The Trial Evidence: Gaping Holes or Smoking Guns?
April 8, 2015 TBMBWH Team
At some point, just about everyone reading this has been following the trial via Twitter (and how screwy is that--the biggest capital murder trial of the decade and you have to rely on TWEETS for timely updates?) All of us have noticed a number of very odd evidentiary elements that just don't seem right. We have captured the ones we find most astounding, and by definition, perhaps the most troubling. Your list probably differs from ours, so go ahead and update what you believe should be here in the "comments" section.
The Devices
First up, we are reminded by the Defense about the "now missing Patriot thumb drive" belonging to Tamerlan Tsarnaev. This drive was used to transfer Tamerlan's jihadi-focused INSPIRE magazine bomb-making instruction from Tamerlan's Samsung laptop to his thumb drive, then to Dzhokhar's laptop. And this transfer of INSPIRE materials occurred on January 21st, 2012, the very same day Tamerlan flew out of Boston to Russia. The Prosecution's expert witness documented this electronic trail. What was the jury left to speculate about? The significance of that specific date for the electronic transfer (Tamerlan left for an international trip on the same day?) and what else might have been on the thumb drive---and how or why is the drive missing?
Next, it seems there was no physical evidence of bomb production at either the Cambridge Norfolk Street apartment inhabited by Tamerlan and his wife or in Dzhokhar's dorm room. (Amazing when you think of it, because as WBUR's Day 14 podcast pointed out, it would take about 130,000 firecrackers to produce the approximately 10 lbs of powder needed for just one of the explosive devices, or about 108 solid hours of powder collection. And prosecution invites us to believe the brothers built at least four of these devices, plus the smaller pipe bombs.) We also heard yet another version of the 'black residue present or not' storyline, this time indicating now residue was found in the Norfolk apartment (in an earlier Court hearing Law Enforcement stated none was found?) and on a pair of Tamerlan's gloves. So which version is the truth?
Also, virtually no evidence was presented either Tamerlan or Dzhokhar had any prior experience or training to enable them to build explosive devices that worked perfectly the first time, and in sequence. No detonator was discovered at the Forum site, either. And according to the evidence presented, Tamerlan did not begin construction on the bombs until April 7. (He also conveniently kept dated store receipts of his purchased bomb making materials in his wallet, found on his body after his shooting death on Laurel Street on the 19th. Why?)
On Boylston
While we all agree the evidence presented was overwhelming and horrific relative to the misery and death inflicted on the victims, the video evidence showing the movements of the "criminal mastermind" Tamerlan was incomplete relative to his movements on Boylston. Where was Tamerlan AFTER he set the gray backpack containing the bomb at victim Jeff Bauman's feet? In Bauman's account, Tamerlan left his bag -- possibly as much as a few minutes before the actual explosion. (His accounts have some variances.) We've seen photos of Tamerlan post-explosion running past the Kingsley Montessori on Exeter, although some have noted the figure's shoes and slacks do not match those worn in the photos taken of the brothers on Boylston in front of the Back Bay. Did he first run back West on Boylston in time to use the (missing) remote detonator on the bomb in Dzhokar's backpack?
Also troubling is the apparent 'glitches' in the Forum restaurant surveillance camera leading to missing frames (several seconds time) that captured Dzhokhar's four minutes by the tree and Tamerlan's march past the restaurant. You can see these jump cuts in the two videos presented by the prosecution at 2:29 and 4:30 respectively here. Intentional or not, did anyone question how this happened?
And we still don't know: who detonated Dzhokhar's bomb? Was it his brother Tamerlan who did not leave him sufficient time to make a safe getaway--between 10 and 11 seconds after the first explosion? Prosecution's Forum video presentation and other evidence do not support Dzhokhar's triggering the device. And the remote controller triggering of the bombs (aka the toy car controller, the Christmas tree lights, etc.) was not the INSPIRE magazine method of detonation--which utilized a simple timer set to go off at a certain time---NOT a remotely controlled bomb detonator. Why is this not important? Is there not a difference between placing a device on the ground (that could explode) and detonating said device, ensuring it does explode?
"The government told you in opening statement that Jahar was -- when he got a safe distance away, he detonated the bomb. We heard no evidence of how the second bomb was detonated and by whom. The evidence does not show that he was a safe distance away." Attorney Judy Clarke, Transcript of Closing Argument
"The government told you in opening statement that Jahar was -- when he got a safe distance away, he detonated the bomb. We heard no evidence of how the second bomb was detonated and by whom. The evidence does not show that he was a safe distance away." Attorney Judy Clarke, Transcript of Closing Argument
The Bag Mystery (Continued)
Once again, we find ourselves revisiting the 'bags' controversy. The erstwhile prosecution team couldn't seem to get the story straight about which backpack was where, who purchased what, etc. Here's Saunders and blogger jimmyslama's accounts, or count. (Remember, no prints or DNA from Dzhokhar was found on the evidence retrieved from bomb debris at the Forum site--aka Site 2/Scene B.)
First, the jury learned there was a bloody FOX label found at the Forum bomb site. Which should indicate it was the backpack brand carried by Dzhokhar. Unfortunately, we have searched and can't find Dzhokhar's Boylston 'white' backpack anywhere......not in the FOX product ranges, not in the Jansport or anywhere else. Nothing returns for FOX brand when we go by the stock numbers on the receipts from Tamerlan's Target purchases the day before the race, which instead turns up a FUL brand and a Jansport brand. (Target store research shows #069100253 was the Jansport and #069100374 was the FUL backpack. Research also yielded the FUL backpack now only comes in lime green or gray.) We also were shown evidence photos of an exploded black backpack, but it could not have been Dzhokhars because it had a very thick handle, and Dzhokhar's 'white' backpack did not.
So, to sum up, from Day 14 of the trial. "Testimony stated the FOX label was found at Scene B (the Forum). So we have 1 Fox backpack at Scene B, 1 backpack at the Crapo dump, 1 backpack on Tamerlan seen leaving Target, 1 Target-purchased FUL backpack found at Scene A (Marathon Sports), 1 Target-purchased Jansport backpack found on Laurel, 1 backpack (origin unknown but similar design to backpack carried by Dzhokhar on Boylston) photographed in Cambridge Norfolk apt. after bombings." This begs the question---how did the FOX backpack label end up at the Forum restaurant bomb site? When was it purchased as the bomb carrier, and by whom was it purchased? And was the FOX label found at Scene B, or more accurately, at Scene A?
First, the jury learned there was a bloody FOX label found at the Forum bomb site. Which should indicate it was the backpack brand carried by Dzhokhar. Unfortunately, we have searched and can't find Dzhokhar's Boylston 'white' backpack anywhere......not in the FOX product ranges, not in the Jansport or anywhere else. Nothing returns for FOX brand when we go by the stock numbers on the receipts from Tamerlan's Target purchases the day before the race, which instead turns up a FUL brand and a Jansport brand. (Target store research shows #069100253 was the Jansport and #069100374 was the FUL backpack. Research also yielded the FUL backpack now only comes in lime green or gray.) We also were shown evidence photos of an exploded black backpack, but it could not have been Dzhokhars because it had a very thick handle, and Dzhokhar's 'white' backpack did not.
So, to sum up, from Day 14 of the trial. "Testimony stated the FOX label was found at Scene B (the Forum). So we have 1 Fox backpack at Scene B, 1 backpack at the Crapo dump, 1 backpack on Tamerlan seen leaving Target, 1 Target-purchased FUL backpack found at Scene A (Marathon Sports), 1 Target-purchased Jansport backpack found on Laurel, 1 backpack (origin unknown but similar design to backpack carried by Dzhokhar on Boylston) photographed in Cambridge Norfolk apt. after bombings." This begs the question---how did the FOX backpack label end up at the Forum restaurant bomb site? When was it purchased as the bomb carrier, and by whom was it purchased? And was the FOX label found at Scene B, or more accurately, at Scene A?
Stata Center & Surveillance
The next time the prosecution wants to convince a jury two men committed the murder of a police officer, perhaps they can locate a surveillance camera closer than several hundred feet distant? So then perhaps the video evidence, taped in the dark, won't show figures the size of mice scurrying around a corner (as if for a meeting?) Could anyone genuinely believe the Tsarnaevs are shown in the video to be the shooters in this senseless murder (for what purpose--to retrieve a gun they were unable to obtain and left without?) But subtract the student eyewitness who claims to have seen Dzhokhar as he whizzed by him on his bike in the dark, and later recognized him as the Boston bomber? The Prosecution would have been forced to rely more heavily on equally murky visual evidence of the arrival of a green Honda from which the brothers 'emerged.' In fact, there seem to be surveillance cameras all over the Courtyard area, and out toward Ames. Why was the jury not shown any clearer/closer footage of these events?
The Mercedes Saga
And then there's the carjacking saga presented by the prosecution. The Shell station outside video evidence clearly shows two men exiting from the Mercedes from the same car door. Yet the victim, Mr. Meng, escaped (at 2:12) from the front seat in his account (or at least one of his versions) when he courageously unfastens his seat belt and literally runs for his life. Dzhokhar (at :12) should have been sitting in the back seat of the Merc and exited through a different side door. Physically impossible for all 3 men to be sitting in the Merc's front seat?
Plus, we have a discrepancy in the evidence presented on exactly when this carjacking occurred. In some accounts, we hear the carjacking occurred at 11 PM on the night of the 18th, and the Bank of America ATM witness stated the $800 withdrawal from Meng's account occurred at 11:18 PM . Unfortunately, the Watertown Incident Report completed in December of 2014 and just now released indicates the carjacking did not start until 11:20 PM. Which version is correct?
Watertown, Last-but-not-least
And from the most puzzling of all the Marathon-bombing related events, the unfolding of the Watertown scene yields a few gems. The Kitzenberg testimony has the Laurel St resident photographer responding to the shots fired on his street by racing upstairs to get his video camera. He then films several seconds of Tamerlan exiting the Mercedes on the driver's side. Kitzenberg then recounts he switches to take stills with his cellphone, the only known record of events. (Presumably all the Watertown officers' cruiser dashboard cameras were switched off as no evidence was offered from any of the many vehicles present that night.) But that doesn't jibe with the official account the shots first fired were by Tamerlan after he inexplicably exited the Mercedes, walking up to Officer Joe Reynold's well-lit cruiser and bouncing shots off the front grill. Did Tamerlan leisurely return to the Merc, take a break, and then go into full-fledged Watertown shootout mode? If not, who fired the original shots that sent Kitzenberg taking the stairs for his camera?
We also have agreement between the two legal teams on the series of events leading to Dzhokhar's escape from the Laurel St. shootout via the Mercedes. Both agree his steering lead to him running over Tamerlan as he threaded the SUV through the cruisers. Unfortunately, immediately after Tamerlan's death, Dr. Richard Wolfe, head of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center told reporters: "This was a trauma arrest, multiple injuries, probably, we believe a combination of blast, potentially gunshot wounds." (He) "said injuries may have been caused by 'an explosive device, possibly shrapnel, thermal injury. It was pretty much throughout the trunk. It was multiple wounds." And from the Boston Herald: "When asked about reports that Tsarnaev was run over by his fleeing brother, Wolfe said he did not see any obvious injuries that would back up that theory. 'I certainly did not see any tire marks or the usual things we see with someone run over by a car,' he said." And no evidence was presented at trial of the deceased's autopsy results to confirm or deny these confusing medical statements.
At TBMBWH site, we have had two years to review and analyze the publicly available data on this case. The jury had a little more than month for an in-depth run through of the prosecution's evidence. Is it reasonable to ask if we might have caught some inconsistencies they would have missed? We think so.
At TBMBWH site, we have had two years to review and analyze the publicly available data on this case. The jury had a little more than month for an in-depth run through of the prosecution's evidence. Is it reasonable to ask if we might have caught some inconsistencies they would have missed? We think so.
Recommend this:
VISIT OUR MAIN ARTICLES AND FEATURED STORIES INDEX HERE
Want more? For NIPS, quick takes, and blog posts by the main contributors to this site visit here
________________________________________________
We actively encourage comments, discussion and debate on this site! Please remember to keep it relevant and be respectful at all times.
Want more? For NIPS, quick takes, and blog posts by the main contributors to this site visit here
________________________________________________
We actively encourage comments, discussion and debate on this site! Please remember to keep it relevant and be respectful at all times.
