GUILTY NH - Abby Hernandez, 14, North Conway, 9 Oct 2013 - #15

[KeRoLe]

I personally am glad this statement was put out there. I think that the media, or certain news "organizations" have more than revictimized Abby. She is a child and deserves to be allowed to heal and have her private life back. I have never doubted since day 1 that this was a stranger abduction and that she has been through hell. I'm just absolutely happy and relieved that she did survive!

I agree. I think even forums such as these can sometimes intentionally or unintentionally "victimize" the victim. We need to be very careful separating facts known from speculation and personal feelings.

 

[skibaboo]

I'm not taking a lawyers words as gospel and find that accusation a little insulting but hey ho.

My words are coming from my own judgement on facts and theories I have contemplated since October 9th last year, and the conduct of the investigation, including conduct of family and LE.

Oh and that $1 million dollar CASH only bail.

 

[LookingHoping]

I'm 100% on-board w/ what you're saying here. I've been in LE for 17 years, so I'm certain I approach most cases from a different perspective & w/ a different agenda. There are some amazing sleuthers here, there're some people who have a fascination w/ crime & mystery, there are some who use this board as a gossip platform, some for entertainment, some as a cheerleading event, among many other things.

The important thing to remember is that we're all here to hope for a good/happy outcome, and to "catch the bad guy". We need to respect each other, and each other's opinion. We're all on the same team.

Um… a cheerleading event?LOL Picturing people at their computers with large ribbons in ponytails and pom poms!

 

[Mountaingazer]

The state has alleged that Kibby voluntarily terminated Abigail's confinement by releasing her into a safe place. The statement, that Abigail "got away" from Kibby, implies that Abigail terminated her own confinement.

Who provided the statement that Abby "got away".

 

[lawstudent]

Early in these sort of investigations there are always a lot of people talking who shouldn't be, and they don't always choose their words carefully. It's hard to analyze at this point - the charges could change etc. We just need more information before we can piece everything together.

 

[cluciano63]

How could a million cash bond be obtained on charges that could only result in seven years? I understand charges are likely to be added but I thought bond had to be in line with current charges. Is this not the case?

 

[liljim]

How could a million cash bond be obtained on charges that could only result in seven years? I understand charges are likely to be added but I thought bond had to be in line with current charges. Is this not the case?

i havent the slightest idea why he would be offered any bond, i have no idea why the killer of jenise wright would be offered any bond either... apparently i need to do some research, i thought when people were a danger to the public and the evidence was compelling the prosecutors would argue for no bond, they didnt even try for that in either of these cases.

does anyone feel like these two men are not dangers to the public?

 

[skibaboo]

i havent the slightest idea why he would be offered any bond, i have no idea why the killer of jenise wright would be offered any bond either... Apparently i need to do some research, i thought when people were a danger to the public and the evidence was compelling the prosecutors would argue for no bond, they didnt even try for that in either of these cases.

does anyone feel like these two men are not dangers to the public?

h*ll no!

 

[Dixie811]

i havent the slightest idea why he would be offered any bond, i have no idea why the killer of jenise wright would be offered any bond either... apparently i need to do some research, i thought when people were a danger to the public and the evidence was compelling the prosecutors would argue for no bond, they didnt even try for that in either of these cases.

does anyone feel like these two men are not dangers to the public?

BBM

Regarding Abby's case-- I don't think any evidence has been presented to the court yet? (Since the defense says they don't have any idea what evidence the prosecution has). Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think the court can act on evidence that has yet to be presented. I imagine the probable cause hearing will reveal more.

 

[BillNH]

not sure if anyone else remembers this but after abigail was home, possibly the night after the court appearance? HLN focused on the case, they had 6 people on the screen, dr drew, his co-host and 4 experts (ha)

5 of the 6 all agreed that abigail was "in on it" in some way, that there was something fishy going on here, that maybe she ran off with him, etc...

i dont know how many people watch that show, but that show was crazy irresponsible i thought, and i would really like to see them cover this case tonight and see what they have to say now.

because there really isnt any ambiguity on those points anymore.

They would likely not say anything different. A statement on the guilt of the accused, given by a paid spokesman for the victim, carries no more weight, to me, than the statement of innocence by the accused himself. They do not wish to try the case in the press but they are doing exactly that with this statement. I believe this is nothing more than influencing the jury pool in Abby's favor to undo some of the damage that the public has done with rampant speculation about Abby's role in her kidnapping. I'm not criticizing the move, it's expected, but I prefer to let a jury decide. Some are acting as if the trial is over, but this statement really changes nothing.

 

[SStarr33]

If that is okay to say, I also thought I saw it, but in 2 different photos.

If he tried to strangle her, it seems like they would charge him with attempted murder

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

it's amazing to me how one lawyer speaks and everyone takes it as gospel.

I know I'm alone in this, so JMO, IMO, MOO obviously...

:hills:

You're not alone. :grouphug:

I've been wondering about these two media releases and about the statement that there are two law firms representing AH and her mom (one from NH and one from MA):

Abigail and Zenya Hernandez are represented by Michael L. Coyne of Andover, Massachusetts and Steven Hyde and Briana Coakley of Coakley and Hyde in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Any questions, please contact Michael Coyne at 978.681.0800 or coyne@mslaw.edu.

http://www.bringabbyhome.com/

AND

Coyne and his associates are now representing Abigail and her mother Zenya. He says Abigail was abused after recently meeting with them. http://www.csnne.com/article/lawyer-kidnapped-nh-teen-suffered-unspeakable-violence

Is this saying that Coyne's associates are the NH firm? Coyne's firm is on record as being an organization of "1" - he apparently is a law professor at an alternative law school in Massachusetts according to the bio posted upthread. From reading his student reviews it appears his "trial team" consists of top students in his classes. So is this what he means by 'his associates,' or does he mean the NH lawyers (Coakley & Hyde)?



http://www.martindale.com/Michael-L-Coyne/law-firm-28316339.htm

(He uses students for his trial team, though, according to ratemyprofessor.com)

Also, as of July 29, 2014, Coyne is only licensed to practice in Massachusetts (see below), so is he allowed to team up with a NH team of associates in order to represent AH and her mom in NH - or is he allowed to also practice in NH with his MA license and his own student trial team? Or...maybe he is doing the 'unofficial media spokesman' kind of representation for no fee (which gets around the license issue?), and the NH licensed team, Coakley & Hyde, is doing the actual legal representation? (I'm confused; someone in the know, please tell me how this works.)



http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/01810-ma-michael-coyne-1330841.html

 

[Minette]

Some are acting as if the trial is over, but this statement really changes nothing.

RSBM. No, it changes nothing, and even if it was directly false it does not change the facts that Abby was 14 years old and therefore could not legally consent to a) being kept away from her parental home, and b) any alleged sexual relationship with the defendant. Seriously, are we going to now give grown-*advertiser censored** men a break for forming illicit relationships with young girls under the age of consent if the silly young thing DID in fact 'think she was in love' or 'ran off with him?' Because really, now, exactly what else is implied by 'Abby could have had a hand in her own disappearance'?

And btw, that is NOT what I think happened, I think Abby was grabbed and imprisoned, and that isn't because what the lawyer said today--as another poster said unthread that is based on my own reading of the facts & circumstances.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I believe that you are referring to RSA 633:1, I-a ("I-a"), which provides an alternative definition of kidnapping. Kibby is charged under RSA 633:1, I(d) ("I[d]"). Therefore, the alternative definition does not apply in his case. The intent requirement of I-a differs from that of I(d). The former involves the intent to detain or conceal a person under the age of 18, other than one related to the defendant by blood, from a parent or legal guardian. See I-a. The latter involves the intent to commit an offense against a person. See I(d).

Abigail seems to be taking the position that Kibby was a stranger (see Bring Abby Home). In my opinion, it would be a stretch to argue that Kibby, a complete stranger to Abigail, would have been driven by the desire to keep Abigail from her mother when he kidnapped her.

I do appreciate your trying to tackle this question, though I'll also admit, I'm not sure if what you've posted in reply connects the dots for me. And it's probably because I didn't frame it very well, sorry! Liljim and I were just discussing about how the whole issue of 'going willingly' is really a moot point when you consider any abduction of a minor--because even if the abductee were not to sense the seriousness of what's coming off at the time of the abduction (as far as future dangers or legal ramifications), the charge is still kidnapping; it's still a crime involving a minor victim. Minimally, the kidnapper has enticed the kid away from his/her legal guardian (eg. the 1-a clause) which is considered harmful or potentially harmful. But, anyway, thanks for posting, as always, and I'm sorry I wasn't more clear.

I'm now muddled about attorneys and if one is licensed to practice in one state, can he practice in another...new question for you!

 

[SStarr33]

You're not alone. :grouphug:

I've been wondering about these two media releases and about the statement that there are two law firms representing AH and her mom (one from NH and one from MA):



AND


Is this saying that Coyne's associates are the NH firm? Coyne's firm is on record as being an organization of "1" - he apparently is a law professor at an alternative law school in Massachusetts according to the bio posted upthread. From reading his student reviews it appears his "trial team" consists of top students in his classes. So is this what he means by 'his associates,' or does he mean the NH lawyers (Coakley & Hyde)?



http://www.martindale.com/Michael-L-Coyne/law-firm-28316339.htm

(He uses students for his trial team, though, according to ratemyprofessor.com)

Also, as of July 29, 2014, Coyne is only licensed to practice in Massachusetts (see below), so is he allowed to team up with a NH team of associates in order to represent AH and her mom in NH - or is he allowed to also practice in NH with his MA license and his own student trial team? Or...maybe he is doing the 'unofficial media spokesman' kind of representation for no fee (which gets around the license issue?), and the NH licensed team, Coakley & Hyde, is doing the actual legal representation? (I'm confused; someone in the know, please tell me how this works.)



http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/01810-ma-michael-coyne-1330841.html

In that interview with NECN, the news host said Coyne appeared "often" on NECN. Maybe he got the case because he is on TV all of the time? He also said Coyne is the dean of the Massachusetts School of Law which I have never heard of.

 

[Minette]

I'm not sure what credentials an attorney needs to serve as the spokesperson for the family of the victim of a violent crime. Can anyone enlighten me?

 

[white rabbit]

WOW.

skibaboo, I'm sorry you took my post as a personal insult...let me rephrase it -- "some of you are taking one lawyer's word as gospel". I'm not pointing at anyone in particular, just the general tone of the past few pages.

liljim, I see nothing BUT ambiguity...according to the current charge and LE's own statements, she was driven away, released in a safe place, and without bodily harm. according to the lawyers representing abby and zenya, that's changed to violent abduction and unspeakable acts for the duration of 9 months (i'll find the links)...

anateresa, nothing would be gained by them lying...but let's see exactly what charges are forthcoming. PR is very important, and lawyers are smart. that's why they're hired in the first place. nor did my post state any were lying, at all. I said "it's amazing to me how one lawyer speaks and everyone takes it as gospel." rephrased as per my statement to skibaboo above...

lawstudent, great post and great points. but if anyone should choose their words carefully, it's a practicing attorney, especially one who teaches the law. so the words weigh heavily, as a representative and spokesperson for the victim, and on facebook no less. gospel, no...truth, I would hope so. grain of salt, most definitely at this early stage of the case.

i apologize for any offense taken by my prior post.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

In that interview with NECN, the news host said Coyne appeared "often" on NECN. Maybe he got the case because he is on TV all of the time? He also said Coyne is the dean of the Massachusetts School of Law which I have never heard of.

From the link supplied upthread by J Block in post 220, the Massachusetts School of Law is apparently an alternative school for people who have trouble getting into law school for whatever reason (age, grades, perceived discrimination, etc.) He's got a few Youtube presentations online as well. He's been listed as dean or associate dean at various places online, though I've also read that there are several family members involved in this school (eg. his wife is also a teacher at the school). The school is not accredited.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I'm not sure what credentials an attorney needs to serve as the spokesperson for the family of the victim of a violent crime. Can anyone enlighten me?

I don't think anyone needs credentials to be a spokesperson for the family of a victim of a violent crime. The family friends were doing it prior to attorneys. I do think if an atty is hired, though, they probably need to be licensed to practice in that state. Which makes me wonder if Coyne is doing this for them for no pay (as did their friends before him).

 

[coffeecup]

I read that, but couldn't see it in her school video, which was blurry. When her items were described, after she disappeared, they had photos of similar purse and necklace. She was seen with a backpack. Having 2 female teens and with how conscientious they are, I thought it unlikely that she'd have the National Guard bag, as well as purse and backpack... And it wasn't mentioned earlier. This is only speculation.