Skip to content
2015 Federal Trialtrial-daytrial-dayAloke ChakravartySteven D. MellinNadine PellegriniDavid I. BruckJudy ClarkeMiriam ConradMark BezyKevin Michael RocheJennifer Carr-CallisonJay GieddSonya PetriEric TraubElmirza KhozhugovsidebardirectcrossDay 59 - May 6, 2015Defense 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.
← Day 582015 Federal TrialDay 60 →

Day 59 - May 6, 2015

Family Testimony, Brain Development, and Prison Restrictions

Judge George A. O'Toole Jr.
24Proceedings
9Pages
7Witnesses
2,172Lines
7Sidebars
Day 59 of 67
Appearing:

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.

Full day summary

The defense presented testimony about family relationships, brain development, school experiences, custody conduct, and prison restrictions. Before Elmirza Khozhugov testified, the judge limited inflammatory custody-dispute terminology and left bias questioning dependent on his testimony. Khozhugov acknowledged violence against Ailina and described Zubeidat's authority, Tamerlan's account of Misha's religious influence, and Jahar's tendency to follow his older brother. On cross-examination, he acknowledged limited direct contact, reliance on relatives for later information, and greater familiarity with Tamerlan than Jahar. Brain-development researcher Jay Giedd described active maturation extending to roughly ages 25 to 30, including changes affecting planning and impulse control. He characterized a brain at 19 as still developing, not damaged or defective. He repeatedly limited his conclusions to general patterns, stressing individual variation. On cross-examination, he emphasized behavior over imaging as a measure of maturity and agreed that younger people can plan and understand consequences. Sonya Petri read Anzor Tsarnaev's treatment records rather than offering observations as a treating clinician. The records described psychiatric symptoms, an August 2009 assault causing a skull fracture and hemorrhage, and later functional impairments. An April 2012 physician's letter stated that he could not work and needed constant supervision and support. Best Buddies advisor Jennifer Callison recalled Jahar's voluntary participation and kindness within the club. Mathematics teacher Eric Traub read his favorable December 2010 recommendation letter and affirmed those assessments. On cross-examination, Traub described classroom self-motivation and maturity relative to a high-school student. Deputy U.S. Marshal Kevin Michael Roche recalled compliance during medical escorts and an apology after the July 2013 cellblock gesture. On cross-examination, he personally interpreted the gesture as defiant but clarified that he had not witnessed it when it occurred. The judge denied a motion to strike that interpretation. The judge permitted challenges to the continuation of special administrative measures, or SAMs, while declining immediate rebuttal directed solely at the defense opening. Retired prison official Mark Bezy described restricted, monitored communications and annual SAMs renewals. His opinion that Tsarnaev would remain at ADX if placed there and SAMs later expired was hypothetical, not a placement decision. On cross-examination, he acknowledged that inmates can leave SAMs and H unit, while emphasizing that ADX step-down advancement is not guaranteed. The supplied record ends during an unresolved objection about books and magazines.

3. Jay Giedd — Direct/Cross

Defense witness Jay Giedd described brain maturation continuing into adulthood while stressing individual variation. On cross-examination, he acknowledged the limits of brain scans and age-based assessments, and agreed that people younger than 19 can plan and understand consequences.

→
Direct
Direct Examination - Jay Giedd Jay Giedd Judy Clarke
141 lines

Giedd explained prolonged adolescent brain development, environmental influence, and individual variation, describing a brain at age 19 as developing rather than defective.

Cross
Cross-Examination - Jay Giedd Jay Giedd Nadine Pellegrini
111 lines

Giedd acknowledged limits on individual maturity assessments from brain scans and group averages, while agreeing that young people can plan and understand consequences.

Highlights

5. Jennifer Carr-Callison — Direct

Jennifer Carr-Callison testified about Jahar’s voluntary Best Buddies participation and kindness toward students with intellectual challenges. Over prosecution objections, the court allowed her to compare the student she knew with his involvement in the bombing.

→
Direct
Direct Examination - Jennifer Carr-Callison Jennifer Carr-Callison Miriam Conrad
132 lines

Jennifer Callison recalled Jahar's voluntary Best Buddies participation and kind conduct; a banquet photograph was admitted, and the court allowed questions comparing her recollections with the bombing.

sidebar
Witness Schedule and Anticipated Testimony Motions
27 lines

Counsel reviewed witness scheduling, disputed whether SAMs or a portrayal of ADX life would open the door to ESPN, and previewed a motion to exclude Sister Helen Prejean’s testimony.

Procedural
Return to Open Court - Lunch Recess
4 lines

8. Kevin Michael Roche — Direct/Cross

Deputy U.S. Marshal Kevin Michael Roche testified about Tsarnaev’s custody, cellblock gestures, and apology. Cross-examination addressed his interpretation of the gestures and clarified that he had not witnessed the initial gesture.

→
Direct
Direct Examination - Kevin Michael Roche Kevin Michael Roche Miriam Conrad
140 lines

Roche described Tsarnaev's custodial demeanor and apology after the cellblock gesture; the judge warned that testimony denying defiance could invite rebuttal.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Demeanor Testimony and Possible Defiance RebuttalCounsel disputed whether testimony about nondefiant behavior at Devens would permit rebuttal using Beth Israel statements, with the defense raising interrogation and discovery concerns.
Cross
Cross-Examination - Kevin Michael Roche Kevin Michael Roche Steven D. Mellin
84 lines

Mr. Roche interpreted the gestures as defiance but qualified his firsthand knowledge; the judge denied a motion to strike and limited questioning about the apology.

Highlights

9. Mark Bezy — Direct/Cross (Part 1)

Mark Bezy described Tsarnaev’s SAMs restrictions and possible ADX confinement; cross-examination challenged his ADX experience and the certainty that restrictive confinement would continue.

→
Direct
Direct Examination - Mark Bezy Mark Bezy David I. Bruck
332 lines

Bezy described SAMs communication controls and opined on continued ADX placement; a contested sidebar preserved existing questioning limits.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Other Terrorist Offenses and ADX Examination LimitsCounsel raised concerns that comparisons to other terrorist offenses could suggest death sentences are uncommon and sought broader questioning about ADX confinement.
sidebar
Defense Drops Disciplinary-Record Inquiry
8 lines

Counsel disputed notice and accuracy of Bezy’s proposed testimony that no prison disciplinary violations were recorded, and the defense dropped the inquiry.

Procedural
Return to Open Court - Bezy Direct Examination Concluded
2 lines
Cross
Cross-Examination - Mark Bezy Mark Bezy Steven D. Mellin
247 lines

Mellin tested Bezy's ADX knowledge and the permanence of SAMs restrictions; Bezy acknowledged possible changes but stressed that step-down advancement is not guaranteed.

sidebar
SAMs Cross-Examination Limits and Remaining Witness Time
34 lines

Counsel disputed cross-examination about SAMs effectiveness, possible withdrawal, and inmate violence, along with the time needed to finish questioning the witness.

Procedural
End-of-Day Jury Admonition and Adjournment
4 lines

Highlights

← Day 582015 Federal TrialDay 60 →