EXPERTS: FEDS’ CASE VS. DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV HAS HOLES
Boston Herald - Tuesday, April 23, 2013
By: Chris Cassidy
Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev is likely to avoid the death penalty, could entirely avoid a trial and in the hands of the right lawyer might win a modicum of mercy, argued top-ranked defense attorneys who have represented some of the nation’s most notorious terrorists and killers.
“We know he’s 19 years old, we don’t think he has a criminal record or been in trouble before. There are a lot of people out there that seem to have warm, positive things about him,” said Tamar Birckhead, whose client, Richard Reed, tried to blow an airliner out of the sky but got life by copping a plea. “To predict he’ll get a life sentence is not unreasonable.”
Stephen Jones’ Oklahoma City bomber client Timothy McVeigh got death, but he said he believes the baby-faced Tsarnaev can pin the Boston Marathon and last week’s deadly final rampage on his slain big brother and seek mercy as a kid who was easily swayed.
“If the younger brother can shed any light on the circumstances of the older brother’s alleged involvement,” said Jones, “that’s valuable information that the government would want.”
Geoffrey Fieger, whose clients have included assisted-suicide advocate Dr. Jack Kevorkian, said, “Nothing about the outcome is assured.”
FIEGER AND THE OTHER TOP DEFENSE LAWYERS SAY THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE IS FRAUGHT WITH WEAK SPOTS THAT A SHARP DEFENSE ATTORNEY COULD EXPLOIT, STARTING WITH THE POSSIBILITY THE FEDS FAILED TO IMMEDIATELY MIRANDIZE TSARNAEV, WHICH COULD LEAVE A GAPING HOLE A GOOD LAWYER COULD DRIVE HIS CASE THROUGH.
“This case is ripe for somebody who’s got the courage to stand up and talk about the system and the railroading of criminal defendants,” Fieger said. “He’s been denied the right to a fair trial. And America’s ...cheering like it was some kind of sporting event. That wasn’t a very flattering image to the rest of the world. Cheering like they won the World Series.”
Birckhead picked through the government’s indictment yesterday and deemed it “circumstantial.”
“You have to ask, is that proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly carried explosives in that knapsack and with the intent to bring about mass destruction?” Birckhead asked. “And that’s how a defense attorney could analyze it and ask a jury to think about it. The burden of the U.S. government is to prove each element of each of these charges beyond a shadow of a doubt.”
Feiger made Kevorkian’s trial a public discussion of doctor-assisted suicide. His client served eight years of a 10- to 25-year second-degree murder conviction. “You use the bully pulpit if you can to make a comment on America and our rights,” Fieger said. “It’s the big picture, not the little picture.”
Jones, who said the defense will want a change of venue away from Boston, cautioned that prosecutors will have compelling evidence: “It would appear the strongest evidence would be the devices and the flight to avoid capture, and the running gun battle.”
Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, a member of OJ Simpson’s “dream team,” said, “The case will go down one of two ways. Either plea bargain ... or he’ll want to become a martyr and he’ll admit everything, boast about the crime, seek to justify it and demand the death penalty.”
If you are sure military courts are the best place to convict terrorists, please read on.
All available evidence from various sources suggests civilian courts are far more effective than military courts when it comes to punishing suspected terrorists.
New York University's Center on Law and Security released a terror trial "report card" covering the years 2001 to 2009 that claims there have been 337 federal terror cases, though each case can involve multiple defendants charged with multiple crimes. In March 2010, in response to questions from Congress about the numbers, the Justice Department released its own report that listed 403 individuals convicted of terror-related charges in 37 different states (including the District of Columbia.) An Associated Press report from 2011 says the number of convictions in the U.S. is more than 2,500, though they are obviously using a much broader definition of "terror" than the feds do.
There have been numerous objections to the official number over the years, but even the most conservative definition of the term "terrorism" pegs the number of convicted individuals somewhere between 150 and 220, including "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui.
The number of people convicted by military tribunal since 2001? . . . SEVEN.
Even though Guantanamo has held nearly 800 prisoners since being established 11 years ago, only SEVEN individuals held there have ever been tried and convicted by a military commission. ONLY THREE of those convicts are still in jail. Two of those were overturned and three more have already been released and deported to other countries. Six others, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who was captured more than 10 years ago, still await their tribunals. Yet, the Justice Department claims to have over 300 prisoners currently serving sentences in regular U.S. prisons, with no deaths or escapes. Meanwhile, there are 166 prisoners currently at Guantanamo—and half are actively trying to kill themselves.
Even more remarkable is that the NYU Law School study says the conviction success rate on terror cases in civilian courts is nearly 90 percent.
However, I wish someone would tell that to Eric Holder and Barack Obama. Why won't the present administration enforce current immigration laws? Why won't it follow the Constitution? As far as information coming from the surviving suspect, it's great to think we'll get "information" - assuming what he tells us is true. I still wonder (after the media says "So far it looks like the brothers acted alone") why did they go back to Russia for lengthy stays? Where did they got all the money for the lifestyle they were living here? Were they fraudulently on Massachusetts welfare(wouldn't surprise me one bit - this state is so darn lenient on awarding benefits)?