Among them are:

• Social media
• The type of court hearing the case
•  The needs of the individual client

Hardin is the founder of Rusty Hardin & Associates, P.C. based in Houston. He has spent time as both a prosecutor and criminal defender and has worked on both civil and criminal cases. His sports clients include Adrian Peterson, Rudy Tomjanovich, Warren Moon, Wade Boggs, Scottie Pippen, Steve Francis, Calvin Murphy, Rafer Alston and Roger Clemens. He has also represented The Venetian Hotel/Las Vegas Sands; the Houston Texans and Rice University, among others.

Hardin said the Hernandez case is unique because the consequences of the verdict are so severe they greatly overshadow the need for him to maintain a positive public perception, which is not always the case with celebrity clients. Hernandez's career and image are a distant second priority to all else, he said. “Most celebrities get into trouble for things that are not a major deal for a regular citizen,” said Hardin.

At issue is Hernandez's role in the 2013 killing of Odin Lloyd. Hernandez's lawyers claim he was present for the murder, but did not execute or plan the murder, according to reports. The judge has already had to grapple with case’s publicity.

Superior Court Judge E. Susan Garsh banned news reporter Robert Cusanelli from covering the widely-followed case for allegedly following a bus with jurors from the trial, according to reports. Although, he apparently had not spoken with any of the members and his news outlet will be permitted to continue coverage of the case.

Hardin has not defended a celebrity client in a murder trial, he said, although some of his cases have had some serious allegations and potential punishments, including life in prison. However, in many high-profile cases he said he believes “there are common things that always happen.”

Many factors contribute to how a legal strategy ultimately takes shape, he said, and the public’s perception of a client and amount of potential legal exposure of that client have varying degrees of relevance depending on the client, he said. It is up to the lawyer to help figure out the best course of action.

“How you handle a public figure… depends, to a certain degree, on what their exposure will be in the criminal justice system,” he said. For Hernandez's particular circumstance, Hardin agrees with the former tight end’s strategy so far; keep quiet until you “have your day in court.”

Considering the nature of the case, it is likely the media, fans and others would already have an opinion about Hernandez that he wasn’t going to overcome in the court of public opinion. So, he said, its best to let the legal process take its course.

In his experience, the type of court hearing the case has been understated and largely ignored when discussing how public perception will impact the verdict. He said, in many ways, the amount the public’s bias will impact a trial depends on if it’s a state of federal court hearing the case. He said judges in federal courts, who have a larger role in jury selection, can be “authoritative, imposing figures” to potential jurors who are unlikely to divulge how much they really know about a case.

He said, for the most part, lawyers in cases tried in lower courts will have a greater opportunity to question potential jurors and weed out the ones who may have been overexposed to coverage. He said lawyers and judges in federal cases, very likely, will have “no idea, truly, if [potential jurors] have been affected by pretrial publicity.”

He said when he defended Arthur Anderson in federal court he was allowed to ask if jurors had heard anything about the case in the media, but he was not permitted to ask what those things may have been. As it turned out, the “foreman followed the case religiously” before being selected. However, of course, fair juries and trials are not impossible, regardless of the allegations, defendant or courtroom circumstances, especially if both lawyers are allowed access to the jury pool.

Hardin said another factor that now must be accounted for is the explosion of social media. He said instant news has “totally changed the name of the game.” Before Facebook and Twitter became popular, a high-profile client would have a chance to find representation and advisors before having to face the world.

Now, it’s “a thousand times more difficult of a process” because within hours, or less, the public is spreading “unrebutted allegations all over the world” before the client has even talked with a lawyer. He added that the need to report news quickly has led some media outlets to report unsubstantiated claims that have not been verified by additional sources. “It’s a horrible thing for the justice system,” he said.