Day 29 - March 9, 2015
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.
Full day summary
1. Survivor Injury and Victim-Impact Limits, Publicity Admonition, and Witness Accommodations
The defense sought limits on survivor and responder testimony. The judge emphasized guilt-phase relevance and limited testimony about Matthew Patterson’s military background.
Highlights
Limits on Survivor Injury and Victim-Impact TestimonyotherCounsel disputed whether survivor victim-impact testimony could reach a penalty-phase jury. The prosecution expressly declined to concede the issue, and the judge emphasized that current testimony must concern guilt of the charged offenses.Limits on Survivor Injury and Victim-Impact Testimony“It still has to be focused on the question of guilt of the offense, though.”— George A. O'Toole Jr.The judge emphasized the governing focus of testimony during the current phase.
7. Anthony Imel — Direct/Cross/Redirect
Anthony Imel authenticated the prosecution’s imagery compilation but acknowledged limits in its timing, image order, and route coverage. Cross-examination explored those uncertainties; on redirect, he said phone records placed the call before the explosion.
Highlights
Direct Examination - Anthony Imeltestimony highlightDuring playback, Imel said the backpack appeared to remain on the depicted suspect's shoulder up to a particular point. After the movement identified by counsel, Imel said it was no longer seen on his back and identified an image showing it at his feet.Cross-Examination - Anthony Imeltestimony highlightImel explained that the timeline's times were approximate and depended on individual camera settings and metadata.Cross-Examination - Anthony Imeltestimony highlightUsing Exhibit 620, Conrad established that Imel had no images showing exactly where or how Tamerlan traveled from Marathon Sports to the Montessori school. Imel believed there might have been interior cameras, but not exterior cameras, between the identified points.Cross-Examination - Anthony ImeladmissionPhone records showed an outgoing call at 2:49:06 and an incoming call at 2:51. Imel agreed the first was from Jahar to Tamerlan and believed the second was the reverse, but could not identify which call appeared in the Forum video.Cross-Examination - Anthony Imel“Again, it's all about time, and then I don't have a relative time that's accurate. So I can only tell you what I see on the records versus the video.”— Anthony ImelImel explained why he could not reliably match the recorded calls to the call depicted in surveillance footage.