Mysterious Boston Trial Begins: Defense Not Defending the Accused

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1592.htm

The trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev began Wednesday, March 4. If anyone still held out any hope that we were going to get some answers, that the government would now be asked to prove their convoluted story related to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, or that Jahar’s lawyers were going to put up a fight, they were brutally disappointed like a slap in the face. I attended opening statements as well as court proceedings the following day and I am as baffled as anyone, for this is the most bizarre criminal trial anyone in history has ever seen.

The prosecution’s opening statement was as expected. It echoed what has already been leaked to the mainstream media, with a few embellishments that sound preposterous. Suddenly now they are saying Jahar’s UMass ID was found on the floor of his Honda Civic, covered in the blood of Officer Collier, the MIT cop who was killed while sitting in his car, as well as his blood covered gloves. Why would any murderer take off the victim’s gloves and then put them in his car? There was so much about the government testimony that begged to be ripped to shreds. Attorney William Weinreb drew upon public prejudice against Islam, calling the defendant  a “holy warrior” whose actions were motivated by a desire to die as a martyr and reach “paradise.”

Defense attorney Judy Clarke then shocked everybody by beginning her opening statement by conceding responsibility for “a series of senseless, horribly misguided acts carried out by two brothers: 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his younger brother, 19-year-old Jahar.”

Isn’t a defense attorney’s job to cast doubt on the government’s accusations? We all expected her top priority to be defending her client’s life but saying, “He did it” in the opening statements went above and beyond most people’s expectations. Seems to be a strategy to make the trial go by as fast as possible so they can focus on the sentencing phase, with the presumption that he is assured of a conviction no matter what arguments are presented. The defense did not cross-examine a single government witness.

I searched Jahar’s face for some sign of guilt or innocence but could find no information except that he is resigned to his situation and trying to stay positive. I watched his long, bony white fingers play with a pencil, standing it up on end, holding it upright awhile with one finger at its tip. His eyes remained downcast most of the time, though he occasionally glanced at a speaker. There was one particular cop that he glared at. Chatting with his legal team, he seemed almost too content with their decision, given that neither death nor life in prison seem like particularly good options. The second day, he looked pale and subdued. There is nothing about his demeanor that seems tense, angry, or fearful. One observer described him “like a lost puppy.” Similarly, a schoolteacher and potential juror that didn’t end up getting selected, blogged:

“There was no cloud of evil that floated around him, nothing that marked him as being different from one of my doofy sophomores.” [http://cognoscenti.wbur.org/2015/03/06/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-trial-erin-dionne]

I turn to his family for some kind of insight. Jahar’s Aunt Maret posted on weebly:

“That team of defense was forced on Dzhokhar. Dzhokhar, I know that from my brother Anzor, apparently was REFUSING those lawyers back in May-June of 2013, he told them to go away, that he did not want them (obviously, he did that since he detected that they were not there for his benefit). When the parents raised the issue before Judy Clarke and William Fick for the first time in June 2013, in Makhachkala, during their first visit, that they (the parents) would want to get a private lawyer to defend Dzhokhar, because they knew that public lawyers are government paid lawyers. Fick's (mostly, it was him pressuring this issue through) and Judy's response to that intention of the parents was "there is no way" you can do that and you will be allowed to do that. Fick said if one of the attorneys go, then the whole team goes. So, Judy Clarke and William Fick also were pushed down Dzhokhar's throat by the government. And, this team got Zubeidat somehow under their influence and that is how they worked out their defense strategy, according to which, they are painting Tamerlan as "self-radicalised" mastermind of the crimes and Dzhokhar is a follower. And there, you should see why Dzhokhar would be seeming indifferent during the court proceeding to those, who report from the courthouse. It was mentioned the other day that Dzhokhar felt nauseous on Thursday, would that be side effect, he was having as a result of drugs he was pumped in before that day's court hearing? Because I cannot image Dzhokhar feeling ok and sitting quietly, while Judy Clarke was given that murderous speech, knowing that that kid is totally innocent.”

It appears to me that both defense and prosecution agreed to steer clear of any mention of FBI involvement in the brother’s lives, in exchange for sparing Jahar’s life. Nevertheless, the judge is acting outrageously, constantly interrupting the defense and even at one point inserting his opinion that “there isn’t much evidence” that the accusations against Jahar are not true! How can that be legal? Whose job is it to censure a Federal judge?

Someone in touch with Jahar’s family shared with me several audiotapes of Jahar’s loving mother, which make clear that he comes from an intensely affectionate and deeply religious family. Whatever he did or did not do, he is not the victim of poor upbringing. “I wish you would have known how full of love we all were… how happy we all were…” Tamerlan used to kiss all of his mother’s toes, saying, “This is my paradise!” Jahar would become possessive and demand to massage her other foot insisting that he should be allowed to share in paradise!

According to his mother’s descriptions of her weekly phone calls with her son, Jahar seems to be in a highly elevated state of iman:

“Allah is with us, Allah watches us always… Everything is by Allah’s will. This is another test for us and we are thanking Allah, we never complain and we know that everything Allah does is for our benefit if not in this dunya then in the Hereafter... inshallah we all will rejoin in Paradise… Tell her (his sister Ailina who cannot visit him due to false accusations) to be patient and not to cry... whatever Allah’s decision is, that is what we are happy with.”

Interpret it how you will, this the mental state of the surviving brother. His sister Ailina gets up late at night to pray for all the Believers.

“We need to love each other like one body,” Jahar’s mother Zubeida implores us. 

“Alllah azza wa jal. He knows how his brother loved him and his brother will be waiting for us inshallah by Allah’s will in Hereafter and we will be all together inshallah.”

Court Hears Tsarnaev Arguments

November 21, 2013 by TMO 

[NOTE: The drawing below is inaccurate. According to people who were there as well as cell phone photos taken secretly, Tsarnaev's had was immobilized in a tight splint or cast. He could not move his wrist as is depicted below. Makes you wonder about those courtroom sketch artists!]

On November 12, 2013 lawyers for and against Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev appeared before Judge George O’Toole for a motion hearing and status conference. Federal attorneys Bill Weinreb, Nadine Pellegrini and Aloka Chakravarty expressed eagerness to push forward with the trial while defense attorneys Tim Watkins, Miriam Conrad, William Fick and Judy Clarke argued for more time, as the government flooded them with over 100,000 pages of documents including a massive volume of tweets and inconclusive grainy photographs, which they must sift through.
Defense attorney Watkins told the judge, “We almost know what we don’t know. The case is moving along. None of us is sitting on our hands looking for things to do.”

After going through the discovery documents, the defense team plans to file motions to suppress or dismiss evidence and ask for more information.

The government is so far withholding evidence that has been specifically requested by defense attorneys, such as the Tsarnaev family’s immigration records, autopsy reports of Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Ibragim Todashev, and any actual evidence for new government accusations against the two dead men along with the defendant. The government won’t release evidence for their claims regarding Tsarnaev’s alleged link to the Waltham murders stating it’s an “ongoing investigation.”

US Attorney Weinreb said he wants the trial to begin in fall of 2014 and wants all discovery motions to be filed within 90 days. He estimated the trial would last 90 days and sentencing would take 6 weeks. Weinreb denied that discovery is incomplete. He believes the government is entitled to withhold information from the defense in order to bring it up later during trial. He said the government will not release autopsy photos but that defense lawyers are welcome to look at them.

Attorney Conrad argued against the government’s proposed “rocket schedule” for one of the “most complex crime scenes in history,” and explained that there is a warehouse full of unlabeled documents related to this case to go through. She demanded the government immediately provide “all exculpatory and mitigating evidence,” so that the defense would be “better able to understand where the government is going.”

Attorney Fick reminded the judge that establishing guilt or innocence of the accused should be the goal of the court.

Judge O’Toole set the date of February 28, 2014 for motions not related to discovery, including  a possible change of venue or requests for dismissal of charges, but agreed to defer the trial date. The next status status conference is scheduled for February 12, after the government is to have made its decision regarding the death penalty.

The attorneys then discussed the Special Administrative Measures (SAMs).

Judge O’Toole said, “I agree enough with the defendant” regarding problems with preparing an adequate defense, but he claimed he did not have the jurisdiction to deal with Constitutional issues such as group prayer. He said these concerns should be brought up in a civil suit by a third party in front of a different judge. He said his job is to determine “not whether SAMs are annoying but if they are limiting.”

Earlier this month the ACLU filed a memorandum with the court calling Tsarnaev’s prison conditions “torture,” but O’Toole ordered the ACLU memo expunged from the federal court record and barred the ACLU from making a statement at the hearing.

Attorney Fick argued that SAMs are “unwarranted” as Tsarnaev is not a political leader. He said the SAMs restrict the defendant’s right to defend himself, because they limit who can see Tsarnaev outside the company of an attorney.

SAMs also tacitly threaten defense attorneys with possible incarceration if they defend their client’s innocence too vigorously. Without mentioning the name of Attorney Lynn Stewart, who is now dying in prison, Attorney Clarke mentioned in court that “attorneys have been prosecuted for differing from prosecutors in their interpretation of SAMs.”

SAMs prevent Tsarnaev from speaking confidentially with his lawyers, and prohibits them from discussing their conversations with Tsarnaev, or relaying messages from him, even a greeting. Tsarnaev’s lawyers are not allowed to talk to any potential defense witnesses without an agent of the federal government there. Tsarnaev’s lawyers argued that SAMs are preventing them from building a fair case in his defense.

The prosecution claims Tsarnaev’s communication needs to be restricted to prevent him from inspiring further acts of violence. The government worries defense lawyers might pass some sort of message from Tsarnaev to a person on the outside. Tsarnaev’s team complained of government prosecutors’ collusion with the Bureau of Prisons.

“The government has no business knowing the details of attorney meetings in prison,” argued Clark. “The prosecution has no business knowing which member of the defense team sees Tsarnaev, when, and what is shown to him.”

“This is not a level playing field,” Conrad told the court. “It appears the government is trying to retain every possible advantage in this case for itself.”

The prosecution said the Attorney General has the authority to institute SAMs and it is the burden of the defense to determine that what is being disseminated to third parties is strictly legal.

Judge O’Toole asked that attorneys agree on a list of people with legal access to the prisoner but would not make any ruling about SAMs, so the restrictions remain.

Next, Conrad reiterated the defense request that the government turn over all the information they have. When the indictment includes a capital charge, it’s a capital case, she said. There should be no need to wait for disclosure. The government has a global network of investigators, police, and witness statements, while the defense must rely on the government to inform them.

Weinreb said they don’t have to provide more evidence until after the decision about the death penalty. “We have turned over everything that we deem to be exculpatory or relevant to mitigation.”

Conrad argued that basic fairness is the core issue. She accused the government of “splitting hairs” over types of evidence. The government is not providing the defense access to their investigation. The defense would have to go through a long process to obtain documents when the government could get it with just a phone call. “You do your investigation and we’ll do ours, is what the government seems to be saying.” Conrad told the court that the government’s resources are global while we are just a handful of people with limited time who have other clients also.

So far the government has not said what information they have from foreign or intercepted sources. Defense attorneys want to interview the CIA. Conrad argued that the government should not be able to decide what information to provide and withhold, or provide summaries instead of transcripts of interviews or secret grand jury statements. The government won’t even provide non-secret information that explains the circumstances or context of available witness statements. The defense has asked for information about Tsarnaev’s repeated requests for a lawyer during his initial hospital bed interrogation. The government is withholding documentary evidence including signed statements, while at the same time pushing for a quick trial date.

Prosecutors claim it is “premature” to disclose information about the Russian communication to the US but Conrad insisted that “the judge has the authority to compel evidence” that is required to make the defense job efficient.

The prosecution said they will show the Russian communication and other key information secretly to the judge, but not share it with the defense.

Prosecution denied the government is withholding any favorable evidence but said the government is withholding unfavorable evidence in order to use later in the trial. Weinreb said the defense is not allowed to second guess the government about whether all evidence has been disclosed and denied that the government is inhibiting investigation.

The defense has asked for files that the government could easily provide. The government won’t give a reason why, but just keeps saying it doesn’t need to provide the information right now.

“This is just plain wrong. We are entitled to information in an orderly and efficient manner,” argued Attorney Conrad.

Judge O’Toole said he would take the matter into advisement.