10.Rosa Booth — Direct/Cross/Redirect
256 linesROSA BOOTH, duly sworn
COURT CLERK: State your name, spell your first and last name for the record.
ROSA BOOTH: Rosa Booth, B-O-O-T-H.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: Good afternoon, Ms. Booth. I'm over here. How old are you?
ROSA BOOTH: Twenty-one.
MS. CONRAD: And are you enrolled in school?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: Where?
ROSA BOOTH: Massachusetts College of Art.
MS. CONRAD: And what year of school are you in right now?
ROSA BOOTH: I'm in my third year.
MS. CONRAD: Where did you go to high school?
ROSA BOOTH: Cambridge Rindge and Latin.
MS. CONRAD: And did you know Jahar Tsarnaev?
ROSA BOOTH: I did.
MS. CONRAD: And do you see him in the courtroom?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes, I do.
MS. CONRAD: And how did you meet Jahar?
ROSA BOOTH: In math class, second semester of 2011.
MS. CONRAD: So that would be your senior year?
ROSA BOOTH: My junior year, his senior year.
MS. CONRAD: I see. So you were a year behind him?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And did you become friends?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: In math class other than listening to the teacher, hopefully, and taking notes, did you and Jahar engage in any particular activity?
ROSA BOOTH: We would sit together most days and talk and sketch.
MS. CONRAD: What do you mean by "sketch"?
ROSA BOOTH: There's a game where you fold a piece of paper over and start a drawing on the top and then fold it and the other person continues and so on.
MS. CONRAD: What was Jahar like when he was a senior in high school?
ROSA BOOTH: He seemed like a sweet boy.
MS. CONRAD: Did you spend time with him outside of school?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And where would you spend time with him mostly?
ROSA BOOTH: At our friend's, Emma's house, or at the river or at parties.
MS. CONRAD: And what kind of activities would -- this would be in groups, I take it?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And what kinds of activities would you and your friends engage in?
ROSA BOOTH: We would -- I mean, we would just spend time together, talk. We would smoke together too.
MS. CONRAD: What do you mean by "smoke"?
ROSA BOOTH: Smoke marijuana.
MS. CONRAD: And so did you get to be pretty good friends with Jahar?
ROSA BOOTH: I would say so, yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And did you like spending time with him?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: Why?
ROSA BOOTH: Well, he had a sweetness about him. Maybe a little shy. I was very shy.
MS. CONRAD: Would you consider him, within this group, a leader?
ROSA BOOTH: No.
MS. CONRAD: How would you describe his sort of way of relating to others when, let's say, there's a group decision to be made?
ROSA BOOTH: Not a group decision-maker, I wouldn't say.
MS. CONRAD: And was he someone who was willing to go along with others?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: Sort of go with the flow?
ROSA BOOTH: Uh-huh.
MS. CONRAD: I'm sorry. I just need you to say "yes" or "no."
ROSA BOOTH: Yes. Sorry.
MS. CONRAD: How would you compare Jahar to other boys his age when you were in high school with him?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Objection.
THE COURT: I don't think the question is clear. On what criteria? I guess is the question.
BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: Well, let's ask -- what about -- let me go back a little bit. Was he funny?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah, goofy.
MS. CONRAD: What do you mean by "goofy"?
ROSA BOOTH: I can't think of an example but just goofy.
MS. CONRAD: Were you aware of any activities that he was involved in at school other than hanging out with his friends?
ROSA BOOTH: Wrestling.
MS. CONRAD: And did you ever see him wrestle?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And how did that come about?
ROSA BOOTH: I was in the dance company, and we both had practice at the same time.
MS. CONRAD: Would he talk about wrestling?
ROSA BOOTH: I think so. I don't recall.
MS. CONRAD: Was he someone who stuck to his own group, or did he have a lot of friends?
ROSA BOOTH: There was fluidity in his friend groups. I would see him move through different groups.
MS. CONRAD: And generally speaking, what was Cambridge Rindge and Latin like in terms of whether there were different cliques or whether it was kids sticking to one type of friendship?
ROSA BOOTH: We stuck to familiarity, but everyone was pretty close.
MS. CONRAD: So it was a pretty close community?
ROSA BOOTH: Definitely.
MS. CONRAD: Did you ever go to Jahar's house?
ROSA BOOTH: No.
MS. CONRAD: Did that ever strike you as odd?
ROSA BOOTH: Not in the moment.
MS. CONRAD: Did he ever express his views about politics?
ROSA BOOTH: Not that I can remember.
MS. CONRAD: What about religion?
ROSA BOOTH: Not that I can remember.
MS. CONRAD: When was the last time that you saw Jahar?
ROSA BOOTH: August of 2012, I think it was.
MS. CONRAD: And what was the occasion?
ROSA BOOTH: We were at our friend's house for a barbecue.
MS. CONRAD: So this was a couple of months after you graduated. Is that right?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: But Jahar was -- it was at the end of or just before the beginning of -- I should say, of Jahar's sophomore year in college?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And I'd like to show you, unless the government has an objection, and publish Exhibit 3286.
MS. CONRAD: If we could have the podium hookup.
And I'd offer this, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
(Defense Exhibit No. 3286 received into evidence.)
BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: Ms. Booth, can you tell us when and where this photograph was taken?
ROSA BOOTH: This was at the barbecue in Cambridge in August of 2012.
MS. CONRAD: And whose house was that at?
ROSA BOOTH: Emma's.
MS. CONRAD: And do you see Emma in the picture?
ROSA BOOTH: No.
MS. CONRAD: Do you see Emma's dog in the picture?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And is that the dog in the center?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: What was the dog's name?
ROSA BOOTH: Dempsey.
MS. CONRAD: And what was Dempsey's relationship like with Jahar?
ROSA BOOTH: He really liked Jahar.
MS. CONRAD: And so can you tell from that photograph if he's looking at Jahar because Jahar's eating something or just because he likes Jahar?
ROSA BOOTH: He was eating something.
MS. CONRAD: Okay. And who is that -- can you just put your finger -- or draw a circle with your finger on the screen around where Jahar is seated in that photograph?
ROSA BOOTH: (Witness complies.)
MS. CONRAD: And I think we can all probably figure out that that's Dempsey in front of him?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And where are you in this photograph?
ROSA BOOTH: (Indicating.)
MS. CONRAD: And what do you remember about that day?
ROSA BOOTH: Good food. I can't really remember -- oh, I remember being surprised by how much bulkier he was in his arms.
MS. CONRAD: Like he'd been working out?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And I'd like to show you Exhibit 3287.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: No objection.
MS. CONRAD: And I'd offer this photograph as well.
THE COURT: All right.
(Defense Exhibit No. 3287 received into evidence.)
BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: And is this from the same event?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MS. CONRAD: And in this photograph, can you circle where Jahar is?
ROSA BOOTH: (Witness complies.)
MS. CONRAD: And where you are?
ROSA BOOTH: (Indicating.)
MS. CONRAD: And at some point, did you post this photograph on Facebook?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes, I did.
MS. CONRAD: And when was that?
ROSA BOOTH: I think it was the day -- it was April 20th, 2013.
MS. CONRAD: And at this time, your Honor, I'd offer and ask to publish Exhibit 3287A.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'd object to that, your Honor. I'd object to that. It's the substance of what she wrote on Facebook.
THE COURT: Let me take a look at it.
(Pause.)
THE COURT: Let me see you.
(Discussion at sidebar and out of the hearing of the jury:)
THE COURT: This appears to just express her reaction to learning about his involvement. I think I've already excluded that from other people.
MS. CONRAD: I think, you know, your Honor, first of all, I'd like to say that it seems to me that the reaction that we've been trying to get has to do with lay witness opinion about character, which is relevant in this portion of the proceedings.
But I think it also expressed -- expresses her feelings both about the tragedy that was the marathon bombing and her memories of Jahar, and I think the strength of that feeling -- this is not, obviously, being offered for the truth of the matter, but this is a present-sense impression that she had at that time.
MR. BRUCK: Lastly, if I could add something, is that it's given particular force and poignancy by the fact that she posted it the day after he was arrested. So it means something. It is an expression that is much more powerful than anything someone can say here. When the chips were down, she remembered him in the positive as well as condemning the act at the same time, and that is our entire message of the case in mitigation. This is in real time as it's happening, and it shows that her --
MR. WEINREB: Your Honor, the relevant evidence is what the defendant's character was, not whether these particular witnesses on the witness stand -- not what their personal thoughts and feelings were upon learning that somebody who they once thought something was turns out to be something different. There's a whole panoply of reactions that people might have in the world to that, and it's just confusing and misleading for the jury to think that that's the thing that they're supposed to be deciding the case on.
The issue is whether there's something about his character, the circumstances of what he did in connection with this crime, make him more or less morally culpable, more or less deserving of the death penalty. Her ability to reflect on things and to reflect on her own thoughts and feelings about it, that's not something the jury should be focusing on.
MS. CONRAD: Your Honor, it seems to me what the government wants to do is to say we can't get into anything that reflects on character beyond the events of the bombing itself, and that just can't possibly be true. Part of our narrative in this case is that Mr. Tsarnaev was basically a good kid, a decent kid who got pulled into this by his older brother. And the fact that the people close to them, in both instances, Tamerlan and Jahar, on the one hand, never saw this coming with Jahar, thought it completely out of character, and did not have that reaction to Tamerlan. I think that's relevant.
And so when they talk about character -- and I want to point out that Ms. Pellegrini's opening statement was almost entirely about character. I have the highlighted portions with me. She's saying this crime reflects his character. We're saying there's more to it than that. And the fact that people's reaction was that this was so shockingly out of character for Mr. Tsarnaev is a relevant fact.
MR. BRUCK: It's also, as I pointed out -- Tennard versus Dretke is the Supreme Court case, and there's a whole series of them that says that the government, the state, cannot limit mitigation to things which are connected to the crime or in which explains the crime in some way. Even if there was no connection whatsoever, no explanation for why someone was a good person and did this horrible thing, the fact that he had been a good person is relevant at mitigation, even if there's a complete history --
THE COURT: You've had quite a bit of it. The question is whether this particular piece of evidence falls into that area.
MR. WEINREB: Just as to whether it falls within it, your Honor, just to make the record clear, every single witness who has been called to date, pretty much, has been a character witness. Certainly every single one who knew the defendant and has testified about him has testified about his character. The government has not objected to witnesses testifying about his character, how kind he was, what a lovely person he was. And the issue here is both whether this falls within the category of character but also whether the risk of prejudice outweighs its probative value.
A lot of these -- what the government's point has been is that these questions about the witness's own personal reactions to learning about something are more prejudicial than probative because they're cumulative, and all of the testimony about what a wonderful, lovely person he is, and -- they have a risk of confusing and misleading the jury because they focus attention on that witness's own humanity; not the defendant's, which is the focus of the -- their inquiry. The witness's own ability to be compassionate, to forgive and so on should not become a proxy for what the jury should do in this case and whether the defendant is a compassionate kind of person.
What this does is asks the jury to confuse what these people have done in their world in this case, which is to measure what his character was based on what people have said about him, what he was like, against the aggravating factors and determine what the appropriate punishment should be. It's too confusing, too misleading to suggest to them that what these witnesses -- how they reacted to it should be what -- the thing that they should be focusing on.
MS. CONRAD: The point, your Honor, is that, you know, Mr. Weinreb says we're going to put in evidence of character, but what we haven't been allowed to do is bring out how these witnesses who are offering lay opinion, proper lay opinion, about the defendant's character reconcile the defendant's character with what he did. And the government has hit that hard, hit it in opening, presumably will hit it in closing. And they'll say, "Well, if he was so sweet, he wouldn't have done that."
But these witnesses have a way of looking at that. Now, I'm not going to pull out "His brother must have led him into it." I'm not going to bring out speculation. But I think that for the witnesses to say "Something changed, because the person I knew would not have done that. The person I knew would not have done that," it seems to me is their response to the government's argument that this was the person he always was.
THE COURT: Well, I think you actually have hit on a way you can get the evidence in, as to whether it's consistent with their observations of his prior conduct. I think that's a question I would permit. But that will be taken as -- even if you say you're not offering it for the truth, it will be taken that way.
So I'm going to exclude the -- what is it, Facebook posting? But you can ask a consistent-with question if you'd like. Okay?
(In open court:)
BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: When you posted that photograph on Facebook, Ms. Booth, what were you feeling?
ROSA BOOTH: Betrayal --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Objection.
THE COURT: Sustained. I think that's what we just...
MS. CONRAD: I have nothing further.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Just very briefly, your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Ms. Booth, you didn't know --
THE COURT: Microphone.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'll move over.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You didn't know the defendant very well, did you?
ROSA BOOTH: I believed that I did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You had a class together with him when you were a junior in high school?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And when you were a senior in high school, he had gone to college?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You didn't remain in touch with him when he was in college, did you?
ROSA BOOTH: Through friends I saw him.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Was it through the Silva brothers?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah, on some occasion.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. And Emma Feigenbaum, was she one of the friends as well?
ROSA BOOTH: Uh-huh.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In 2012, the picture that we just looked at, that was the only time in 2012 that you saw the defendant, correct?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So that's the scope of your relationship with him. You didn't have a contact with him after that, correct?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm sorry. Yes, you did not have contact with him after that?
ROSA BOOTH: I think on Facebook we did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: But you never talked to him?
ROSA BOOTH: I didn't see him in person after that.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. And your relationship in high school was pretty much what you described. It was your -- you sat next to him in a math class?
ROSA BOOTH: Yeah. I had a crush on him then.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And, in fact, he asked you out to his prom, right?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And you rejected him?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. And the -- but your relationship was one of -- where you were classmates who didn't do a whole lot together when you were not with your other friends?
ROSA BOOTH: One-on-one, you mean?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Correct.
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And your other friends included the Silva brothers. Did you know all of the things that they were doing?
ROSA BOOTH: Well, I wasn't friends with them in high school.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You became friends with them after high school?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Were you friends -- did you know that they were drug dealing at the time?
MS. CONRAD: Objection, your Honor. This is a different time period we're talking about now.
THE COURT: Well, just be clear about --
MS. CONRAD: Beyond the scope, your Honor.
THE COURT: No. You may have it. Just be clear about the time period you're talking about.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So after high school, 2012 and on -- you graduated in 2012, correct?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so you were friends with the Silvas and Ms. Feigenbaum and the defendant in 2012, correct?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And knew the Silva brothers were drug dealing, correct?
ROSA BOOTH: Not at the time.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You didn't know that they were drug dealing?
ROSA BOOTH: Well, when I graduated I didn't know them, in 2012.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So then after you got to know them, then you learned that they were drug dealing?
ROSA BOOTH: In 2013.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. Before or after the Boston Marathon?
ROSA BOOTH: After.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: After the Boston Marathon. You still hung out with them?
ROSA BOOTH: That's what I --
MS. CONRAD: Objection at this point, your Honor, relevance and scope.
THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.
MS. CONRAD: Thank you.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: At one point, in fact, one of the Silva brothers actually would come to your house and stay with you?
MS. CONRAD: Objection, your Honor. This is far outside the time frame.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MS. CONRAD: It's irrelevant.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Just one moment, your Honor.
(Pause.)
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: That's all I have.
MS. CONRAD: Very briefly.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CONRAD:
MS. CONRAD: So I'm a little confused, Ms. Booth. You had a crush on Jahar, right?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: And he asked you to the prom?
ROSA BOOTH: Yes.
MS. CONRAD: But you didn't go with him?
ROSA BOOTH: No. Like I said, I was very shy.
MS. CONRAD: I have nothing further.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, Ms. Booth. Thank you. You may step down.
(The witness is excused.)
MS. CONRAD: I don't think we have anyone else today, your Honor.
THE COURT: That's it?
Jurors, the day went a little faster than anticipated, and we've come to a point where there are no other witnesses present, so we'll have to break a little early. We'll continue on the schedule. I am told that tomorrow will be a full day, and we look forward to that.
So, again, I remind you of the cautions: Avoid news reports, any discussion of the case in any way among yourselves or with others. Enjoy the rest of the day. I think the weather has turned for the better. And we'll see you in the morning and continue with the case.
Let me just see the lawyers briefly for scheduling.
COURT CLERK: All rise for the jury.
(The jury exits the courtroom at 2:45 p.m.)
COURT CLERK: Be seated.
THE COURT: Did you want a sidebar?
MR. BRUCK: Please.
THE COURT: Okay.