Great News: You’re Paying for Tsarnaev’s Defense Team

Posted by on Apr 30, 2013 at 7:59 am

We guess all that welfare money the family collected over the years is gone, so now we have to dig deeper to support this terrorist. Remind us again how evil America is, OK?

“The defense team representing the Boston Marathon bombing suspect got a major boost Monday with the addition of Judy Clarke, a San Diego lawyer who has managed to get life sentences instead of the death penalty for several high-profile clients, including the Unabomber and the gunman in the rampage that injured former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords,” reports the AP.

“Clarke’s appointment was approved Monday by U.S. Magistrate Judge Marianne Bowler.”

CNN confirmed last night that bill for the attorney would be picked up by “Uncle Sam,” or the American taxpayer.

Maybe the taxpayers can help pay for the lawyers hired by the intimidated Benghazi witnesses. Is that too much to ask?

 

Tags: ,

15 Responses to “Great News: You’re Paying for Tsarnaev’s Defense Team”

  1. Blue Hen on 30/30/13 at 9:13 am

    It’d be nice to know where they’re getting the airfare to and from Whereveristan.

    It would also be interesting to know if any of this merry band is still receiving benefits.

  2. Chris W. on 30/30/13 at 10:25 am

    This is bullshit. He should have a regular public defender just like any other Joe Schmuck who can’t afford his own attorney.

  3. Jay in Ames on 30/30/13 at 10:51 am

    I wonder what the bill will be for this “public defender”. Methinks it will be considerably more than the minimum, along with expenses.

  4. AnnS on 30/30/13 at 11:48 am

    We also paid for their terrorist attack; 100k in welfare benefits and part of the radical muslim mosque where they learned jihadists tactics.

    “Published on May 28, 2010

    On May 22nd, Massachusetts Governor Patrick embraced the radical leadership of the Muslim American Society (MAS), including Imam Abdullah Faarooq who told followers they must “pick up the gun and the sword” in response to the arrests of local Islamic extremist Aafia Siddiqui and terror suspect Tarek Mehanna. Full sermon by Imam Faaruuq is available here:”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qUYIHRRaPmA

  5. MT Geoff on 30/30/13 at 12:00 pm

    Long before “Gideon” established the modern concept of requiring public defenders, most courts would provide legal counsel at no cost to defendants accused of capital crimes. No big change there.
    Many convictions, especially capital convictions, get tossed because of “ineffective counsel” and this is especially true in cases defended by public defenders. Some may even be creating that appearance to help the appeals, I dunno. But the result is that, in a case of this prominence and complexity, it is a good tactical move for the government go provide top-shelf legal aid to the defendant.
    I realize that, in a place like Russia, that would not be the case. But that’s why this isn’t a place like Russia. Tsarnaev hasn’t been convicted of anything yet.

  6. Blue Hen on 30/30/13 at 12:22 pm

    “But the result is that, in a case of this prominence and complexity, it is a good tactical move for the government go provide top-shelf legal aid to the defendant”

    1. So. Lawyers play a never ending game of “my client and/or his parents and/or me, his lawyer, is insane/retarded and/or abused and/or incompetent”. And the payoff is the government rewarding the instigators of this game by paying them to oppose the government that hired them.

    Nice work if you can get/invent it.

    2. I really don’t give a tinker’s damn what Russia does. That has nothing to do what what happened here.

    3. Tsarnaev hasn’t been convicted of anything yet”.

    About 18 people have already been found guilty of something; their lives and limbs were taken. or should we be referring to them as the alleged victims?

    Furthermore, you were singing a different tune when the maker of the mighty mo video was imprisoned for blasphemy.

  7. cas on 30/30/13 at 12:43 pm

    “Clarke’s appointment was approved Monday by U.S. Magistrate Judge Marianne Bowler.”

    Isn’t this the same magistrate who barged in on the FBI interrogation, thereby ending any actionable intelligence he might have provided? It figures…

  8. MT Geoff on 30/30/13 at 2:29 pm

    Howdy Blue Hen
    I’m aware of the tendentious character of lawyers and the endlessness of litigation, especially if there’s a capital sentence involved. I didn’t say I liked it; I said it was a good idea to provide high-caliber defense attorneys. I stand by that.
    BTW, for death penalty opponents who prate about the endless cost of death-penalty litigation, I invite your attention to the Blind Sheikh. He was sentenced to life and he is still litigating his case 20 years down the road. “Endless litigation” is a weak argument in the death-penalty debate.
    As for Nakouola, the filmmaker violated his probation, having already been convicted of a fraud-related felony, and he was returned to prison after a hearing established the probation violation. So yes, he had been convicted of something. He had due process, including legal representation. I agree that imprisoning him for creating the video would be wrong — and if he had not been on probation, he would not have gone to prison. It’s at least possible (no proof that I know of) that Nakouola was using the film for fraud.

  9. Blue Hen on 30/30/13 at 3:41 pm

    Once again, you very conveniently left out a few things. Like over 50 cops and a herd of media rousing this “parole violater”, and the President of the United States referring to it in the General Assembly of the UN, BEFORE he ever saw a courtroom. Not to mention the solitary confinement for a nonviolent alleged offender. But sure, he was convicted solely on the evidence, and I’m sure that he got the exact same representation that the Boston bomber, whoops, alleged boston alleged bomber will be getting.

    he did, right? And we paid for it then too, right?

  10. MT Geoff on 30/30/13 at 4:21 pm

    Howdy Blue Hen
    The Nakoula case and the Tsarnaev case are very different.
    I’m sure that, without the need for a Benghazi distraction, Nakoula’s parole violation would have passed off of almost everyone’s radar. That doesn’t mean he was innocent, which he was not, nor that he was treated more severely than most of those who violate supervised release.
    The midnight visit that resulted in the well-known picture is not the event at which he was remanded to custody. If you look closely, you can see that he’s not in handcuffs. He also chose to mask himself, which was probably a good idea. It was a week or so later that he was jailed, pending a hearing, and then returned to prison. The publicity didn’t do him any good, I’m sure.
    None of that is relevant to the defense of Tsarnaev the Younger, whose first name I can’t even spell. He has been accused of a dreadful crime. He is nearly certainly guilty of it. He is still entitled to due process and effective assistance of counsel.
    For one thing, let’s remember that he could be innocent. The first suspects in the Atlanta Olympic bombing and the recent Ricin case were innocent. I don’t think Tsarnaev is innocent but I will defend his rights on any blog.

  11. Blue Hen on 30/30/13 at 7:10 pm

    “That doesn’t mean he was innocent, which he was not, nor that he was treated more severely than most of those who violate supervised release.”

    You’re fucking kidding. Most are thrown into solitary confinement? You can prove that? Or are you just making this up?

    “The midnight visit that resulted in the well-known picture is not the event at which he was remanded to custody. If you look closely, you can see that he’s not in handcuffs.”

    50 cops show up at his doorstep, and he wasn’t in custody? He went because they asked nicely?

    “The publicity didn’t do him any good, I’m sure.”

    He was accused by the President of the United States of fomenting riots that killed people.

    You’ve tried this line of shit before. It hasn’t improved with age.

  12. MT Geoff on 1/01/13 at 2:52 pm

    Howdy Blue Hen
    Your command of profanity must be concealing the strength of your arguments.

  13. Blue Hen on 1/01/13 at 3:51 pm

    I can’t compete with the winner of the understatement of the year champion.

    1.President of the United States accuses a guy of sparking riots in two countries and killing people = “the publicity didn’t do him any good.”

    2. Being hauled off in the dead of night with 50 cops = midnight stroll; note the absence of handcuffs. ( as if 50 cops needed a pair of handcuffs for one film maker).

    3. solitary confinement = “nor that he was treated more severely than most of those who violate supervised release.”

    Congrats. You swept the awards. The prize is a job at the Ministry of Truth.

    There ya go champ. All squeaky clean. And your lines of garbage are no prettier than the first time you emitted them.