Ortiz says Hernandez put guns in a box after Lloyd’s shooting


Police still don’t know where the gun used to kill Odin Lloyd is.  But they believe they know where it was.

Via the Associated Press, an affidavit released Friday by the Attleboro District Court alleges that Aaron Hernandez associate Carlos Ortiz informed police Hernandez put guns in a black box after Lloyd was shot.

Lloyd was shot with a .45 caliber Glock.  Other guns were present in the car and in Hernandez’s home on the night of the slaying.

Presumably, Ortiz at some point said more about the disposal of the guns.  The four-day search of a pond in Bristol, Connecticut (unsuccessful, so far) possibly was prompted by Ortiz telling the authorities the gun was thrown into it.

Other affidavits previously released indicate that Ortiz told police he was asleep in the car when Hernandez, Ernest Wallace, and Lloyd exited at an industrial park near Hernandez’s home.  Shots were fired, Hernandez and Wallace returned to the car, and Wallace later told Ortiz that Hernandez was the one who fired on Lloyd.

All affidavits were filed in support of the issuance of various search warrants.  The latest apparently was used to support seizure of a phone, credits cards, and bank cards from Tanya Singleton-Valderramma, a woman with whom Ortiz had been living.  Ortiz said he discussed the killing of Lloyd with her.

Ortiz, who faces only weapons charges, is being held without bail.  The affidavits show that Ortiz has cooperated extensively with police.  The biggest questions remaining are whether he’ll testify in court against Hernandez, whether his testimony will be viewed as credible, and whether Hernandez will be able to distance himself from any credibility issues related to the testimony, given that Hernandez summoned Ortiz from Connecticut to Massachusetts on the night of the murder.

22 responses to “Ortiz says Hernandez put guns in a box after Lloyd’s shooting

  1. Can we get a list of all of the information/facts that Ortiz has given to police that has been verified as true?

    I believe him that his name is Ortiz. That’s it so far.

  2. Ortiz wasn’t asked to drive 2 hours to sleep in the car. I wouldn’t be suprised if HE was the trigger man – leading the cops on an endless hunt for the murder weapon because wherever it is it probably has Ortiz’ fingerprints all over it.

  3. So the prosecution’s case is based on circumstantial evidence and the words of a p.o.s. who has everything to gain from selling out Hernandez.

    I know that people who believe in the Nancy Grace school of justice, and there are plenty on this board, have already convicted Hernandez. Objective folks may want some concrete evidence and an actual murder weapon.

    I’m not going to say that I think Hernandez is not guilty. I believe he’s guilty of conspiracy at a minimum. I simply don’t believe any of Ortiz’s story, specifically the part where everyone exits the car, except him because he was asleep. That’s awfully convenient isn’t it?

  4. The only problem that New England fans have with Hernandez is the fact he spent their money to buy a piss poor weapon like a glock instead of a Dirty Harry.

  5. All of which means that the case is continuing its crawl through the bowels of the criminal justice system.

  6. so this guy was sleeping in the car, didnt hear a shot or see the shooting magically but then was told about it LMAO yeah thats believable

    no gun = hernandez walks.

  7. Hernandez will not walk. They have him on illegal possession of fire arms. And you don’t know they haven’t found the gun. Your assuming.

  8. I can read about this in the Washington Post. It is just more bad national news now that I am trying my best to hide from by this escape hatch: NFL Football.

  9. We’ve seen time and again defense lawyers tears into witnesses like Ortiz. Frankly, I’ll be shocked if Hernandez gets convicted. I wonder how long he’ll last before he kills another person?

  10. I hope the prosecution has more against Hernandez than this witness. I predict he will be found not guilty in record time.

  11. Kind of hard to believe the prosecution would stake this case on what Ortiz has been telling them.

    As someone suggested up-thread, Ortiz’ story about sleeping through the incident, then being told by Wallace that AH shot Odin sounds like a pretty tall tale. Wonder if they’ve put him through a lie detector test (I know, not admissible).

  12. When there is enough Circumstantial evidence, like in this case, the murder weapon will not be needed. People have been convicted of murder without a body you dopes. Just because Ortiz is a low life doesn’t mean Hernandez is not guilty. Hernandez will never see the light of day, no matter how many posters think you need video evidence of a crime to convict someone. Shows like CSI are terrible for the criminal justice system. Everybody thinks you need video or DNA to convict somebody of a crime.

  13. Yep. I’d like Tim’s opinion too about those firearms, but man it would take too long waiting for him to get up from Tebowing about it to The Lord.

  14. Once again, for all the thick headed DA’s out there. They don’t need to have the weapon to convict Hernandez of homicide. It takes more than discarding a gun to get away with murder. He’s toast.

  15. So he put the guns in a box and then threw the box in the lake? Either the government is leaking weird misinformation, the leaks are slow and out of sequence/lacking relevant details, or theyre getting multiple stories from their “ace in the hole” witness. That’s all I can come up with because I said on here a week or two ago, I think Aaron Hernandez is going to look much smarter the more this unfolds. Something isn’t right.

  16. Reasonable doubt is all it takes. Without a murder weapon, with only this guy as a witness… prosecution still has a really strong case. But i wouldn’t bank on a conviction.

  17. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Ortiz doesn’t even testify in the trial. He’d be destroyed on cross examination and the prosecution has plenty of evidence without his testimony. Sure it’s circumstantial, most evidence in a criminal case is.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.