Another Show Trial For Another Patsy
The recent trial of alleged Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was just the latest high-profile example of how corrupt our legal system is. Tsarnaev was accorded the same brand of justice that patsies charged with significant events have received since at least the 1930s, when hapless Bruno Richard Hauptmann was “defended” by a famous lawyer known by the confidence-building name of “Death House” Reilly.
Tsarnaev’s attorney was Judy Clarke, who seems to gravitate to these cases. She built her undeserved reputation by “defending” the likes of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski and purported Gabby Giffords’ assailant Jared Lee Loughner. Despite the fact that Tsarnaev had initially pleaded not guilty to all 30 charges against him, and the myriad of easily detected holes in the case against him, Clarke opened her defense by telling the court, “It was him.” There was no attempt to cross-examine the dubious witnesses, or dismantle the easily dismantled arguments of the prosecution. Instead, Clarke blamed Dzhokhar’s deceased older brother, killed under very questionable circumstances by the police, and insinuated that the younger boy was merely a naive dupe.
Clarke’s ridiculous, twenty minute closing statement consisted of attempts to cast her client in the role of misguided, jealous sibling. “He expressed he was jealous of his brother, who achieved martyrdom,” Clarke declared. She did not explain how he was by any definition a martyr, or who would have considered him as such. She bought every bit of the absurd official narrative, including the mind numbingly impossible “confession” Dzhokhar supposedly wrote on the side of the boat where he was captured.
The entire Boston Bombing event has been dissected to pieces on the internet, by real citizen investigators. There are no true investigative spirits left in the mainstream media, of course, so the mainstream media dutifully passed along all the implausible elements of this story, without questioning a single thing. Their “coverage” was perhaps best expressed in a March 30, 2015 Vanity Fair headline, “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, The Boston Bomber, Has the Most Ferocious Lawyer in America Defending Him.” How many inaccuracies can one media organ fit into a single headline? Clarke’s defense of Tsarnaev certainly turned out to be anything but “ferocious,” and the magazine might at least have paid cursory service to the whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing, and identified Tsarnaev as the “alleged” Boston Bomber.
But the secrecy surrounding these proceedings even taxed the patience of the compliant establishment press. The Washington Post complained, in a January 29, 2015 story, that they “have never faced the sorts of restrictions imposed by Judge George O’Toole in the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev…The bulk of the filings in the case are under seal…and reporters are excluded from seeing or hearing much of the courtroom discussion that would customarily be public.” Judy Clarke called all of four witnesses before resting her case, and never cross- examined any of the victims.
Even leaving aside all the questionable aspects of the event, which were captured on film and subjected to intense scrutiny on the internet, the case against the Tsarnaev brothers was flimsier even than the case against Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City Bombing, and it should have been destroyed by any competent defense attorney. Was older brother Tamerlan an FBI informant? Their mother insisted that the FBI had been in contact with Tamerlan for up to five years. What about all the footage of individuals wearing the uniform of private security firm Craft International, complete with backpacks, who were in the immediate vicinity of the blast?
The questions are plentiful. Why were runners told that a bomb squad drill was taking place during the Boston Marathon? As participant Alastair Stevenson told a local television station, “They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was nothing to worry about.” Stevenson also described lookouts on the rooftops and “dogs with their handlers sniffing around for explosives..” Clearly, this cried out for investigation, but the mainstream media has become totally toothless and hardly more than a mouthpiece for the state at this point.
Was it really Tamerlan who was killed by the authorities in a shoot out? How and why was he shot, after being apprehended naked (and how strange was that?) His aunt claimed adamantly to alternative reporters that the naked man was not her nephew. And what about the preposterous added detail, not seen in the footage (which also doesn’t show the naked “Tamerlan” being shot or even injured as he is led into a police car) that Dzhokhar backed the car over his brother’s body in an attempt to escape?
A key question is just how Judy Clarke came to be Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s attorney. Could he not make her aware of the key flaws in the case against him? What about his family- they had been quite vocal early on about his (and Tamerlan’s) innocence, although his mother was pressured to flee America and could only rant about the verdict from abroad. Exactly who decided to “appoint” Clarke to represent Tsarnaev? Surely, with all the conjecture about the case, there must have been a decent lawyer somewhere who was cognizant of the holes in the story, and anxious to bolster their reputation by defending Tsarnaev.
What about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s friend Ibragim Todashev, who was simply murdered by the FBI while in custody? You read that correctly. That’s all the information we have about this incident; that Todashev was killed while being questioned. This is a highly unusual circumstance, to say the least. What innocent explanation would there be for a witness under interrogation to ever be killed by the authorities? Needless to say, there are no Woodward and Bernsteins out there in the heartland to ask the tough questions of those who were responsible for Todashev’s death. But it certainly isn’t a “conspiracy theory” to be flabbergasted and highly suspicious about this.
The “evidence” against the Tsarnaev brothers consisted largely of a video tape that the authorities have yet to produce, and which even his inept defense team declared did not exist, and a mysterious, still unidentified witness known only as “Danny,” a Chinese man who was supposedly carjacked by the Tsarnaevs and heard Tamerlan conveniently confess to the Boston Bombing, as well as to the shooting of a police officer at MIT. Following the death of Tamerlan under still unclear circumstances, a huge manhunt for Dzhokhar ensued, resulting in a virtual lockdown of the city and culminating in the apprehension of the younger brother, amid a fusillade of excess bullets, in a boat in the backyard of a residence.
How did “Danny” escape the clutches of the carjacking fugitives? How did Dzhokhar escape the authorities, in the midst of a huge shootout, during which he was wildly outmatched, and elude them for so long when the entire area was under intense surveillance? Why wasn’t the eerily timed drill investigated? Why didn’t the defense raise any of the multitude of questions that cry out for answers?
In the aftermath of the apprehension of the wounded Dzhokhar, America regressed into its customary Idiocracy-like mindlessness. “Boston Strong” became the rallying cry everywhere, from sporting events to shameless politicians, as everyone praised the city itself for somehow being heroic by virtue of enduring an event that took the lives of three people. They also proudly endured virtual martial law, and Americans were treated to videos of military tanks rolling through tree-lined streets, with sharpshooters pointing their weapons at innocent residents. They ordered citizens out of their homes without any reason or rationale. And after all the terrorizing was over, the citizens who experienced it cheered the militarized police, crediting their heroes for a capture they would never have made without the help of the resident of the home, who contacted the clueless authorities and told them the suspect was outside hiding in his boat.
I refer those interested in the more frightening, esoteric elements of the Boston Bombing story to the work done by Dave McGowan on his web site. He really goes down the rabbit hole at this link: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr114.html If ever there was a case where a real defense could have embarrassed the authorities by exposing their lies and chicanery, it was this one. A first year law student could have done a better job than Judy Clarke. But I’m sure the mainstream media still thinks she’s “ferocious.”
In the end, Judy Clarke’s curious strategy of fighting only to defeat the death penalty failed, as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was sentenced to death. And so he will presumably join Timothy McVeigh in the pantheon of patsies killed by the state, forever silenced without even testifying in his own defense. Like McVeigh, Dzhokhar sat stoically throughout his farce of a trial, and there is little chance that he will ever be interviewed by any intrepid journalist before his execution.
Dzhokhar’s fate was assured from the moment he was charged. To be accused of a highly publicized violent crime, especially where any political motives can be ascribed, is tantamount to guilt in our culture. Did anyone really imagine that Bruno Richard Hauptmann, James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan, Timothy McVeigh, Jared Lee Loughner or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev would be found not guilty? Does anyone expect that James Holmes (the alleged Aurora, Colorado “Batman” shooter whose trial is about to begin) will be found not guilty? There is a 100% conviction rate in these kinds of high-profile cases, which makes every one of the trials associated with them nothing more than legal charades.
There is far more to this story than I can write about here. I would urge interested readers to check out all the excellent videos readily available online, that break down all the impossible aspects of the incident, and show beyond any doubt that, whatever happened that day at the Boston Marathon, the Tsarnaev brothers weren’t responsible for it.