Posted on 03/04/2015 8:28:24 AM PST by Citizen Zed
The lawyer carried out the bombing? Why isn’t he on trial?
How much will this farce cost the US and Mass. taxpayers.
Thanks to Holder, his lawyer buddies win another lottery re defending traitors.
If this is a “Holy War”, why is he being tried in a civilian court? Take the scumbag out and hang him.
So what will all the teeny bopper fangirls of this Muslim terrorist, who swear he is innocent, say?
Well, in case you didn’t realize it, under the U.S. Constitution one is considered innocent. The burden of proof is upon the “state” to actually prove its case, beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s called “due process”. In the USA, and under “due process” this is required before the state can forcefully condemn anyone to jail or death (whichever is applicable).
If you support the U.S. Constitution, you want it no other way.
AND ... being on Free Republic presumes you know this.
He’s cute?
Here let me channel for a sec
*puts on John Edwards cap*
*this is just proof that's it's a Govt conspiracy because no one would plead that*
The BB truthers claim the bombing was staged to push agun ban....
I happily point out it was obviously a plot to ban pressure cookers....and invade Chechnya LMAO!
So if he is already stipulating to the crime, why the three-ring circus of a four month trial?
That is how the headline reads!
“Well, in case you didn’t realize it, under the U.S. Constitution one is considered innocent. The burden of proof is upon the “state” to actually prove its case, beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s called “due process”. In the USA, and under “due process” this is required before the state can forcefully condemn anyone to jail or death (whichever is applicable).
If you support the U.S. Constitution, you want it no other way.
AND ... being on Free Republic presumes you know this.”
Pretty much a moot point now...I’m move for summery judgement this afternoon.
His lawyer admitted guilt.
From the OP:
“He believed that he was a soldier in a holy war against Americans,” Assistant U.S. Attorney William Weinreb said. “He also believed that by winning that victory, he had taken a step toward reaching paradise. That was his motive for committing these crimes.”
Probably because the lawyer is a "she" (not that there's anything wrong with that). /s
Typical lawyer.
“We aren’t in the middle ages.”
Hello?...caliphate?
Yes we are....it’s just they have better technology this time.....tanks, bombs, guns, and the ability to recruit soldiers to attack behind the lines like these creeps.
This is very much a holy war to THEM.....for us?...not so much....
That statement was not made by his lawyer, rather that statement was made by the prosecutor.
The statement by his own lawyer admitting his guilt was, according to the linked article, ""It WAS him," Judy Clarke, one of the nation's foremost death-penalty defense attorneys, said of Tsarnaev in a startling opening statement in the most closely watched terrorism trial in the U.S. since the Oklahoma City bombing nearly 20 years ago.".
I agree. He basically pled guilty so the rest is semantics. Let’s move to the sentencing phase and be done with it.
The process — for due process — still has to be followed through. There are a lot of cases in our courts with a plea agreement (for example) in which the accused does admit guilt, but there is still a process that must be followed and the courts must also insure that no rights are violated. In other words, there is still the crossing of the “t-s” and the dotting of the “i-s” to be done and done in a manner that will pass all legal muster.
Suggestions of barbaric retaliation are barbaric.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.