So the thumpa-thumpa continues. It always will, no matter what happens, no matter whoâs president. As our lady of disco, the divine Miss Gloria Gaynor has always sung to us : We will survive.
Iâve read that some inmates have access to radios and even TVs, which may include news reports. But I have no idea what is going on at ADX now or what restrictions Jahar is currently under.Â
No matter what his current mindset is, it is probably best that he not know how inspirational he and Tamerlan were to the guy in Orlando. Â
@GarrettQuinn: "Immediately after the bombing, of which I am guilty of, there is little doubt about that. I learned their faces, their names." He's crying.
Before Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was the convicted Boston Marathon bomber, he was Becki Norris' beloved student.
Becki Norris: âOver the past two years, I have had to accept that a kind and gentle temperament is not a lifetime guarantee, and a smart and caring child can go far, far down an evil path.â In this photo, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is pictured at his high school graduation in 2011. (Robin Young/AP)
Last Wednesday afternoon, I walked up to the witness stand in courtroom nine at the Moakley Federal Courthouse in Boston, took my seat, and looked at the young man seated a few feet away. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev looked back, locked eyes with me, and smiled. I smiled back, relieved to see something of the boy I once knew.
I have discovered the painful truth that when you care deeply for someone, that does not stop even if he does unfathomably horrible things.
I have many pictures of a 12- and 13-year-old Dzhokhar. The one that still hits me right in the gut shows him smiling into the camera as he holds my newborn daughter. Dzhokhar is known to many as the younger, surviving Boston Marathon bomber. To me, he was a beloved advisee and student. Teachers encounter thousands of youth over the years, and a few find a special spot in our hearts. They stick there, unforgettable. Dzhokhar was one of those few.
I have followed the trial closely, knowing that Dzhokhar would be found guilty and agreeing that he has forfeited any rights to freedom. I have wept over stories of victims and hugged my own children tighter as I read of othersâ loss. But I have been saddened to hear descriptions of Dzhokhar as âevil,â âinhuman,â âa monster.â
Why do we feel the need to believe that monstrous deeds can only be committed by those who are evil to the core? Is it too difficult to see the world in shades of gray, too disturbing to confront the idea of a good person turning to unspeakable acts?
Before Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was the convicted Boston Marathon bomber, he was Becki Norrisâ student. Tsarnaev is pictured here holding the authorâs newborn daughter in an undated photo. (Courtesy)
Over the past two years, I have had to accept that a kind and gentle temperament is not a lifetime guarantee, and a smart and caring child can go far, far down an evil path. I have discovered the painful truth that when you care deeply for someone, that does not stop even if he does unfathomably horrible things. We humans are surprisingly good at holding two irreconcilable ideas in our psyches at the same time. Yes, he did the unforgivable. And yes, I still love him. And â this one is hard to fathom, I know â he is a human being who still needs love.
So I testified on Dzhokharâs behalf, during the penalty phase of his trial. I testified to help the jury see why he might be spared the death penalty. I also hoped to show him, in spite of what he has done, that someone cares about him as a person. Throughout that half hour of testimony, Dzhokhar made eye contact several times. We smiled at each other each time, as he heard me saying why I cared. I will hold onto those moments, and I hope he does too.
When I stood up to exit the courtroom, I looked one last time at Dzhokhar. And then I walked to the door, flooded with grief at the realization that I would never set eyes on the child I loved again.
Convicted Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar #tsarnaev turns 22 tom at ADX Supermax. His self-described fan girls gearing up. https://twitter.com/MontseTsarnaeva/status/623447735014977536 âŠ
Former associates say Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez was a devoted mixed martial arts fighter, a top student and a devout Muslim, with Middle Eastern roots.
Iâm not surprised. After all this time with Z and A saying he didnât do it, and now he himself admitted that they did it, what can they really say?
 Maybe she could express remorse about acts of her sons, apologize to the victims for the suffering and the United States for her wish about burning hell⊠and ask for mercy for Jahar. But I think that to do something like this also needs courage, sincerity and repentance.
She knew full well that they were guilty from the beginning. Who do you think facilitated the radicalisation of the brothers and set them down the wrong path in the first place?
Why was Dzhokhar Tsarnaev silent during the penalty phase of his trial, when his life was on the line, only to speak after the jury chose death, when it no longer mattered?
The government focused on the claim that Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not show remorse for his heinous, unimaginable crime until last weekâs sentencing proceeding. That, counsel suggested, was too little, too late. Why was Tsarnaev silent during the penalty phase, when his life was on the line, only to speak after the jury chose death, when it no longer mattered? The sealed docket entries, the arguments of counsel, the documents that have been kept from the public, may hold the clue.
The defense reported that there was a 2013 letter from Tsarnaev, written just months after the bombing, about which the government knew. It suggested that letter did demonstrate remorse, and further, that Tsarnaev went so far as to offer to cooperate with the government. The letter was sealed under the governmentâs Special Administrative Measures. SAMs, as these measures are called, were put in place to block a defendantâs communications with the outside world, even if those communications contained an apology, had evidentiary value, and â in this case â may have served to dissuade others from following Tsarnaevâs lead. What did he say then? What was the context?
As a judge for nearly two decades, I saw many â indeed, most â defendants express remorse in all sorts of cases. They did so not out of any genuine feeling, but because their counsel told them to, because they figured it would benefit them at sentencing. Their remarks were often canned; some read from a script drafted by others. There was even a category for it under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines called âacceptance of responsibility,â which entitled the defendant to a reduction in his sentence. But while the rationale for the âacceptance ruleâ was to enable credit for a genuine show of remorse, over time it meant nothing more than pleading guilty, saving the court the time to try the case, or cooperating with the government. The ceremony had been emptied of all moral meaning. Indeed, the most remorseful of all were those cooperating with the government. But their remorse had a payoff â a lesser sentence.
A death penalty proceeding is dramatically different. Remorse is a critical element of the penalty phase, one of the factors that a jury is to expressly consider in drawing the line between death and life. So why didnât Tsarnaev take the opportunity to speak at that time? Clearly the jury (and the public) was waiting to hear from him. There is a simple answer: Had Tsarnaev testified in the penalty phase, he could have been cross examined under oath about a wide range of issues â his brother, his political beliefs, his religion.
In contrast, at sentencing, the right of allocution allowed him to speak in a narrative, to say whatever he wanted to say â unsworn and unchallenged. But that simple answer isnât sufficient without an understanding of evidence Tsarnaev would have been allowed to present, notwithstanding the SAMs and the scope of the governmentâs cross examination. How far would the court permit the government to go in examining Tsarnaev? Would that cross examination enable the government to raise every single inflammatory issue it could find, not cabined by the evidentiary rules, to play even more directly on the juryâs prejudices? Given the courtâs rulings throughout the trial, the defense could well have feared a wide-open attack, with the limitations of the SAMs preventing a meaningful rejoinder about who Tsarnaev was and is.
So do we really know how remorseful he was? What did he say in communications that the government has sought to silence? What were the courtâs rulings that prompted counsel to choose not to put him on the stand in the penalty phase? And why did he choose to speak when it did not matter, and not when it did? In the final analysis, would this jury â selected as it was and when it was, in the city that was one of the victims â have been satisfied?
Nancy Gertner is a retired federal judge and a professor at Harvard Law School.
The sedative was used in a series of executions widely considered botched
Rainbow flags going up; Confederate flags coming down. America finally seems to be joining the 21st century. Letâs see you guys join the rest of us civilised nations by abolishing capital punishment next?
Why'd you burp in my face?! @aurora1990 - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
turnnoffyourmind
romaincrisis
theartofmadeline
snowghoul
baratheonpilled
