hernandez was appealing his conviction for the murder of Odin Lloyd at the time he died, under Massachusetts law that conviction could be vacated as if it had never happened: The legal concept of abatement ab initio is both seldom invoked and not without controversy due to its potential effect on victims' families: Speculative online posts have stated with certainty that Hernandez's death triggered a windfall for his surviving relatives, presuming the NFL star would once again be entitled to a considerable fortune from his football career, but legal analysts and extant case law paint a muddier picture. They say an argument could be made disputing the severance of a contract based upon an arrest for an overturned or vacated conviction, but not that such a lawsuit would necessarily be successful: However, the Boston Globe disputed that achieving such an outcome was feasible: In June 2013, NFL.com reported that Hernandez's contract guarantees had been revoked, a decision the NFL based on his arrest and his conduct subsequent to that arrest, not his later conviction. In other words, had Hernandez not been convicted in the murder of Odin Lloyd, that circumstance would have had no bearing on the NFL's June 2013 decision: Speculation holds that if Hernandez's conviction were vacated it would posthumously restore his standing with the NFL, thereby entitling his next of kin to the wealth he would have accumulated if he had never been convicted. But that speculation presumes that since the legal doctrine triggered by Hernandez's suicide could vacate his conviction, the NFL would somehow be bound by that outcome to pay out the contract's promises to his family. However, the NFL is a business entity and not a court of law, and Hernandez's contract was voided 90 minutes after his arrest based on conduct unbecoming, not on his conviction. Abatement ab initio may possibly clear Hernandez's name in a technical sense, but legal experts say only that a creative lawyer could initiate litigation based on that concept, not that the outcome of such litigation is automatic or certain. The legal concept of abatement ab initio is controversial when invoked in high-profile cases like this one because it often serves to protect the existing assets of an appellant's estate, and no provision of the law mandates that the NFL must reinstate Hernandez's contract terms on the basis of his death. UPDATE: Henandez' conviction was erased by a Massachusetts judge in May 2017. It was later reinstated in March 2019 with the Associated Press reporting: The Supreme Judicial Court unanimously found that the legal rule that erased Hernandez’s conviction is 'outdated and no longer consonant with the circumstances of contemporary life.' It ordered that Hernandez’s conviction be restored and that the practice be abolished for future cases. The ruling does not affect past cases.
(en)
|
![[This page as RDF]](http://data.gesis.org/claimskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}