Will The Court Cook Teen With Pressure Cooker?

“Justice is incidental to law and order,” was allegedly said by John Edgar Hoover. And we do know that Too many cooks spoil the broth.

So what will happen to Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev? Will they boil, grill or fry him?

dzhokhar-tsarnaev

Tsarnaev’s lawyer, Judy Clarke, admitted his guilt – and he was thus convicted on April 8. Now the jury will begin hearing arguments this week to determine whether to sentence him to death for the Boston bombing (drill).

But in this modern world 2 + 2 = 5.

“… jurors were shown the backpack in which Tsarnaev carried his shrapnel-packed pressure cooker bomb to the finish line. And like many of the victims, it too was in shreds” (quoted from nydailynews)

Below: the (darkish) backpack allegedly shown in court (L), and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev carrying his (lightish) pack (R).

backpack

This series of photos below from What Really Happened.

tsarnaevreasonabledoubt2

And a video about the “drill”.

Apologies, 2 + 2 = 7

 

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Carroll Sanders says:

    What your looking at in the photos of the backpack in court is the grey strap that is sewn onto Tsarnaev’s back pack it had been melted by the heat and flames created by the carbon and sulfur flame from the black powder explosion pressure cooker explosion.

    The square is just the strap attachment point, where it is sewn on the bag.

    It clearly is not the name tag on the back pack the man in the kachi pants has.

    The shape and attachment are geometrically wrong.

    Two of the Witness’s that testified against him intend to testify that he should not be given the death penalty.
    One lost his son in the blast.

  2. Carroll Sanders says:

    The people the witness’s testified against him in a court of law,
    No amount of conspiracy theorist trickery will change that or the fact he said he did it.
    He dies for his crime it is only his fault.

    • Thanks for the comment C. Do you know anyone who attended court?
      Justice must be done.
      But we cannot be sure if it is being done. I posted the backpacks because the black backpack was presented in mainstream news as his backpack. A year six student can probably tell you it is not his backpack. This is photographic evidence on the day…. not reliant on “witness statements” that could possibly change or twist.
      Did the defense att. Clark bring up the back pack… or address it any way. If she did not then she should be removed from the case for failure to do her job in defending the alleged murderer.
      If the evidence really does lead to D T… then fine. But everyone is allowed a fair trial.
      And we know prosecutions have concocted evidence many times before. You talk of trickery. Trickery is possible from both sides.

      • Carroll Sanders says:

        The back pack was presented to the Jury, the lawyer did not dispute it.
        The reason why is credibility, now she will argue that without the influence of his brother, he wouldn’t have committed the crime.
        In other words she thought it would destroy her credibility if
        She lied and said it was not his.

        • Carroll – you have absolutely nailed the problem. The two of us are discussing the pack… And whether it is the actual pack… To me it looks not. But even it it did… If I was the defense attorney that would be my duty to make it difficult for the prosecution to prove their case. But this shows what a sham this case is. If she is worried about “lying” or upsetting the status quo. Her duty would be to make the prosecution prove that it was his pack. She should be barred ( my opinion).

          • Carroll Sanders says:

            The evidence is over whelming he did the crime the pack argument is worthless to saving his life which is what see is trying to do, your confrontational approach would most likely have put him to death.
            An Attorney’s job is to represent the clients wishes, he most likely fears the death penalty so much that he wants to go this route to save his life.

          • dan pink says:

            Carroll, are you a paid shill? There are such people, hired by the US government.

    • Martyn Bryant was ultimately convinced to say he did Port Arthur, despite the clear evidence that he couldn’t have done it based on how events played out. As a result no “evidence” even had to be tested in Court. Guilt by persuasive second lawyer.

  3. Dalia, your title asks “will the Court cook” Tsarnaev, but I say if he gets cooked the party doing the cooking is all of us. Clearly the people of Massachusetts are staying silent. This is phenomenal! Who would ever have dreamed it 20 years ago?

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: