2015 Federal Trial

Judge O'Toole instructed prospective jurors on the presumption of innocence, conditional capital sentencing duties, questionnaires, and restrictions on case discussions, media coverage, and research.

Judge O'Toole instructed two prospective-juror groups on questionnaires, the presumption of innocence, and sentencing duties if there were a death-eligible conviction. He addressed privacy and hardship requests and directed jurors to avoid case discussions, coverage, and outside research.

Judge O'Toole oriented prospective jurors, explained questionnaire requirements and hardship review, and prohibited case discussions, media exposure and independent research.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-sentencing rules and questioned prospective jurors about impartiality, punishment, and hardship. He limited case-specific follow-up questions, resolved agreed exclusions and contested challenges, and left a proposed pool-reporter arrangement unresolved.

Individual voir dire addressed impartiality, hardship, and capital sentencing views alongside disputes over questioning and public access. The court excused Jurors 42 and 43 for cause over defense opposition and deferred decisions on Jurors 38 and 54 for transcript review.

Capital-trial instructions and individual voir dire addressed publicity, impartiality, punishment views and hardship. The court set limits on questioning, provisionally qualified Juror 60, excused Jurors 65, 70 and 76, and denied several challenges.

Jury selection focused on existing guilt opinions, capital punishment and hardship. The court declined major changes to voir dire, excused Juror 84 after she said she could not vote for death, and denied the defense's challenge to Juror 98.

Voir dire examined presumed guilt and death-penalty views, and three prospective jurors were added to the pool. The court deferred reconsideration of Juror 60's qualification and sealed a venue motion pending review of redactions.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-trial standards as individual voir dire examined publicity, impartiality, and sentencing views. The court preserved a continuing defense objection to questioning limits, excluded Juror No. 140 after a conditional social-media agreement, and ruled on several juror challenges. The issue of jurors viewing life imprisonment as harsher than death remained unresolved.

Judge O'Toole explained conditional capital sentencing as individual jury questioning continued on publicity, hardship, impartiality, and punishment views. The court resolved challenges, confirmed five prospective jurors as qualified, and left courthouse security measures unchanged after defense objections about their possible effect on jurors.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-trial rules while prospective jurors were questioned about impartiality and sentencing. He limited portions of counsel's questioning and denied government cause challenges to Jurors 204 and 215. Four prospective jurors advanced.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-trial standards before individual juror interviews addressed publicity, sentencing views, personal connections, social media, and hardship. He struck Jurors 219 and 251, citing volatility as the principal reason for striking Juror 251, while other qualification and hardship matters remained unresolved.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-case sentencing rules before individual questioning explored publicity, prior opinions, hardship, and punishment views. The court later rejected challenges to Jurors 260 and 263, allowed unopposed strikes of Jurors 281 and 296, and excused Juror 288 as substantially impaired in considering death.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-sentencing standards before individual juror questioning on guilt opinions, punishment, and hardship. Sidebar rulings included several excusals, a reserved decision, and rejection of the defense's asserted tradeoff between impartiality on guilt and favorability on punishment.

Judge O'Toole explained capital-case responsibilities as individual jury questioning continued. For-cause rulings excluded Jurors 345 and 355, while rejecting challenges to Jurors 350 and 352.

Judge O'Toole explained capital sentencing requirements before questioning prospective jurors about hardship, impartiality, and punishment. The court denied defense challenges to Jurors 375 and 390 and excused Jurors 393 and 396, distinguishing similar answers partly through its observations of juror demeanor.

Judge O'Toole explained capital sentencing requirements before individual juror questioning on impartiality, hardship, and death-penalty views. The court granted the defense challenge to Juror 427, denied the challenge to Juror 429, and confirmed that Jurors 425 and 429 remained in the pool.

Judge O'Toole explained capital sentencing requirements before individual juror questioning explored death-penalty views and prior opinions. The court denied the defense challenge to Juror 448, excused Juror 454 from returning, and left a proposed change to peremptory-strike procedures undecided.

Prospective jurors received capital-sentencing instructions and answered questions about impartiality, death-penalty views, and hardship. The Court addressed questioning limits, rejected the government's cause challenge to Juror 446, and granted the defense's challenge to Juror 489.

Jury questioning examined prior guilt opinions, death-penalty views, personal connections, and service hardships. The court denied defense cause challenges to Jurors 534 and 536, found Juror 537 substantially impaired, and excused a prospective juror with family connections to Officer Rick Donahue.

Judge O'Toole explained conditional capital sentencing before individual questioning about impartiality, personal connections, hardship, and death-penalty views. The court retained three challenged jurors, excused Juror No. 649, and outlined a conditional schedule for completing jury selection.

Counsel disputed guilt-phase mitigation, physical and forensic evidence, and foreign witness requests. The judge denied exclusion of proposed polymer and tape comparisons but reserved or deferred several other issues. Jury-selection procedures were set, with two jury challenges still requiring resolution before the jury was sworn.

The court accepted the defense’s stated nonracial reasons for three challenged juror strikes and announced 18 selected trial jurors and alternates.

Guilt-phase rulings and jury instructions preceded competing opening statements about the brothers' roles. Marathon organizers, a store manager, and injured spectators then testified about the blasts, emergency aid, and injuries, with photographs and videos presented to the jury.

Survivors, relatives, and police officers described the Marathon explosions, rescues, and injuries. FBI witnesses addressed surveillance collection, and the Forum video was admitted. The court addressed photograph and injury-testimony objections, cautioned against testimony concerning punishment rather than guilt, and required prior permission for references to Iraq or Afghanistan.

Survivors and emergency responders described bombing injuries, treatment, and rescue efforts. Anthony Imel presented surveillance imagery and acknowledged timing and route limitations. Later witnesses authenticated store surveillance, campus access records, and Twitter material linked to the defendant.

Kimball faced questions about tweet selection and context, Brown described the boat writing and his search, and FBI witnesses explained evidence recovery, custody, and mapping. The Court admitted physical evidence and specified diagram portions, clarified the relevance basis for excluding glove DNA, and arranged a boat inspection.

Chad Fitzgerald described cell-site activity and its limits, while defense questioning distinguished recorded call durations from actual conversations. Witnesses described Sean Collier's shooting, emergency response, and surveillance; Nathan Harman identified the defendant beside the cruiser. The court also granted a jury view of the boat and restricted public display of autopsy photographs.

Witnesses described Collier's shooting scene and autopsy, while Dun Meng recounted the armed carjacking and his escape. Surveillance, bank records, and police tracking testimony followed. Counsel also addressed proposed gun-request testimony, the temporal limits of glove DNA evidence, and the source of Whole Foods footage.

Jurors inspected the boat before hearing officers and residents describe the Watertown gunfire, explosions, and Mercedes escape. Witnesses distinguished their identifications from limits on visibility and attention. A physician described Officer Donohue's resuscitation, and a State Police commander testified about the search and boat response while clarifying what he had personally observed.

Stephen Silva testified that he lent Jahar Tsarnaev a gun; cross-examination addressed his prior lies and sentencing incentives. David Henneberry described finding a person in his boat, and FBI agents testified about recovered evidence. The Court also discussed jury instructions and limited relationship testimony.

Forensic witnesses described Watertown evidence recovery, vehicle damage, fingerprint findings, and blood testing. Jennifer Montgomery reported DNA matches to Sean Collier on glove samples and to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on eight sweatshirt samples, with limits on mixed profiles and unsampled areas.

Corcoran described Watertown evidence, and Christiana testified about seized devices. The court admitted laptops and an iPhone as physical objects only. Computer-forensics expert Swindon presented selected digital files while explaining limits on access histories, user attribution, and comparisons. The court admitted multiple digital exhibits but required redaction of extraneous phone communications.

Kevin Swindon testified about digital exhibits and limits on file selection, timestamps, and user identification. Matthew Levitt began expert testimony on extremist propaganda and the boat writing, with defense objections addressing scope, methodology, and exhibit displays.

Levitt completed testimony on extremist literature and the limits of his analysis. Witnesses described Watertown ballistics, fingerprints, scene mapping and the SUV's departure, followed by university and dorm-room evidence. The court restricted inquiry into Officer Donohue's injury and required facial masking for some autopsy photographs.

Agents testified about dorm-room and apartment searches, purchase records, GPS data, and a landfill backpack recovery, while cross-examination addressed attribution and handling limits. Language specialists and an FBI agent discussed translations and digital messages. The court limited several exhibits' use and denied renewed residence-related discovery relief.

David McCollam testified about explosive materials and limits of residue testing. Edward S. Knapp described bomb reconstructions and demonstrated separate remote-control systems; the court excluded proposed transmitter-range evidence. Jennifer Hammers testified about Krystle Marie Campbell's fatal blast injuries and gave a qualified survival-time estimate over a defense objection.

The government rested after medical testimony about Lingzi Lu and Martin Richard and examination of bombing-scene imagery. The defense presented search evidence and digital-record analysis, with witnesses acknowledging limits on timing and location conclusions. The Rule 29 motion and proposed defense evidence remained unresolved.

Defense witnesses Mark Spencer and Elena Graff addressed computer records, fingerprint findings, and the limits of attributing activity or timing contact. The defense rested, and the court read a Count 7 foreign-national victim stipulation with legal objections preserved. The renewed Rule 29 motion remained reserved, with closing statements scheduled for Monday.

Closing arguments contrasted the prosecution's partnership theory with the defense's acknowledgment of participation and emphasis on Tamerlan's leadership. Judge O'Toole instructed jurors on all 30 counts and the burden of proof, denied a defense mistrial motion, and designated six alternates. The remaining 12 jurors would begin deliberations the next morning.

The jury began deliberations while the court addressed uncertain exhibit admission status and omitted victim photographs.

After supplemental instructions on conspiracy and aiding and abetting, the jury found Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev guilty on all 30 counts. Judge O'Toole announced a penalty phase, with no penalty selected and no return date set.

Counsel disputed penalty-phase evidence concerning Tamerlan Tsarnaev, plea negotiations and remorse, medical testimony, and proposed mitigation arguments. The Court reserved decision on the plea evidence, set submission deadlines, and sought safeguards for overseas video testimony. No evidentiary ruling on the disputed requests is recorded.

The Court set penalty-phase evidence to begin April 21 and instructed jurors and alternates to avoid the Boston Marathon, related anniversary events, case coverage, and discussions.

The court ruled on penalty-phase evidence, including the Waltham events, a conditional use of a guilty-plea offer, and limits on medical testimony and mitigation arguments. Counsel also discussed preliminary jury instructions, witness arrangements, and disclosure requests, several of which remained unresolved.

The penalty phase opened with evidence rulings, sentencing instructions and the prosecution's request for death. Jurors heard injury testimony from Celeste Corcoran, Gillian Reny and Nicole Gross, and family-impact testimony from Krystle Campbell's brother and father. The defense moved for a mistrial after Corcoran's testimony; no express disposition was recorded.

Family and community witnesses described Sean Collier and Lingzi Lu, while bombing survivors testified about their injuries. The Court addressed victim-impact testimony and photograph objections, and the jury saw a cell-surveillance still followed by defense video clips.

Survivors described amputations, treatment, and rescue efforts in penalty-phase testimony. David King offered medical opinions about Martin Richard’s death and vulnerability. The Court denied a mistrial motion over King’s testimony and admitted photographs and video exhibits while limiting witness interpretation of movements shown on video.

The Court permitted generalized adolescent brain-development testimony while limiting experts to their fields. It reserved decisions on CT-scan production and immigration parole for Khozhugov, and denied a defense witness-statement motion while leaving open reconsideration of grand jury disclosure if a particularized need developed.

The defense sought life imprisonment in its opening and presented testimony about Tamerlan's behavior, family relationships, and digital records. Cross-examination explored witnesses' limited knowledge of Dzhokhar and the brothers' relationship.

Defense witnesses described Tamerlan Tsarnaev's social contacts and boxing conduct, while Mark Spencer reviewed computer evidence. The court limited FBI interview-report readings and cautioned jurors about their use without sworn testimony or cross-examination. Sam Lipson began testimony about the family's home and his encounters with its members.

The Court ruled on documentary evidence and limits on expert testimony. Defense witnesses read reports concerning Tamerlan, described both brothers' ambulance treatment, and recalled Dzhokhar's school and college years. Cross-examinations addressed the limits of witnesses' knowledge and Dzhokhar's independence.

The court requested proposed mitigating factors for a draft verdict form. The defense sought Waltham investigative records, while the government maintained that federal disclosure was complete. No ruling on those requests was recorded.

Relatives and friends offered childhood and social recollections of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The court limited personal-reaction and family-history questioning, denied a mistrial motion, and excluded a Facebook post while admitting photographs and a recording identified as Tamerlan’s voice.

Defense witnesses described family relationships, Anzor Tsarnaev's psychiatric treatment, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's school and wrestling activities. Professor Michel Reynolds testified about Chechen family traditions and religious materials, faced questioning about his earlier article, and qualified how cultural patterns apply to individuals.

Defense witnesses described family relationships, adolescent brain development, medical records, school experiences, and custody conduct. Prosecutors questioned the limits of those accounts and the certainty of continued prison restrictions; the judge limited broader prison-condition questioning.

Mark Bezy completed testimony on ADX confinement and SAMs, including limits on his experience and qualifications to his placement opinions. The Court denied a mistrial, told jurors to disregard punishment costs, excluded proposed remorse documents while deferring a decision on Sister Prejean's testimony, and denied a renewed request for Waltham materials.

Sister Helen Prejean gave a limited opinion about Tsarnaev’s remorse and acknowledged that her death-penalty opposition influenced it. The defense rested, and prosecution rebuttal addressed SAMs review and ADX conditions. The Court left disputed SAMs testimony unchanged and requested written Rule 29 grounds.

The court addressed penalty-phase jury instructions, sentencing factors, and closing-argument limits. It declined to explain deadlock consequences, refused to strike the Martin Richard victim-impact factor, and barred displaying his physical clothing during closings.

Jurors received sentencing instructions and heard competing requests for death and life without release. The court denied a defense mistrial motion and later rejected requests for a reply and a curative instruction concerning Sister Helen Prejean's testimony. Sentencing deliberations began briefly before the jury was released for the evening.

Judge O’Toole answered jury questions by directing gateway-factor findings to Tsarnaev’s own actions and intent and clarifying unanimity requirements for the first aggravating factor. Jurors then resumed deliberations.

The jury unanimously selected death for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on six counts. All 12 jurors confirmed the verdict in an individual poll before the court discharged the jury.

The Court set requirements for victim statements and reviewed sentencing terms. Restitution and forfeiture disputes were deferred, while written-statement redactions and a press request for juror identification remained unresolved.

Survivors and relatives delivered victim impact statements, and Tsarnaev admitted the bombing and apologized. The Court imposed six death sentences, additional prison terms, and financial orders, leaving restitution amounts for later determination.