Tamerlan Tsarnaev killed three people in 2011, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is not as culpable in the Boston Marathon jihad massacre. In reality, Dzhokhar never showed any sign of being anything but a convinced and willing participant, and was defiant after the massacre, as the jail photo of him giving the finger to the camera demonstrates. This solicitude for the perpetrators and callous disregard for the victims is one of the prevailing maladies of our age.
“Barr: Feds to appeal ruling, seek death for Boston bomber,” Associated Press, August 20, 2020:
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Justice Department will seek to reinstate a death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the man who was convicted of carrying out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, Attorney General William Barr said Thursday.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Barr said the Justice Department would appeal the court´s ruling last month that tossed Tsarnaev´s death sentence and ordered a trial to determine whether he should be executed for the attack that killed three people and wounded more than 260 others. Barr said the Justice Department would take the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“We will do whatever´s necessary,” Barr said. “We will take it up to the Supreme Court and we will continue to pursue the death penalty.”…
A three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit court found in July that the judge who oversaw the 2015 trial did not adequately question potential jurors about what they had read or heard about the highly publicized case….
The defense acknowledged that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, carried out the attack on April 15, 2013, but sought to portray his brother as the radicalized mastermind who they said lured his impressionable younger brother into violence….
Tsarnaev, now 27, was convicted of all 30 charges against him, including conspiracy and use of a weapon of mass destruction and the killing of an MIT police officer during the Tsarnaev brothers´ getaway attempt. The appeals court upheld all but a few of his convictions.
An attorney for Tsarnaev, David Patton, declined to comment Thursday. Patton said after the 1st Circuit´s decision that “it is now up to the government to determine whether to put the victims and Boston through a second trial, or to allow closure to this terrible tragedy by permitting a sentence of life without the possibility of release.”
Prosecutors told jurors that Tsarnaev was just as culpable in the attack they say was meant to punish the U.S. for its wars in Muslim countries. In the boat where he was found hiding, he wrote, “Stop killing our innocent people and we will stop.”…
The 1st Circuit also found that O´Toole erred in refusing to let the defense tell jurors about evidence tying Tamerlan Tsarnaev to the killings of three people in the Boston suburb of Waltham in 2011.
“If the judge had admitted the Waltham evidence – evidence that shows (like no other) that Tamerlan was predisposed to religiously-inspired brutality before the bombings and before Dzhokhar´s radicalization – the defense could have more forcefully rebutted the government´s claim that the brothers had a `partnership of equals,´” Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson wrote in the ruling.
President Donald Trump tweeted after the decision that the federal government “must again seek the Death Penalty in a do-over of that chapter of the original trial.” The ruling came as the U.S. government recently resumed federal executions following a 17-year pause.
Dude says
The dude wants death. Be kind, give it to him.
curious says
+1
gravenimage says
Of course, we should not care what Jihad terrorists or any other criminals want.
James Rau says
I admit to having conflicting thoughts on this. Yes, he should be executed, but no, I don’t want to give him what he wants. Catch-22 I guess.
talleyrand says
+1
Kepha says
Good for the DoJ. However, there’s still a lot of troubling things about this case.
Why is it that the death penalty is only trotted out in sensational, high-profile, possibly political cases? Sure, the Boston Marathon’s a big event, with lots of people, and a sign of municipal solidarity and nejoyment. That’s understood, and not disputed. I absolutely agree that we should send the message that someone who plans and executes major crimes against our cities deserves the death penalty.
But, isn’t the thug who shoots a four-year-old in an inner city during a drive-by aimed at a rival gang’s members just as bad? Isn’t the creep who kills a convenience store clerk because he didn’t get as much as he expected during a robbery equally guilty of an assault on the image of God (cf. Gen. 9)? Part of our social contract is that the government cares about the little people down on Main Street and individual justice, too.
gravenimage says
Kepha, as horrifying as drive-bys are this is even worse. The gangster was probably aiming at other gang members, and not innocent bystanders–with Jihadists it is the innocent bystanders that are the targets.
This doesn’t mean that I don’t think the death penalty should not be extended to those committing drive-bys, with their disregard for endangering the innocent–in many cases I do. Just the Jihad terrorists are even worse.
Walter Sieruk says
On the subject of Capital Punishment those who go outside a protest against the state government using of the death penalty and holding up signs show the words printed on them “Thou shall not kill”, those four words which are the sixth commandment , Exodus 20:13. are taken form the AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION translation of the Bible of the Ten Commandments . By and large the A.K.J.V.is a good translation yet not a perfect one. For Jewish and Christian scholar who understand the original Hebrew which the Old Testament , some call it the “Older Testament “, of the Bible which was first written in Hebrew, the point the those scholars will inform all who are willing to listen that the word was “Murder”” and not “Kill” in the original Hebrew of which the First Old Testament was written
.
There is a vast different between those two words “Killing “and “murder “, for example a dictionary definition of the word “Murder” is “the unlawful and malicious act of killing another person.” In contrast “Killing is defined as “To put to death or to slay”
So the anti-capital punishment people who quote Exodus 20:13 in the A.K.J. V. might also look up that same specific verse in the NEW KING JAMES VERSION and see how it’s put right by reading “ You shall not murder” For in the very next chapter in Exodus 21:12 it reads “He who strikes man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.”
Further, in the New Testament the Bible reader in Roman 13:1-4 that not only are governmental law enforcement forces are ordained by God to hold back and stop the criminal and wicked activities by evil and dangerous men. This also this may extent to the criminal courts which h included punishment for the evil doer. If the Bible student examines more closely the specific verse number four he or she will discover that the scripture even refers to the government executor as type of minister of God to punish such men.
As that Boston Marathon jihad murderous jihad bomber
In conclusion the people who use their constitutional right to speak out against capital punishment do and should have the right of freedom of speech and expression to let other know how they feel on the subject of capital punishment. Nevertheless they either don’t know or do know but couldn’t care less that they are misusing the Bible in quoting Exodus 20:13 out of context.
Some of the anti –capital punishment feel might feel real righteous and pious by quoting that single verse out of the whole Bible , still in spite of the “pious emotions” some of them might have ,they are still misusing the Bible.
In addition to all this , the Bible in is written “Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.” Leviticus 27:17 [N.K.J.V.]
Rarely says
It is always interesting when people use a 21st Century dictionary to explain the meanings of words in English writings that are 500 years old. Better yet, 500 year old translations of writings that were +1500 years old at that time. The exact meanings of words and phrases in old, even ancient, writings cannot be determined with any degree of accuracy without a clear grasp of the times in which they were written.
CogitoErgoSum says
I’d say if you are able to read ancient writings you could eventually come to tell the difference between the words for “kill” and “murder.” Do the ancient writers say their armies “killed” their enemies or that their hunters “killed” their prey and were celebrated for it? Then find out if they use a different word to say a man “murdered” another man and was punished for it. If there is a different word used in each case the difference in meaning could be understood. Does not seem like it would be all that hard to figure out – especially for concepts like “killing” and “murdering.”
Keith O says
Rarely,
Well put, given that something can be said and then mistranslated not 5 minutes later, what chance do words and documents that are up to a thousand years old have?
Keith O says
WS,
I’m not a fan of the bible, but have read it in the same light of knowing your enemy, as I have the Koran.
The views you put forward are, from what I can remember, spot on.
A document that was written in ancient Hebrew, translated to Greek, then Latin, then English, in it’s various forms and now used as justification to stop a murderer being executed?
WOW, talk about “lost in translation”.
He murdered non combatants in an act of terrorism. The state and country where he did this has the death penalty. So sad, too bad.
He did the crime, now he can take his punishment, the same as anyone else who does what he did.
No Muzzies Here says
This penalty should be carried out. Then we will hear wailing and weeping from the insane teenage females who fell in love with him after seeing his picture on Rolling Stone.
Anna Yelena says
Hope the justice department stops pussyfooting around and do it. But first I would cut off his balls so he’s of no use to the promised 72 virgins, ???
John says
+1
Carson says
Kamel Harris told Don Lemon in response to the question if we should let felons like the Boston Marathon bomber vote–We need to have a conversation about that.
Keys says
“We need to have a conversation about that.”
Kamala Harris weasel words for “yes, and I don’t want to lose any votes over my answer to this question.”
Kepha says
In fairness to Kamala Harris’ weasel words, as a prosecutor who put lots of people behind bars for crimes great and small, she probably realizes she wouldn’t be very popular with a certain Democratic constituency (at least in States where they’re allowed to vote).
gravenimage says
Yes–her putting *anyone* behind bars is too much for some leftists.
CogitoErgoSum says
I would be for letting him vote – on whether he wants the gas chamber, the electric chair, hanging or lethal injection. He can discuss that all he wants up to the day of his execution. Then he can vote on whether he wants a hamburger or a taco for his last meal and finally he can vote on whether he wants to be cremated or buried at sea.
curious says
+1
gravenimage says
Yes–disgusting.
Jihad Watch covered that here:
“Trump Wants Boston Marathon Bomber to Get Death Penalty. Dems Want Him to Vote.”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/08/trump-wants-boston-marathon-bomber-to-get-death-penalty-dems-want-him-to-vote
JP Mitra says
The Trump Administration want to impose harsher punishments for Jihad actions in America in which innocent people dies or gets grievously injured. The Trump Administration doesn’t have any otherwise aspirations. Life term is not always sufficient for Jihadists. Please note that, Belgian Jihadists supporting the Caliphate believe Christian rule will not survive due to their malpractice.
James Lincoln says
Tsarnaev was sentenced to death on June 24, 2015.
He should have been given a maximum five years to appeal his sentence.
If that had been true, he would have been executed by now.
Still more taxpayer money being wasted…
gravenimage says
Justice Department will seek to reinstate death penalty for Boston Marathon jihad murderer
…………….
Good to hear.