Tsarnaev pleads not guilty as Boston Marathon bombing survivors watch

Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev pleaded not guilty Wednesday as 30 survivors and victims' relatives stared him down in a Boston courtroom.

Tsarnaev, 19, was arraigned on a 30-count indictment that charges him with using weapons of mass destruction and killing four people. He wore an orange jail jumpsuit over a black T-shirt and a bandage or cast on his left hand and smiled crookedly at times.

"Not guilty," he said over and over as each charge was read.
The eight-minute hearing marked Tsarnaev's first public appearance since he was hauled bleeding from a boat four days after the twin blasts near the finish line of the April 15 race. He returns to court Sept. 23.

Around 30 people injured during the Boston incident attended the court hearing to witness.

usnews.nbcnews.com...

Personally, I'm glad there's going to be a trial as I'm curious about a lot of things leading up to it. Hopefully there will be no media ban, etc.

What's the rest of you's opinion?

Glad there is a trial as well, though it will not be a fair one. Im still not sure what I believe about the bombings after hours of research I just had to move on to something different honestly. I certainly hope some truth will come out of this.

Originally posted by tigershark1988
Glad there is a trial as well, though it will not be a fair one. Im still not sure what I believe about the bombings after hours of research I just had to move on to something different honestly. I certainly hope some truth will come out of this.

Myself as well. But if he did indeed do what he did, regardless of who else was involved, he should stand trial in the court of law. It beats sending him off to Guantanamo, it beats vigilante justice, it beats him going suicidal.

The people who were hurt in this I'm sure feel the same way.

reply to post by boncho


This is going to get real ugly. All the rhetoric/video's, everything surrounding this scenerio stinks... I truelly hope closure comes from this but inside, me inner self say "WTF THIS CAN GET UGLY"

I want to hear his defense.

Wouldn't be surprised if they 'sedated' him like they did with James Holmes.

Why would he plead not guilty if he supposeddly confessed two different times?!?

Originally posted by ObservingYou
I want to hear his defense.

Wouldn't be surprised if they 'sedated' him like they did with James Holmes.

James Holmes was/is mentally ill also unstable and that is not the case with Tsarnaev, i doubt they would do that.

The truth is there is so many things that are not even going to be looked at during this trial that it wont even be a fail trial.

I feel this kid was setup to sell something illegal and once stuff hit the fan he started running. With his backpack on.

Even some of his friends said he wouldn't of been caught with something like that, but he would of been caught with something illegal.

The fact he left with his backpack on. The fact there was other individuals there wearing the seal hats or w/e. The fact they had backpacks up until the bombing.

The family guy episode with the same exact event (Don't tell me it's not true. I have the episode saved).

The Illuminati card game (Of course these and the family guy wouldn't be brought up in a trial).

The fact there is a picture of this kid coming out of the boat, but the next ones are him getting a Tracheotomy?

The fact the boat had blood on it, like he got shot.

The fact he was unarmed, the fact they wont show the video of him and his brother in the gun fight but there are witnesses who say the cops ran him over.

Man there are so many FACTS, things that are actually non debatable.

I bet though, Actually I predict none of this comes up. Why? Because it's factual and not debatable.

These are things that are on the kids side and would make the jury question the police and establishment.

Which would be in favor of him.

Which obviously they don't want.

Perhaps in facing the grim prospect of the death penalty, his council have advised him to at least try and fight the charges. It is his right, or does the patriot act and such render that point moot?

He could also believe he is not guilty of a crime in the context in which he envisions his actions or perhaps he believes he is non guilty as part of some delusion.

In any case I don't think he is escaping so e form of punishment, regardless of the veracity of the charges or the final verdict.

reply to post by JrDavis

Which obviously they don't want.

Unless of course it is not even a real trial or not even the real kid.

Originally posted by jaws1975
Why would he plead not guilty if he supposeddly confessed two different times?!?

If he is going to trial it means he was given a lawyer. That lawyer has the interest of their client first and foremost in mind when they advise them.

In this case the lawyer is going to argue those confessions should be thrown out, or they were done in extenuating circumstances, etc.

Any lawyer will try and win a case for their clients. No matter the client, as it's their job and it represents what the system is founded off of.

Sometimes people go free when everyone knows they are guilty, like OJ, and the system has a target on their back for the rest of their life. Which is why OJ ended up going to jail for something else entirely.

There is also the possibility of the lawyer planning to dump truck him. The term used, when they either convince them to plea, or offer them up such a terrible defence they are guaranteed to go away. This would be the latter, and in which case, pleading guilty would actually get them a worse sentence because they did not admit their guilt or take responsibility.

it can only ever be a fake trial as the bombings 'he' is accused of were staged
with no real deaths or injuries.
i suspect these 'terrorists' don't really exist (as opposed to being patsies or actors)
and look forward examing high definition motion images of the 'defendant' in action
at his trial. i won't hold my breath.

I've been waiting to see the evidence. I'm also not convinced about a lot of things.

I definitely want to see the video of someone setting down a bag at one of the sites.

I too am glad there will be a trial.


I remember when "weapons of mass destruction" meant nuclear bomb. Now just any ole bomb eh?

reply to post by TopsyTurvyOne

it can only ever be a fake trial as the bombings 'he' is accused of were staged with no real deaths or injuries.

"No real deaths or injuries"?.............really?

What a clown

Originally posted by TopsyTurvyOne
it can only ever be a fake trial as the bombings 'he' is accused of were staged
with no real deaths or injuries.
i suspect these 'terrorists' don't really exist (as opposed to being patsies or actors)
and look forward examing high definition motion images of the 'defendant' in action
at his trial. i won't hold my breath.

edit on 10-7-2013 by TopsyTurvyOne because: (no reason given)

You have absolutely no evidence to support that opinion. You admit so by posting such an accusation without providing anything to support such an incredible statement.

There is a 30 page thread here,vetting all the fake articles online about the event being fake.

I admit, in the beginning it was mostly a logical argument, but myself and others pulled apart all the made up stories that were floating around about the entire thing being fake, or fake people involved. The only fake thing about Boston, was the lies made up after to push peoples online profiles or get them attention.

reply to post by JrDavis


Wow, this is exactly what is wrong with ATS.

"I know all the facts like the guys in seal hats, or whatever they were and that family guy cartoon, don't try to tell me it's not what it is!!!!"

You should have been a lawyer. Really. They need professionals like you in the system...

Originally posted by boncho
...Personally, I'm glad there's going to be a trial as I'm curious about a lot of things leading up to it. Hopefully there will be no media ban, etc.
...What's the rest of you's opinion?

I'm glad there will be a trial, too.
I've been sorely disappointed in the quality of the claims/case made against him in the Criminal Complaint and Indictment...
For a grand jury to put so lengthy an indictment together...with the grand bulk of it "circumstantial", I would think any attorney worth half a juris doctorate could get him off...if the proceedings were "fair".
If it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (in the jury's eyes), that he wrote the message in the boat...the government will probably win.
I have to wonder, though - how in the world can there be an impartial jury? ...
How can there be a jury whose views aren't tainted by all "the leaks" and slabs of misinformation that poured from "government officials" (not to forget conspiracy & other theorists from coast to coast) for weeks after the incident?

What I want to know is why craft agents were seen at the "bombing site" that day? There the ones wearing the black hats with the punisher like symbol. I'm not totally sold that Tsarnaev or his brother were responsible. The craft agency is nefarious at best. One agent was actually photgrahped holding what appears to be some kind of detonator. I also find it strange that bombing "drills" were held just days before the incident. This seems like another case where a "drill" was "flipped live". There are still many unanswered questions. I never trust the "official" story.

reply to post by IndieA

I've been waiting to see the evidence. I'm also not convinced about a lot of things. I definitely want to see the video of someone setting down a bag at one of the sites.

Has there been a video of them dropping the bag? All I have seen is them walking down the sidewalk, is there something I have missed?

Sorry if I have not done the quoting right, this is only my 2nd post.