Lawyers defending Pedro Hernandez, who was convicted for the murder of six-year-old Etan Patz, have requested that a judge impose a quick deadline on determining Hernandez’s future. This comes after an appellate court indicated he could receive a new trial or be set free.
Back in July, the court raised concerns regarding Hernandez’s police questioning, his mental health history, and the jury instructions at his original trial as justifications for re-evaluating his conviction from 2017.
On Thursday, Manhattan prosecutors—determined to uphold the original conviction—requested 90 days to deliberate on whether to retry Hernandez. Conversely, Hernandez’s defense team argued for a decision to be made in just 30 days.
US District Judge Colleen McMahon mentioned she would issue a ruling soon, emphasizing that it’s been decades since the distressing event of Etan’s disappearance.
The heart-wrenching disappearance of Etan Patz back in May 1979 while on his way to his Manhattan school captured national attention and raised awareness about missing children.
As he vanished from a bus stop in SoHo, it triggered an enormous search effort, attracting the attention of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Despite applying vast resources, Patz was never found, cementing his case as one of the most haunting mysteries in New York City’s recent history.
Hernandez was reportedly working as a shop clerk geographically near the bus stop where Patz disappeared. During an interrogation in 2012, Hernandez confessed that he lured Patz into a basement and subsequently strangled him.
The case has already seen two trials. The first in 2015 ended in a mistrial, as the jury couldn’t come to a unanimous agreement.
At his second trial in 2017, Hernandez was found guilty of felony murder and kidnapping, although he was acquitted of the charge of intentional murder.
Hernandez’s legal team has disputed the convicting guidelines provided to the jury, particularly after the jury inquired whether they could dismiss Hernandez’s later confessions if they believed his initial admissions were coerced. The judge’s answer was a straightforward “no.”
Hernandez’s lawyers contend that this instruction biased the jury’s decision against him, arguing it was inconsistent with established legal norms.
In July, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals surprisingly sided with Hernandez, indicating that the circumstances warranted serious reconsideration.
On Thursday, Harvey Fishbein, one of Hernandez’s attorneys, expressed to the media that “an innocent man is sitting in jail right now.” Their goal is to secure his release as soon as possible and avoid the process of retrying the case.
However, prosecutors in Manhattan believe the conviction should stand. They articulated in their filings that there are pressing legal problems with the appellate court’s ruling.
Additionally, the prosecution mentioned to the judge that the necessary time is needed to assess their options for a potential retrial because several past witnesses are either “elderly” or “deceased.” Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo noted that some witnesses might have relocated far from New York, while others assumed they wouldn’t have to testify again.
The prosecutors also plan to appeal to the US Supreme Court, though it remains uncertain if the court will take up the case.
