• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tsarnaev guilty in Boston bombing

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,003
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
CNN said:
Boston (CNN) [Breaking news update, posted at 2:13 p.m.]

Jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial have found Dzhokhar Tsarnaev guilty of using a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death, and aiding and abetting, a charge that carries a possible penalty of death.

[Breaking news update, posted at 2:12 p.m.]
Jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial have found Dzhokhar Tsarnaev guilty of conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death, a charge that carries a possible penalty of death.

Tsarnaev guilty in Boston bombing - CNN.com
Tsarnev is found guilty and guilty of the charges that carry the death penalty. The penalty phase should be (I would assume) be seeking the death penalty, though I do not believe Mass. has executed someone since the 1940's.
 
Tsarnaev guilty in Boston bombing - CNN.com
Tsarnev is found guilty and guilty of the charges that carry the death penalty. The penalty phase should be (I would assume) be seeking the death penalty, though I do not believe Mass. has executed someone since the 1940's.

Isn't it a federal case? I don't think Massachusetts gets to make the call here.

Either way, the guilty verdict was pretty much a foregone conclusion.
 
Well considering that Tsarnaev did admit to bombing the Boston Marathon I would have been surprised if he wasnt guilty... I mean why even have a trial if the guy admitted to it in the first place?
 
Well considering that Tsarnaev did admit to bombing the Boston Marathon I would have been surprised if he wasnt guilty... I mean why even have a trial if the guy admitted to it in the first place?

He admitted involvement; his defense claimed the brother was the brains behind it. There were 30-some-odd counts; he was trying to skate on a few of them and maybe avoid lethal injection. There was no way he was going to get off totally clean.
 
Well considering that Tsarnaev did admit to bombing the Boston Marathon I would have been surprised if he wasnt guilty... I mean why even have a trial if the guy admitted to it in the first place?

Due process is the answer to your question.

But anyway... Justice is done, I'm comfortable with the death penalty in these kinds of cases but life imprisonment is just fine as well.
 
Yup it was a foregone conclusion it is just whether he gets the death penalty or not
 
Good. Hope he dies soon.
 
Due process is the answer to your question.
There was no need to spend millions on a trial that lasted for weeks when he admitted to it. Probably been better off if he just got sentenced right after the charges were filed.
 
There was no need to spend millions on a trial that lasted for weeks when he admitted to it. Probably been better off if he just got sentenced right after the charges were filed.

In our form of government, trials bring a level of closure to those directly involved and to the community at large. They are well worth the price.

In addition, a trial is necessary for death penalty cases in that someone admitting to such a crime cannot plea bargain for the death penalty and I'm sure prosecutors want nothing less.
 
There was no need to spend millions on a trial that lasted for weeks when he admitted to it. Probably been better off if he just got sentenced right after the charges were filed.

In an ideal world yes, but the constitution demands a trial.

Personally in an ideal world guys like this, Breivik and that Colorado Batman shooter guy are taken behind the shed and put down like the animals they are.
 
There was no need to spend millions on a trial that lasted for weeks when he admitted to it. Probably been better off if he just got sentenced right after the charges were filed.
I'm okay with a trial, that's his right under the Constitution. Now that he's been found guilty, he needs to become worm food as soon as possible.
 
Meh, I dont care if he gets life in prison, in general population, with no chance of parole. He's young...that's a long time in prison with Americans.
 
The death penalty is too good for him, put him to work doing hard labor.
 
I agree that this was going to be the result. There was no way he was going to walk away from this a free man. Now it's time to decide whether to put him to death or not.

I say kill him!
 
It never had a chance in H*** of workign but I guess he had to try something.

Blaming the older brother and extremist religious indoctrination were probably more strategies to avoid the death penalty than prevent conviction.
 
Blaming the older brother and extremist religious indoctrination were probably more strategies to avoid the death penalty than prevent conviction.

Definetly, doubt it will work
 
I'm happy to learn that he was convicted on all 30 counts.
 
Definetly, doubt it will work

Well given he was found guilty of all the charges I doubt it will work, but if the defense worked and a few of the charges came back not guilty, then it might of.
 
Tsarnaev guilty in Boston bombing - CNN.com
Tsarnev is found guilty and guilty of the charges that carry the death penalty. The penalty phase should be (I would assume) be seeking the death penalty, though I do not believe Mass. has executed someone since the 1940's.

That's been our leading news story for weeks now. I'm glad it's over and wow, did they come back with their verdict quickly.

He can actually get the death penalty. Of course he'll still end up dying an old man in prison because it doesn't seem like we like to actually put those on death row to death.
 
Blaming the older brother and extremist religious indoctrination were probably more strategies to avoid the death penalty than prevent conviction.

That's exactly right. Heard that more than a few times when we heard every day about what went on in the trial that day. That was the defense and that was the hope, to avoid the death penalty. There was never a question of his actual guilt. Blaming it on the big brother was a way to lessen his part in things, meaning he wouldn't get death. I don't think it will work.
 
In an ideal world yes, but the constitution demands a trial.

Personally in an ideal world guys like this, Breivik and that Colorado Batman shooter guy are taken behind the shed and put down like the animals they are.
In an ideal world, I'd like to think we wouldn't have mass killings at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom