Defense attorney opens up about Nasser Hamad and capital murder - WFMJ.com News weather sports for Youngstown-Warren Ohio

Defense attorney opens up about Nasser Hamad and capital murder trial

Posted: Updated:
YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio -

One of Nasser Hamad's defense attorney's, Geoffrey Oglesby, said the recent sentence against Hamad was the best outcome the defense could have asked for under the circumstances. 

In a phone interview with 21 News anchor Derek Steyer, Oglesby opened up about his client and the trial.

Oglesby says looking back, one thing that stands out was the fact they weren't able to strongly send the message to the jury that Hamad did not know who the attackers were the afternoon of February 25th.

"The fact that all this stuff was going back and forth was really irrevelant because he didn't know who the people were that came over, so there is a different type of fear when your fighting someone unknown as opposed to fighting somone you know," said Oglesby.  "I mean, who walks out their door, gets beat up by strangers and says ok, let me just call 911, people I don't even know. The lines apparently got blurred, so that the message the jury got was that Mr. Hamad knew exactly who these people were because he lured them over there and obviously that message did not get across to the jury that was not the case. Even Mr. Hendrickson's own mother did not know it was him, so they concealed themselves and it just wasn't made clear enough."

As far as the strategy of the defense calling Hamad as their only witness, Oglesby admits there probably should have been character witnesses during the trial, not just the penalty phase.

"They came out as character witnesses when Nasser stood convicted and said he was honest, so you can imagine how powerful their testimony would have been had they come out during the trial," said Oglesby.

Hamad told the judge he wasn't properly represented by his attorneys and even quit talking to lead attorneys David Doughten and Robert Dixon. Oglesby said Hamad understood the legal process, but simply didn't agree with certain things over the course of the trial.

"In this particular situation, Nasser had his own opinion about certain things. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that he doesn't agree with me doesn't make him uncooperative, it just makes him have a different opinion. Nasser just had a different opinion about things and if we couldn't convince him that it was the best way to go then we failed at our jobs," said Oglesby.

Oglesby also said Hamad was almost too honest for his own good, starting with the night of the shooting and not hiring an attorney before talking to police.

"He should have obtained an attorney, ok, that was numero uno. The questioning, the tone was appeared to be dedicated to having Nasser say things to dig him further in a hole. I always tell my clients, when you talk to police, you're not talking to the police to get you off the hook, they're talking to you to get you on the hook," said Oglesby.

Oglesby says he still stands by the evidence that should have proved Hamad acted in self-defense.

"If he wanted to kill the people, probably the best place to shoot them would have been point blank in the head while they were in the car. The randomness of the shooting clearly shows he wasn't out to get anybody. If you really think about it, the guy that was in the front seat, Shively, when they were leaving, that was the one that attacked him so if it was about killing somebody he would have shot him first," said Oglesby.

Oglesby says there is a chance they will file a motion for a completely new trial, but if they don't, they will file an appeal.
 

Powered by Frankly
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2017 WFMJ. All Rights Reserved. For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms