Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
GRUESOME DETAILS OF injuries sustained by victims of the Boston Marathon bombings were recounted to jurors as lawyers for the student on trial for the attack admitted he carried out the bloody assault.
Nearly two years after what was the worst attack on US soil since 9/11, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s trial got under way in a federal court packed with victims, survivors and the media.
Prosecutors said Tsarnaev, 21, had carried out the attacks to avenge the deaths of Muslims overseas after learning how to build pressure-cooker bombs through Al-Qaeda propaganda.
The Kyrgyzstan-born US citizen faces the death penalty if convicted of the bombings which killed three people and wounded 264, on 15 April 2013.
In a dramatic opening statement by Tsarnaev’s defense defence team, attorney Judy Clarke admitted the client had planted the bombs, telling jurors bluntly: “It was him.”
“We do not and will not at any point sidestep or attempt to sidestep Dzhokhar’s responsibility for his actions,” she said.
She said the defense would agree with the government about much of the evidence and instead appealed on the jury to keep their hearts and minds open for the second half of the trial focused on the sentencing.
Government prosecutors meanwhile painted the picture of a cold, callous killer who calmy shopped for milk just 20 minutes later as paramedics battled in vain to save a mortally wounded eight-year-old boy.
Assistant US attorney William Weinreb used much of his 50-minute address to emphasise the horror unleashed when Tsarnaev and his 26-year-old brother Tamerlan allegedly planted two bombs near the race finish line.
‘Shred flesh, shatter bones’
As the jury were shown pictures of victims Krystle Marie Campbell, Lingzi Lu and Martin Richard in happier days, Weinreb described in graphic detail the injuries that saw them bleed to death on the sidewalk.
Martin was so small that the bomb damaged his entire body, exposing his ribs and organs, eviscerating his bowels and burning his skin. He lost so much blood that he had practically none left, the prosecutor said.
“The purpose of this bomb was to shred flesh, shatter bones, set people on fire,” Weinreb told the court.
The purpose was to kill and maim as many people as possible.
Tsarnaev showed no emotion as the details of his alleged crimes were read out, looking straight ahead or resting one finger against his lip, his hair a mop of dark brown unruly curls, and wearing a dark blazer and a pin-stripped shirt.
Weinreb said that Tsarnaev may have lived outwardly the life of an ordinary University of Massachusetts student but “he had a side to him that he kept hidden” and was reading terrorist literature as early as 2011.
It was that literature that convinced him to kill Americans to punish them for killing Muslims overseas and to earn him a place in paradise, he said.
Inside a boat, the bolthole where he was eventually arrested four days after the attacks, Tsarnaev left a message criticising the US government over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“Stop killing our innocent people, and we will stop,” said part of the message that was read out.
Al-Qaeda propaganda
An almost complete set of Al-Qaeda’s English-language magazine Inspire – which taught the brothers how to make their bombs – audio lectures and songs were found on his laptop, ipod and on CDs in his car, he said.
Months before the attacks he obtained a handgun through a friend and the brothers went to a shooting range for target practice. The day after the attacks, he again opened up Inspire on his computer.
Tsarnaev, who became a US citizen in 2012, has pleaded not guilty to 30 charges over the attacks, the subsequent killing of a police officer, a car jacking and shootout with police while on the run.
Tamerlan was killed in the shootout, and run over by his brother who eventually surrendered on April 19 after being discovered in the boat in a suburban backyard.
Seventeen of the 30 charges against him carry the possibility of a death penalty under federal law. Massachusetts abolished the death penalty in 1984 and no one has been executed in the state since 1947.
Tsarnaev’s attorney said her client had been radicalized by his elder brother.
“It was Tamerlan Tsarnaev who self-radicalised. It was Dzhokhar who followed,” she said.
The jury of eight men and 10 women was sworn in Tuesday after a two-month selection process delayed by historic snowfall and repeated attempts to move the trial elsewhere, rejected by District Judge George O’Toole.
Tsarnaev moved to the United States aged eight, finished school and was a student at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
How dare these backward men lecture anyone on morals!
They think TD’s should resign if they vote for abortion legislation,
But Brady wouldn’t resign for knowing about and covering up sexual abusing priests?
Brady also wouldn’t walk the 20-30metres to his local Gardai station to report the abuse, but he’d walk around some religious shrine in protest of abortion legislation.
Pathetic bunch of so called human beings, it seems they care all about the zygot but they don’t give a crap once its a child.
Funny how they are threatening excommunication coz when I wrote to them specially asking to be removed from all catholic records I was told it wasn’t possible anymore. I’m up for excommunication if they want to excommunicate someone.
Spit out their magic bread and stomp on it. Then tell them you did it on purpose knowing full well l what you were doing. If they don’t kick you out then, tell them it’ll happen again and again until they delete your name from their records. They’ll reach for the tippex there and then.
Haha hilarious. I got a letter saying that I might regret my decision and my future wife would be displeased if I left as she might want a church wedding. I don’t think my future husband would be too bothered to be honest.
Bloody brilliant David!!!!
Can you sue under the data protection act to have your name removed
You should have told them that. Because obviously your purpose as a man is to marry women and have lots of babbies.
Priceless :-) well said .
Was thinking that myself, what do I have to do to get excommunicated?
@Tony, I wasn’t joking about spitting out the bread, it’s called “defiling the host” and seems to be one of the mortal sins that are both victimless and can lead to excommunication. I had a quick look online and found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_desecration it’s only Wikipedia though, but snopes.com might have put it through a bs detector. Replying to them when they refuse your countmeout request including your intention to defile the host might be enough.
I think it was Conor Buggy on here who said he was writing identical notarised letters to the parish and dioces of his baptism, some thought-crime unit in Rome called the congregation of the doctrine of faith (or something like that) and someone else…maybe the pope or Brady or someone. The letters would detail his rejection of their authority and disbelief in their central ideas like bread=meat etc.
Excommunication does not mean you are no longer Catholic, it just means you are not permitted to partake in the sacraments.
@stephen at least its a step in the right direction. the furthest i can get away from them the better!
Thanks be to almighty god that your previous picture of you attached to an electric socket has been dropped. Who’s the wan? Your sister?
None of your business.
Ooops, I was referring to Stephen Mc Elligott The fundamentalist Catholic.
Not believing their horsesh!t means you’re not a catholic and excommunication means they can’t desecrate your body and your memory with their zombie inspired nonsense. Result.
@william lol. didnt know what was going on.
@Fuh Qiu – you are to be pitied more than reviled.
My head just exploded with the hypocrisy of everything in this article
The church needs to F off and keep out of government business.
Right you are… sick of the interference that goes on. They shouldn’t even be allowed to lobby unless it’s a point of law rather than morality. Religions seem to think they have exclusive rights over morality.
Are the Vatican lads going on a comedy tour soon? Their material is priceless.
Pretty sure they’re doing one during lent next year. Pretty sure Reginald D Hunter and Frankie Boyle are heading with them. The whole thing is supposed to be finishing with something special at Easter and rumour has it they’re gonna get god to finally do something by resurrecting Bill Hicks.
And the hats, red shoes, etc, clowns!
Bill hicks, George Carlin How we miss and could use them now!
#truthseekers and funny as f**k
I would LOVE to see Carlin’s reaction to this
The dog collar comedy tour with Larry the Canon Law guy
Oooh, if only they WOULD resign, particularly Ms. Lucinda Cretin.
Let’s rewind 50 years to when anyone gave a sh1t what the Church thought. Whether you’re pro-life or pro-choice it’s should be nothing to do with those bunch of hypocrites. They should stick to getting their own house in order. It’s not like they’re too interested in the welfare of children anyway! Rant over.
Phew. That’s a relief.
Was just about to say the same Phil! You best me to it!
Abort the Catholic Church. Bunch of knob jockeys.
No doubts the lingering threat of celestial judgement and eternal hellfire will remain in the minds of overly pious TD’s…time to give superstition the boot out of politics, no-one cares what a bronze age Palestinian cult says anymore.
The only thing those lads do religiously is to devise more ways to make themselves a little bit richer.
They don’t really believe that men touching boys is a sin. According to the reports on priests in arbour hill, they won’t attend counselling as they see no need. Most of these guys including the bishops, cardinals, even the pope grew up in seminaries where it was learned behaviour. Very difficult to change this behaviour as denial is their biggest defence.
“…seminaries where this was learned behaviour”. What a most ridiculous statement.
Where does this paedophile ring of old guys get off lecturing anyone. Their superstitious clap trap has been superceded by education and open access to real knowledge. Irrelevant is not the word for them
They are not on their own, Muhammad married a nine year old, seems to be a bit of a habit with these holy guys.
Steve, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Hari Krishnas, the Presbyterians in NI, Evangelical Christians in the US, and many others have been raping children, seems to go with religion for some odd reason. Maybe it’s the control freakery.
William, proof, please.
Smiley, you can google as easy as I can.
Lazy reply.
Funny how Sean Brady never got around to excommunicating his rapist pal Brendan Smyth! The Catholic Church doesn’t excommunicate priests who destroyed the lives of countless children. When they’ll keep the faith with those sort, is it an organisation you really want to be associated with?
This has always puzzled me. Is it that they don’t think raping children is wrong? It’s very hard to know what goes on in their nutty heads.
I know catholic faith needed clean out closet and that is what happened and should go on until all evil is rooted out.people seem forget the good catholic people these days.we are also here.
BAHAHAHAHAHA!
Again, it’s almost cute how the Church still thinks its relevant and has as much sway as it did decades ago.
Once they put their own house in order, and and emerge as a more humble and less hypocritical organisation, then their input might be taken more seriously.
From the RTE coverage on this:
“Speaking to the Irish Catholic newspaper, Monsignor Jacques Suaudeau said that if the Taoiseach does not want to impose his Catholic belief on people, and the time has come for a more moderate line on abortion, then he too should resign.”
So this dude reckons that Kenny has a duty to impose his catholic teachings on others? Or have I read that wrong?
There’s about 30% of the Irish who are non religious, so don’t vote for Catholics.
They really do.
The church has every right to suggest excommunication for those who support legislation against its teachings
However they have no right to suggest people resign from their roles in government
They still think they have power over the lay folk , in reality they have serious issues with maintaining moral teaching rights over their own flock
Wish to god they would shut up
The church has no place in legislation, they can excommunicate anyone they want inside the realms of their own cult but they’re delusional to think they can still influence politics with superstition.
Any politician who brings religion to work with him/her is a hypocrite and cannot act rationally.
Any politician who doesn’t bring their beliefs to legislation is the hypocrite,
But id suggest many have had any belief in the teachings of the Catholic Church shattered over recent years, rendering them teaching irrelevant
You can’t make rational and informed decisions towards legislating for every person in this country if you seek moral advice from a sky wizard or act under the influence of a supervisory and judgmental sky wizard..it’s preposterous.
Shay, politicians are there to represent their constituents, not themselves.
Smiley, this legislation presents an issue that is moral in nature for the people who vote them in
Whatever decision they make will go against the wishes of someone, therefore they must make that decision with their conscious and personal beliefs
Ps I’m a firm believer that a woman should choose for herself and that
all options should be available to her
I believe that decision is compatible with my personal beliefs but can understand how others may view the decision differently
Funny 99% of the world manages it though. Obama is obviously unfit for office due to his sky wizard worship.
Kevin, Obama is an Atheist. He couldn’t get elected in the US if he told the truth. Only 6% of Americans state they are Atheists.
So, he’s a liar? That’s ok then.
@ kevin. A) where are you getting your 99% figure from? B) Obama is a politician, of course he’s a liar.
No one has the right to threaten legislators in a democracy, whether with violence or words.
So if an Amnesty International member votes in favour of the death penalty that organisation cannot threaten him with expulsion?
Not if he or she is a TD and the threat is before the vote in order to induce him/her to chnage it.
Is that a yes or a no? Can the NAACP threaten to expel a racist or is that anti-democratic according to you?
I think I was quite clear.
The opinions of these people aren’t worth a bucket of spit
Tis a pity, I would have loved to see how they would have enforced it. Bouncers at the door? Everyone required to bring photo ID? What if you spotted one sneaky yoke who crept in halfway through mass, would you stop what you were doing and shoo him out with a cattle prod? All talk, no action. Go backing to praying lads, we’ll be the ones really fighting.
@ Laura: Surely a bolt from the heavens or hell fire & brimstone? No more fanciful than the nonsense they preach
Had to do a double take at the pic
The really annoying thing is the calls of ‘abortion abortion abortion’ or ‘aggressive abortion legislation’ have these jokes even read the legislation? Its to save a mothers life! I fear for my daughters future because these neanderthals stll have influence on our legislators.
I REALLY object to calling these primates neanderthals. Neanderthals were very clever they just died out due to climate change.
…and Neanderthals had religion that wasn’t a business seeking money.
The Catholic Church – what a weird sect
The French for a religion is cult
The Catholic Church nowadays is like that one annoying kind in the back of the class who raises his hand to say the most pointless things..!
Kid*
What about the Priests, Bishops & Cardinals who helped the Nazi war criminals escape to South America, were they also just following orders, Dear church you also helped child abusers escape justice too you Hypocrites.
Respect is earned or lost as to ones behaviour so this is why a lot of people have no tolerance or time to be lectured by the Church
Threatening TDs to induce them to vote in a particular way should be made illegal.
The church is making our politicians ‘an offer they can’t refuse’.
When can we expect to see Cardinal Brady excommunicated for his role in the cover up of child abuse?
The Christianity enthusiasts are very quiet today…what are they up to I wonder?
Sometimes I wonder if the Vatican are having a laugh? These fools are so deluded!
They would prefer to let a woman die :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-22712756
Who cares about this irrelevant bunch of old men in dresses and there sky daddy
Of course they are threatening and interfering but you cant argue with them on this one. You are either a Catholic and follow their rules or you have critical thinking skills, renounce your Catholicism and don’t. Simple. The whole a la carte religion thing really bugs me. Become an atheist – its a lot more fun and you will have a much better time http://www.newstiller.com/en/society/686-burn-in-hell-at-least-the-sex-is-better
Nice to see tolerance is alive and well amongst commenters on the journal. With no irony they decry hypocrisy and then display the kind of religious intolerance that would make even the fascists in the EDL baulk. Well done everyone.
I don’t see any intolerance here. We live in a secular Republic, not a Catholic theocracy and people have every right to take the piss of of the church and all its ridiculous trappings.
I will say this though, when there was worry about being kicked out of an entire religion for voting one way or another on a health care bill, the church’s critics mus feel pretty undercut.
You’re right. Mocking people’s deeply held beliefs and traditions is incredibly tolerant. My bad. Catholics aren’t Catholics because they’re trying to be backward/cruel/sky wizard worshippers, it’s because of deeply held faith and conviction. If you can’t at least respect the other side of an argument then our liberal democracy is lost to be replaced by the tyranny of the majority.
Catholics are catholics because their parents are catholics, (bare some converts), if they were born in Scandinavia 1500 years ago Thor would have been their sky buddy. Believe whatever you want, but leave you fairy dust at the door of Dail Eireann.
Am I a Catholic because my parents were? Probably. Does that mean my beliefs are any less deeply held or important to me? No.
I’m not expecting us all to agree on every issue but for fcuk’s sake let’s leave pejorative stuff like “fairy dust” and “sky wizard” out if it.
Kevin tolerance of a belief means you do not object to people believing what they want. It does not mean you have treat it with the same reverence as its adherents.
Criticism of a religion is no more intolerant than criticism of a political opinion.
Not asking for reverence John, just the same respect I would accord your beliefs (or lack thereof).
Respect has to be earned Kevin, and IMO the Catholic church is not worthy of respect. I will not pretend to respect an institution which I find morally reprehensible; to do so would make me the worst type of hypocrite.
Just as I do not get offended when people belittle my beliefs (whatever they may be), I think a lot of Catholics need thicker skins.
If your faith is important to you (and I have no issue if it is), you should not object to valid criticisms of it. You should relish those opportunities to defend it
I do. In respect of the subject matter of this article, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for the Church to ask people who purport to be Catholics to behave accordingly. Is the Church not entitled to ask its adherents to obey the rules they purportedly believe to be the law of God?
If Catholicism is not for you: leave. If it is, you should be expected to have the courage of your convictions, to walk the walk. Why the outrage at the Vatican asking Catholics to be Catholic?
That being said, I still don’t see how insults and mockery advance any reasoned argument.
The Vatican is trying to force their will on the entire people of Ireland. Now you can dress that up however you like but we both know that is exactly what they are doing.
Nobody has said any untruths about the church in this column. They have committed some unspeakable evil acts right from their conception 2000 years ago through to present times. Do not ask me to respect them because you believe their nonsense. Should I also respect the kkk because they believe in something I think is evil?
If you can’t handle the very fair criticism of your church, that is your problem. Not mine.
Kevin I think there is a fine line between mockery and criticism. For example, many people believe in the existence of a supernatural entity. Others, because of scientific advances etc., would consider such belief ludicrous. This position is understandable given how much we now know about the origins of ourselves and our planet.
Now arguing that belief in a supernatural being (which runs contrary to the majority of scientific teaching) is ludicrous is completely justified. It is as justified in arguing that the economic policies of a communist are ludicrous or that the views of the Ku Klux Klan on equality are ludicrous.
Religion is a set of beliefs which takes a position which a lot of people find silly. That is their opinion; and the degree to which a position is held in reverence by its adherents should not limit the rights of others to criticise those beliefs as ridiculous if they believe them to be so.
Very fair points, expressed in measured and considered terms.
I will stop with the sky wizards stuff when your mates in Rome stop threatening our democratically elected representatives.
Kevin I love and respect people, real people. Stupid religious superstition deserves all the ridicule that it receives.Why should I respect lies and nonsense bullshit peddlers motivated by power and money.
The title of this article confirms no such threats have been, or will be, made.
Kevin, when you can understand why you’re not say a Hindu, you should be able to figure out why you shouldn’t be a Catholic. Try and put your brain in gear.
Yes it does and is about as convincing as New Jersey Mafiosa stating that he is a legitimate businessman. What has legislation in a secular state got to do with the Catholic church anyway.
So what threats were you talking about above? When did my “mates in Rome” threaten any politician on this issue?
I didn’t know that Ireland is a secular state. I thought Catholic Church is written into the Constitution.
Why would your organisation state “pushing themselves out of the Church”, if it was a business that would be constructive dismissal
There is some nonsense about the holy spirit in the preamble, but nothing in the constitution
They didn’t threaten but they advised our leader, bad and all as he is, to “impose” their doctrine on us (monsignor whatshisface’s word)
Article 44.1 of the Constitution:
“The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion.”
Still no luck finding those Roman threats yet?
So nothing about the Catholic Church in our constitution. Thanks for clarifying Kevin.
Fair play, there isn’t. My point is, the Constitution isn’t completely “secular” and religions have the right to state their positions on the issues of the day, including prospective legislation.
Well Kevin if you can’t see the threat then your parents taught you well. Where is the reference to catholicism again?
State their positions, fair enough. But I think the Vatican is being sinister in all this. Today they likened Enda Kenny to a nazi.
On a wider note about religion, I just don’t see the point. Why do you need to worship your god via Rome? Surely god would be more pleased with direct worship without all the politics and money? Honest question.
If the Catholic Church isn’t written into the Constitution, why does it have so much sway?
Honestly, it came from a study of history. I believe in God because (without getting too drippy) I have felt his presence throughout my life. From that starting point, through looking at history and ecclesiology, the Catholic Church and its teachings are the only ones that make sense to me. Only my personal view.
Cardinal Newman – a famous convert – said (admittedly in a slightly different context) that “to study history is to cease to be Protestant.”
Thanks for answering. But I still don’t get it. You said you felt the presence of god in your life. Why do you need to complicate that presence with silly man made rules and tradition?
In my view it came from what Jesus said when he was here: the authority he gave to Peter to “bind and loose,” the mission he gave to his apostles to continue to teach and forgive sins after he was gone. I believe the Catholic Church are the direct successors of those apostles (that’s the study of history bit).
The traditions are all about continuity with the Church through the ages. They are a visible reminder of that critical historicity I’m talking about.
I realise it’s not for everyone btw!
I guess my point is, the bible is another man made text. So all your beliefs are based on faith. But not faith in god, but faith in the bible not being a lie written by men as a way of controlling the masses.
But you last point about it not being for everybody is what gets me riled up about the church. The church doesn’t share your view. They want our laws to reflect their beliefs instead of letting their members make their own decisions based on their beliefs.
An example is marriage equality. If they are against gay marriage, then don’t have one. But don’t try stopping those who do want it from having one.
I take your point. But at the end of the day, do we not all want the law to reflect our own beliefs? Surely that is the reason for political debate.
Law, by definition, is about imposing society’s beliefs. Eg. society believes theft is wrong, therefore it imposes that law on thieves, it isn’t enough to say “I, personally, will not steal.”
The arguments are about which beliefs we, as a society, are willing to import into law.
Also, on the new testsment being a lie to control: 90% of the lads who wrote it were violently executed as penniless men. They got nothing out of it, it’s that sort of thing gives it the ring of legitimacy to me.
I agree with you entirely. Poll after poll plus two referenda have shown the majority of our society want x case legislated for. The church won’t accept this.
They were executed by other people with different beliefs in their own god. I believe the founders of Christianity, seeing how successful religion as a tool was, tried using it to their own political gains. But trying to wrestle power from the powerful usually doesn’t end well. Especially back then.
Indeed the establishment of the Catholic Church was an attempt by the Romans to keep control of the growing number of dissidents.
A big reason why the referenda failed is because Dana and some hard liners felt the proposed pro-life constitutional amendments didn’t go far enough. So I don’t think you can quite extrapolate out that therefore a majority favours legislating for X. That being said, I think a majority probably are in favour of it. That doesn’t mean the Church has to accept that view and is forbidden from arguing against it. That’s what they’re doing now.
Kevin, do you believe that, during mass, the bread and wine is transubstantiated into the body and blood of christ?
Yep
That’s mental, you actually believe that
You do believe it kevin? I can see where your lack of common sense and reason comes from. Were ypu indoctrinated as a child like most catholics?
Yeah. Gave it a lot of critical thought as an adult… still buy it.
To study history is to cease to be a Catholic. Look at the Inquisition, for starters.
Fair fecks to you Kevin, gotta admire your backbone, when I hear hooves I think horses not zebras
So Kevin, you were brainwashed as a child into believing in one particular version of Christianity out of the estimated 16,000 different Christian sects. You don’t believe in the 250,000 gods of Hinduism. You don’t believe in the Koran, the Talmud or the sacred writings of dozens of other religions. Shinto does nothing for you. HOWEVER, after studying history and âexperiencing godâ you by an astonishing coincidence decided as an adult that the Catholicism you were brainwashed into believing as a child was after all the correct religion and all the others now and in the tens of thousands of years of human history were wrong.
In a nutshell, yes. Obviously my upbringing made me predisposed to Catholicism so of course it’s not the “coincidence” you sarcastically suggest.
What were the odds? Pretty slim, the majority of my friends are atheists and lapsed Catholics which shows that a Catholic upbringing or “brainwashing,” to use your word, isn’t enough. Critical philosophical analysis as an adult coupled with a Catholic upbringing makes me believe.
Kevin, so you admit that the chances of being brainwashed into a particular religion AND then figuring out through “history” and “experiencing god” that it was right after all is slim yet you still bash on believing in it? Please explain to the next brainwashed Hindu or Muslim woman wearing a tent you meet where they’ve gone wrong in their study of history.
Will do. I’ll tell them you said hello.
To be honest I was kinda hoping they’d stick to their threat, would have been interesting!
Glad I wasn’t the only one to see the irony in this article.
Phew.
The cap looks suspicously like a penis!
Roman Catholicism and Fascism. Easy to compare. Harder to contrast.
Catholic Church loves fetuses – and physically and sexually tortures children.
Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?
Why do people still care about the Catholic Church if any other organisation committed half the crimes they have you would have nothing to do with them. They have no right to interfere in anything in the country they are a pack of money grabbing power driven liers.
If it isnt already.
have your say