quote:

quote:

It’s time to do some cost cutting.

A public hanging is not expensive.

I'm sure some members of the public would gladly step up and construct a proper gallows free of charge to hang this turd.

So, the judge is worried the jury in this case was biased while a judge in the Roger Stone case wasn't concerned the Foreman of the Jury who found Stone guilty had published her animosity for President Trump?

It's not surprising anymore that the Judicial system is every bit as poisoned by TDS as the Legislative.

Death or Life in prison doesn't matter to me as long as he has no chance of harming another person.

I still vote for death - it’s what he deserves And at the least possible expense to the country.

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
I’m not opposed to the death penalty, either generally or as applied to this guy, but getting arrested at 20 years old and then spending the rest of your life in prison is pretty awful.

Excuse me?

You think that carrying out mass murder and getting a life sentence at age twenty is pretty hard cheese? The survivors who were maimed, lost limbs and so on, also have life sentences imposed on them.

If he somehow dodges the needles an gets jail, he still has all his limbs and everything else.

I don’t disagree with you and it’s likely he will get the death penalty again. He’s certainly earned it.

If he is executed he gets a quick, painless death and whatever suffering he is experiencing ends. I’ve been in a prison and spent some time talking to both lifers and people on death row. It’s a sobering experience but what truck me was the hopelessness of the lifers. They were in a far worse place psychologically than the death row inmates because the latter at least knew their torment would end. My point was based on that experience - it’s no small thing to take all hope away from someone and let them live that way for 50 plus years.

So, they think anyone in Boston can't be an objective juror. This was national news, probably can't find any venue in the country that would be much different.

The most prejudicial thing the jury saw was the death and injury caused by the bomb. Put that in front of any rational American and I'm pretty sure they would approve the death penalty.

Who were the judges and which President appointed them?

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
I don’t think death is the correct sentence because it will end his incarceration in the federal Supermax prison in Colorado.

I think another 50 or so years of solitary confinement in a prison where he won’t see anything or anyone not part of the prison is a far worse punishment.

Let's see... 50 years times $70k/year equals $3.5M to store this filth. I don't think so. Put a round in the back of his head and let's move on.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
I’m not opposed to the death penalty, either generally or as applied to this guy, but getting arrested at 20 years old and then spending the rest of your life in prison is pretty awful.

Excuse me?

You think that carrying out mass murder and getting a life sentence at age twenty is pretty hard cheese?

I don’t disagree with you and it’s likely he will get the death penalty again. He’s certainly earned it.

If he is executed he gets a quick, painless death and whatever suffering he is experiencing ends.

It’s a sobering experience but what truck me was the hopelessness of the lifers.
They were in a far worse place psychologically than the death row inmates because the latter at least knew their torment would end.

I am definitely not opposed to the death penalty but a lifetime of suffering in prison would be worse than getting it over with death, IMO.

On January 30, 2014, United States Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the federal government would seek the death penalty against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.[9] A plea deal failed when the government refused to rule out the possibility of the death penalty. The proceedings are led by Judge George O'Toole.[10][11] Jury selection lasted two months.[3]

Geoorge A. O'Toole, Jr. (born 1947) is a Senior United States federal judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Born in Worcester, Massachusetts, O'Toole received an A.B. from Boston College in 1969 and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1972. He was in private practice in Boston, Massachusetts from 1972 to 1982. He was an Associate Justice of the Boston Municipal Court from 1982 to 1990, and of the Superior Court of Massachusetts from 1990 to 1995.

On April 4, 1995, O'Toole was nominated by President Bill Clinton to a new seat on the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts created by 104 Stat. 5089. He was confirmed by the United States Senate on May 25, 1995, and received his commission on May 26, 1995. He assumed senior status on January 1, 2018.

O'Toole presided over the 2015 trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, one of the perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing.[1][2]

quote:

Originally posted by synthplayer:

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
I don’t think death is the correct sentence because it will end his incarceration in the federal Supermax prison in Colorado.

I think another 50 or so years of solitary confinement in a prison where he won’t see anything or anyone not part of the prison is a far worse punishment.

The punishment for a crime should befit the severity of the crime. This is a crime that warrants the death penalty. And, there's more to this than just how the punishment affects the perpetrator - it's how it affects the population of the USA at large. We are all affected when justice is not served.

quote:

Originally posted by Fla. Jim:

Hopefully he will live to a ripe old age reflecting on just what he has done. Hell on earth indeed.

This guy will CHERISH what he has done. It is probably the one and only thing he has ever done that with which he can be very proud. You have to understand how the devout Muslim thinks: His holy book, the Qu'ran unequivocally commands its followers to kill the infidel. He considers himself as devout as the 19 hijackers that accomplished 9/11. In other words, he'll never contemplate his actions and eventually regret them, or come to realize how "evil" he truly is. Instead, he can rest assured that Allah is very pleased with him. With such an ingrained outlook, which has been planted in his mind since birth, there will never be any regret.

He should just be nuked, and let's move on.

Well said and more elaborate than my intended post sir. Exacta-mundo!

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
I’m not opposed to the death penalty, either generally or as applied to this guy, but getting arrested at 20 years old and then spending the rest of your life in prison is pretty awful.

He was a coconspirator in a terrorist attack on a marathon running event. In a crowd of spectators. He tried to evade capture for the act, indicating a lack of remorse for his crime. I’d submit that THAT is pretty damn awful. Why should he get to draw breath for a single second longer? At our expense?

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
So, they think anyone in Boston can't be an objective juror. This was national news, probably can't find any venue in the country that would be much different.

The most prejudicial thing the jury saw was the death and injury caused by the bomb. Put that in front of any rational American and I'm pretty sure they would approve the death penalty.

Who were the judges and which President appointed them?

I'm going to say something that many here won't like, but: Considering the amount of pre-trial publicity, the case should have been moved to another jurisdiction, as the jury pool in Boston was clearly too biased for this defendant to get a trial where a verdict wouldn't be overturned on appeal for the reasons it was. The prosecutors knew this from the start and (IMHO) figured this issue would be kicked down the road for others to deal with later. It was, and now we have to spend the money and resources to have another long and drawn out penalty phase. This isn't the fault of the judges that ruled the jury was biased to the point a retrial (penalty) is necessary, it's the fault of those who prosecuted the case. They left the opening and the defense took advantage of it, as is their responsibility.

This offender absolutely deserves to be executed and even the former (Obama administration) prosecutors know it, but do they want an execution of anyone to occur due (in large part) because they demonstrated that some crimes practically "scream" (pun intended) for the ultimate punishment? Of course not! Capital punishment is reserved for the worst of the worst, but Democrats pander to their most important base (criminals and enablers) by trying to evoke sympathy no matter how vicious, cruel, and unrepentant those who found themselves on Death Row might be. If the scumbag that bombed the marathon and assassinated a college police officer as he sat in his patrol car should be executed, why should those who murder sexual assault or robbery victims so they can't be witnesses against them in court? How about serial murders that killed numerous victims for the sexual thrill of doing it? How does any death penalty opponent keep from (properly) being called a hypocrite when they say "some crimes" (such as this one) are exceptions to their rule that "death is never an appropriate punishment for murder."?

Glad to see the President and I are on the same page.