Boston Bomber Found Guilty

Omackeral

Boston Bomber Dzhokar Tsarnaev has been found guilty of the atrocity after two months of jury selection and 17 days of moving and often disturbing testimony from 95 witnesses. It took a Boston jury just over 11 hours to convict Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on all charges relating to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.

Tsarnaev, 21, was found guilty of all 30 counts against him, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, for his role in the attack that left three people dead and 264 injured two years ago. Seventeen charges carried the death penalty, and the same jury will now decide whether to sentence Tsarnaev to death or life in prison without possibility of parole.

The jury officially began their deliberation on Tuesday morning following closing statements from the prosecution, the defence, and a brief prosecution rebuttal. Assistant US attorney Aloke Chakravarty gave an emotional closing argument which aimed to ram home the horror of Tsarnaev’s crimes. As the clerk slowly delivered the verdict, Tsarnaev, dressed in a charcoal jacket and blue-grey sweater, remained impassive.He fiddled with his hands, hugged himself, scratched his hair and beard, but did not appear to react as the guilty verdicts were read. Briefly, at the end, he placed his head in his hands, before returning them to his pockets.

Bolded bit is weird. You reckon this chap is deserves the death penalty or life imprisonment. I'm torn on it. He's bloody young for one thing but then again, so was his victim Martin Richards, who hadn't even hit double digits yet


Full article here:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/08/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-verdict-boston-marathon-bombing

libelula

I don't know how he can not deserve a death penalty tbh.
Then again, sometimes I lack compassion for people who can deliberately and methodically fcuk up and/or end so many lives.

Fr_Dougal

libelula wrote: »

I don't know how he can not deserve a death penalty tbh.
Then again, sometimes I lack compassion for people who can deliberately and methodically fcuk up and/or end so many lives.

Let him rot in prison knowing that he'll never get out. No martyrdom, nothing.

lertsnim

Death would be too easy for someone like him. He should be left to rot for the rest of his natural life.

Lisa2011

Agreed. I think he should suffer for what he did and the death penalty is the easy way out.

Who knows he might end up being killed while in prison.

Menas

Life in prison is what he deserves.
Death is too soft for this fella.
His defence was pretty ****...."my brother told me to do it".

allthedoyles

they need to send out the right message to other would-be / home-grown jihadists , so life in prison is best .

Macavity.

I'm shocked, thought he was innocent.

Omackeral

allthedoyles wrote: »

they need to send out the right message to other would-be / home-grown jihadists , so life in prison is best .

Dzhokhar was a student at University of Massachusetts Dartmouth who became a naturalized U.S. citizen on September 11, 2012, seven months before the bombings.

Eerie coincidence if true.

My name is URL

'The death penalty is too good for him' is such a bull**** reason to oppose the death penalty.

You're either in favor of it as a punishment or you're not.

Saying things like 'oh well, maybe in cases like this' isn't justice.. it's vengeance.

crockholm

Would probably prefer to see him get the Death penalty,failing that,life in solitary.As long as we won't walk out a free man ever again,that will be the best outcome.

In a sort of mixing of threads,one of the officers involved in the manhunt and capture of the suspect,officer Moynihan,was shot in the face and critically wounded during a routine traffic stop Little over a week ago by a career criminal,Angelo West.

suicide_circus

Another death won't solve much I'm afraid.

hfallada

He will most likely end up in ADX Florence in Colorado. Read this article and you will find out its probably worst than the death penalty. Zero Human interaction most of the time, you dont see any natural light, you often pinned down to your bed. They even take people off their medication for mental health issues, as its makes them too happy

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/29/magazine/inside-americas-toughest-federal-prison.html

I think a prison like this is the best punishment. Imagine living in this place until the day you die.

4zn76tysfajdxp

I hope they don't give him the death penalty. A high profile case like this one in particular wouldn't need to end so barbarically.

harry Bailey esq

The death penalty would only make a 'martyr' of him.His lot love that sh1t.

harry Bailey esq

The death penalty would only make a 'martyr' of him,his lot love that sh1t.Not much of a punishment either

policarp

If he is going to be killed
let it be tomorrow.

Billy86

Rather than the death penalty or life in prison as a 'revenge' of sorts, how about life imprisonment as a means of actually analysing him, figuring out his motivations, if-and-how he was manipulated, how his brain works, etc that all lead to him doing what he did, and... you know... call me crazy, but try to prevent things like this from happening in future?

lertsnim

My name is URL wrote: »

'The death penalty is too good for him' is such a bull**** reason to oppose the death penalty.

You're either in favor of it as a punishment or you're not.

I'm completely opposed to it for all crimes.

efb

I'm completely opposed to the death penalty. Life imprisonment.

JCX BXC

He's a right messed up bastard isn't he?

For him, the only punishment I would find acceptable is a slow painful torture. Forget human rights, we know he did forgot them when killing all those people. His limbs should be cut off one by one in a sign of justice for people who lost their limbs.

efb

He's certainly inglorious

murpho999

Carnacalla wrote: »

He's a right messed up bastard isn't he?

For him, the only punishment I would find acceptable is a slow painful torture. Forget human rights, we know he did. His limbs should be cut off one by one in a sign of justice for people who lost their limbs.

Never get this sort of logic.

Countries should not be murdering or torturing people as a form of punishment.

Although the crimes are terrible , states should stand above their level and retain the morale high ground by not resorting to their level.

This eye for eye stuff just makes the punishers just as evil as the criminal in my opinion.

Billy86

Carnacalla wrote: »

He's a right messed up bastard isn't he?

For him, the only punishment I would find acceptable is a slow painful torture. Forget human rights, we know he did. His limbs should be cut off one by one in a sign of justice for people who lost their limbs.

And the benefit to society from this would be... ???

JCX BXC

Why should people who commit such sick and disgusting crimes be treated humanely? People will never get justice from this man. If he was tortured in the most extreme way it would not be justice, his crimes are too extreme.

It sickens me that seriel killer pedofiles get such benefits in prisons in Europe, TVs, bathrooms etc.

Saudi Arabia is the only country with the right punishments for extreme crimes. (Although I don't agree with a lot of there laws)

JCX BXC

Billy86 wrote: »

And the benefit to society from this would be... ???

A lot better than leaving him in prison and costing €10,000. It acts as a serious disincentive to people to commit these crimes and finally they deserve it. They should know their victims pain.

Arsemageddon

Carnacalla wrote: »

Saudi Arabia is the only country with the right punishments for extreme crimes. (Although I don't agree with a lot of there laws)

Strangely enough hacking arms and legs off, gouging out eyes and stoning people to death has done nothing whatsoever to reduce crime.

I have to be off now, have fun with all your torture fantasies!

JCX BXC

Arsemageddon wrote: »

Strangely enough hacking arms and legs off, gouging out eyes and stoning people to death has done nothing whatsoever to reduce crime.

Reference to this?

I can only imagine it would reduce it. Would you be more inclined to steal a bar of chocolate in Saudi Arabia or steal a car in Ireland?

That's not the point at hand. Why should they be left in prisons to watch tv, exercise, read and get the occasional anal trauma*? The very least they should get is the death sentence. (Only in extreme cases should it be used, and this is one of them. A single murder doesn't warrant an execution.)

Arsemageddon

Carnacalla wrote: »

Reference to this?

I can only imagine it would reduce it. Would you be more inclined to steal a bar of chocolate in Saudi Arabia or steal a car in Ireland?

That's not the point at hand. Why should they be left in prisons to watch tv, exercise, read and get the occasional anal trauma*? The very least they should get is the death sentence. (Only in extreme cases should it be used, and this is one of them. A single murder doesn't warrant an execution.)

A reference to why torturing and mutilating people is not a deterrent to crime? Seriously? Try a couple of centuries of western legal tradition, multiple international treaties or even basic common sense.

You are the one proposing all the fvcked up ideas about wanting to inflict extreme pain on people, I'd say the onus is on you to try and back up what your saying with some actual proof.

Billy86

Carnacalla wrote: »

A lot better than leaving him in prison and costing €10,000. It acts as a serious disincentive to people to commit these crimes and finally they deserve it. They should know their victims pain.

And this "slow painful torture" you want - you expect it to be a free service?

God forbid we actually try to study and analyse these types of people and what caused them to do what they did, in order to reduce the chances of this type of thing occurring again. Sure that would just be madness altogether!

Billy86

Carnacalla wrote: »

Reference to this?

I can only imagine it would reduce it. Would you be more inclined to steal a bar of chocolate in Saudi Arabia or steal a car in Ireland?

That's not the point at hand. Why should they be left in prisons to watch tv, exercise, read and get the occasional anal trauma*? The very least they should get is the death sentence. (Only in extreme cases should it be used, and this is one of them. A single murder doesn't warrant an execution.)

And yet despite Saudi Arabia having skewed crime statistics due to resolving many matters outside of the courts, they still have a higher crime rate than Denmark, Norway, Finland, Germany, Spain, Estonia, Iceland, Poland, Austria and Switzerland to name a few - none of which practice either the death penalty nor the torture methods you so keen on in this case. Crime in these countries is also generally decreasing over time, whereas in Saudi Arabia it is on the rise.

They should not be killed because we can learn from them - we know they are deeply disturbed individuals, but we also know there are many more like that out there, and will be in the future. The only way to try and combat that is by figuring out why they are so deeply disturbed, and why they did what they did (on a subconscious/neurological level) to try and reduce it in the future by any findings gained from them.

seamus

Carnacalla wrote: »

It acts as a serious disincentive to people to commit these crimes

No it doesn't. And it never has. I know it would disincentivise you, but then you don't plan on carrying out a bombing anytime soon, right?

The death penalty never serves any useful purpose except to save some taxpayer money and satisfy the bloodlust of idiots. US states with the death penalty do not see lower rates of capital crimes than other states.

In cases of terrorism, the death penalty is counter productive. It makes a martyr of the terrorist and strengthens the resolve of his allies.

Look at Bobby Sands and how his death galvanised republican support in the North. No, he wasn't executed but many people think he was as good as executed because the British refused to bow to his demands.

Barbarism, be that torture, death or any other form of suffering against a criminal who committed a crime of ideology, teaches his allies that what he did was good and right.

RobertKK

He should serve the rest of his life in prison, the death penalty was needed in a time when prisons were not secure.
It is not needed now.

MrWalsh

How come we are allowed talk about this case, he has been found guilty but not sentenced yet. Is it only Irish cases we cant talk about?

anncoates

As well as any other abjection I have to it, he'd probably want the martyrdom of death as well.

seamus

MrWalsh wrote: »

How come we are allowed talk about this case, he has been found guilty but not sentenced yet. Is it only Irish cases we cant talk about?

Yep. Different jurisdiction, different rules.

Plus, as this is an Irish site, the odds of discussion of this case resulting in a US court proceeding from being undermined is minimal.

MrWalsh

seamus wrote: »

Yep. Different jurisdiction, different rules.

Plus, as this is an Irish site, the odds of discussion of this case resulting in a US court proceeding from being undermined is minimal.

Thanks seamus, was there ever an explanation given after the closed thread in feedback?

AudreyHepburn

I personally think life behind bars is the way to go here....I've never agreed with the death penalty because I don't like the idea that anyone should have the right to decide whether some-one else lives or dies.

And with some-one like Tsarnaev death is the easy way out and makes him a martyr for those who agree with his cause....surely this is playing right into his hands?

Eircom_Sucks

prob take eternity on death row for him as per usual

why sentence somebody to death to leave them wasting more tax payers money etc

granted you may have a last ditch attempt for clemency etc

death penalty and death within 1 year would send out intent to others

this 40 years on death row is pathethic " we here by sentence you to death " by natural causes lol

crockholm

seamus wrote: »

No it doesn't. And it never has. I know it would disincentivise you, but then you don't plan on carrying out a bombing anytime soon, right?

The death penalty never serves any useful purpose except to save some taxpayer money and satisfy the bloodlust of idiots. US states with the death penalty do not see lower rates of capital crimes than other states.

In cases of terrorism, the death penalty is counter productive. It makes a martyr of the terrorist and strengthens the resolve of his allies.

Look at Bobby Sands and how his death galvanised republican support in the North. No, he wasn't executed but many people think he was as good as executed because the British refused to bow to his demands.

Barbarism, be that torture, death or any other form of suffering against a criminal who committed a crime of ideology, teaches his allies that what he did was good and right.

Looking at statistics re. states and the Death penalty,what you said is not entirely true,if it were,then Utah would have a higher homicide rate than Michigan-which is not true.
Homicide rates tend to bunch geographically. Also,not all murderers that are convicted in Death penalty states are sentenced to Death.Judging how effective (or not) having the Death penalty would mean examining the conscience of everyone who held a gun and the consequences of their actions flashed Before them as the held the gun.We don't know how many lowered the gun on account of this.

I'm not entirely sure where I stand regards the Death penalty,ought we allow the victims family decide? Does it deter even one potential murder?
Ought a government have the Power of Life or Death over its Citizens?

I Think it is probably Worth examining more rather than holding up Louisiana as proof of its failure.

walkingshadow

MrWalsh wrote: »

How come we are allowed talk about this case, he has been found guilty but not sentenced yet. Is it only Irish cases we cant talk about?

Because Boards doesn't like anyone trying to tarnish the good name of any architects.

seamus

crockholm wrote: »

Looking at statistics re. states and the Death penalty,what you said is not entirely true,if it were,then Utah would have a higher homicide rate than Michigan-which is not true.

I'm not sure really if that has anything to do with my point. My point is that there is no correlation between having the death penalty and the rate of homicides in a state. Some states have lower homicide rates with the death penalty, and some have lower homicide rates without it.

I'm not entirely sure where I stand regards the Death penalty,ought we allow the victims family decide? Does it deter even one potential murder?
Ought a government have the Power of Life or Death over its Citizens?

I Think it is probably Worth examining more rather than holding up Louisiana as proof of its failure.

The death penalty is a failure due to the large number of people who have been sentenced to death and subsequently acquitted.
The law makes mistakes, that's a known and a given. Death is final and knowing that someone was innocent is little or no comfort for the fact that they have been murdered by the state.
Life imprisonment is no basket of puppies, but at the very least there is the opportunity there to both fight for release and make reparations for the wrong done.

You cannot release a man from death nor compensate his family for it.

The death penalty only serves as revenge. And any justice system which places value on revenge belongs with the savages in the middle east and the dark ages. This is the same reason why families should have no input into sentencing.

Menas

seamus wrote: »

The death penalty only serves as revenge. And any justice system which places value on revenge belongs with the savages in the middle east and the dark ages. This is the same reason why families should have no input into sentencing.

Completely agree. If some states want the death penalty then let those handing down, and implementing that sentence be on the hook for the death sentence themselves should the convicted ever get acquitted.
You would pretty soon see no one willing to put people on death row.

Egginacup

Wayne Numerous Viewfinder wrote: »

I hope they don't give him the death penalty. A high profile case like this one in particular wouldn't need to end so barbarically.

How the hell can they give him the death penalty when he was convicted of murder in Massachusetts?

crockholm

seamus wrote: »

I'm not sure really if that has anything to do with my point. My point is that there is no correlation between having the death penalty and the rate of homicides in a state. Some states have lower homicide rates with the death penalty, and some have lower homicide rates without it.
The death penalty is a failure due to the large number of people who have been sentenced to death and subsequently acquitted.
The law makes mistakes, that's a known and a given. Death is final and knowing that someone was innocent is little or no comfort for the fact that they have been murdered by the state.
Life imprisonment is no basket of puppies, but at the very least there is the opportunity there to both fight for release and make reparations for the wrong done.

You cannot release a man from death nor compensate his family for it.

The death penalty only serves as revenge. And any justice system which places value on revenge belongs with the savages in the middle east and the dark ages. This is the same reason why families should have no input into sentencing.

With DNA testing and modern techniques perhaps perhaps we can determine better who is innocent and who is guilty.In some cases there will be "Slam dunks" while others will be quite the "whodunnit"-there would be no Point executing a man where there is still doubt in the judges mind as to his innocence.
Whether the american taxpayers wish to pay for Tsarnaev breathing for the next 60 years,is up to them,which ever way it goes,I will respect their choice.
All sentencing is revenge,it is just a matter of the severity and as for it being confined to the Dark ages,I recall it was used with abandon during our "Enlightenment",so......

Egginacup

Carnacalla wrote: »

Why should people who commit such sick and disgusting crimes be treated humanely? People will never get justice from this man. If he was tortured in the most extreme way it would not be justice, his crimes are too extreme.

It sickens me that seriel killer pedofiles get such benefits in prisons in Europe, TVs, bathrooms etc.

Saudi Arabia is the only country with the right punishments for extreme crimes. (Although I don't agree with a lot of there laws)

I think you need some counselling.

Menas

Egginacup wrote: »

How the hell can they give him the death penalty when he was convicted of murder in Massachusetts?

Federal conviction, not state.

ohnonotgmail

Egginacup wrote: »

How the hell can they give him the death penalty when he was convicted of murder in Massachusetts?

He was convicted of federal not state crimes so he can be given the death penalty

jamesoneill

When is George Bush going on trial for mass murder and crimes against humanity?

seamus

crockholm wrote: »

With DNA testing and modern techniques perhaps perhaps we can determine better who is innocent and who is guilty.In some cases there will be "Slam dunks" while others will be quite the "whodunnit"-there would be no Point executing a man where there is still doubt in the judges mind as to his innocence.

We all know this is technically true, but at the end of the day, you have to draw a line between what is a "slam dunk" and what is not.
And if you have a dig into that thought, you find it's basically impossible to define a difference between "definitely guilty" and "most probably guilty", without a margin of error.

In short, there is no way you can have a death penalty and not accidentally execute an innocent person. There is no way to define a set of criteria that ensures that you always only execute people who definitely carried out the act they were convicted for.

Egginacup

Carnacalla wrote: »

A lot better than leaving him in prison and costing €10,000. It acts as a serious disincentive to people to commit these crimes and finally they deserve it. They should know their victims pain.

How about burning at the stake or hung, drawn and quartered?

How about the rack?