GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - Criminal complaint against the bomber

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)

- Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

- - Criminal complaint against the bomber (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1107267)

sarettah

04-22-2013 02:12 PM

Criminal complaint against the bomber

Apologies if this has been posted, checked but did not find it.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/doc...-tsarnaev/412/

It is a pdf in a frame so I can't copy and paste the text.

.

nexcom28

04-22-2013 02:15 PM

Is this a leaked document?

sarettah

04-22-2013 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexcom28 (Post 19591728)

Is this a leaked document?

Nope, they unsealed it.

Quote:

The Justice Department, in a criminal complaint unsealed Monday, charged Dzhokhar Tsarnaev with using a "weapon of mass destruction" in the Boston Marathon bombings. It said he used his cellphone as he waited for the first blast, allegedly detonated by his older brother a block up the street, then "calmly but rapidly" walked away, leaving a backpack containing the second bomb on the ground near a metal barrier in front of the Forum Restaurant, where it exploded about 10 seconds later. According to the FBI, one of the brothers later told the driver of a vehicle they carjacked, “Did you hear about the Boston explosion? I did that."

sarettah

04-22-2013 02:21 PM

The chronology from the complaint. That is NOT an exact match to the complaint, it is from CNN http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/22/us/cri...ston-marathon/

Quote:

At 2:38 p.m. on Monday, April 15, roughly 11 minutes prior to the first blast, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are caught on camera turning onto Boylston Street, the thoroughfare where the finish line is located.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev is wearing a baseball cap, sunglasses, a white shirt, dark coat and tan pants. His little brother is wearing a gray hoodie, a black jacket and dark pants. He also has a white baseball cap, turned backward on his head.

The pair walks east, toward the Boston Marathon finish line, Tamerlan Tsarnaev in front of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, wearing a knapsack on his back.

The two are seen standing about a half-block from Forum restaurant, the site of the second explosion, at about 2:41 p.m. A minute later, Tamerlan Tsarnaev begins walking toward the finish line again. He still has his knapsack.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev begins walking toward the finish line at about 2:45 p.m. He has his right thumb hooked under his backpack strap and there's a phone in his left hand. He stops in front of Forum.

He's near the metal barricades separating spectators from the marathon contestants, standing with his back to the cameras.
"He then can be seen apparently slipping his knapsack onto the ground. A photograph taken from the opposite side of the street shows the knapsack on the ground at (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's) feet."

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev stays at this location for about four minutes, looking at his cell phone and "once appearing to take a picture with it." About 30 seconds before the first blast, he lifts the phone to his head and speaks for about 18 seconds.

He finishes the call, and the first explosion goes off within seconds. "Virtually" everyone along Boylston turns toward the finish line, "in apparent bewilderment and alarm," but not Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. He appears calm.

"He glances to the east and then calmly but rapidly begins moving to the west, away from the direction of the finish line. He walks away without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing.

"Approximately 10 seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev) had placed his knapsack." Like Tamerlan Tsarnaev's bag, the knapsack is placed along a metal barrier. It's about a block from the first explosion.

sarettah

04-22-2013 02:24 PM

Patch has an html version up now

http://eastgreenwich.patch.com/artic...rnaev-e71de402

.

_Richard_

04-22-2013 02:25 PM

ahh so it's a 'complaint' and not a charge?

that's cute

sarettah

04-22-2013 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19591743)

ahh so it's a 'complaint' and not a charge?

that's cute

This is the application for complaint that the charges are based on. So, this is what was presented to the judge.

Quote:

28. Based on the foregoing, there is probable cause to believe that on or about April 15, 2013, DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV violated 18 U.S.C. 2332a (using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction, resulting in death) and 844(i) (malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive device, resulting in death). Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Court issue a complaint charging DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV with those crimes.

Daniel R. Genck

Special Agent

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Mr Pheer

04-22-2013 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19591743)

ahh so it's a 'complaint' and not a charge?

that's cute

Courts work on formalities. Pretty sure Canada's justice system works in a similar way.

_Richard_

04-22-2013 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarettah (Post 19591750)

This is the application for complaint that the charges are based on. So, this is what was presented to the judge.

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Pheer (Post 19591891)

Courts work on formalities. Pretty sure Canada's justice system works in a similar way.

i was under the impression the 'legal reason' for not reading miranda rights and making this a 'complaint'; is that the crime is 'still ongoing'

is this incorrect?

seems to be all sorts of experts

2013	04-22-2013 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19592052)

i was under the impression the 'legal reason' for not reading miranda rights and making this a 'complaint'; is that the crime is 'still ongoing'

is this incorrect?

seems to be all sorts of experts

no miranda rights because with terrorism charges they don't have to give you the rights of regular criminals

Supz	04-22-2013 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19592052)

i was under the impression the 'legal reason' for not reading miranda rights and making this a 'complaint'; is that the crime is 'still ongoing'

is this incorrect?

seems to be all sorts of experts

He was officially charged today.

I am not sure, but you might give up your miranda rights if it has something to do with terrorism.

_Richard_

04-22-2013 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supz (Post 19592060)

He was officially charged today.

I am not sure, but you might give up your miranda rights if it has something to do with terrorism.

terrorism, that weird, legal, grey area word, that no one will define, correct?

hey did Israel get rid of that law that legalizes using Palestinian children and women as human shields?

ZeroHero

04-22-2013 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supz (Post 19592060)

He was officially charged today.

I am not sure, but you might give up your miranda rights if it has something to do with terrorism.

terorism is fancy this days :)

Rochard

04-22-2013 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2013 (Post 19592059)

no miranda rights because with terrorism charges they don't have to give you the rights of regular criminals

It seems you do not have to be read your miranda rights. You only get read your miranda rights if they plan on using statements you make against you later in court.

sandman!

04-22-2013 05:11 PM

hope he fries in hell

_Richard_

04-22-2013 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 19592112)

It seems you do not have to be read your miranda rights. You only get read your miranda rights if they plan on using statements you make against you later in court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_v._Arizona

seems like the supreme court disagrees with you

Supz	04-22-2013 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19592086)

terrorism, that weird, legal, grey area word, that no one will define, correct?

hey did Israel get rid of that law that legalizes using Palestinian children and women as human shields?

i mean. nothing really grey about putting bombs in a place that is populated by masses.

Verb
Create and maintain a state of extreme fear and distress in (someone); fill with terror

Barry-xlovecam

04-22-2013 05:49 PM

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_10
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
Rule 10. Arraignment

_Richard_

04-22-2013 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supz (Post 19592189)

i mean. nothing really grey about putting bombs in a place that is populated by masses.

Verb
Create and maintain a state of extreme fear and distress in (someone); fill with terror

(d) Definitions
As used in this section?
(1) the term ?international terrorism? means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
(2) the term ?terrorism? means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
(3) the term ?terrorist group? means any group, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism;
(4) the terms ?territory? and ?territory of the country? mean the land, waters, and airspace of the country; and
(5) the terms ?terrorist sanctuary? and ?sanctuary? mean an area in the territory of the country?
(A) that is used by a terrorist or terrorist organization?
(i) to carry out terrorist activities, including training, fundraising, financing, and recruitment; or
(ii) as a transit point; and
(B) the government of which expressly consents to, or with knowledge, allows, tolerates, or disregards such use of its territory and is not subject to a determination under?
(i) section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the Appendix to title 50;
(ii) section 2371 (a) of this title; or
(iii) section 2780 (d) of this title.

Quote:

United States Law Code ? the law that governs the entire country ? contains a definition of terrorism embedded in its requirement that Annual Country reports on Terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year. (From U.S. Code Title 22, Ch.38, Para. 2656f(d)

which one of these does your scholarship student belong in?

I am assuming the 2nd point.. but what political message did they have?

very confusing

and when does 'terrorist bill of rights (or lackthereof)' start, and where does the 'regular criminal bill of rights' begin?

_Richard_

04-22-2013 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19592209)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_10
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
Rule 10. Arraignment

thought that must be done in open court?

theking

04-22-2013 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19592130)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_v._Arizona

seems like the supreme court disagrees with you

I think not.

Barry-xlovecam

04-22-2013 06:13 PM

The government didn't read him his Miranda rights because they have enough to convict him at trial already.

There were exigent circumstances to find out immediately if he had any other accomplices. Interestingly, the Canadians made arrests today of "alleged" terrorists;

Quote:

Alleged 'al-Qaeda-supported' plot against Via train thwarted
Police say 2 accused were getting 'direction and guidance' from al-Qaeda elements in Iran

There was a specific route targeted, not necessarily a specific train, Strachan said, although she declined to reveal the route. According to a Reuters report, U.S. law enforcement and national security sources said the alleged plot targeted a rail line between Toronto and New York City.

The two men arrested are not Canadian citizens but were in the country legally, police said Monday. Investigators would not provide any details about their nationalities.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...c-arrests.html

No connection from the reported arrests but this is a continuing thing. How many Canadians would have been on that train? "the alleged plot targeted a rail line between Toronto and New York City"

Barry-xlovecam

04-22-2013 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 19592219)

thought that must be done in open court?

It's allowed to do an arraignment by a video link and is done all the time. Read to the bottom of rule 10.

Quote:

(c) Video Teleconferencing. Video teleconferencing may be used to arraign a defendant if the defendant consents.

He must have consented and his court appointed attorney was present.

sarettah

04-22-2013 06:21 PM

I have read in several places that he was read his rights when he was charged. This is what Huffington Post says:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3134745.html

Quote:

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, charged Monday with using a weapon of mass destruction and malicious destruction of property resulting in a death in the Boston Marathon Bombings, was read his Miranda rights at his hospital bedside Monday after the Justice Department invoked Miranda's public safety exception.

A federal magistrate judge read the rights to Tsarnaev, an American citizen of Chechen descent, at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Tsarnaev nodded his head to answer the judge's questions, and answered "no" when asked if he could afford a lawyer. He remained in serious condition at the hospital.

_Richard_

04-22-2013 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19592243)

The government didn't read him his Miranda rights because they have enough to convict him at trial already.

There were exigent circumstances to find out immediately if he had any other accomplices. Interestingly, the Canadians made arrests today of "alleged" terrorists;

No connection from the reported arrests but this is a continuing thing. How many Canadians would have been on that train? "the alleged plot targeted a rail line between Toronto and New York City"

libya and syria they're the good guys

north america they're the bad guys

tough keeping up

SEXTANT

04-22-2013 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZeroHero (Post 19592109)

terorism is fancy this days :)

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

_Richard_

04-23-2013 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19592247)

It's allowed to do an arraignment by a video link and is done all the time. Read to the bottom of rule 10.

He must have consented and his court appointed attorney was present.

Quote:

Tsarnaev was informed of the charges and read his rights in his hospital room on Monday morning,

guess he should have been read his rights?

Coup D'etat

04-23-2013 03:19 PM

Why is the media, and everyone else, ignoring a very pertinent question? How did the brothers afford their lifestyle (driving a Benz, nice clothes)? Tamerlan was apparently a stay at home dad, and an ex-boxer... These guys were funded by somebody, or were drug dealers. This, not all of the other retarded conspiracy theories, makes me think there is something muddy here...

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:54 PM.