Carney: Tsarnaev charged, won’t be held as an enemy combatant; Update: Tsarnaev cooperating with feds

posted at 3:11 pm on April 22, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via the Examiner, they’ve hit him with just two counts thus far, one of which is conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction (i.e. an IED) against persons or property in the U.S., but that’s enough for a death sentence if the DOJ chooses to seek it. I sense some anger on the right that the feds aren’t treating him as an “enemy combatant,” but I think that has more to do with the condemnatory power of that term than the legal consequences flowing from it. Terrorism is qualitatively different from common crime in its political motivation and so people want Tsarnaev to be treated qualitatively differently by the justice system. That’s also what drives much of the objections to Mirandizing terrorists, I think: It’s not that Miranda will matter hugely in determining whether he talks, it’s that by Mirandizing him you’re treating him like a common criminal rather than a man who’s declared war on the United States. (Tsarnaev’s motive is still unknown but we all know which way the arrow’s pointing given his dead brother’s radicalism.) I’m more of a bottom-line guy on this sort of thing, though. Is there any chance that he’ll end up going free because the feds aren’t treating him as an EC? Nah. Given the video/photo evidence against him, at worst this guy’s going to prison forever. At best he’s getting the needle. Here’s a glimpse at the evidence against him from the complaint, which is posted at Legal Insurrection:

1314

They’ve also got the carjacking victim set to testify against him — and I recommend reading the full complaint for more on him, to see what he had to endure. The bombers did, allegedly, tell him right up front that they were the people who blew up the marathon, and according to the feds, the victim did indeed escape. He wasn’t “let go,” which, as noted this morning, would have been an insane gesture of magnanimity by the two most wanted men in America.

But as I was saying, I don’t think EC status matters (much). They can’t try him at a military tribunal regardless because he’s a U.S. citizen; even Lindsey Graham acknowledged that on Fox News this morning. They’re not sparing him their toughest interrogators just because he’s not an EC: The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Team will be grilling him. Arguably, they shouldn’t even be allowed to consider designating him an EC unless/until they prove that he’s part of a group that “planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons” per the 2001 AUMF. Their best weapon in getting him to share intel is the death sentence hanging over his head, which doesn’t depend on EC status. If he wants to live — and it sure seemed like he did on Friday — then it’s time to talk.

Here’s Carney sounding very grand indeed about handling terrorists in federal court. Exit quotation:

Update: For what it’s worth:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Is it too soon for Tsarnaev to request tenureship as a professor at a top-tier New England college???

LarryinLA on April 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Weapon of mass destruction?

Ben Hur on April 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Via the Examiner, they’ve hit him with just two counts thus far,

Only two? I really hope that is just federal charges and that the state gets to charge him. There is a little issue of murdering an MIT cop, possession of firearms without permit, possession of ammo without permit, car theft, kidnapping, possession of explosives without permits, discharge of a firearm in public, littering and trespassing.

I’m sure there are others like causing public mayhem or similar.

The guy should get life in MA just for the acts he committed after the bombing.

Dr. Frank Enstine on April 22, 2013 at 4:13 PM

My concern is not for Tsarnaev, it is for the Constitution and the rule of law. Give him his rights, dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s.

Then execute him.

myiq2xu on April 22, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Yup – give the guilty b@stahd a fair trial and then hang’im….

dentarthurdent on April 22, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Can we call him JarJar Binks, I don’t have to look that up.

Cindy Munford on April 22, 2013 at 3:40 PM

LOL.

My wife referred to him as that guy in the movie “Don’t mess with the Zohan Jockhar”.

portlandon on April 22, 2013 at 4:14 PM

I support the death penalty for typical murderers, but not for jihadists. These guys want to die. Let’s put them into supermax prisons, and keep them there for as long as we can keep them alive. I bet a lot of them will come to regret, perhaps openly, their crimes. Jakov Tsarnaev could be there for seventy years or more, stuck 22.5 hours/day in an 8×10 cell. It’d be better for us if these psychopaths come to regret martyrdom, rather than to achieve it.

EricW on April 22, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Weapon of mass destruction?

Ben Hur on April 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Big bombs purposely designed to kill and injure large numbers of people that are placed in the middle of crowds do not qualify for what part of “weapon, mass destruction”?

farsighted on April 22, 2013 at 4:21 PM

So he is talking? With his lawyer’s approval?

Sounds fishy. Sounds like a “deal” is being made. If he doesn’t reveal a whole freaking network, I would say we are being had.

PattyJ on April 22, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Capitalist Hog on April 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Oh, indeed, my apologies, I don’t know how I managed to mix the names.

Cindy Munford on April 22, 2013 at 4:28 PM

I sense some anger on the right that the feds aren’t treating him as an “enemy combatant,”

Maybe you shouldn’t trust the force so much Allah. What I read here is that people just expect Obama’s government to cover up, hide the guy’s crimes and create a college professor out of him. Wouldn’t that be easier if he were whisked off to Gitmo?

Give him all his rights and make sure every stinkin’ detail is blurted all over the media. Give us the details about the nails in the bombs, about why they chose the time they chose. Tell us all about their relatives, where the weapons came from, the training. And most of all tell us about how this SHOULD have been prevented were it not for an out of touch and bloated government. Oh wait, Obama’s the prosecutor. Never mind.

rhombus on April 22, 2013 at 4:29 PM

His name is Zooey Deschanel.

steebo77 on April 22, 2013 at 3:44 PM

I saw that too.

She was not happy about it.
Story here

nobar on April 22, 2013 at 3:57 PM

TOO FUNNY!!
However, I’m not surprised she’s mad.
And I like Zooey (though I don’t know whether she’s a typical Hwood lefty) – very cute, good singer.

dentarthurdent on April 22, 2013 at 4:01 PM

I always thought there was something hinky about her.

slickwillie2001 on April 22, 2013 at 4:29 PM

The guy is regrettably a U.S. citizen. Since he’s reasonably within the reach of U.S. law enforcement, I think it’d be a bad precedent to treat him any differently than, say, McVeigh was.

Try him, convict him, and then send him to the depths of a Supermax solitary cell where he can slowly lose his mind for the next 60 years.

LukeinNE on April 22, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Man don’t we wish Bush’s team was in charge right now…

DanMan on April 22, 2013 at 3:22 PM

You just know that the Democrat Left is in full freakout mode because O’bama’s “response” to this act of terror hasn’t sent his Job Approval skyrocketing like Chimpy’s did after 9/11. Bush’s Job Approval went up between 32 and 35 points in 4 days.

The latest Gallup Daily Tracking shows absolutely no post-4/15 bounce for Dear Leader. In fact, yesterday he was at 53% Job Approval, and today it’s down to 50%.

Maybe if he blamed 4/15 on Bush he might do better?

Del Dolemonte on April 22, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Big bombs purposely designed to kill and injure large numbers of people that are placed in the middle of crowds do not qualify for what part of “weapon, mass destruction”?

farsighted on April 22, 2013 at 4:21 PM

The part where when outside of the US it’s a roadside bomb.

We all know what WMD’s are. And they’re not roadside bombs us,,,sorry, I meant IED’s.

Ben Hur on April 22, 2013 at 4:38 PM

You just know that the Democrat Left is in full freakout mode because O’bama’s “response” to this act of terror hasn’t sent his Job Approval skyrocketing like Chimpy’s did after 9/11. Bush’s Job Approval went up between 32 and 35 points in 4 days.

The latest Gallup Daily Tracking shows absolutely no post-4/15 bounce for Dear Leader. In fact, yesterday he was at 53% Job Approval, and today it’s down to 50%.

Maybe if he blamed 4/15 on Bush he might do better?

Del Dolemonte on April 22, 2013 at 4:32 PM

That’s because no matter how hard someone tries, unless you are an award winning actor honest sincerity is hard to fake.

Obama never bothered to take acting lessons. GWB actually did care and it was obvious.

kim roy on April 22, 2013 at 4:43 PM

The one thing I think (hope) makes us different than liberals is that we believe in consistancy in application of the rule of law. Just as there were never any questions whether Eric Rudolph should have been Mirandized, neither should there be in this case.

The law shouldn’t be politicized or construed to fit the latest cause.

Tater Salad on April 22, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Weapon of mass destruction?

Ben Hur on April 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Big bombs purposely designed to kill and injure large numbers of people that are placed in the middle of crowds do not qualify for what part of “weapon, mass destruction”?

farsighted on April 22, 2013 at 4:21 PM

From the FBI, as just one source:

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are defined in US law (18 USC §2332a) as:
“(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title (i.e. explosive device);
(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;
(C) any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are defined in section 178 of this title)(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life.”

WMD is often referred to by the collection of modalities that make up the set of weapons: chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE). These are weapons that have a relatively large-scale impact on people, property, and/or infrastructure.

So even a regular military type 2000 pound bomb is not considered a WMD.

dentarthurdent on April 22, 2013 at 4:44 PM

That’s because no matter how hard someone tries, unless you are an award winning actor honest sincerity is hard to fake.
kim roy on April 22, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Once you’ve learned how to fake sincerity, you’ve got it made….

dentarthurdent on April 22, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Del Dolemonte on April 22, 2013 at 4:32 PM

In a sane rational country Dear Leader’s approval numbers would go down considering all of the chest pounding he did from after bin Laden was killed right through the Democratic nominating convention — “Bin Laden is dead and al Qaeda is on the run!”

Especially considering the Benghazi terrorist attack.

And considering the unfolding story of the incompetence of the Feds. By all accounts they were absolutely clueless. They never saw this attack coming and were sucker punched. No one identified one dot, much less two or more to try to connect. Twelve and a half years after 9/11 that is unacceptable.

Do Americans feel safer now than they did at this time in 2012? Do they feel as safe?

Polls now seem to only measure the ignorance and foolishness of the American people.

farsighted on April 22, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Twelve Eleven and a half years after 9/11 that is unacceptable.

farsighted on April 22, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Arguably, they shouldn’t even be allowed to consider designating him an EC unless/until they prove that he’s part of a group that “planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001

Hello Jihadists have declared war on us. There are two or more types of jihadists, there is just “the jihadists” nuff said.

paulsur on April 22, 2013 at 4:52 PM

No need for any more Tsarnaev’s in America, the family has done enough damage…

OmahaConservative on April 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM

That family did nothing, it is the pressure cookers’ fault
/s

burrata on April 22, 2013 at 5:00 PM

“Bomber Two” did this:
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/peter_gelzinis/2013/04/dance_instructor_injured_in_bombing_vows_ill_dance

He destroyed her foot, but it doesn’t sound like he did any damage to her spirit.

That brave woman’s brother is a friend of mine. Pray for their family.

acasilaco on April 22, 2013 at 5:02 PM

I sense some anger on the right that the feds aren’t treating him as an “enemy combatant,” but I think that has more to do with the condemnatory power of that term than the legal consequences flowing from it.

I think it’s about more than that. It’s about the feeling that terrorism should be treated more aggressively than ordinary crime, and that our investigation should not be limited to strict procedures in order to make sure we get a conviction. Terrorists are more existential threats, and we should be able to respond in kind. The mere fact of the terrorism should make it possible to retaliate with the death penalty without the need of a full hearing and jury trial.

But in this particular case, I do believe you’re correct that his guilt is so easy to establish as to present no practical problem in making him pay for his violence.

There Goes the Neighborhood on April 22, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Jakov Tsarnaev could be there for seventy years or more, stuck 22.5 hours/day in an 8×10 cell.

Interesting dilemma… Take on the cost of a private cell for the rest of his life, or should he be released into the general prison population where he could decide whether he wanted to be Bubba’s #1 wife or take the heat for killing a kid? One hears that prison culture doesn’t take kindly to that particular kind of offense.

worldtvlr on April 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM

Stop. They can’t just lock people up in supermaxes for no reason. They do it because they are dangerous. As they change their behavior, they are rewarded with privileges and eventually a transfer out to general pop and a job.

I am sick of people pretending that locking them up and throwing away the key could happen or would be worse punishment than execution. Just tell the truth and admit that you are antiDP than spewing this crap.

Blake on April 22, 2013 at 5:15 PM

Anger is for lynch mobs. Justice is dispassionate.

Let’s give Tsarnaev a full measure of justice.

myiq2xu on April 22, 2013 at 5:19 PM

I sense some anger on the right that the feds aren’t treating him as an “enemy combatant,”…

Not me. I didn’t want him going to Club Gitmo anyway. It’s pretty darned nice from what I hear, what with Obama being so thin-skinned and afraid of any hint of global criticism. Sure… we have to pay for a trial, and it’ll be a three-ringed circus, but there’s not a whole lot that can be done about it, since some moron in this administration saw fit to award him citizenship.

Under ordinary circumstances and as a parent, I might’ve been able to work up a certain limited amount of sympathy for a 19 year-old who had ruined his life following along behind his older brother and too young and stupid to see sense. But not in this case. He set that bomb down at the feet of innocents, people who had never harmed him in any way. He looked into their faces… and walked away. Nope. He doesn’t deserve Club Gitmo, where his religious whims will be catered to on a daily basis. He deserves the crappiest prison cell this country has to offer, and the every day reminder of the innocent human beings he maimed and killed.

Murf76 on April 22, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Only two? I really hope that is just federal charges and that the state gets to charge him. There is a little issue of murdering an MIT cop, possession of firearms without permit, possession of ammo without permit, car theft, kidnapping, possession of explosives without permits, discharge of a firearm in public, littering and trespassing.

Dr. Frank Enstine on April 22, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Killing a cop on non-Federal property is not a Federal offense. It’s up to Massachusetts to prosecute him for that (and there is no death penalty in Massachusetts).

The sole point of the WMD charge is to be able to prosecute him under Federal law and be able to threaten him with the death penalty. If you read the criminal complaint, you’ll see how careful the FBI is about explaining that the two explosions impacted interstate commerce. Again, that’s in order to make the charge a Federal offense, because for whatever it’s worth, regulating exploding pressure cookers is not among the enumerated powers of Congress.

Time Lord on April 22, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Of course King Barry wants him charged CRIMINALLY. That way King Barry can avoid talking about a TERRORIST INCIDENT.

GarandFan on April 22, 2013 at 8:35 PM

If he got his citizenship by fraud, it can be revoked. It is my understanding it can be revoked for a lot of reasons.

lonestar1 on April 22, 2013 at 10:15 PM

Let’s give Tsarnaev a full measure of justice.

Think about it, 55 to 60 years in supermax isolation, maybe once every 2 weeks, he gets to see Ted Kaczynski being walked to the shower. Sure sounds a lot worse than a clean, quick death. In five years, he will be 24 years old and forgotten, slowly wasting in a small grey concrete cell.

Wallythedog on April 22, 2013 at 11:04 PM

If Obama Administration thinks pressure cooker bombs are “weapons of mass destruction” on what basis does it criticize George W. Bush for invading Iraq?

Just wondering….

bobcalco on April 22, 2013 at 11:37 PM

I think one of our biggest criminal organizations are those that put out Weapons of Misinformation: the MSM and gov’t schools at start.

It was an I.E.D. not a WMD. Pure and simple. COULD he be charged as a terrorist? Certainly. Theirs was a short range anti-personnel device. We are fortunate that they didn’t decide to open with their illegally obtained firearms just before the Senate vote.

Hopefully we’ll find out more as to the motivation of the older brother and get some insight into those amongst us who might consider similar acts of terror.

Let’s face it. Their pressure cooker bomb was not the most effective weapon for its size. (I know..say that to its victims.) There are plenty of ways to cook up a similarly sized package and cause more havoc.

He’s going to prison. Where prisoners don’t take kindly to people who kill children, should he somehow ever find himself in the general population there.

ProfShadow on April 23, 2013 at 6:18 AM

THOUGHTS:

1) Surprise, surprise….the man who officially called the Fort Hood terrorist attack a case of ‘Workplace Violence’….the man who violated the War Powers Act to help Al Qaeda-backed rebels take over Libya then abandoned Ambassador Stevens to their protection…the man who just gave $1.5 billion, 24 F-16 fighter Jets, and 200 tanks to the terrorist group he help put in office in Egypt and who facilitated the ransacking of our Embassy in Cairo on the anniversary of 9/11…the man who actually said he was ‘wary’ of calling a bombing like the one in Boston a ‘terrorist attack’…is not going to allow Tsarnaev to be charged as an ‘Enemy Combatant’.

2) Tsarnaev COULD face the death penalty? He placed a bomb at the feet of an 8yo little boy then headed back to his dorm to party. He’s cooperating with us now & giving us information? Great – get everything you can out of him…try him…then put him to death! The death penalty should not even be a question!

3) Had the bombers turned out to be Conservatives/TEA Party members, as Obama and Liberals openly hoped they would be before we found out who REALLY perpetrated the bombings, the death penalty would definitely be applied immediately. Interesting…Timmothy Mcveigh, a ‘right-wing’ nut job was rightfully put to death in 2001 for the terrorist attack he perpetrated against fellow Americans. However, Obama’s buddy – Bill Ayers, who also perpetrated terrorist bombings resulting in the deaths of fellow Americans, to include 1st responders, the un-repentant terrorist in whose living room Obama 1st announced his plan to run for political office – is alive and well, a professor in a college. Mcveigh perpetrates a terrorist attack & is put to death. Ayers perpetrates a terrorist attack & Hollywood makes a movie about it, glamorizing it, and Ayers gets to influence the minds of young Americans with his Progressive garbage. Tsarnaev perpetrates a terrorist attack…and Obama is going to do all he cans to spare the misguided Islamic Terrorist doesn’t face the death penalty?

4) Tsarnaev & his brother embraced Islam & the idea that the whole world should convert to Islam, that it should live and die under Shari’a law. I say we give him what he wants/wanted. Collect all the information you can from Tsarnaev, put him on trial, and when he is found GUILTY hand him over to Saudi Arabia, an ‘ally’ & nation ruled by Shari’a law, to carry out his sentence. Under Saudi / Shari’a law, murder is punishable by BEHEADING BY SWORD…in public as a warning to others. In rare instances murderers are sometimes put to death by firing squad or stoned to death; however, beheading by sword in a public square is most often the punishment. In this scenario Tsarnaev gets what he wanted – to live & die under Shari’a law, Boston victims/Americans get justice, and Muslims could not blame the U.S. for killing one of their own.

easyt65 on April 23, 2013 at 9:21 AM

The big question is should the Boston Marathon Bomber be tried as a civilian or treated as an enemy combatant? My position may not be popular but I will explain. He should be tried in civilian court then if he is not given life without parole or death his citizenship should be revoked upon the completion of his sentence. My reasoning is simple and I think logical. He was a naturalized citizen and all citizens regardless should be treated with the utmost respect from our legal system. He should get the same treatment from the courts as I would want or you would want. Once the system has adjudicated his crimes then he should be stripped of his naturalized status and deported to wherever he came from. If we allow the government to start classifying some citizens as “enemy combatants’ what is to stop them from classifying you or I as such?

JKotthoff on April 23, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2