The verdict is in for the Boston Marathon bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and the jury has recommended a death sentence.
The jury only needed 14 hours to reach its verdict on the 17 counts where he could be sentenced to death, and found for the death penalty for six of those. The only other choice for sentencing on those charges would have been life in prison. The attack killed 3 people and injured 264 people. It was the worst attack on US soil since the attack on 9/11.
AlterNet reports:
Their only other option was life without the possibility of release in America's toughest "super-max" prison in Colorado, which some have dubbed the "Alcatraz of the Rockies".
[...] "'No remorse, no apology'. Those are the words of a terrorist convinced he has done the right thing", US assistant attorney Steven Mellin said.
[...] Judge George O'Toole will now formally sentence Tsarnaev at a hearing expected to be held later in the year.
[...] The verdict in the federal case came despite widespread local opposition to capital punishment in Massachusetts, a largely Democratic state that abolished the death penalty in 1947.
Prominent survivors, including the parents of the youngest victim Martin Richard, had also opposed the death penalty on the grounds that years of prospective appeals would dredge up their agony.
[...] Since the federal death penalty was reinstated in 1988, only 79 people have been sentenced to die and only three have been executed, says the Death Penalty Information Center. Three other death verdicts were turned into life sentences after new trials were granted.
(Score: 4, Disagree) by drussell on Sunday May 17 2015, @10:35AM
Nothing about that "bombing" makes any sense.
I'm quite convinced it was a false flag sham and more of a test run for basically shutting down a city.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @10:39AM
So exactly like 9/11 then?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @11:53AM
If I were responsible for test-running psychological warfare tactics, I'd pick a small secluded community, and use something less media attention grabbing than terrorism.
Invoking Occam's Razor here, the most plausible explanation is that the guy doesn't have all his faculties together.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @02:52PM
The AlterNet page is much longer that the parts in the summary.
The defense argued that he was under the influence of his big brother.
The jury didn't buy it.
The summary mentioned that he had no remorse.
It appears that that's ultimately what sealed his fate.
-- gewg_
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tftp on Sunday May 17 2015, @01:29PM
Nothing about that "bombing" makes any sense.
Why? Chechens are Muslims. USA wages wars against Muslims. Chechens are not strangers to weapons and bombs. Younger men can be easily radicalized by Imams. What of that "doesn't make any sense" ?
(Score: 2) by BK on Sunday May 17 2015, @02:43PM
If it's a false flag op, who profits by it?
If it was the cia/nsa with a domestic spying agenda, I'd expect the bombers to be Christian militia members... Or maybe pseudo-libertarian hipsters. USA folks already mistrust Muslims (right or wrong) and don't need the graphic encouragement.
So who else?
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @06:01PM
There's lots of bigoted nutjobs who feel their hate-filled accusations against Muslims fall on deaf ears, so they take it upon themselves [muslimnewsmagazine.tv] to "prove" that Muslims are violent, evil monsters.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday May 17 2015, @06:04PM
No, they would get too much push-back from Christians and hipsters. Pick on the muslims and use them as the excuse for implementing police state measures, and no one with political clout will object until it's too late.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @06:43PM
Remember the only terrorist in the Boston court was the proceuction. Who terrorised the jury to give a non-meaningful polical verdict. Now, the US is "tough on terrorist". But instead, our goverenment has allowed the "terrorist" to win, by destoring US's liberites and creating a fasist state. What is the difference between "Life-in-Prison" and "Death-Sentence". Nothing - you die in prison both ways, except the second keeps bring out into the public month after month, year after year, the name of "terrorist" to scare Americans into accepting the Fasist state of America.
Hell, this is Hydra from Angents of SHEILD. Hide plain site.
The killing him makes about much sence as old laws. like "attempted suicide is a capital offence punishable by death" http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2936/did-there-use-to-be-a-law-that-made-attempted-suicide-a-capital-offence-punishab [stackexchange.com]
Better to let him live out a full and fruitless life. Makes others less likely wanting to do the samething. Then again the 3-strike laws had side affect, with the third strike being faced, the defendant was more likely fight it out, than spend life in prision.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @07:54PM
Mod parent up.
-- gewg_
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18 2015, @07:31AM
For someone looking forward to 72 virgins when he dies, the difference is huge.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @07:30PM
Everything nowadays is a false flag sham, even systemd which was a false flag by the NSA!