Boston Muslim Shot and Killed & then Convicted by the Media

June 7, 2015
http://www.newtrendmag.org/ntma1605.htm


At 7am on Tuesday, June 2, a black Muslim man, Usaama Rahim, 26, was shot by Boston FBI and police in front of the CVS in Roslindale, a relatively nice area of Boston. His brother, Ibrahim Rahim, who is an imam in California, stated that Usaama was waiting for the bus to go to work when police and FBI approached him for "questioning." The police claim he wielded a knife, which left them no choice but to shoot him dead.

Not a single community organization in Boston from the Green Rainbow Party to the Muslims have made any kind of immediate attempt at organizing a demonstration or making a statement as one would expect. The news reports that the man was "under investigation" (as we all are). This alone is enough for them to say the authorities killed a "terrorism suspect." There are some reports the man had made some statements online supporting the Islamic Caliphate. He had been trailed by government agents for the past 6 days 24/7 and was said to be visibly nervous.

This event is even more alarming than your average police shooting because, like the case of Ibrahim Todashev, who was killed by Boston police and FBI in his Florida home in 2013, the murder appears to be premeditated. Todashev is also said to have lunged at officers, which somehow resulted in him being hit in every major organ and a final kill shot to the back of the head.

"CNN already has the black Muslim killed by Boston police convicted as "part of terror network" - a "source" said so!" opined Glenn Greenwald that day. "1) Police kill a black US Muslim on the street; 2) anonymously claim he follows ISIS on social media; 3) case closed."

Local clergy were invited to view the videotape of the event. Imam Farooq Abdullah, who is a highly respected local African American leader, stated that the footage was very distant and inconclusive as to whether or not the man had brandished a knife but it was true that the police backed up several yards before shooting him in the chest. He was not, as his brother Ibrahim was told by their father, shot in the back, nor was he talking on a cell phone at that moment.

Nevertheless, there was no need to kill him. The story about him planning to behead a police officer sounds far-fetched, though if true, would indicate that he was either mentally unstable or just making a joke about smoking pigs. If the authorities actually had any evidence of this plot, they could have easily obtained a warrant for his arrest. Approaching him in the street to intimidate him was certainly not the appropriate way to deal with either a dangerous terrorist or a mentally ill person. They could have left their card at his house or called him.

The most worrying aspect of this entire story is the complete silence of the usual activist crowd.

What is the matter with this town? They stopped traffic when police killed a black man elsewhere, but when it happens here at home they don't care? Why, because he is Muslim? I posted a comment expressing concern on Mayor Walsh's Facebook page and was deluged by hateful comments, mostly from Irish people, who are convinced the police must have been justified in killing a terrorist and that by killing him, they saved a lot of taxpayer's money.

Most likely, public sentiment against Muslims has been stoked by the Boston Marathon Bombing trials, which are all winding down this month. On Tuesday, June 2, Dias Kadyrbayev, the Kazakh friend who threw away the backpack, was sentenced to 6 years by Judge Woodlock after agreeing to plead guilty. Azamat Tazhayakov of Kazakhstan and Robel Phillipos of Ethiopian heritage, who both plead innocent but were found guilty, and Khairullozhon Matanov of Kyrgyzstan, who agreed to plead guilty because he knew he would not get a fair trial in Boston, will be sentenced within the week. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's official sentencing is scheduled for June 24. Dias, Azamat and Khairullozhon are expected to be deported after serving out their sentences. Stephen Silva, who sold Dzhokhar the gun, got 7 years. Silva is being held in general population and Robel is under house arrest while the Asian kids are all in solitary confinement. After sentencing they will be moved to other prisons. I pray they will be safe.

Marathon Bombing Case: They Forgave the killer of 9 in Charleston, but not Dzhokhar.

On Wednesday, June 24, 2015, Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev finally spoke.

"I would like to begin in the name of Allah, the exalted and glorious, the most gracious, the most merciful, "Allah" among the most beautiful names. Any act that does not begin in the name of God is separate from goodness."

The victims, the jury, nobody was expecting this religious sermon.

"He did crack up and pause a few times, it sounded like he was trying to compose himself," stated a courtroom observer.

Before thanking his attorneys, he invoked the name of Muhammed. He thanked those who testified on his behalf, he thanked the jury for their service, and even the Court.

"The Prophet Muhammed, peace and blessings be upon him, said that if you do not show mercy to Allah's creation, then Allah will not have mercy on you, so I'd like to apologize now to the victims, to the survivors. Now, I am sorry for the lives that I've taken, for the suffering that I've caused you, for the damage that I've done. Irreparable damage."

What he said satisfied neither the victims nor those who continue to believe that he was framed.

"Immediately after the bombing, which I am guilty of - if there's any lingering doubt about that, let there be no more. I did do it, along with my brother."

Those who were hoping he would 'do a Tarek Mehanna' political speech got instead a speech on forgiveness that sounded at once sincere yet highly scripted, but answered nobody's questions like why? or how?

"Now, I am a Muslim. My religion is Islam. The God I worship, besides whom there is no other God, is Allah. And I prayed to Allah to bestow his mercy upon the deceased, those affected in the bombing, and their families. Allah says in the Quran that with every hardship is relief. I pray for your relief, for your healing, for your well-being, for your strength. I ask Allah to have mercy upon me and my brother and my family. I ask Allah to bestow his mercy upon those present here today. And Allah knows best those deserving of His mercy."

This convoluted sort of apology left everyone scratching their heads.

Why would he wait until AFTER he was found guilty and sentenced to death to apologize? And why, how, what the heck - and how is it that he is suddenly speaking with a thick Arabian accent? Not a Russian accent. He sounded Middle Eastern, two different observers told New Trend. It really was him, they said, but strangely out of character. He used to talk like "Yo what's up."

The most bizarre part of it is that not only Carmen Ortiz the lead prosecutor, but Judge O'Toole made public statements condemning Jahar's interpretation of his own religion.

"You did it on purpose... It is tragic, for your victims and now for you, surely someone who believes God smiles on and rewards the killing of innocents believes in a cruel god. This is not and cannot be the god of Islam," said the judge right before condemning Jahar to death. So is he being executed for murder or for a politically incorrect interpretation of Islam?

U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz, whose office prosecuted Tsarnaev, said she was "struck more by what he didn't say.

"He didn't renounce terrorism, he didn't renounce violent extremism, and he couched his comments in line with Allah and Allah's view, which gave it a religious tone, and there was nothing...about this crime that was Islam-associated."

Tsarnaev adhered to a radicalized version of Islam was not in line with the faith's "peaceful and loving" roots, Ortiz explained.

"The youth will not stay quiet while America is killing the innocent Muslims. As my sons there will be many many many inshallah! And I will die with my love towards them," texted Jahar's mother to a supporter.

"Your country kills the brothers and sisters and those good hearted and beautiful souls like my sons who love their ummah cannot see the conspiracies of your government towards our ummah and things like that happen! For example if someone kills my brother or my sister I will not blink and destroy whoever killed them - why?? Because I love them...Everything is by Allah's will... Allah knows the intention and the purity of it and what was the intention for!" concluded Jahar's mother.

I am worried that they are going to execute Jahar before we learn the true story. His statement created as many questions as it answered. This is quite a decade, quite a century, already. However, Jahar has been moved to a prison in Florence, Colorado. It is nearby but not the same place where Imam Jamil al-Amin is being held in Supermax.

Boston Marathon Bombing Court Appeals Begin: Public Donating For Tsarnaev Funds.

On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's attorneys brought up a number of arguments at Moakley Federal Courthouse in Boston. I watched the hearing on the screen in the overflow room. The first order of business was an attempt to reduce the number of charges against the young man. He was convicted of 30 counts, several of which are more than sufficient to result in the death penalty. His attorneys argued that the sheer number of counts against him overwhelmed the jury and caused them to be influenced in favor of the death penalty.

They would like to have a retrial in a different city because the locals of Boston are likely to be driven by revenge since they were personally affected by the tragedy. In their motion, they mentioned that the people on the jury were actively exposed to coverage and opinions about the bombing on Facebook during the trial, and that many of their Facebook friends were Bostonians. Some of the jurists actually made or were exposed to prejudiced comments even before evidence of the crime was presented.

Defense attorneys spent a lot of time bringing up technicalities that in my opinion were not very forceful arguments. Attorney William Fick said many of the charges were unconstitutional because they mentioned "violent physical force." They said the government "conflates the ability to cause injury with violent force." They claimed that setting the bomb down was not technically the use of violent force any more than arson, which is not considered a violent crime even if people are hurt in the process. Regarding the charge of "malicious bombing of property," they argued that the word "malicious" refers to a mental state resulting in "intentional and reckless" behavior but does not imply violent force was used. The carjacking took place because of intimidation - no violence was involved.

Naturally, the government disagreed that the counts needed to be vacated and stated that the decision should be left to the Supreme Court.

In the second part of the hearing, the fiery Attorney Miriam Conrad argued forcefully against the Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) against Tsarnaev. She said there was "no valid argument to justify" having a federal agent monitor attorney visits with Tsarnaev's sisters in prison. In an earlier court hearing "in the shadow of litigation," the court had ruled that the agent would be from a different state and not part of the government prosecution team. He was not to relay information to the prosecutors about their conversations due to "attorney client privilege."

However, in a recent email to the defense lawyers, the government lawyers said that they no longer plan to abide by that agreement and that they want access to the defense's information file. They want to know who visits Tsarnaev and what they talked about. Defense lawyers said the government cannot just unilaterally decide to revoke an agreement, that litigation is far from over and that attorney client privilege still holds. It is not at all normal for prosecutors to get access to defense attorney's private files whether before, during, or after litigation. The government should not decide whether meetings should take place, nor see documents, Conrad argued. The agreement does not say that the information is only private until after the verdict. She said that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is not being treated like any other defendant. There are far more restrictions on his lawyers' ability to defend him, even though he is not just serving a sentence, he is awaiting the death penalty.

The government argued that the presence of Tsarnaev's sisters invalidates attorney-client privilege and that the agreement is not enforceable because the government needs to know if there were visitors who were not expert witnesses, so they can investigate these persons because the government "needs to know if they've ever had problems before." They mentioned Sister Helena, the nun that testified that Tsarnaev was sorry for his actions. They didn't think she should be visiting Tsarnaev because she is not an expert witness.

Conrad replied that listening to the government talk is like Alice looking through the looking glass. The government should have modified the agreement not just send an email saying we aren't following it anymore. Sister Helena was cleared under the heavy restrictions of the SAMs and there is no reason that the government needs to know what she said to him.

As usual, Judge O'Toole mumbled that he would not rule at this time.

The next issue that was discussed was how much money would be taken out of Tsarnaev's commissary to go towards "Mass Fund" which gifted 57 victims with restitution money. The court ruled that Tsarnaev would have to pay $25 per quarter ($100/year), an amount that would be adjusted based on availability. This seems to be aimed at discouraging supporters to donate money in fear that the government will take it. In the past, Tsarnaev received so many donations that the government threatened not to provide him with a free lawyer as he had too much money. Now, nobody is even allowed to send him books. His attorneys were not even allowed to give him a family photo.

Finally, the court discussed the unsealing of documents. As of now, Tsarnaev's trial is unprecedented in terms of how much of the proceedings has gone on under the veil of secrecy. "We are anxious on behalf of a lot of people to unseal the documents," said O'Toole. He ruled that for starters, both defense and prosecution would decide which of their own documents they wished to unseal. After that would come a future discussion on which of the other party's documents the parties would agree to unseal, before arguing about the remaining documents. Clearly the judge is in no hurry for the proceedings to become transparent to the public.

The Tsarnaev case, as with most cases where the defendant is a Muslim, continues to elements and types of issues that normally do not arise in other cases, even when the defendant, who is not Muslim, has committed a mass murder. For example, the fellow who shot up the church got a speedy trial and was not sentenced to death, whereas the Boston Bombing trial went on for years and there is no end in sight.

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1631.htm

Was the Boston Bombing case a Show Trial?:

Eyewitness Account: Questions that were not asked.

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1597.htm


On the morning of the verdict, April 8, 2015 in front of the courthouse, there were old ladies passing out anti-death penalty literature based on Roman Catholicism; Veterans for Peace were there with their white flag holding signs about "blowback," and later on an Islamophobe with his face covered with an American flag held a sign saying,""Dzokhar Tsarnaev was not a follower. He is just another Islamic terrorist declaring war against (kafirs mean infidels) Non-Muslims people. He is just trying to please his god (Satan)" and something about "Islamofascism."

There were many many intimidating looking police and Homeland Security vehicles preventing any traffic in front of the courthouse, guards, police dogs and many cameramen.

As expected, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was found guilty. He did not react with any emotion. He seemed to be "not there," leading many to speculate that he had been heavily drugged. Throughout the trial, his eyes looked kind of strange.

It was still astonishing that he was found guilty of all 30 charges, including the bomb that his brother is said to have placed down, and the death of the police officer that was already determined to be shot by "friendly fire" during the chaos at Watertown. He was also found guilty of killing the MIT police officer even though investigators only claim to have found his brother's fingerprints on the gun. The entire trial was carefully controlled, with defense lawyers looking to the judge for permission to speak, witnesses looking to the CIA and FBI officers for cues.

The big elephant in the room was all the questions that were not allowed to be asked. The defense was not allowed to ask whether Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was even armed when officers pumped more than 100 bullets into the boat where he was hiding.There is definitely some huge cover-up going on, something that the government does not want coming out! It was a show trial.

"The prosecution and the defense have been doing a startling job. They are amazing. I've covered a lot of trials and it's absolutely the best tried trial I've ever seen in my life. The choice of witnesses ... the timing of the prosecution's case, was unbelievably good," commented Russian author Masha Gesser. "But structurally it's not the role of the American justice system to find the truth. The American justice system administers punishment. It does not conduct inquests and it does not find facts."

The FBI's failure to protect the public "is either grounds for indicting the Bureau for incompetence, or it is an indication that these brothers were, like thousands of others, caught up in some web of provocation, either as plot infiltrators or informants," writes Russ Baker.

Those who have been paying attention are still scratching their heads at all the things that made no sense, like why Tsarnaev would calmly spend several minutes in the store deciding which snacks to buy, while his brother held a man at gunpoint in a hijacked vehicle. Or why they thought it would be better to hijack a car when they already had a car. Or why they would kill a cop in order to get his gun, when they already had a gun.

A skeptic I talked to at the courthouse speculated that the Mossad, whose Israeli agents had immediately swooped into Boston to capitalize on the post-bombing situation, had created the diversion by killing the officer in order to steal classified information from MIT.

"What also doesn't make sense is for the prosecution to omit a chunk of time from that video, which can clearly be observed in the video linked above (as evidence by the timestamp and the cars passing on the upper left corner of the video). There is really no need to edit out any part of the video if everything happened exactly as the prosecution has described it," writes Klaus Marre of whowhatwhy.org.

The prosecutors had justified this video editing as saving the jury's time, but they had not cared about wasting hours and hours of the jury's time listening to irrelevant testimony. Most Americans are not asking these questions. They are debating what the best punishment for the little terrorist should be, based on what would hurt him more. There is a vicious lynch mob mentality that is seething with hate and anti-Muslim prejudice.

If it were really true that Jahar bombed the marathon in retaliation for US war victims, which we know nothing about except from a note that mysteriously appeared three weeks later in the boat where he was captured, then the American people are the ones who should feel the most remorse! Because the American people would thus be morally responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing. Their eyes should be wet with tears of shame for the suffering that they have caused to innocent people, and thanksgiving to God that only four people were killed this time.

Instead, the event has served to create a fascist public mentality, to create support for ongoing killing of Muslims around the world and strip away civil freedoms at home.

Lessons from the Boston Massacre

A trial says as much about the people holding it as it does about the person who is on trial. What will this trial say about Boston? Will Boston’s noble heritage be disgraced or upheld? As jury selection begins this week in Dzhokhar’ Tsarnaev's trial, let us ask ourselves: what would John Adams do? Put simply, he would defend the accused Boston Marathon bomber.

John Adams, an attorney and revolutionary, insisted upon representing the British soldiers that gunned down rioters in the spring of 1770, so that they would not be lynched by a mob but rather, receive a fair trial. It is the historical tradition of Boston, to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights no matter how severe the crime. Indeed, Adams gave such an impassioned speech at the trial that the jury, rather than execute the unpopular defendants, was moved to acquit 6 of the 8 soldiers and reduce the charges of the remaining two to manslaughter. The strong defense of even one’s political enemies not only demonstrated the future US President’s moral character but forms the basis of Constitutional law.

The most basic concept of the fair trial is that the defendant shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I have been in attendance at nearly every pre-trial hearing for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and I can assure the public that no meaningful evidence has been revealed. Most everything remains in sealed documents that have not yet been discussed. Therefore, any opinion that any person claims to have about the case, if not obtained from court documents, has been obtained illegitimately via made-for-TV movies that never claimed to be more than fiction. The amount of arrogant, willful ignorance amongst the jury pool is sickening.

Many tweets are circulating that demonstrate extreme prejudice: 


“I’m just gonna say this… I hope #Tsarnaev gets shanked tonight so we don’t have to go through this trial.. #sorrynotsorry”

“Jury duty coming up. Really hoping for the Tsarnaev case so someone can deliver him a fair chance at the electric chair.”

“So Pamela has to report for federal jury duty on Monday. 1st day of the Boston bomber trial voir dire. Can’t believe it. Yeah, we’re prejudiced!”

Harvey Silvergate argues in the Boston Globe that due to the prevalence of such extreme sentiments among the locals who were personally affected by the bombings, Judge O’Toole ought to have moved Tsarnaev’s trial out of Boston, “out of an abundance of caution, erring on the side of a fair trial that is supposed to be the norm especially when the death penalty hangs in the balance.” He further states: “O’Toole instead is erring on the side of expedition. Efficiency can be overrated when justice, and our own adherence to civilized and constitutional norms, hang in the balance.”

I can think of no greater stupidity than to allow “blind faith” in a man’s guilt sway a trial of this importance to our nation. This is a huge test of what the Founding Fathers stood for. We must insist on clear evidence, not hearsay, not doctored photos, not unsubstantiated news reports, no secret evidence - Bostonians deserve to watch not only a fair trial but proceedings that seek to “unravel the mystery” of the bombings. All we know for sure right now is that we don’t know anything. No bomb making materials were found in either brother’s apartment. The FBI claims they “don’t know” where the bombs were made. Does the prosecution even have a case? This is a valuable question, based in our Bill of Rights.

Even if the Tsarnaev brothers are guilty of some or all of the charges, it's still important to ask deeper questions, like who put them up to it. The truth could be rather complex. MLFA attorney Charles Swift opined: “Just because the government is lying doesn’t mean the defendant is innocent.” I fear that this rush to declare the kid guilty and then execute him is covering up a much bigger story. Even if the bigger story is just that law enforcement failed miserably and then tried to cover its mistakes by exaggerating the “Islamic threat,” embellishing and inflating the story into mythical proportions in order to explain their inability to protect the public from harm.

The Massachusetts Constitution, Article XIII states that “In criminal prosecutions, the verification of facts in the vicinity where they happen, is one of the greatest securities of the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.”

Unfortunately, the government has worked overtime to remove the evidence from the scene. The mailbox, the tree that were hit with shards of shrapnel have been removed so that we cannot determine the direction of the blast. Officer Collier's car has been refurbished and put back into use, the boat where Tsarnaev was captured has been removed from the property and replaced with a new boat, witnesses have been deported and jailed, intimidated or killed/died mysteriously; including law enforcement witnesses! Will the truth ever come out? If so, how?

Boston should stand strong and insist that the government follow the laws of our land and actually demonstrate the veracity of its accusations with hard evidence. If we allow murderous hysteria to take over Boston, then we are acting in the tradition of Salem.

Boston Gears Up for Bombing Trial

http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1583.htm

The past couple weeks have been strange, with the defense for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev filing a motion to keep protesters who were supporting their client away from the courthouse! (?) Tsarnaev’s attorneys oddly argued that the presence of demonstrators, whose arguments vary, would rob Tsarnaev of his right to a fair trial. The defense again frantically requested for a third time a change of venue the late afternoon of New Year’s Eve,arguing that “every member of the jury pool is, in effect, an actual victim of the charged offenses.”

Judge O’Toole routinely denied the defense request at the advice of the prosecution, who insisted that the trial should be conducted in the community most affected by the bombing. "Moving the trial out of the Eastern Division would create an enormous hardship for those victims and their families, depriving many, if not most of them, of any ability to see the trial."

Harvey Silvergate writes in the Boston Globe, “The Oklahoma City bombing prosecution furnishes an instructive precedent that strongly suggests that Tsarnaev should not be tried in Massachusetts. It is a precedent that O’Toole has recklessly misread and misrepresented in denying a venue change… O’Toole ignores yet another precedent, this one right in his own back yard.”

Boston Judge Wolf decided to postpone the sentencing trial of Gary Lee Sampson, who was convicted in 2003 of the carjack killings of three men, Silvergate continues, “out of an abundance of caution, erring on the side of a fair trial that is supposed to be the norm especially when the death penalty hangs in the balance. O’Toole instead is erring on the side of expedition. Efficiency can be overrated when justice, and our own adherence to civilized and constitutional norms, hang in the balance.”

After being found guilty, Sampson was sent to New Hampshire for execution, since Massachusetts does not allow the death penalty. If a Bostonian can be found guilty in Massachusetts and executed in New Hampshire, why can’t a Bostonian get his trial moved to New Hampshire, where the libertarian population is more likely to question the FBI’s story?

Bostonians are largely debating the death penalty vs. life in prison rather than innocence vs. guilt. A 2013 Boston Globe poll found that 57% of Bostonians favored life without parole for Tsarnaev, while 33% favored death.

Jury selection is expected to begin on Monday, January 5, 2014.

Attorney Judy Clarke has made overtures to prosecutors about a plea bargain, according to a lawyer close to the case. But so far she has been rebuffed, reports the NY Times. Imprisoned friend Stephen Silva is expected to confess to selling or giving a gun with an obliterated serial number to the Tsarnaevs in February 2013, due to FBI evidence against him obtained by the wiretapping of an informant, two months before the April events. Media insinuates, but court documents do not clearly link the gun to the killing of MIT officer Sean Collier.

The official prosecution narrative centers on the story that Tsarnaev, angry about the killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, scrawled incriminating messages (“Stop killing our innocent people and we will stop”) on the inside of the boat where he was captured. This message appeared about three weeks after his arrest, just in time for the grand jury hearing, and is therefore rather suspect as evidence. I think it is baloney that Jahar just happened to have a Sharpie and suddenly began to compose a manifesto after having been shot multiple times.

What is important to acknowledge though, is that Bostonians, and the American people in general, are desperate to execute Tsarnaev as a terrorist rather than to pity him as a wayward teen - BECAUSE of the erroneous belief that he was retaliating against America for propagating massacres overseas. BECAUSE of the deep dark guilt inside the American conscience. The hysteria that this kind of propaganda arouses points to a dark side of American ignorance and exceptionalism. The idea that a Muslim kid might say that retaliation is justified makes this a high profile case. He might even end up publicly hanged on TV like Saddam Hussein (God forbid)! But what about the random jerk off his meds who guns down a classroom? Not news. The United States is treating Tsarnaev like a scapegoat that they can just load up with all their baggage and send him out to the desert to “take away the sins of the world.”

Indeed if Tsarnaev had committed bombings in the name of Islam, in retaliation for Muslim deaths overseas, he would be protected by international law. The United Nations could recognize him as a political prisoner and he would enjoy certain rights enforceable by the international community. If Tsarnaev is truly an Islamic jihad terrorist, where is his legal support? Where is his army? There is none because he never was a jihadi despite some general interest in Islamic causes such as sympathy for Gaza and Syria. He also has no background of crime or any issue that would consider him to be a disturbed youth. He was a lifeguard, who volunteered to help handicapped kids. He was a well adjusted and very popular kid. 

Is that what this trial is going to boil down to? The right of a well-adjusted American kid to openly care about Muslim suffering?

Art Exhibit Questions Boston Marathon Bombing Scenario

 TMO 

 

The author standing next to a  on display at Black Indian Inn in Dorchester, MA. Photo by David Barkley.

The Boston Chapter of The Jericho Movement recently held an event at the Black Indian Inn art gallery, entitled ‘Artistic Hospitality in the Hood.’ The event featured a film about Abu Mumia Jamal, an African American convicted and sentenced to life without parole for the 1981 murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.

 

This event coincided with an exhibit questioning the official story in the Boston Marathon bombing that took place in April 2013. To me, the most immediately noticeable panel of the display shows a picture of the accused Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s face coming out of the darkness with the words, “I’m not asking for mercy, I’m asking for justice,” positioned next to it. The display awakens the part of the mind that questions official details about a crime scene and allows a “shadow of a doubt” to penetrate the consciousness.

 

The panels on display in this exhibit were the same panels were held by protesters in front of Boston’s federal courthouse on October 20, 2014. Among those present that day was Elena Teyer, mother in law of Ibrahim Todashev, who was murdered by a Boston FBI agent in his Florida home in May 2013, while writing a forced confession implicating himself and Tamerlan Tsarnaev in a triple homicide. His confession does not match the actual crime scene. One of the most important panels shows photographs from Todashev’s autopsy.

 

The most terrifying aspect of this young man’s situation while awaiting trial is that despite an endless stream of media content vilifying him and his Islamic religion, we the public have never been allowed to hear him say more than “Not Guilty,” which he said seven times at his arraignment. Not even his sisters are allowed to talk to him without an FBI officer present in the room. The defense is gagged – prevented from saying publicly that their client is innocent! Meanwhile, the media has not been stopped from airing highly inflammatory stories about him.

 

“Meet Jahar…” reads a statement on the most prominent poster of the exhibit. It shows the boy’s downcast face as he was captured in the boat after being shot multiple times by police despite being unarmed. One thing is clear in the face of this 19-year-old in this most terrifying of circumstances: he looks alarmingly handsome, calm, and resolved. It is rumored that he is ready to accept death penalty before he will plead guilty for a crime he did not commit. He is placing his fate in the hands of Allah.

Nearby, we see the innocent boy on a happier day with a carnation in his lapel. The public has never before been exposed to the image of him with a flower! We learn that this “terrorist” sounds like the kid we wish we could say was our son.

 

Panel on display depicting the scene of the Boston Marathon Bombing. Photo by David Barkley.

Crowning the display is a collection of photos of young men who are currently being held in solitary confinement, basically because they knew the Tsarnaevs.

Many of the panels discuss the logistics of what happened when the first and second bombs went off. One poster claims to show photographic evidence that “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was not even standing at the site of the 2nd bomb. He was next door at Atlantic Fish Restaurant.”

 

One section of the display concentrates on the “bomb squad practice” that was going on at the same time as the actual bombs, and official media assurances that these explosions were only a “training exercise.” We see bomb sniffing dogs at the finish line, snipers on the roof wearing protective gear, and a tweet from the Boston Globe that reads, “Officials: There will be a controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities.”

 

Three panels focus on the issue of “the backpack.” Photographic evidence clearly demonstrates that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not have any kind of pressure cooker or anything heavy in his light colored backpack. The exploded backpack shown in the media bears close resemblance to that worn by men who are believed to be Craft International employees, who were photographed standing around with heavy black backpacks near the time of the blasts.

 

An additional panel exhibits conflicting accounts of what happened that night when the brothers were on the run. Early media reports said they had robbed a 7-11. Surveillance photos show they just bought snacks. Similar discrepancies exist regarding the story about the shooting of MIT police officer Sean Collier. Early police reports stated they were looking for a dark skinned male. Tsarnaev was first accused of this cop killing a few weeks later at his grand jury hearing. Another poster shows multiple images of the unconstitutional behavior of police raiding homes in Watertown, Massachusetts.

 

The display raises more questions than it answers, but it is not the citizens’ job to prove anyone’s innocence. It is the government’s job to establish guilt of the accused, “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Meanwhile, we watch and wait.

If Jahar didn't bomb the marathon, who did?

Boston - Accused Marathon bomber, Dzhokhar (Jahar) Tsarnaev’s last pre-trial hearing took place on December 18th. He still resolutely refuses to plead guilty for a crime he claims he did not commit. I watched the proceedings in the overflow room and also participated in a protest outside the courthouse, where I was interviewed by reporters from every news channel.

I explained to them that I want a fair trial for Jahar. The public deserves to know what really happened. We need to make sure we got the right guy. Erroneous media reports based on leaks from anonymous law enforcement officials have been presented to the public in lieu of evidence, and have greatly biased the jury pool against the defendant before he has even gone to trial. As to whether or not I personally think he’s innocent, I would say, based on past prosecutions by US Attorney Carmen Ortiz’s team in front of the same Judge O’Toole, that it is highly probable that the young man is simply a victim of anti-Islamic prejudice.

For example, Tarek Mehanna was sentenced to over 17 years for joking comments he made on the internet, which the government misconstrued as planning to commit terrorist acts. His trial was based on highly inflammatory statements against the Islamic religion, irrelevant evidence such as beheading videos, expert testimony from career neocons, and plea bargains from acquaintances who were facing decades in prison unless they testified against Mehanna. Based on the media reports, during the time of the trial, many people in the Muslim community refused to stand up for their brother and spent energy distancing themselves from him. It was only after sentencing that he was allowed to speak out about his unjust conviction.

In Jahar’s case, he is not just accused of thought crimes but actual explosions that killed and maimed people. If he is innocent, then the real bomber is still at large. In the worst case scenario, Jahar was chosen as a fall guy to cover up for a plot that is much more sinister. So far, there have been no bomb making materials found in either his home nor that of his brother. The government has never once claimed that the fireworks that his friends took out of his dorm room were linked to the bombing. The government prosecuted the friends for lying about throwing away the backpacks, in order to pressure them to testify against their friend.

If there is evidence that Jahar and his brother Tamerlan had something to do with the Boston Marathon bombings, then the public still deserves to know the bigger picture. I have no problem with executing a criminal who committed murder but I have a huge problem with someone being executed in order to silence him. The government has silenced almost every potential defense witness. Jahar’s friends, relatives, friends of friends and even relatives of friends of friends have been deported, imprisoned and even killed by the FBI. The defense complains that they are having trouble getting anyone to talk due to government intimidation.

Furthermore, defense lawyers have complained that the prosecution is being evasive instead of presenting clear arguments as to why they believe he is the bomber. They don’t seem to want to “unravel the mystery.”

I don’t know if the truth will ever come out in this courtroom. It is not being played as a straightforward prosecution. The government is playing chess, not proving their point.

Hearing after hearing, the defense has been begging the prosecution to present their argument. Instead, the government has dumped on them millions of pages of unsearchable computer records without any explanation as to their significance. US Attorney Weinreb has consistently argued, with a smirk on his face, that if the government were to present their case to the defense, the defense would be able to come up with a counter-argument, which would be unfair to prosecutors; therefore they need to keep the element of surprise. Yet at the same time, the government has been illegally feeding news stories to the media. The defense complained that they are learning more about the government’s narrative of this case from the television than they are getting from the other attorneys. The government is not playing fair, which leads to the question of whether it is covering up the truth.

In 95% of cases since 9/11, where Muslims are accused of terrorism related acts, the FBI has been involved. We need to know more about the extent of FBI involvement in the Boston Marathon bombing suspects’ lives. His mother stated to reporters last year that the FBI had been interviewing Tamerlan on a regular basis for two years before the bombing. He had been asked to become an informant. They knew him well. So, the most likely scenario is either that he bombed the marathon as an employee of the FBI, or else that he was framed for a crime he did not commit in retaliation for refusing to become an informant for the FBI.

I don’t want to live in a country where the FBI can just come into your house and murder you because you knew somebody, where they can just accuse you of a bombing and then, instead of presenting evidence in a court of law, make up TV docu-dramas about you without even consulting you for your side of the story. Perhaps it’s not as important to ordinary Americans that their government obey the rule of law, but as someone whose parents came to this country and swore their allegiance to the US Constitution, I see no other course of action possible other than standing up and fighting for what my country stands for.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is an American citizen with rights. He came to this country as a refugee. He loved living here. He had many friends, no criminal record, and absolutely no motive to hurt anyone. If people don’t stand up for his rights, next week it could be your son in shackles.

Government Aggressively Seeks Defendant’s Associates; Defense Fears Intimidation

TMO 

Editor’s note:  Karin Friedemann is a TMO Columnist.  Her opinions are her own.

Demonstrators held signs in front of Boston’s federal courthouse on October 20, 2014 during the last hearing for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was accused of the Boston Marathon bombings.

Arina Montag of Haverhill, Massachusetts told reporters she believes Tsarnaev and his late brother are being unfairly prosecuted.

“I believe the boys have been set up,” she said. “I haven’t seen any actual evidence against them. I mean I’ve seen circumstantial evidence. Nothing that actually links them to what they are allegedly being accused of doing.”

Elena Teyer, the mother-in-law of Ibragim Todashev, was one of the seven people speaking out against the justice system. Her daughter’s husband was shot seven times and killed in his Florida home by federal agents from Boston in May 2013. Teyer held a collage of his autopsy photographs.

“I am dead because I knew Tsarnaevs. I knew the truth,” her sign read.

Teyer told reporters about the email between FBI agents after they killed Todashev. It says, “Good work. A job well done.” The email congratulated the FBI team for their success! It did not say, “Well that turned uglier than we had planned.” This can only imply that they were sent from Boston to Orlando to murder a potential witness.

“They came from Boston to kill my son-in-law. I know that for sure.”

“We are all here for justice,” said Teyer, detailing to reporters the holes and inconsistencies in law enforcement’s account of Todashev’s death.

The news story of the alleged Todashev confession – that he and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were involved a drug-related 2011 triple homicide in Waltham, Massachusetts – was originally leaked to the media by reporter Michelle McPhee. There is a bloodstained note partially written, never signed. Todashev apparently had refused to continue with this forced confession, and paid with his brains splattered next to his front door.

Government prosecutors mentioned this unsigned confession letter in a previous court filing as if it were indeed undisputed fact. Defense attorneys have since tried repeatedly without success to compel the government to give some more details about these murders, which seem to be unrelated to the Boston Marathon bombing.

On October 24, 2014, four days after the hearing, US prosecutors filed with the court their opposition to Tsarnaev’s Fourth Motion to Compel [Discovery]. In order to avoid having to hand over any evidence to the defense, US prosecutors now suddenly admit:

“The government has no evidence that Tamerlan Tsarnaev actually participated in the Walham murders.”

J.M. Lawrence, who writes for Bloomberg and the Boston Globe, tweets: “If US ‘has no evidence’ Tamerlan murdered 3 in Waltham, was the Todashev ‘confession’ in FL false? Lots of unanswered questions.”

McPhee’s most recent article in Newsweek entitled “Twisted Sisters” took heat inside the courtroom. The Islamophobic article painted a negative picture of the Tsarnaev family and contained a number of factual errors. McPhee’s article states that she was tipped off by a high ranking law enforcement official. McPhee is also the source of other erroneous stories related to the Boston Marathon bombing like the “note in the boat.”

Media leaks are very serious, because the TV version of events is extremely absent from the actual court proceedings – but heavily weighs the jury’s mindset against the defendant. Tsarnaev’s motion to address leaks “requests that the Court hold a hearing, and direct government counsel to produce the supervising law enforcement officers with access to information about this case including both federal and state supervising agents or officers – to testify about their instructions and efforts to investigate and stop unauthorized communications with news media.” 

The other big issue is the government intimidation of witnesses. The government wants the defense to reveal the names of Jahar’s old friends and relatives long before the trial. This is something that is not normally done, and the defense is not going along with it, because they fear for the safety of these people and they also fear that these people once the FBI starts harassing them, will cease to become defense witnesses.

“Defense counsel have described the unusual and severe obstacles they have encountered in their efforts to interview and secure testimony from potential witnesses who knew the defendant, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and other members of his family prior to April 15, 2013… A substantial part of these difficulties stems from the aggressive, persistent and pervasive law enforcement presence in the lives of many potential defense witnesses, and the atmosphere of fear and intimidation that has necessarily followed…”

“Given the virtual certainty that the FBI will descend on each of the non-expert witnesses to interview them (and in most cases, to re-interview them), the defendant has a well-founded concern that in the very unusual context of this case, defense witnesses whose identities are disclosed to the government prior to trial will quickly cease to be defense witnesses. For this reason, the defense does not agree to a witness disclosure requirement that is not mandated by statute or rule.”

1,000 potential jurors will be screened for Tsarnaev’s trial, District Judge George O’Toole said at Monday’s hearing. The process of picking the 12 jurors and six alternates who will hear the case against Tsarnaev is expected to begin on November 3, 2014.

Tsarnaev Case Inches Forward

TMO 

The most recent status conference for Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev took place Thursday, September 18, 2014 in front of Judge George O’Toole. The defense lawyers in attendance were David Bruck and Timothy Watkins; the prosecution team consisted of William Weinreb, Aloke Chakravarty, Nadine Pellegrini and the newly hired African American assistant attorney Donald Cabell.

Considering the gravity of the case, the atmosphere in the full courtroom before the judge entered was strangely chatty and jovial, almost like a cocktail party, in which employees affiliated with government and media appeared to be pleased as punch to see each other. Only the defense lawyers appeared to be taking their responsibilities towards the American people to “get at the truth” seriously.

Tsarnaev, who has not been seen since his first court hearing when he pled “Not Guilty,” was again not present for the proceeding. The prosecution stated that they want Tsarnaev to be present during the final pre-trial and for jury selection. His lawyers said they will ask him how he feels about this.

The hearing was once again an exercise in hypocrisy on the part of the government, which made clear that the prosecution is more interested in convicting the young man as soon as possible than unravelling the mystery of the bombing. They can’t let this case settle down because if the case were tried on facts rather than emotion, a conviction would not be guaranteed. The two sides do not share an even playing field.

The government has 177 FBI scientists and technicians working on this case while the defense has only a handful of lawyers that have almost no information to work with other than what the government has provided to them. Even as recently as this week the defense was flooded with more discovery from the government, which they should have received a year ago, argued defense attorney Bruck, who complained:

“The government said they were finished in September but we continue to receive matters… critical issues.”

US Attorney Weinreb, refusing to cooperate in good faith, cynically mocked defense arguments from previous hearings:

“We have received absolutely nothing,” Weinreb complained. “The defense refuses to hand over any discovery unless it will be used in court. The law needs to be interpreted in a responsible manner. The defense is gathering things at the last minute… A couple weeks after government gives discovery, the defense is supposed to respond. The government needs these materials to strategize decisions. We need to know what witness are going to say. We need reciprocal discovery.”

The defense reminded the court that this is about a human life: “It is not true that there is equivalence between the government and defense.”

In what would appear to be obstruction of justice, prosecutors refuse to hand over Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s computer data saying “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is on trial here not his brother.”

How could Tamerlan’s information be irrelevant to the case? Didn’t the brothers supposedly bomb the marathon as a team-according to the media? Tamerlan’s computer data could potentially demonstrate that Jahar was influenced by his brother’s radicalism, but it’s quite likely the data could also potentially show that Tamerlan was not violently motivated and cast doubt on the whole scenario.

Judge O’Toole sided with the prosecution by replying to the defense, “The government needs to hand over information they won’t use?”

While the prosecutors play games, they still continue to push for a November 3 trial date. Tsarnaev’s defense insists they are “utterly unprepared for trial.” Despite the overwhelming amount of irrelevant evidence the defense attorneys have to sift through, as “Tsarnaev’s whole life has been seized by the government,” the defense still has not been advised precisely as to what the government’s actual argument is going to be.

The defense has been hard at work overseas interviewing family and people who knew Tsarnaev. This has proven to be a huge challenge since most people are afraid to speak to the attorneys, a logical fear given what has happened to any of Tsarnaev’s friends who have been willing to speak to authorities.

“We have done our best to meet the trial date. It cannot be done. The defendant has a right to a fair trial but there is a broader interest as well,” Bruck pleaded.

“The day of bombing, Obama said we will find out who did this and why. This is the question everyone wants answered. It is not in the interest of victims for there to be half a trial. We need to get to the bottom of this. There are the gravest reasons for this. It won’t help anyone for the case to be tried before evidence is fully developed.

“If the government hadn’t asked for the death penalty this would have been over a long time ago. Asking court to set date fair to the defendant,” Bruck added.

Weinreb postulated, “Question is, how much time should be allowed to get to the bottom of it. I would wager that if you give them three years they’d take three years.”

Tsarnaev’s attorneys want the trial delayed until September 2015 based on past capital cases involving Russian defendants, which took over 4 years to prepare due to the difficulty of overseas investigating potential mitigating evidence. Compared to the 119 federal death penalty cases in the past decade, the timetable to trial in this case is half the median of others.

The government is still pressuring the defense to provide a list of the arguments their expert witnesses plan to use on why the accused terrorist should live, for example mental health issues, while the defense claims that this request is unconstitutional and refuses to comply since such a list “assumes guilt.” No court has ever provided a list of mitigating factors before the jury pool, Bruck argued.

The defense continues to grapple with the countless unsubstantiated media leaks that are heavily influencing public opinion and thus tainting the future jury.

Spy for us: Offer Refused!

Our America: Boston  http://newtrendmag.org/ntma1559.htm

Spy for us: Offer Refused! Family says Help the hungry in Syria. 
by Sis. Karin Friedemann


On Friday, July 18, a brief hearing took place in front of Judge William Young at the federal courthouse in Boston for Khairullozhon Matanov, the cab driver from Kyrgyzstan who had dinner with the Tsarnaev brothers the day after the Boston Marathon bombing in April 2013. He is accused of lying to the FBI about whether he happened to run into them at the restaurant or if he drove them there. He is also accused of deleting google searches from his computer knowing that the FBI would be visiting, even though everything he deleted was public information that provided no clues to the bombing investigation whatsoever.

Matanov's situation is an unusual case because the FBI used a drone to circle around his apartment building on numerous occasions and employed 3-4 FBI agents to follow him around wherever he went, 24 hours a day for one year. This incredible taxpayer expense resulted in not one single alarming activity being detected other than charitable wire transfers to his family overseas.

In a new development, the government seems to now be asking for 15 years under sentencing guidelines with terrorism enhancements for "destroying evidence," when in the previous hearing they were talking about 44 years.

In prison, Matanov was asked by the FBI to spy on "terrorists." He was also told that if he were to plead guilty, his sentence would be reduced to under 7 years.

A tentative trial date was set on June 8, 2015 for the young man, who is being held under 24 hour solitary confinement. The government offered this date, saying they wanted to give defense attorney Edward Hayden plenty of time to review the discovery, which Hayden said was a stack of paper about a foot high. Hayden agreed to this date "in good faith that I will need this time," while reserving the right to move the trial sooner.

This approach is polar opposite to all the other BMB related cases, where the prosecution has dumped millions of pages worth of unsearchable digital evidence upon the defense, and then insisted upon plowing forward with the proceedings despite defense cries for more time to not only review the evidence, but to figure out where the government is going with the case.

The US prosecuting attorney against Matanov is Scott Garland. Reporters asked Hayden if he thought Garland was playing games and Hayden replied he did not think so, as Garland had never played games in the past.

The defense is planning on filing another motion for release on bail, so another bail hearing is expected within a couple weeks. Hayden argued that Matanov is "in a stressful situation." Court filings which state Matanov, "whose ability to respond lucidly to questions has deteriorated because of his solitary confinement," ask the court to employ his previous attorney, Paul Glickman.

"Because Mr. Matanov is a very scared young man, thousands of miles away from his family members and facing serious criminal charges that may result in his exclusion from the United States, I believe that the trusting attorney-client relationship I have built with Mr. Matanov is critical to an adequate defense of this case," Glickman said in an affidavit filed in court. The judge refused to appoint Glickman but agreed to pay him a $2,500 consulting fee to assist Hayden.

While this is a small but pleasing improvement, two letters from Matanov received by this author have found him to be in a state of iman. His main concern is for his family. He may be a bit cranky due to fasting for Ramadan under prison constrictions. He has been feeling frustrated by inability to add people to his phone list or visitor list. He talks to his attorney and his mother overseas.

The young lady on the defense team told me he has a window looking outside. His cell is like a small room (no bars). However the prisoners are able to shout to one another through the walls.

July 22 Birthday Campaign for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

In order to help in the SAMs case against Dzhokhar (Jahar) Tsarnaev's solitary confinement, Jahar supporters have suggested Ramadan charity actions in his name to demonstrate that the only thing Jahar "inspires" is good deeds and acts of kindness.

Jahar reportedly "had a big smile on his face" when he heard that people were doing this, but he asked that his deceased brother Tamerlan receive the award in heaven for these kind acts. Tsarnaev family members suggested donating to the hungry in Syria.

"Your kindness to others is the only gift he can receive. And the only gift he wants," writes Amber Bishop, who is spearheading the campaign.

Documentation of the beautiful deeds will be put into a humble scrapbook and given to the Tsarnaev family. If you would like to contribute to this effort please contact Amber Bishop on facebook or send an email to acbishop74@yahoo.com

"Get creative and get out there and do amazing things for people, animals, the environment, the sick, the needy, the voiceless. Make suggestions, post ideas, work in teams. Be unique so your act stands out. And feel good about what you are doing. A small act of kindness can go a long way in this world. It can start a chain reaction of good deeds. I can't wait to see what you send!" writes Amber.

1st BMB Trial Commences as Jahar’s Birthday Approaches

July 17, 2014 by TMO 

The trial of Azamat Tazhayakov began July 7 and is expected to conclude next week. Azamat along with two other friends, Dias Kadyrbayev and Robel Philipos are accused of concealing evidence from the FBI in relation to their pursuit of his friend, Dzhokhar (Jahar) Tsarnaev, who is accused of bombing the Boston Marathon in April 2013. Dias and Robel will be tried separately. Azamat’s father, a wealthy oil man and local Khazak politician, insisted on a speedy trial even though the attorneys wanted more time to prepare, so Azamat’s trial comes first.

“The government will prove to you that the defendant and his co-conspirator removed the backpack for one reason, and that reason was to protect their friend who they had just learned was one of the two suspected Marathon bombers,” said US assistant attorney Stephanie Siegmann in her opening statement.

A number of mutual friends were subpoenaed as witnesses. Without exception they testified that Jahar was not acting strangely after the bombings, that he had never said anything anti-American, he had never been seen with a pressure cooker, BBs or bomb making material, that they could not believe he was a terrorist, and that his friends had gone into Jahar’s dorm room to take marijuana after receiving a message from Jahar saying “take whatever you want.” They were all under the impression that Jahar was leaving the country. Dias Kadyrbayev removed some fireworks from the room, but not all of the fireworks. He also took a laptop, a spiral notebook, a thumb drive, and a jar of Vaseline and took them home to the New Bedford, Massachusetts apartment he shared with Azamat. FBI testimony revealed that there were still other fireworks found in the apartment.

Only after Dias’ girlfriend Bayan Kumiskali told him to “get rid of it” did Dias throw away the bag with fireworks, but he kept the laptop. It had not occurred to him that these items could be evidence of anything. It does not appear that he was trying to conceal evidence, since he threw away Jahar’s homework assignment in the same bag. Azamat’s defense also argued that Azamat never threw away the bag, it was Dias who did.

As an engineering major, Jahar’s roommate Andrew Dwinells owned a lab kit, which contained wire, wire cutters, and other items. The kit was in plain sight on his bookcase on the 18th, but Dzhokhar’s three friends did not take it.

A number of FBI agents gave testimony that was often contradictory. The “white hat” that they had removed from the apartment as evidence had a different number on it than the hat in the surveillance photo. Agent Walker gave testimony that contradicted his previous testimony. He now “doesn’t recall” many things he said it pretrial testimony. Agent Walker says he could have arrested the men on 4/19/13 but then admitted he testified previously he had no basis to arrest them. The FBI admitted there’s no evidence Azamat knew about the bombing, though earlier Agent Walker testified that Azamat had done web searches for Tsarnaev before he had been identified as a suspect. Defense attorney Wooldridge asks Agent Walker if he realized the media had previously misidentified suspects in bombing. Walker says he was “not aware of this.”

On Monday, July 14 the defense and prosecution rested their cases. Judge Woodlock told the jury the burden of proof is on the government, and that they should not hold Azamat’s decision not to testify against him. The judge referred to the possible defense view that Azamat’s actions on 4/18/13 were related to hiding drug activity, not terrorism. Closing arguments are to take place Wednesday July 16.

Jahar Supporters Initiate Birthday Campaign 2014

This July 22 will be Dzokhar (Jahar) Tsarnaev’s second birthday in prison held in solitary confinement. He will be 21 years old. Since he cannot receive cards, letters, gifts or any other kind of birthday wishes, Amber Bishop from the Free Jahar movement has come up with the perfect way to let him know how much people care about him.

The group is asking people to do magnificent works of charity in Jahar’s name. ”This could mean donating to a charity, taking snacks to your local fire department, handing out balloons to children in the hospital, giving a flower to random passersby, helping someone to their car or carrying their groceries. Mow someone’s lawn for free. Take food to the food pantry. If all you have to offer is prayers, then pray for someone. The sky is the limit when it comes to being kind.”

Amber is creating a scrapbook of everyone’s “amazing deeds” that will be given to his sister, who promised to tell him all about it when she visits him in prison.

“The prosecution contends that Jahar inspires people. Let’s show them how right they are,” writes Amber. “You may be wondering how this campaign “helps” him. Just imagine if when arguing his character at the SAMs hearing and how he could potentially inspire others to continue his work, the defense can produce a book full of heart-felt, charitable deeds that our sweet boy has inspired us to do… He can only do these things through us, so don’t let him down.”

The Tsarnaev family likes charities that feed the hungry. They suggested sending money to the needy in Syria, but they also mentioned that they care deeply about Africa, Palestine, and Pakistan.

“A small act of kindness can go a long way in this world. It can start a chain reaction of good deeds. “I can’t wait to see what you send!” writes Amber. She suggests sending donations in his name, when possible, or letting people know you are doing this deed for Jahar in some way.

If you would like to contribute to this effort, message Amber Bishop on facebook or send an email to acbishop74@yahoo.com

FBI Monitoring Prison Visits of Defense attorney with Marathon Bombing Suspect

A pre-trial hearing for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev took place on June 18, 2014. US Attorney Carmen Ortiz was front row in the audience. Ortiz has ambitions to be governor and is no doubt using this terrorism prosecution as a personal career move.

As they have done in every hearing, defense lawyers requested the removal of Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) restrictions on their client, who is being kept in total lockdown. Lawyers have been complaining that they are unable to meet with Tsarnaev without the presence of an FBI officer in the room. During the last hearing on April 24, Judge O'Toole agreed with the defense that there is no national security reason why an FBI officer needs to be present and felt that the prison security should suffice. Although prosecutors insist that the FBI officer present is not going to be a witness at the trial, defense attorneys reported that the FBI officer was taking notes. The judge refused to remove SAMs and told the government they should use an out-of-state FBI agent during prison visits. The Constitutional protection of attorney-client privilege clearly does not apply especially when the defendant is a Muslim.

The defense complained about media leaks. Instead of handing over evidence to the defense, the government is working with the media. FBI agents were interviewed for TV documentaries that aired on National Geographic and 60 Minutes commemorating the one year anniversary of the bombing. These reports, which conflict each other in many ways, served to influence the minds of the public regarding guilt, long before trial. Defense attorneys complained that it is only on TV that they are learning what the prosecution's case is. Judge O'Toole admonished the government for participating in media interviews, calling it "unwise," but refused to penalize them in any way.

Throughout the proceedings, the defense has been muzzled. Attorneys have been warned against making any statements to media or even talking to friends and supporters about the case. Previously, government prosecutors brought up the possibility that defense attorneys might pass along messages from Tsarnaev to his "following" - very similar to the situation with Shaykh Omar Abdul Rahman's attorney, Lynne Stewart, who was imprisoned in retaliation for making statements to the press regarding statements her client made, except that Tsarnaev is not a political or religious leader with any following other than people following his case.

Tsarnaev cannot read any of his mail without a lawyer present and has been advised not to answer any of his mail. Likewise, his family cannot speak to the media about their belief in their son's innocence, lest they be accused of "passing along messages."

The only good thing coming out of this hearing is that the government's emotional tactic of accusing Tsarnaev of "betraying America" was struck down.

"I agree with the defense position that it was unduly prejudicial," O'Toole said, calling this type of charge "obnoxious."

However the prosecution will continue to use "He was comforting our enemies" as an argument for motive in the trial. It appears that pushing the issue of Tsarnaev's interest in Islamic causes will be central to their case. This would imply that they lack evidence, or that the evidence they have would not make the government look good. So far, they have swamped the defense with millions of pages of inconclusive, grainy photographs and some computer files showing that Tsarnaev watched jihad-related material on his laptop, but they have refused to hand over tangible evidence like the GPS of the vehicle that was used to flee from police the night Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed.

The prosecution asked the judge to demand that the defense supply them the name of their witnesses that they would use to counter the government expert witness' testimony on the Islamic nature of the Boston Marathon bombing. Presumably the government "expert witness" will be the laughingstock, Evan "Saddam is allied with al-Qaeda" Kohlmann, who has already been testifying in front of Congress about Tsarnaev's Islamic motivations long before he has even been found guilty. Defense attorney Judy Clarke argued that this is not standard practice, and according to the Fifth Amendment, they are not required to disclose this type of information to the prosecution at this point in the proceedings. O'Toole delayed making a decision.

US prosecutors say they will not use statements Tsarnaev made during his hospital bed FBI interrogation before his Miranda rights were read, during the guilt/innocence part of the trial but may bring it up for the sentencing part. Defense wants the evidence of these statements to be suppressed. O'Toole delayed the decision for mid-trial.

Tsarnaev's next status hearing is scheduled for August 14. 

2014-06-21
NewTrendMag.org

Another Tsarnaev Friend Ensnared: Todashev Relative Offers Home

TMO 

On June 4, TMO attended a bail hearing in front of Judge Marianne Bowler for Khairullozhan Matanov, 23. The young man, clad in orange, looked exhausted. He put his hands over his face, leaning on the table briefly before the hearing began. No friends or family were there.

“He was shaking and looked like he had just finished crying,” described court observer, Jill, who attended his first hearing.

Matanov, a friend of Boston Marathon bombing suspects Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, is facing decades in prison for allegedly lying to the FBI and deleting files off his computer.

Matanov’s “lies” to the FBI were completely unrelated to the bombing. They included things like whether or not he drove the brothers to a restaurant or if they walked in, whether or not he ever watched movies on his computer, and if he had seen the photos of the brothers on TV or heard the the news on the radio, before he personally went to the police to identify them.

The FBI already knew who the brothers were. They had Tamerlan’s house under surveillance. The photos were intended to ensnare friends of the Tsarnaevs into becoming informants. Matanov believed his friends were innocent and had nothing of interest to tell the FBI beyond that he liked to play soccer with them.

As a result, the government is now accusing Matanov of the absurd, including: “hiking up a New Hampshire mountain in order to train like, and praise the mujahideen.”
Matanov’s computer deletions were easily recovered by the authorities after he gave them permission to search his computer – “saving them the time of having to get a search warrant,” Attorney Hayden quipped.

Yet prosecutors say Matanov “obstructed the FBI’s investigation of the bombings and the suspected bombers, and have caused the FBI to expend considerable additional resources during its investigation of the bombings and the suspected bombers.”

The files Matanov deleted were all public information that provided no additional clues whatsoever into the bombing. The FBI has been wasting ungodly amounts of money over the past year to spy on him. A large unmanned aircraft was spotted circling around his home. Several FBI agents were employed full time to follow him around in cars and to keep him in sight at all times around the clock, even following him into a dental office. Matanov’s needless incarceration continues at taxpayer expense.

Former prosecutor Matt Connolly writes in the Milford Daily News: “Matanov was exercising his right not to incriminate himself… All he did was try to distance himself from the Tsarnaevs thinking that his close connection with them would get him into trouble. If you know nothing about the crime being investigated you can’t obstruct it.”

Actually, the government indictment, which claims that Matanov hid his close relationship with the Tsarnaevs from the FBI seriously conflicts with the actual transcripts of police and FBI interviews with the defendant. Matanov’s lawyer made extensive use of these transcripts during the cross-examination of FBI Agent Timothy McElroy to demonstrate that Matanov immediately told the FBI everything he knew.

“I can’t imagine that they did it but I am willing to help,” the transcript reads.

According to his first FBI interview report dated 4/20, Matanov said that he saw and called Tamerlan often. Tamerlan drove Matanov to get his drivers license. Matanov told the FBI he often invited the brothers to Manasawa Restaurant, went to Tamerlan’s house, met his parents and skyped with Tamerlan when he went to Dagestan.

The indictment claims that Matanov told police detective Heslam he didn’t know whether Tamerlan lived with his wife and daughter. However, Heslam never asked about this.
According to the actual transcript, Matanov told the FBI he saw no one in Tamerlan’s apartment other than his wife and daughter.

The indictment accuses him of changing stories regarding whether or not he visited Tamerlan the Wednesday after the bombing. He admitted going to Tamerlan’s house during his first FBI interview. He didn’t withhold any information. The government allegation is referring to comments Matanov made to his roommate as well as a passenger in his taxicab, telling them he had not visited Tamerlan “in a while” and downplaying the relationship. He was not talking to the FBI. The FBI later talked to his roommate.

A Boston Globe editorial states, “Matanov charges look like a vindictive overreach.”

The hearing mainly focused on wire transfers Matanov made overseas. He appears to have been working very hard as a taxi driver to send money to his family. He sent money to 15 people in 6 different countries, sometimes using an alias. He also asked a friend to dispose of some cell phones. His lawyer, Edward Hayden, argued that Matanov was operating an illegal business sending stolen cell phones overseas. Neither the phones nor the wire transfers had anything to do with terrorism.

FBI Agent McElroy testified that he has no knowledge of anything on phones having to do with terrorism.

US prosecutor Scott Garland argued against granting Matanov bail, saying he was a “huge flight risk.” He speaks seven languages and has ties in six different countries. He has no reason to stay in the US – no family, no job, no property. He faces 20 years for obstruction of justice and eight years for each lie. He is likely to be deported after time served. “His only assurance would be his promise,” and the US alleges that he “repeatedly deceived authorities.”

Defense attorney Hayden then requested “voluntary incarceration” of his client, saying “there is no place for him to go.” Judge Bowler said if this changes, they could “revisit the issue.” She then asked if Matanov was ready to be arraigned.

As he stood to hear the charges read against him, Matanov gripped the table. He whimpered, “Not guilty” very quietly and was told to speak up. He repeated “Not guilty” to all the charges against him in a louder voice. The judge than warned Hayden to “be cautious regarding public statements,” alluding to a previous press conference. Matanov’s next hearing is scheduled for July 15 at 2pm. Matanov looked emotionally broken as US Marshalls shackled and handcuffed him.

Upon hearing the news of this “voluntary incarceration,” Elena Teyer, mother-in-law of Ibrahim Todashev, the friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev who was murdered in his home in Florida by Aaron McFarlane, an FBI agent from Boston, was deeply moved. She immediately called Matanov’s attorney to offer her home in Georgia. Teyer has never met Matanov nor the Tsnarnaevs but she told TMO, “We are all family now.” Another supporter in Massachusetts also offered Matanov a home. Attorney Hayden said he would try to find out what the amount of bail would be.