Yep.
And if so, do the feds even have jurisdiction?
Would you prefer Taxachusetts had jurisdiction? Because, then, the Joker wouldn't be slated to die, Massachusetts not having the death penalty.
Instead, he might marry one to four of his groupies ... e.g.,
I kinda figured that Massachusetts doesn’t have the death penalty.
Which leads us to a question: Why, if the murders happened in Massachusetts, do the feds have jurisdiction?
And I AM NOT asking because I don’t think he deserves it, but I am asking because of the powers that exist, the Tenth amendment.
Could be fed jurisdiction because of terrorism or with “use of a weapon of mass destruction”.
In 1997 the MA Legislatur almost approved the DP, but state rep. John Slattery (”Slattery will get you nowhere”, I always say) changed his vote and it went down. (Thought there was a non binding referendum question about it shortly before which did pass...)
http://www.nodp.org/ma/stacks/globe_110797.html
>>(Nov 1997) Nine days after voting 81-79 in favor of capital punishment, the chamber deadlocked after one representative, John P. Slattery of Peabody, switched
his vote out of concern that innocent people could face execution, and that the bill did not afford enough protection for juveniles and minorities.
>>Under parliamentary rules, the 80-80 vote killed the bill, which would have allowed capital punishment for 15 categories of first-degree murder. The vote preserved Massachusetts’ status as one of 12 states without the
death penalty.
Wiki (Marathon Bombings): “On April 18 at about 10:48 pm, Sean A. Collier, 27, an MIT police officer...was ambushed in his police car and died from multiple gunshot wounds from the bombing suspects.”