<p>Not a death penalty supporter, but IMHO it would have been wise to wait to announce this decision until after the Sochi Olympics. Why give lunatic militants in Chechnya an excuse to target the American Olympic team? </p>
<p>Links:
[Huffington</a> Post Tsarnaev Effects](<a href=“http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4694745]Huffington”>http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4694745)
[CNN</a> Tsarnaev Death Penalty](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/30/justice/tsarnaev-death-penalty/]CNN”>http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/30/justice/tsarnaev-death-penalty/)
[US</a> News Tsarnaev Death Penalty](<a href=“U.S. News: Latest Breaking Stories, Video, and Photos on American Politics, Economy, and Society | NBC News”>U.S. News: Latest Breaking Stories, Video, and Photos on American Politics, Economy, and Society | NBC News)</p>
<p>They don’t need an excuse to target the American Olympics team, or any American. It’s like getting psyched out about the anniversary of 9/11 – as if bad guys need to wait until the 11th of September to go and do bad things. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was my understanding that they had to file their intentions by today or tomorrow, so it is public record anyway.</p>
<p>It’s understandable from a public policy perspective: if you believe in the death penalty at all, then it should be applied in cases of mass murder with the aggravating circumstance of terrorism. I can see the intent to make that statement, though of course the “bad guys” don’t care. </p>
<p>It is a good day when prosecutors apply the laws as they were intended to be applied. When a terrorist murders others, he should be punished with death. I just hope they can find a jury that won’t interject their own personal agendas and disregard the death penalty. The evidence will be overwhelming that this terrorist killed many people. I cannot wait until he sees his last breath. </p>
<p>^^^ agree</p>
<p>"if you believe in the death penalty at all, then it should be applied in cases of mass murder with the aggravating circumstance of terrorism. "</p>
<p>Exactly. I don’t think there is any question as to whether the “right guy” has been arrested for this crime. When there isn’t any doubt and the crime is DP-worthy, then it should be applied. </p>
<p>He hasn’t gotten the death penalty. It’s an option for him, and that had to be so designated. In Mass, the chances are pretty danged low he will get it. But it’s on the table for pleas, deals, info. Until the trial and the evidence is all on the table, whether it should be applied is a whole other issue. </p>
<p>“But it’s on the table for pleas, deals, info.”</p>
<p>Good point. Sometimes just having it on the table moves the defense to do a plea deal. however, I don’t think this particular defendant would accept one. </p>
<p>Plus, having the DP on the table means that the jury must be DP-qualified.</p>
<p>Razor, I don’t care what a killer’s politics are, whether she’s a terrorist, jealous spouse or a simply or remorseless thug with homicidal tendencies. I want the laws applied equally when equivalent circumstances justify it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought this is a federal case?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And this is why designation of "hate crime’ is so preposterous to me. When we don’t apply this designation, do we mean to say that the crime was the crime of tolerance or love?</p>
<p>Yes, it is…It will be tried in federal courts in Massachusetts, still. My very close friends DD worked for a federal judge in Mass. And she says there hasn’t been a death penalty since it was added to the feds. Look up when the last execution in Mass occurred.</p>
<p>And the fact of the matter is that this trial is going to cost–big time. Take a lot of resources whether it’s from feds or the state, and you get an anti death penalty judge which could well be the case in Mass? They may well negotiate. Honestly, the only reason i see that they would not is because of the national, worldwide interest in the case, so they will have to step carefully to avoid getting crucified. Seriously, check out the scene in Mass courts and the death penalty, and yes, the fed courts in Mass, and tell me what you think the odds are of a jury trial ending in the DP there. Especially, look a the polls as to what the sentiment is about the DP in Mass. Makes it tricky for the prosecutor to go for the DP, because when you do that with a jury that doesn’t want to do it, you do risk losing the case. That 's sort of what happened with the Casey Anthony case, and that was in Florida where the population is not DP adverse.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree 100%. That’s why it is so important that the prosecutors sought the death penalty. The evidence will be overwhelming against this murder and he should be given the death penalty. </p>
<p>Actual death penalty executions in the US are quite rare, except in a few states, notably Texas.</p>
<p>I oppose the death penalty in all cases, including this one. I’d like to see THAT applied equally. Life in prison: fine.</p>
<p>The idea of a “death qualified” jury is sickening. </p>
<p>The prosecutors will be hard pressed to find jurors here in MA who think the death penalty is okay, or who don’t think Tsarnaev is guilty as sin. A change of venue is more likely to get him a fair trial, but could increase the odds of him receiving the death penalty if convicted. I haven’t been called for jury duty in years and I am worried that I might get called for this case. I wish that coward would just admit what he did and go to prison for the rest of his life rather than putting people through a long, expensive and painful trial.</p>
<p>I don’t think admitting what he did would make much of a difference. With what he did, the DA is going to have to go to trial. It was just too big, too newsworthy, too shocking, involving too many people. </p>
<p>He’d do better getting a local trial. A lot of people in the area who know the young many, liked him. They are of the mind that he got dragged into this by his horrible, terrorist brother who is now dead, so a lot can just be thrown on him. I think Mass is going to hard pressed to get a tough verdict on him locally because of that. </p>
<p>Ted Kaczynski pleaded in exchange for life without parole.
No surprise if Tsarnaev does the same.</p>
<p>The prosecutors invoked the death penalty not only because of the serious nature of the crime, but also to maximize their penalty negotiating position should the defendant be inclined to plead. </p>
<p>If they start out with the most serious penalty on the table, they can probably increase the ultimate negotiated penalty should it go to plea-bargaining. </p>