Boston Marathon

[allegro]

No, he will be. No amount of appeals in the world will overturn that sentence, although it'll take years (more likely, decades) and tens of millions of dollars of our money to make it happen.

Like @Dra508 said, read the article. 77 people sentenced to death since the Federal death penalty was reinstated in 1988, but only 3 have been executed. The government doesn't do anything fast, if ever.

The Jury did not likely use their personal feelings, but used the sentencing guidelines provided to them (otherwise their decision could be easily overturned). The big kicker here was the footage of the Defendant placing a bomb directly behind some children without a look of care on his face.

[Dra508]

The big kicker here was the footage of the Defendant placing a bomb directly behind some children without a look of care on his face.

I don't put much credence in a 19 year old boy's facial expressions. They have their own resting bitch face. Now, if he was smiling and laughing when he put down the bomb, then I'd think we have a person without a soul.

I'd be curious, but way too lazy and busy with life, to see what all those other convictions were overturned for.

[allegro]

I don't put much credence in a 19 year old boy's facial expressions. They have their own resting bitch face. Now, if he was smiling and laughing when he put down the bomb, then I'd think we have a person without a soul.

I'd be curious, but way too lazy and busy with life, to see what all those other convictions were overturned for.

They weren't overturned; the government hasn't gotten around to executing them, yet. It takes a long time for any death row prisoner to be executed.

John Wayne Gacy was sentenced to death in 1980. He was executed in 1994.

Facial expression wasn't the point; it was the fact that he willingly placed bombs near children, and didn't appear to be under the control of his brother. He expressed in notes that while he felt bad that innocent people were injured or killed, it was necessary for Americans to be punished. He will be kept away from the general prison population, so he won't be murdered in prison like Jeffrey Dahmer. The fact that the Defendant is 19 has no weight at all. Really heinous cold calculated crimes have been committed by people much younger than him. Laughing could indicate insanity, which is a whole other defense.

I am also against the death penalty, in all cases. It keeps prisoners from the general population, and it's too good for them in many cases. Life in prison is far worse punishment than death.

[Dra508]

Point taken.

[ickyvicky]

Are you fucking kidding me?

"Boston Marathon bomber appeals his death sentence, claims juror bias"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/12/us/bo...eal/index.html

[theimage13]

Are you fucking kidding me?

"Boston Marathon bomber appeals his death sentence, claims juror bias"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/12/us/bo...eal/index.html

Disclaimer: I'm both anti-death penalty and very much not a lawyer. But....

Two jurors had shown clear bias, Habib said. The first, Juror 286, discussed the case years before the trial, posting tweets that called Tsarnaev a "piece of garbage" and admitting that she sheltered in her home with her family during the manhunt.

This does sound like a clear bias to me. Law is full of technicalities and loopholes, and your defense attorney's job, like it or not, is to find ANY way possible of keeping their client out of jail (or at least, alive).

Given the way this attack made headlines around the country, I'm not sure a truly unbiased jury was ever going to be possible, but especially in Boston...

I don't have the slightest bit of sympathy for him. I firmly believe that the maximum legal penalty should be levied against him, even if I disagree with what that penalty happens to be. But I also respect that his attorney has a job to do, and (in my amateur understanding) a not entirely invalid position.

[ickyvicky]

I totally understand that point and agree with those facts.

I hope this quickly gets thrown out because this was very clearly a terrorist act, and with all the photos and videos taken when it happened - does it really matter that a juror was biased? The deed was done with the intent to hurt people.

[theimage13]

with all the photos and videos taken when it happened - does it really matter that a juror was biased?

It's not a matter of guilty or not guilty though, which is why the obvious nature of the crime isn't what's on trial here. It's a question of whether a juror was acting vindictively versus impartially when it came to sentencing. And if a juror was shown to be making comments both presumptuous of guilt and derogatory of the suspect before there was even a trial...that doesn't sound like an impartial juror anymore. How would you feel, as a defense attorney, if a juror had said "FRY THE MOTHERFUCKER" in a bunch of FB comments before there was even a trial? And let's assume that you knew this all before the juror was seated. Would you allow that juror to serve? Or would you dismiss them and move on?

Our legal system is far from perfect, but it's built on precedent and following a set of rules. We need to be able to at least request that those rules be applied (i.e., file this kind of appeal) if we want to have any faith that the system will work for us should we ever find ourselves in personal need of it. Sometimes, the consequences of that mean that rulings go very much against what we feel and/or know to be "right". I'm very curious to see how this one goes - I'm not sure on what grounds it could be thrown out quickly, but on the other hand we do seem to love revenge executions in this country, so I'm not struggling to picture the appeal being tossed / denied.