Skip to content
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev— Case Archive
2015 Federal Trialtrial-daytrial-dayjury_instructionssidebarvoir_direjury_selectionDay 8 - January 22, 2015Voir 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.
← Day 72015 Federal TrialDay 9 →

Day 8 - January 22, 2015

Voir Dire, Juror Qualification Review, and Venue Motion Sealing

Judge George A. O'Toole Jr.
10Proceedings
9Pages
0Witnesses
1,423Lines
3Sidebars
Day 8 of 67

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.

Full day summary

Jury selection continued with questions about publicity, presumed guilt, hardship, and capital sentencing. The parties did not oppose the Globe's courtroom-access motion, but the court announced no access ruling. Judge O'Toole explained that a penalty phase would occur only after conviction for a capital crime, that death required unanimous findings, and that a death sentence was never mandatory. He also outlined safeguards for sensitive answers during public questioning. The defense challenged defendant-specific death-penalty questions and the questioning of jurors with existing opinions of guilt. The court directed counsel to keep sentencing questions general but upheld its approach to assessing impartiality through jurors' answers, self-assessments, demeanor, and context. During individual questioning, Juror 115 said the defense would have to change his mind despite the court's explanation of the government's burden. Juror 116 initially believed acquittal was unavailable, then said she could consider the evidence after the court corrected that misunderstanding. Juror 118 expressed difficulty accepting responsibility for a death sentence. Juror 119 repeatedly returned to a media-based belief in guilt and gave conflicting sentencing answers. The record marks Jurors 118 and 119 excused without separate stated cause rulings. Other questioning explored witness connections, possible prosecution bias, and fear of error in capital sentencing. The court later reported that Jurors 113, 129, and 134 had been added to the pool. The defense sought reconsideration of Juror 60's qualification, and the government opposed the request. The court deferred its decision until the next morning to review the full interview transcript. The court ordered a newly filed venue motion sealed because it quoted prospective jurors' questionnaires, including one from a person not yet examined. The entire motion remained sealed pending review of any proposed redacted version.

1. Agreed Juror Excusals and the Globe's Courtroom-Access Motion

Neither side opposed the Globe’s courtroom-access motion, but no access ruling was announced. Defense counsel also raised a forthcoming objection and reconsideration of Juror No. 60’s qualification.

→
Procedural
Agreed Juror Excusals and Pool Management
5 lines
Procedural
Party Positions on the Globe's Courtroom-Access Motion
8 lines

Neither side planned to oppose the Globe's courtroom-access motion. The government proposed accommodating ten reporters, and the court said it would address the motion.

2. Preliminary Instructions on the Capital Trial and Jury Service

Judge O'Toole explained the conditional penalty phase, jurors' sentencing responsibilities, safeguards for sensitive answers during public questioning, and restrictions on case-related conduct.

→
Jury Instruction
Preliminary Instructions on the Capital Trial and Jury Service
8 lines

Judge O'Toole outlined conditional capital sentencing, differing proof requirements, and prospective jurors' duties during selection.

Highlights

Preliminary Instructions on the Capital Trial and Jury Servicejury eventThe judge explains the conditional penalty phase, differing proof requirements, and unanimous findings required for a death sentence, emphasizing that death is never mandatory.Preliminary Instructions on the Capital Trial and Jury Service“You should understand that a jury is never required to find that a sentence of death is justified.”— George A. O'Toole Jr.Clarifies that a death sentence is not mandatory even when the jury finds aggravating factors.

3. Voir Dire Rulings on Death-Penalty Questions and Presumed Guilt

The court said death-penalty questions should avoid defendant-specific wording and upheld its approach to assessing prospective jurors with existing opinions of guilt over defense objections.

→
sidebar
Death-Penalty Questions and Preconceived Beliefs About Guilt
14 lines

Defense counsel challenged defendant-specific death-penalty questions and whether voir dire adequately probed jurors’ preconceived beliefs about guilt.

Highlights

Voir Dire Rulings on Death-Penalty Questions and Presumed GuiltrulingAfter the defense challenged questions asking whether jurors could sentence this defendant to death, the government offered to rephrase them. The court directed that questions avoid focusing specifically on the defendant.Voir Dire Rulings on Death-Penalty Questions and Presumed GuiltrulingThe defense challenged rehabilitation questions for jurors with existing opinions of guilt. After hearing competing arguments, the court upheld its approach of evaluating jurors' self-assessments, answers, demeanor, and context.

4. Individual Voir Dire — Hardship, Impartiality, and Death-Penalty Views (Part 1)

Individual voir dire on Day 8 addressed financial hardship, employment, social media, family connections, and news exposure, followed by a redacted sidebar.

→
Voir Dire
Individual Voir Dire - Hardship, Impartiality, and Death-Penalty Views
62 lines

Juror 111 described financial hardship; Juror 113 said news of attacks in France had not changed questionnaire answers. A sidebar's substantive content is redacted.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Video, Audio, and Reporters' ReturnMr. Doreau indicated that video and audio were on.

5. Individual Voir Dire — Presumed Guilt and Death-Penalty Views (Part 2)

Individual jury questioning examined media-based guilt beliefs and sentencing views. Jurors 118 and 119 were recorded as excused, without a separate stated cause ruling.

→
Voir Dire
Individual Voir Dire - Presumed Guilt and Death-Penalty Views
640 lines

Prospective jurors were questioned about presumed guilt and capital sentencing; conflicting answers prompted follow-up and limits on hypothetical verdict questions.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Juror’s Ride to WorkCounsel asked how the juror gets to work, and the juror said they get a ride.

Highlights

Individual Voir Dire - Presumed Guilt and Death-Penalty Viewsjury eventJuror 115 said the defendant would have to change his mind and the defense would have to show proof, despite the court's explanation that the government alone bears the burden of proving guilt.Individual Voir Dire - Presumed Guilt and Death-Penalty Views“So I think the defense would have to tell me that -- to show me proof. Right now I have an opinion, and -- you know, just based on all the information that was fed to me over the years.”— Prospective juror 115Juror 115 expressly placed an expectation of proof on the defense after the court explained the government's burden.Individual Voir Dire - Presumed Guilt and Death-Penalty Viewsjury eventAsked whether she would find guilt if the government's trial evidence did not establish it beyond a reasonable doubt, Juror 119 again referred to her media-based belief in guilt. The court ended the questioning, and the record marks her excused.

6. Individual Voir Dire — Transportation, Impartiality, and Death-Penalty Views (Part 3)

Five prospective jurors were questioned about hardship, impartiality, potential witness connections, and their ability to consider life imprisonment or death. No qualification or strike decisions are stated.

→
Voir Dire
Individual Voir Dire - Transportation, Impartiality, and Death-Penalty Views
616 lines

Five prospective jurors were questioned about impartiality, witness connections, hardship, and capital sentencing. The court limited defendant-specific questions; the final juror expressed anxiety about imposing death.

7. Juror Qualification Review — Three Added to the Pool

The court reported three additions to the juror pool and reviewed agreements concerning other prospective jurors.

→
jury selection
Juror Qualification Review - Three Added to the Pool
33 lines

The court reported three additions to the juror pool: 113, 129, and 134.

Highlights

Juror Qualification Review - Three Added to the Pooljury eventThe court reported three additions to the juror pool: Jurors 113, 129, and 134.

8. Juror 60 Reconsideration Motion — Decision Deferred

The court deferred a decision on Bruck’s request to reconsider Juror 60’s qualification until the next morning, pending review of her full interview transcript.

→
Procedural
Juror 60 Reconsideration Motion - Decision Deferred
23 lines

The court deferred the defense's motion to reconsider Juror 60's qualification until the next morning, pending review of her interview transcript.

Highlights

Juror 60 Reconsideration Motion - Decision DeferredrulingThe court deferred its decision until the next morning to review the full interview transcript. It agreed with the government's assessment of the juror's reaction to her husband's remarks but left the presumption-of-innocence issue for review.

9. Venue Motion Sealed Pending Review of Redactions

The court sealed a newly filed venue motion containing juror questionnaire quotations and required review before any redacted version could be made public.

→
Procedural
Venue Motion Sealed Pending Review of Redactions
14 lines

The court sealed the venue motion over its disclosure of juror questionnaire responses and required review before any redacted version could be publicly filed.

Highlights

Venue Motion Sealed Pending Review of RedactionsrulingAt the government's request, the court kept the entire motion sealed and required review of a proposed redacted version before it could enter the public record.
← Day 72015 Federal TrialDay 9 →