GUILTY WI - Samuel Aegerter, 30, killed in road rage incident, Janesville, 4 June 2010

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Yes Believe09- next week on the 12th will be the hearing for this. I highly doubt that Mr.Humphrey`s remarks to the officer`s "off the record" will be thrown out. These are detectives/officers, they would have zero reason to make up false statements in this case-IMO.
 
Attempting to have spontaneous statements thrown out is SOP for most cases-the defense attorneys would not be doing their "due diligence" if they did not make an attempt. The same with any confessions-they seem to always try to impeach whether or not the defendant was adequately given their rights.

It is a terribly sad situation-from my position it looks like someone lost their life over words and a middle finger. What a waste.
 
I agree.The lawyers are doing what they must. Yet, I doubt and hope that these statements which appear to admission of guilt are not thrown out. If they are not thrown out, I hope that the accused will plead out and that there will not have to be a trial... This would be hard on many, especially for the Aegerter family.. It is an absolute tragedy that a life was lost in this incident. It has affected many, and will continue to affect many for life.
 
If BOTH bikers where chasing the Jeep, they were both comitting a crime. If Hall found out when they returned that night that Humphrey shot into the car and Humphrey told him THAT NIGHT he thought he hit someone in the car, Hall should have reported it that night.

Did hall call 911 and report this crime that night?

If not, IMO he is an accessory and should be charged.

JMO
 
The bikers fled to Humphrey's house, where Hall confronted Humphrey with what happened.

"I said, 'Jim, What are you doing shooting a gun?'" Hall testified. "He said, 'I think I hit him.'"

"I said, 'You were f——— aiming at him?'"

"He said, 'I just snapped.'"

Snipped for space...

This is what I'm talking about. This is Hall's statement correct?
So, not only did he see the gun and hear the shots, he was told point blank by Humphrey that Humphrey thought he hit someone.

That's when Hall should have reported it. Because he didn't and because he was part of the original crime, that would make him an accessory and in some states he would face the same murder charge as Humphrey. Not sure what the laws are there.

JMO
 
Mr.Hall has not been charged with anything. Nor does he have some "special immunity". It seems that the man in jail is the one that is because he indeed was the shooter. Again, there were three eye witness`s.

I did spend some time reviewing the media on this case-of the three eyewitnesses, Hall was the one that ID'd Humphrey as the shooter. The two passengers in the jeep, at least at the time of the articles, did not see who fired the shot. Has that changed?

I am intrigued that the gun has not been found, if Mr. Hall says he buried it with Mr. Humphrey-does LE believe the gun was moved again? How is that possible if Mr. Humphrey has been in jail on his astronomical bond?

Can anyone share the lag time from event to arrest?

TIA...

ETA: I am surprised at the first degree intentional homicide charge, fwiw. The case has to be pretty strong to support the charge-right now it looks like reckless homicide to me, I mean clearly fueled by alcohol and rage etc. But the first degree charge is harsh-the DA is going to have to have very very very strong evidence. Do juries get a choice in WI? Like can they convict on lesser charges?
 
Both men had been interviewed by police that evening. Nothing had been mentioned about anyone injured etc. So I would guess at that point they are covering up a stupid thing Jimmy did. Which was probably thought to be shooting a gun off in public. I believe it was the shooters responsibility more then anyone else`s. He had a much better view of what he was shooting at. I am sure there was quite a bit of shock involved by both Humphrey and Hall.
 
Yes Believe09- next week on the 12th will be the hearing for this. I highly doubt that Mr.Humphrey`s remarks to the officer`s "off the record" will be thrown out. These are detectives/officers, they would have zero reason to make up false statements in this case-IMO.


I was told that Jim was not marandized and therefore his statements cannot be used. Does anyone know if that's the law?
 
Both men had been interviewed by police that evening. Nothing had been mentioned about anyone injured etc. So I would guess at that point they are covering up a stupid thing Jimmy did. Which was probably thought to be shooting a gun off in public. I believe it was the shooters responsibility more then anyone else`s. He had a much better view of what he was shooting at. I am sure there was quite a bit of shock involved by both Humphrey and Hall.


So when did they have time to bury the gun?

From my perspective, the whole thing is stupid because it was just words-it was words and the finger and someone died. So all who were engaged in fueling this encounter have to evaluate their role in it I would think.
 
Believe- it was said that the gun was yes- removed and "gotten rid of" again. From Humphrey to Hall. Yes I believe there has been more evidence to support Hall`s statements.
 
I was told that Jim was not marandized and therefore his statements cannot be used. Does anyone know if that's the law?

Well, there are a few things that could apply-if Jim was mirandized and lawyered up, spontaneous statements could be excluded if it is determined the detectives continued to ask questions that caused the statements. If Jim was not mirandized at any point, well then they cannot use any of it. The article seems to indicate that Jim lawyered up, which is his right, and the self incriminating statements followed. Since the encounter was not filmed, it could go either way depending on what the statements are.
 
I did spend some time reviewing the media on this case-of the three eyewitnesses, Hall was the one that ID'd Humphrey as the shooter. The two passengers in the jeep, at least at the time of the articles, did not see who fired the shot. Has that changed?

I am intrigued that the gun has not been found, if Mr. Hall says he buried it with Mr. Humphrey-does LE believe the gun was moved again? How is that possible if Mr. Humphrey has been in jail on his astronomical bond?

Can anyone share the lag time from event to arrest?

TIA...

ETA: I am surprised at the first degree intentional homicide charge, fwiw. The case has to be pretty strong to support the charge-right now it looks like reckless homicide to me, I mean clearly fueled by alcohol and rage etc. But the first degree charge is harsh-the DA is going to have to have very very very strong evidence. Do juries get a choice in WI? Like can they convict on lesser charges?


IF that's the case- that they could not ID Jim, then that's a huge problem for the state, if, after the arrest, they said "That's the guy!"
 
Well, there are a few things that could apply-if Jim was mirandized and lawyered up, spontaneous statements could be excluded if it is determined the detectives continued to ask questions that caused the statements. If Jim was not mirandized at any point, well then they cannot use any of it. The article seems to indicate that Jim lawyered up, which is his right, and the self incriminating statements followed. Since the encounter was not filmed, it could go either way depending on what the statements are.

As I understood the motions from the defense atty- he was not marandized until AFTER he asked for an attorney.
 
I understand this is a sensitive thread for those who know both men and I appreciate how respectful everyone is being!

Again, I think this is a tragedy-I do not know any of the players but it is clear that this case has ripped people's lives apart, certainly for the victim's family the most. :(
 
mssheila. Whether Jim was read his rights is in question from the accused`s standpoint. I believe the argument is that he was read his rights when he was arrested at his place of work. But that the statements he made in the hallway were not on "camera" and that he was not re-read his rights there.. I guess this will all be settked next Wednesday.
 
Both men had been interviewed by police that evening. Nothing had been mentioned about anyone injured etc. So I would guess at that point they are covering up a stupid thing Jimmy did. Which was probably thought to be shooting a gun off in public. I believe it was the shooters responsibility more then anyone else`s. He had a much better view of what he was shooting at. I am sure there was quite a bit of shock involved by both Humphrey and Hall.

But by Hall's own statement (given later) he said they discussed it THAT NIGHT and Humphrey said he thought he "hit somebody". So yeah, I think they did kinda know someone had been shot.

If he remembers the details of that conversation word for word as given in his statement, I don't think shock was involved.

Seems to me they both tried to cover this up. They both lied and they both got rid of the murder weapon.

JMO
 
I'll add to Believe's statement in that if the information, statements were made before Jim was placed under arrest, they will be allowed, unless there is another reason for exclusion.

LE does not have to give a suspect their rights, until such time as they place the suspect under arrest.

Salem
 
IF that's the case- that they could not ID Jim, then that's a huge problem for the state, if, after the arrest, they said "That's the guy!"

Yes-it could be a huge problem. I would think a competent defense attorney might be able to plant a seed regarding some kind of influence at work.
 
mssheila. Whether Jim was read his rights is in question from the accused`s standpoint. I believe the argument is that he was read his rights when he was arrested at his place of work. But that the statements he made in the hallway were not on "camera" and that he was not re-read his rights there.. I guess this will all be settked next Wednesday.


Yes, I think it will be settled. it is going to be a tough wait for everyone.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
3,003
Total visitors
3,144

Forum statistics

Threads
603,194
Messages
18,153,323
Members
231,670
Latest member
xhononibb
Back
Top