Hey, there! Log in / Register

Now comes the second phase of the trial: A sentence

WBUR explains what happens after yesterday's verdict in the Tsarnaev case.

Kevin Cullen wonders:

Do we, or in this case the jurors acting as our surrogates, serve justice and honor the memory of Tsarnaev’s victims more by killing him or by putting him in prison for the rest of his sorry life?

Yvonne Abraham replies we're better than him and should avoid a revenge death sentence.

Joe Fitzgerald opposes death as well, but to avoid giving America haters a martyr - and to let him spend every day realizing it's the country he hates that is keeping him alive.

L’chaim, Dzhokhar! Live long as America’s guest. That’s your punishment, kid.

Don't worry, the Herald has a columnist who wants him to fry.

The Globe talks to bombing victims. Peter Gelzinis reports there's no closure for one victim.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

... had been tried in Mass. Superior Court for multiple homicide, as he could have been, he would have received mandatory life without parole and we would be done with him.

up
Voting closed 0

Massachusetts has automatic Supreme Judicial Court review of every life-without-parole sentence (see G.L. c. 278 § 33E), so there would still be at least a pro forma appeal. But you're right that it would be over a lot quicker than if the federal jury sentences Tsarnaev to die; if so, expect a decade of appeals up and down the federal court system.

up
Voting closed 0

He certainly deserves to die but killing him would just be extending our pointless war w Islam. Let's stop killing.

up
Voting closed 0

You have any idea how much revenue the war on Islam generates?

What are you...a Communist?

up
Voting closed 0

Is awesome!

up
Voting closed 0