A Nonprofit, Reader-Supported News Organization
The video of Dun “Danny” Meng’s escape is a microcosm of what’s frustrating about the Boston bombing trial: It features cherry-picked prosecution evidence, inconsistencies that were uncovered pre-trial and a defense solely interested in trying to avoid the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. So the video raises more questions than it answers, and no one’s asking those questions.
Prosecutors in the case against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev turned hostile toward their own witness once it became clear her findings didn’t support their allegations of murder. Joanne Potter unpacks the strange reversal.
Imagine if someone looked at a Christian cross on the wall, and took it to be representative of the cross-burning Ku Klux Klan? That’s the logic some reporters are applying to the black Muslim flag found on Boston Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s wall. They’re equating the flag, a common symbol of a Muslim’s faith, to a sign of affiliation with al Qaeda.
At the height of the manhunt for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, one police officer came within a few feet of the suspect. And let him go. Not that you’d have learned this from testimony in the courtroom. Joanne Potter looks at the escape of a most wanted man.
The trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev may turn out to be one of the strangest in history. The main story doesn’t make much sense, yet nearly all mainstream accounts suggest there is nothing more to be learned about the Boston Marathon bombing. Russ Baker ruminates on the “known unknowns” that await resolution.
Accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev unsurprisingly lost his second appellate bid to move his trial by a vote of 2-1. But dissenting Judge Juan R. Torruella issued a scathing opinion, arguing that the refusal by both the trial and appeals courts to move the case were abuses of discretion. Further, he argued that if Tsarnaev’s case couldn’t prove overwhelming pretrial prejudice, no case could. Read on for more highlights from the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals opinion.
Several mainstream media reporters in Boston admitted that they don’t see the need to use the word “alleged” when talking about Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The trial is merely a formality, and so are journalistic ethics, apparently. Lara Turner examines the shocking admission.
On Feb. 19, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals heard Dzhohar Tsarnaev’s argument why his trial for the Marathon Bombing should be moved from Boston. Since the media is barred from recording the proceedings in his trial, the oral arguments before the appeals court offer a unique opportunity to actually hear the case in action. Listen in to decide for yourself if the three-judge panel was persuaded by the arguments put forth by both sides.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals will hear Boston Marathon Bombing defendant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s argument that he can’t get a fair trial in Boston. Don’t hold your breath for any revelations though: the appellate court has forbidden lawyers for either side to talk about the details at the heart of the argument.
Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s defense is trying to get his death penalty trial moved again. This time, they’ve asked an appeals court to overrule the presiding judge’s obstinate objections to taking the trial out of Boston. Lara Turner explains.
When it came to Whodunnit for any crime around the time of the Boston Bombing, law enforcement’s answer always was “the Tsarnaev brothers.” In a shocking reversal, prosecutors now admit there’s barely any evidence they took part in a 2011 triple murder that’s been pinned on them.
Dzokhar Tsarnaev’s lawyers are again trying to get his looming trial moved out of Boston. Despite a stream of potentially prejudicial publicity and polls showing the majority of Bostonians think he’s guilty, there’s little chance the judge will agree.