On April 21st, one week after the Boston 2013 Marathon bombing, locals come to Boylston Street's improvised memorials in Boston, MA, to pay respect and leave mementos on April 21, 2013. Photo: Marcio Jose Bastos Silva | Shutterstock.com. |
But will the request for a new trial go through? In May of
this year, former US Attorney Kendall
Coffey and Steve Malzberg discussed the case on Malzberg’s show, where
Coffey explained that this case has been much more streamlined and moved more
quickly than other federal death penalty cases. In the show
segment, Coffey suggested that while the appeals process for other cases
like this could be 12 to 15 years, he did not anticipate Tsarnaev’s process to
go on for more than five.
While most successful retrial requests for these kinds of
cases concern the defense’s ability to adequately represent their clients,
Coffey acknowledges that Tsarnaev’s defense lawyer “did everything humanly and
imaginably possible to save the client’s life.” However, the evidence against
Tsarnaev is so overwhelming that the defense did not even dispute his guilt.
Tsarnaev was convicted of 30
federal charges; three people died in the bombings and another 260 were
injured.
Coffey argues that Tsarnaev’s case is a “death penalty
case,” given the magnitude and horror of his crimes, coupled with his lack of
remorse for the bombings. Coffey does not believe that bias among the case’s
jurors will be a problem because they will follow the law and look only at the
evidence.
The appeals court agrees that Boston is a reasonable place for the trial to be held, despite public opinion; other options for appeal requests are running low for Tsarnaev’s defense. It may prove very difficult for the defense to demonstrate the necessity of a new trial, and a long appeals process may not do the case any good.
The appeals court agrees that Boston is a reasonable place for the trial to be held, despite public opinion; other options for appeal requests are running low for Tsarnaev’s defense. It may prove very difficult for the defense to demonstrate the necessity of a new trial, and a long appeals process may not do the case any good.
While there is no death penalty in the state of
Massachusetts, Tsarnaev’s case is federal, which means that the death penalty
is on the table as an option for the case’s final verdict.
Post a Comment