Skip to content
2015 Federal TrialtranscripttranscriptSAMs Testimony Left Unchanged, Written Rule 29 Grounds, and Penalty-Phase Verdict Form and Closing Preparations - Day 61 - 2015 Federal TrialThe Court left disputed SAMs testimony unchanged and requested written Rule 29 grounds from the defense.
Steven D. MellinWilliam D. WeinrebDavid I. BruckJudy ClarkeMiriam ConradGeorge A. O'Toole Jr.THE COURTMR. BRUCKMR. WEINREBMS. CLARKEMR. MELLINMS. CONRADCourt Clerkproceduralcharge_conference
7 pages·3 witnesses·1,369 lines
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.
← Day 60Day 62 →
SAMs Testimony Left Unchanged; Written Rule 29 Grounds Requested
ProceduralProc.SAMs Testimony Left Unchanged; Written Rule 29 Grounds Requested

P R O C E E D I N G S

THE COURT: So I just thought before we go back out -- we're either at the end of the evidence or just about, and I just wanted to know so I could tell the jury what to expect, that's all. I didn't want to be doing it at the side.

First of all, with respect to the issue about whether the Court has ordered a change, I think I'm going to leave things where they are. I have looked at the clerk's note and the transcript of the April 16, 2014, conference, and it could easily be interpreted in a less than formal way that I had made an order.

The clerk's note, for example, says, "The government shall either allow the visits without contemporaneous monitoring or propose a plan of contemporaneous monitoring that excludes members of the investigative or prosecutorial team." The parties then worked something out in response to that.

That could be understood by some people as an order. I don't think it is in anybody's particular interest for us to dig down into what an order is in front of the jury and have them decide whether something has been ordered or not.

The witness actually answered the question both ways, eventually, and I think we'll just leave it at is. I think it will add confusion to the jury if we try to do anything more.

With respect to the Rule 29 motion, you mentioned in addition to past general reasons there was some particular issue that you wanted to raise with respect to the Richard matter. Could you put it in writing? That's all.

THE COURT: Present a Rule 29 -- what I'm interested in is, of course, the general reasons that are applicable to all counts, perhaps. But if you have some particularly targeted reasons, I think it's best if they're expressed in writing on the record, okay? Then we can address those.

Does this conclude the evidence after this witness?

Charge ConferenceCharge Conf.Penalty-Phase Verdict Form and Closing Preparations

THE COURT: Okay. So as I think we discussed on this contingency, that we would take tomorrow and have the arguments and charge beginning on Wednesday morning. And I want to be able to tell the jury that. Obviously, they won't come tomorrow, then.

My thought is we will prepare, based on what has been submitted, a proposed verdict slip, try to get it to you as soon as we can, if not by the end of the day today, then early tomorrow so that we can get any comment on it. I will say that I think it will be more like the defense proposal than the government's proposal. I thought the government's proposal was intriguing but a little too innovative for my taste, and so I think we'll try to follow the more traditional model.

And I guess we will -- one we already talked about, we will add in "18 years of age" to that because I think the government's probably right, the jury will tell us that's what their conclusion is.

MR. WEINREB: With respect to jury instructions, the defense had submitted a request for several specific jury instructions different from their sort of general Sand instruction. We have an objection to one of them and some slight suggestions with respect to the other two, so we'll file that later today.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. BRUCK: And we have one more to send in today.

THE COURT: If you could get all of that in today, our attention will first be to the verdict slip. That will be today. I have not yet, myself, looked at the instructions yet. And I will do that, and I'll spend most of the day tomorrow on instructions, I expect.

MS. CLARKE: Will we get them tomorrow?

THE COURT: Yes, I'll try to get them to you by the end of the day tomorrow.

Now, in terms of format for closings, I will again do as I've done, begin the instructions before arguments, do the gateways and everything. I think we'll put up the verdict slip on the monitors for the jury as we do that so they can actually visually follow it as we go through it and they'll know what to expect.

Then we will have arguments.

Who is arguing?

MR. WEINREB: Mr. Mellin will do the initial closing for the government.

MS. CLARKE: And I'll do the closing for the defense.

THE COURT: Time estimates?

MR. MELLIN: Maybe a little over an hour?

THE COURT: Same or similar?

MS. CLARKE: Probably.

THE COURT: The process will probably -- if we were to start at nine, it would probably take a nine-to-one block to get the whole thing done.

MS. CLARKE: I think so. It depends on how outrageous Mr. Mellin gets in his closing.

MR. WEINREB: And then rebuttal. You know, genuine rebuttal as previously.

THE COURT: Right. You'll do that?

MR. WEINREB: I will. I won't belabor it.

THE COURT: Okay. Anything else before we go and tell everybody this?

MS. CONRAD: You're going to tell them if they're deliberating, I take it they will be sitting on Fridays?

THE COURT: Yes, I will tell them that.

MR. WEINREB: Nothing more from us.

THE COURT: Okay. You'll rest on the record in front of the jury?

MS. CLARKE: In an abundance of caution, we renew the Rule 29. I don't know how often we have to do that --

THE COURT: Fine. Noted. But we'll also await the written version -- the written expression of it so that will be clear on the record.

MS. CLARKE: Thank you.

(The proceedings adjourned at 12:00 p.m.)

COURT CLERK: All rise for the Court and the jury.

(The Court and jury enter the courtroom at 12:06 p.m.)

COURT CLERK: Be seated.

THE COURT: Mr. Weinreb?

MR. WEINREB: The government rests, your Honor.

THE COURT: The government has rested its rebuttal part of the case. That means that the evidence presentation has concluded in this phase. The next steps, as you would expect, would be some further instructions about the responsibilities you will have in your deliberations as to this phase of the case and the final arguments that will be presented by both sides.

There are some preparations that the lawyers and I have to do, as you've come to expect, with respect to that. We're going to adjourn now for the day and resume on Wednesday morning. We will skip your part of the trial tomorrow, but we'll proceed on the usual schedule on Wednesday when we will have the closing instructions and the closing arguments by the parties. You'll commence your deliberations as of Wednesday at the conclusion of those events in the courtroom. So please plan accordingly.

Once your deliberations have begun, they will continue day to day until finished, and that will include Fridays as an exception to the normal schedule we've been following, all right?

So I strongly caution you now against any discussion of the case with yourselves, among yourselves, with anybody else. Don't try to form any conclusions yourself individually about any of the issues in the case. It's important that first you have my instructions about those matters and of course that you discuss those matters among yourselves as a deliberating jury. And please continue to avoid any exposure to media accounts of the case.

With that, we will recess for the day.

COURT CLERK: All rise for the Court. The Court and jury will be in recess.

(The Court and jury exit the courtroom and the proceedings adjourned at 12:08 p.m.)

Continue to Day 621.Charge Conference — Deadlock, Unanimity, Mitigating Factors, and Martin Richard's Victim-Impact Aggravating Factor