PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, TUESDAY, APRIL 23, 2013) — The accusations of the government against

Photo of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (white hat) Near (8yr old) Martin Richard (blue circle) Who Died in Boston Bombing (lower red circled image allegedly Tsarnaev’s backpack bomb)

19-year-old  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev spell out a series of actions that match, down to the minute, the actions of “two young men” near the finish line of the Boston Marathon near and at the time of the bombings. When one reads the complaint of FBI agent Daniel Genck, it is hard to hold on to a presumption of innocence. Legally, the courts and all involved in the prosecution will, for the record, observe this formality, and the affidavit refers only to a “probable cause” in associated Tsarnaev with the bombings.

Here’s the question: Who among us is willing to grant this young man his constitutional rights?

His older brother, Tamerlane, died in a shootout with police, the same action in which Dzhokhar was injured in the head, neck, hand, and legs. Tamerlane, 26, leaves behind a wife, 24-year-old Rhose Island native Katherine Russell, and a daughter, Zahara, 3.

An Eerie Reminder of Poe

When hearing the older brother’s name, THE PLANET can’t help but think of Tamerlane and Other Poems, written in Boston and published there in 1827 by Edgar A. Poe anonymously, under the byline of “A Bostonian.” The title poem is about a conqueror hero who, dying, remembers his past and faces the regrets he has about leaving his first love to pursue his large ambitions. Sounds a little like Tamerlan Tsarnaev, in our imaginations, at least. We wonder, like Tamerlane, did he have regrets when the end came? Did he lament his pursuit of angry ambitions rather than care for his family?

Tamerlan, Katherine, and Zahara lived in Cambrigde. According to Yahoo! News, she worked seven days a week, 70 to 80 hours a week, as a home health-care aide. Her father is an ER doctor. Her mother is a nurse. Katherine became a different person after she met Tamerlan. This bright young woman who dreamed of serving in the Peace Corps after college instead met and married Tamerlan, dropped out of college, converted to Islam, took his name, and had his baby before she turned 21. In 2009, Cambridge police arrested Tamerlan on a charge of domestic assault and battery. Katherine Russell: Tamerlan’s first victim.

Here is the affidavit of FBI special agent Daniel Genck:

—– 00 —–


I, Daniel R. Genck, being duly sworn, depose and state:

  1. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and have been so employed since 2009. I am currently assigned to one of the Boston Field Office’s Counter-terrorism Squads. Among other things, I am responsible for conducting national security investigations of potential violations of federal criminal laws as a member of the Joint Terrorism Task Force (“JTTF”). During my tenure as an agent, I have participated in numerous national security investigations. I have received extensive training and experience in the conduct of national security investigations, and those matters involving domestic and international terrorism.
  2. During my employment with the FBI, I have conducted and participated in many investigations involving violations of United States laws relating to the provision of material support to terrorism. I have participated in the execution of numerous federal Search and arrest warrants in such investigations. I have had extensive training in many methods used to commit acts of terrorism contrary to United States law.
  3. This affdavit is submitted in support of an application for a complaint chargingDZHOKHAR A. TSARNAEV of Cambridge, Massachusetts (“DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV“) with using a weapon of mass destruction against persons and property at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, resulting in death. More specifically, I submit this affidavit in support of an application for a complaint charging DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV with (1) unlawfully using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction (namely, an improvised explosive device) against persons and property within the United States used in interstate and foreign commerce and in an activity that affects interstate and foreign commerce, which offense and its results affected interstate and foreign commerce (including, but not limited to, the Boston Marathon, private businesses in Eastern Massachusetts, and the City of Boston itself), resulting in death, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2332a; and (2) maliciously damaging and destroying, by means of an explosive, real and personal property used in interstate and foreign commerce and in an activity affecting interstate and foreign commerce, resulting in personal injury and death, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(i).
  4. This affidavit is based upon my personal involvement in this investigation, my training and experience, my review of relevant evidence, and information supplied to me by other law enforcement officers. It does not include each and every fact known to me about the investigation, but rather only those facts that I believe are sufficient to establish the requisite probable cause.


    A. The Boston Marathon Explosions
  1. The Boston Marathon is an annual race that attracts runners from all over the United States and the world. According to the Boston Athletic Association, which administers the Marathon, over 23,000 runners participated in this year’s race. The Marathon has a substantial impact on interstate and foreign commerce. For example, based on publicly available information, I believe that the runners and their families — including those who travel to the Boston area from other states and countries — typically spend tens of millions of dollars each year at local area hotels, restaurants and shops, in the days before, during, and after the Marathon. In addition, a number of the restaurants and stores in the area near the finish line have special events for spectators.
  2. The final stretch ofthe Boston Marathon runs eastward along the center of Boylston Street in Boston from Hereford Street to the finish line, which is located between Exeter and Dartmouth Streets. Low metal barriers line both edges of the street and separate the spectators from the runners. Many businesses line the streets of the Marathon route. In the area near the finish line, businesses are located on both sides of Boylston Street, including restaurants, a department store, a hotel and various retail stores.
  3. On April 15, 2013, at approximately 2:49 pm., while the Marathon was still underway, two explosions occurred on the north side of Boylston Street along the Marathon’s final stretch. The first explosion occurred in front of 671 Boylston Street and the second occurred approximately one block away in front of 755 Boylston Street. The explosive devices were placed near the metal barriers where hundreds of spectators were watching runners approach the finish line. Each explosion killed at least one person, maimed, burned and wounded scores of others, and damaged public and private property, including the streets, sidewalk, barriers, and property owned by people and businesses in the locations where the explosions occurred. In total, three people were killed and over two hundred individuals were injured.
  4. The explosions had a substantial impact on interstate and foreign commerce. Among other things, they forced a premature end to the Marathon and the evacuation and temporary closure of numerous businesses along Boylston Street for several days.
    B. Surveillance Evidence
  1. I have reviewed videotape footage taken from a security camera located on Boylston Street near the corner of Boylston and Gloucester Streets. At approximately 2:38 pm. (based on the video’s duration and timing of the explosions) — i.e., approximately 11 minutes before the first explosion — two young men can be seen turning left (eastward) onto Boylston from Gloucester Street. Both men are carrying large knapsacks. The first man, whom I refer to in this affidavit as Bomber One, is a young male, wearing a dark-colored baseball cap, sunglasses, a white shirt, dark coat, and tan pants. The second man, whom I refer to in this affidavit as Bomber Two, is a young male, wearing a white baseball cap backwards, a gray hooded sweatshirt, a lightweight black jacket, and dark pants. As set forth below, there is probable cause to believe that Bomber One is Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Bomber Two is his brother, DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV.
  2. After turning onto Boylston Street, Bomber One and Bomber Two can be seen walking eastward along the north side of the sidewalk towards the Marathon finish line. Bomber One is in front and Bomber Two is a few feet behind him. Additional security camera video taken from a location farther east on Boylston Street, as well as contemporaneous photographs taken from across the street, show the men continuing to walk together eastward along Boylston Street towards Fairfield Street.
  3. I have also reviewed video footage taken from a security camera affixed above the doorway of the Forum Restaurant located at 755 Boylston Street, which was the site of the second explosion. This camera is located approximately midway between Fairfield and Exeter Streets and points out in the direction of Boylston and is turned slightly towards Fairfield. At approximately 2:41 p.m. (based on the video’s duration and the timing of the explosions), Bomber One and Bomber Two can be seen standing together approximately one half-block from the restaurant.
  4. At approximately 2:42 pm. (i.e., approximately seven minutes before the first explosion), Bomber One can be seen detaching himself from the crowd and walking east on Boylston Street towards the Marathon finish line. Approximately 15 seconds later, he can be seen passing directly in front of the Forum Restaurant and continuing in the direction of the location where the first explosion occurred. His knapsack is still on his back.
  5. At approximately 2:45 p.m., Bomber Two can be seen detaching himself from the crowd and walking east on Boylston Street toward the Marathon finishing line. He appears to have the thumb of his right hand hooked under the strap of his knapsack and a cell phone in his left hand. Approximately 15 seconds later, he can be seen stopping directly in front of the Forum Restaurant and standing near the metal barrier among numerous spectators, with his back to the camera, facing the runners. He then can be seen apparentiy slipping his knapsack onto the ground. A photograph taken from the opposite side of the street shows the knapsack on the ground at Bomber Two’s feet.
  6. The Forum Restaurant video shows that Bomber Two remained in the same spot for approximately four minutes, occasionally looking at his cell phone and once appearing to take a picture with it. At some point he appears to look at his phone, which is held at approximately waist level, and may be manipulating the phone. Approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, he lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone, and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. A few seconds after he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. Virtually every head turns to the east (towards the finish line) and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. Bomber Two, virtually alone among the individuals in front of the restaurant, appears calm. He glances to the east and then calmly but rapidly begins moving to the west, away from the direction of the finish line. He walks away without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing. Approximately 10 seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where Bomber Two had placed his knapsack.
  7. I have observed video and photographic footage ofthe location where the second explosion occurred from a number viewpoints and angles, including from directly across the street. I can discern nothing in that location in the period before the explosion that might have caused that explosion, other than Bomber Two’s knapsack.
    C. Photographic Identifications
  1. I have compared a Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (“RMV”) photographt of DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV with photographic and video images of Bomber Two, and I believe, based on their close physical resemblance, there is probable cause that they are one and the same person. Similarly, I have compared an RMV photograph of Tamerlan Tsarnaev with photographic and video images of Bomber One, and I likewise believe that they are one and the same person.
    D. The Bombers Emerge
  1. I base the allegations set forth in paragraphs 18 through 27 on information that has been provided to me by fellow law enforcement officers, including members of the JTTF and state and local law enforcement who responded to the crime scenes, as well as on publicly available information that I deem reliable.
  2. At approximately 5:00 p_m. on April 18, 2013, the FBI published video and photographic images of Bomber One and Bomber Two on its web site. Those images were widely rebroadcast by media outlets all over the country and the world.
  3. Near midnight on April 18, 2013, an individual carjacked a vehicle at gunpoint in Cambridge, Massachusetts. A victim of the carjacking was interviewed by law enforcement and provided the following information. The victim stated that while he was sitting in his car on a road in Cambridge, a man approached and tapped on his passenger-side window. When the victim rolled down the window, the man reached in, opened the door, and entered the victim’s vehicle. The man pointed a firearm at the victim and stated, “Did you hear about the Boston explosion?” and “I did that.” The man removed the magazine from his gun and showed the victim that it had a bullet in it, and then re-inserted the magazine. The man then stated, “I am serious.”
  4. The man with the gun forced the victim to drive to another location, where they picked up a second man. The two men put something in the trunk of the victim’s vehicle. The man with the gun took the victim’s keys and sat in the driver’s seat, while the victim moved to the front passenger seat. The second man entered the victim’s vehicle and sat in the rear passenger seat. The man with the gun and the second man spoke to each other in a foreign language.
  5. While they were driving, the man with the gun demanded money from the victim, who gave the man 45 dollars. One of the men compelled the victim to hand over his ATM card and password. They then drove to an ATM machine and attempted to withdraw money from the victim’s account. The two men and the victim then drove to a gas station/convenience store in the vicinity of 816 Memorial Drive, Cambridge. The two men got out of the car, at which point the victim managed to escape.
  6. A short time later, the stolen vehicle was located by law enforcement in Watertown, Massachusetts. As the men drove down Dexter Street in Watertown, they threw at least two small improvised explosive devices (“IEDs”) out of the car. A gun fight ensued between the car’s occupants and law enforcement officers in which numerous shots were fired. One of the men was severely injured and remained at the scene; the other managed to escape in the car. That car was later found abandoned a short distance away, and an intact low-grade explosive device was discovered inside it. In addition, from the scene of the shootout on Laurel Street in Watertown, the FBI has recovered two unexploded IEDS, as well as the remnants of numerous exploded IEDS.
    E. Identification of the Carjackers
  1. I have reviewed images of two men taken at approximately 12:17 a.m. by a security camera at the ATM and the gas station/convenience store where the two carjackers drove with the victim in his car. Based on the men’s close physical resemblance to RMV photos of Tamerlan and DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV, I believe the two men who carjacked, kidnapped, and robbed the victim are Tamerlan and DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV. In addition, the carjacker who was severely injured during the shoot-out in Watertown was taken to Beth Israel Hospital, where he was pronounced dead. FBI fingerprint analysis confirms that he is Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and the man’s face matches the RMV photograph of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. RMV records indicate that Tamcrian Tsarnaev and DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV share the same address on Norfolk Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. According to Department of Homeland Security immigration records, Tamerlan Tsarnaev and DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV are brothers. Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a Lawful Permanent Resident. DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV entered the United States on April 12, 2002, and is a naturalized U.S. citizen.
    F. Preliminary Examination ofthe Explosives
  1. A preliminary examination of the remains of the explosive devices that were used at the Boston Marathon revealed that they were low-grade explosives that were housed in pressure cookers. Both pressure cookers were of the same brand. The pressure cookers also contained metallic BBS and nails. Many of the BBs were contained within an adhesive material. The explosives contained green-colored hobby fuse.
  2. A preliminary examination of the explosive devices that were discovered at the scene of the shootout in Watertown and in the abandoned vehicle has revealed similarities to the explosives used at the Boston Marathon. The remnants of at least one of the exploded IEDS at the scene of the shootout indicate a low-grade explosive had been contained in a pressure cooker. The pressure cooker was of the same brand as the ones used in the Marathon explosions. The explosive also contained metallic BBS contained within an adhesive material as well as green-colored hobby fuse. The intact low-grade explosive device found in the abandoned car was in a plastic container and wrapped with green-colored hobby fuse.
    G. DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV is located
  1. On the evening of April 19, 2013, police investigation revealed that there was an individual in a covered boat located at 67 Franklin Street in Watertown. After a stand-off between the boat’s occupant and the police involving gunfire, the individual was removed from the boat and searched. A University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth identification card, credit cards, and other forms of identification were found in his pockets. All of them identified the man as DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV. He had visible injuries, including apparent gunshot wounds to the head, neck, legs, and hand.DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV‘s wounds were triaged and he was brought to an area hospital, where he remains for medical treatment.
  2. On April 21, 2013, the FBI searched DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV‘s dormitory room at 7341 Pine Dale Hall at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, pursuant to a search warrant. The FBI seized from his room, among other things, a large pyrotechnic, a black jacket and a white hat of the same general appearance as those worn by Bomber Two at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, and BBs.


  1. Based on the foregoing, there is probable cause to believe that on or about April 15, 2013, DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV violated 18 U.S.C. 2332a (using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction, resulting in death) and 844(i) (malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive device, resulting in death). Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Court issue a complaint chargingDZHOKHAR TSARNAEV with those crimes.

Daniel R. Genck Special Agent Federal Bureau of Investigation

 —– 00 —–

So what of the “presumption of innocence”? How can one not predict guilt before a trial in this case? Essentially, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been treated as a person “deemed guilty” by both the evidence and by emotion. In his case, the presumption of innocence will be in tact for administrative purposes only, a legal burden but not much else. There will be little to no concern about whether the defendant committed any crimes, since the presumption will be that he has.

He is a capital defendant. He will be denied bail. He will have no chance in court. His pretrial confinement will not be challenged. He will face a version of Judge Roy Bean. When a cattle rustler asked if he would get a fair trial, Judge Bean said, “Of course you will. And after that, I’m gonna hand you.”

Like it or not, however, at this moment, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev must be presumed “innocent.” THE PLANET argues that we must hold that to be true, in our hearts and not just on the books. Otherwise, the precocity of this teenager shall have scored its final “victory,” and in the zero-sum game that is public life supposed to be based on constitutional rights and freedoms, his win is our loss.


“In the hour of death, after this life’s whim, / When the heart beats low and the eyes grow dim, / And pain has exhausted every limb — / The lover of the Lord shall trust in Him.”Richard Blackmore





  1. Wilson
    April 23, 2013 at 9:29 am #

    The police and prosecution always presume everyone guilty, and their denunciations are often hostile and exaggerated. It’s the judge/jury who are supposed to be impartial.

    • Scott
      April 23, 2013 at 12:20 pm #

      Wilson, good post!

  2. Still wondering
    April 23, 2013 at 10:27 am #

    Police are taught from day one of their training that everyone they see is a potential of not actual criminal. They view a crowd or a line of traffic as being every 4th person that goes by has broken the law in some way.

  3. Hilly Billy 2 in Ward 4
    April 23, 2013 at 10:57 am #

    Here you go Scott….let me know your thoughts..

    • Joe Blow
      April 23, 2013 at 12:29 pm #

      Enforce the laws on the book with firearms and immigration first. Just the other day in the B.B. a gang member fired 8 shots into a crowd of people…his sentence was 2 1/2 reduced to 9 months. Just another slap on the wrist from R.O.R. Rutberg.

      • Dave
        April 23, 2013 at 2:09 pm #

        Typical example of why this country is in such a mess.

        Gun crime, slap on the wrist.

        Short time and perp is back on the street and committing more crime.

    • Dave
      April 23, 2013 at 2:07 pm #

      Hill Billy
      You are again posting a link to MSNBC, Not a very creditable source for trusted news.

  4. Scott
    April 23, 2013 at 11:22 am #

    They did not read the Miranda rights to him because they wanted to deal with him as an enemy combatant. That would allow enhanced interrogation techniques that can’t be used against Americans to extract valuable information on other possible threats. I feel he should be detained as an enemy combatant and dealt with accordingly. When you do something like this you give up your rights I’m more concerned about the rights of the kid he killed and what the parents must be feeling and other potential victims who’s lives can be save by squeezing this little puke a little.

    @ Hilly no thanks. The argument is absurd under that line of thinking Dan isn’t covered under the first amendment on this blog how could the framers have seen any technological advancement? (Not to mention firing systems haven’t changed much since then.) That’s why we have a constitution and a process to change it. Go through the steps if you want the 2nd amendment repealed.

    • Charles
      April 26, 2013 at 4:07 pm #

      From Heller Vs. DC:

      Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivo­lous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications … and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search … the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding

      1 B, Heller V. DC

  5. Hilly Billy 2 in Ward 4
    April 23, 2013 at 11:32 am #

    You are in the Extreme minority not only in MA but in the US…

    and they did read him his Miranda rights

  6. Hilly Billy 2 in Ward 4
    April 23, 2013 at 11:36 am #

    He will not be tried as an enemy combatant because he is a naturalized U.S. citizen and under federal law, citizens cannot be tried in military commissions, the White House said Monday. Instead, he will be tried in the U.S. justice system

    • Scott
      April 23, 2013 at 12:09 pm #

      I respect what they’re doing I just gave my opinion.

      • Relax
        April 23, 2013 at 12:21 pm #


        Please try to get your facts straight. The FBI used the public safety exemption to question this scumbag without Mirandizing him. In fact, Miranda only applies to statements that the prosecution wants to use against the defendant in court. The evidence against this guy is so overwhelming that it’s likely the government has concluded it does not need his statements to convict him. That’s all the Miranda rules means.

        And, because he is a US citizen, he cannot be tried as an enemy combatant. All the people arrested in the US for terrorist activities have been prosecuted in civilian courts. The shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the blind shiek, and the Pakistani guy who had a bomb in his trunk in NYC were all prosecuted and convicted.

        Finally, the “presumption of innocence” applies only to juries in a criminal trial. It is a rule of evidence that places the burden of proof on the prosecution. But, the prosecutor does not have to presume the defendant is innocent. How could it apply to the prosecution? The prosecution wants a conviction.

        The presumption has no applicability outside a courtroom. Any person is free to presume this guy guilty. That includes journalists, bloggers, people on the street, victims of the attack, politicians, and the like. That people believe the presumption of innocence is this blanket presumption that covers all conversations about a criminal act is mind-boggling.

        • Scott
          April 23, 2013 at 12:45 pm #

          I understand that. Dan asked in the blog who was willing to give him his constitutional rights. I hope whatever happens he get’s the maximum penalty. I have no sympathy for him or his brother. My opinion is just that my opinion.

          • Relax
            April 23, 2013 at 1:35 pm #

            Fair enough, but no person “gives” another their Constitutional rights. The suspect will be afforded due process, and all American citizens are. Then, he will be convicted. I’ll won’t lose any sleep if he gets the needle.

        • Hilly Billy 2 in Ward 4
          April 24, 2013 at 6:58 am #

          I dont usually agree with you Relax but, well said

        • Kevin
          April 24, 2013 at 11:40 am #

          Hold on……much of what you are saying is correct, the cops think you are guilty and do not want to question the suspect, maranda is not required. But as far as “And, because he is a US citizen, he cannot be tried as an enemy combatant. All the people arrested in the US for terrorist activities have been prosecuted in civilian courts. The shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the blind shiek, and the Pakistani guy who had a bomb in his trunk in NYC were all prosecuted and convicted.” And, because he is a US citizen, he cannot be tried as an enemy combatant. All the people arrested in the US for terrorist activities have been prosecuted in civilian courts. The shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the blind shiek, and the Pakistani guy who had a bomb in his trunk in NYC were all prosecuted and convicted.” Yes but on And, because he is a US citizen, he cannot be tried as an enemy combatant. All the people arrested in the US for terrorist activities have been prosecuted in civilian courts. Really? On Jan 3, 2013 – President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act, also know as NDAA, indefinite detention without charge or trial, as well as the illegal military commissions, will be extended….To US Citizens!! Source:

  7. Scott
    April 23, 2013 at 12:18 pm #

    To answer Dan, YES he should be given due process. But how can you presume innocence when it’s such a blatant act?

    • Charles
      April 26, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

      Presumption of innocence means the State has to prove its case. The defendent can remain silent from start to finish, can call upon witnesses, can hire a lawyer.

      Meanwhile, the State has the burden of proving a crime took place, and that the defendent is guilty.

      Sometimes the media muddies it up. And sometimes the media gets sued by the public for their adventures.

  8. Joe Blow
    April 23, 2013 at 12:41 pm #

    I had to really think about this one and at first I was in favor of him being a enemy combatant. But, like it or not he is a US citizen and it would be a slippery slope to disregard The Constitution. On the other hand the Boston P.D.,St. Police and the F.B.I. ignored the 4th amendment when the forced people out of their house at gun point. A wise man once said “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

    • Scott
      April 23, 2013 at 12:49 pm #

      Yes Joe that is one of my favorite quotes it was Ben Fraklin and others used it as well.

      “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

    • Relax
      April 23, 2013 at 1:33 pm #


      The 4th amendment applies to “unreasonable searches and seizures.” The police had to assume that the suspect had additional explosives. If he was hiding in a house, and they receive information that he was hiding in a particular house, then prudence demands that the police order the occupants out of the house. The police can’t know whether anyone in the house is harboring the suspect. Is that “unreasonable” under the circumstances? No, it is not. It was an emergency. The Supreme Court has long recognized an emergency aid exception to the Fourth Amendment.

      Remember Columbine? The cops ordered all of the students out of the school with their hands up. They couldn’t know whether one of the students was involved and hiding among the uninvolved students. Now, while a school is not someone’s house, prudence demands that the police act cautiously not only to protect themselves, but other members of the public.

      • Scott
        April 23, 2013 at 1:37 pm #

        I don’t believe you would legally be obligated to let them in. I would and most reasonable people would but you don’t have to. They can take someones word the home is clear or get a warrant.

        • Relax
          April 23, 2013 at 1:56 pm #


          Come on. The police would be concerned that the suspect has a hostage and is ordering the person answering the door to tell the cops that all is well. The police simply order the person out.

          These emergencies are, mercifully, rare events. The police aren’t just willy-nilly ordering people out of their homes for no reason every other day. If this family sues, they’ll be laughed out of court.

          • Scott
            April 23, 2013 at 2:08 pm #

            I agree and as I said I’d let them in.

      • Joe Blow
        April 23, 2013 at 3:05 pm #

        I disagree and think it set a very dangerous precedent.

        • Relax
          April 23, 2013 at 3:07 pm #

          Why do you think the police needed a warrant? This is not

          • Joe Blow
            April 23, 2013 at 4:21 pm #

            I had to look up what infowars was and I think Alex Jones is a grade A idiot. He is full of it and making big $$$ off of weak minded people. Nice try with the “crazy right-winger” insult! I’m a critical thinker and make up my own mind on what I read and see on the news. I always question the answer and seek the truth. I suggest you do some research and see for yourself what the police did wrong in Watertown. I’m not gonna post pic/video links for you, I don’t don’t have the time or energy. Gotta run I hear we might get some T storms and Patrick might order us to stay indoors so we don’t get hit by lightning.

          • danvalenti
            April 23, 2013 at 5:39 pm #

            Question everything. If your mother says she loves you, check it out. The truth welcomes scrutiny, for in it there is confirmation.

          • Relax
            April 23, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

            I have looked at the videos, and the police did nothing wrong. Yours is a complete overreaction to a uniquely emergent event.

        • Kevin
          April 24, 2013 at 11:58 am #

          Joe/Scott most of the stuff on this site is BS except the first 2 pictures which is of our emerging police state here in Mass as well as around the country, 3500 police used, the first 2 pictures could be Pittsfield? I agree bad precedent also wondering if NADD might have been used to detain anyone, the problem is under NADD US Citizens can be held indefinitely

  9. Rivetor
    April 23, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

    The presumption of innocence applies in all criminal cases from the moment of arrest until actual trial. The prosecution is asserting guilt and must convince beyond a reasonable doubt. Until he or she makes others by that assertion the suspect is considered innocent.

    As DV ppoints out, the affidavit contains the phrase “probable cause.” As far as constitutional rights, the young man is a US citizen and he isentitled to the full extent of his rights. Yes, to answer DV’s question, I want the suspect to have his full rights.

    That’s what makes America what we are. So as we speak today at this moment, the suspect is an innocent man.

    • Dave
      April 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm #

      Presumed inocent

      • danvalenti
        April 23, 2013 at 5:47 pm #

        Yes, “presumed” innocent. That presumption applies to anyone who has anything to say about the young man at this time.

        • Hilly Billy 2 in Ward 4
          April 24, 2013 at 10:28 am #

          Gotta disagree with that one DV…Presupmtion of Innocence applies to the Courts

          • danvalenti
            April 24, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

            I agree. Where do you differ, HILLY?

    • Relax
      April 23, 2013 at 2:22 pm #

      The affidavit was filed so the court would issue a criminal complaint against the suspect. All that’s required to issue a criminal complaint is that the government establish is that it’s more likely then not that the defendant committed the crime alleged.

      To convict, the government must convince the jury that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The presumption of innocence only applies to the jury. It is a rule of evidence. Nothing more.

      • danvalenti
        April 23, 2013 at 5:46 pm #

        The presumption of innocence applies to those to whom is given the power to judge up or down, guilty or not guilty. The defendant does not have to prove that he is innocent, since he is “presumed” to be for all legal purposes. The prosecution must, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove guilt. Unless one is a member of the prosecution, a person must hold that the suspect is innocent. As someone else said earlier, as of this moment, the young man in this case is “innocent.”

        • Relax
          April 23, 2013 at 7:11 pm #


          While journalists may refer to an accused as having “allegedly” committed the acts the accused is charged with, the presumption of innocence only applies in a courtroom.

          Any person commenting on this case is free to say the suspect is guilty.

          • danvalenti
            April 23, 2013 at 7:35 pm #

            True. People can casually say anything they wish. However, we are talking about definitive terms as they apply to this young man’s experience with the US criminal justice system. In that connection, he is presumed innocent or not guilty. He can be presumed to be nothing else.

    • bobbyd
      April 24, 2013 at 5:09 am #

      Everyone show be presumed innocent! Unless their name begins with “M” and ends in “eridith Nylan”.

  10. tito
    April 23, 2013 at 2:19 pm #

    ,,,,until death.

  11. Sean
    April 23, 2013 at 3:38 pm #

    Realize that absolute adherents to “the presumption of innocence”
    belief: also hold that a video recording (in slow motion) of a murder being committed is in fact no certainty that the murderer actually committed that murder.

    People have twin brothers……..etc….etc…. and all that stuff.

    Don’t forget…..we live in Massachusetts here, and not some crazy place like Idaho.

    • danvalenti
      April 23, 2013 at 5:42 pm #

      Salient points, SEAN.

  12. FPR
    April 23, 2013 at 7:01 pm #

    Hey Dan,

    Not only is suspect #2 presumed innocent, I believe he is innocent.

    There is video showing him leaving the scene, after, the second explosion, with his backpack on.

    Video surveillance also shows a Craft aka Blackwater Agent running away from the scene without his backpack and his backpack matches exactly one of the ones that exploded.

    So there is already reasonable doubt and video proof that this young man is innocent.

    Youtube will probably remove this but see for yourself:


    • danvalenti
      April 23, 2013 at 7:36 pm #

      Thank you. It might very well prove that the young man IS innocent. Would he have a chance, though, in the courts?

      • Relax
        April 23, 2013 at 7:48 pm #


        You’ve got to be kidding. FPR is given to flights of conspiratorial nonsense, and that you would give this nonsense a moment’s attention calls your judgment into serious question.

        FPR got these videos from, which is a hateful, paranoid site replete with end-of-the world rhetoric. Infowars had a So-called reporter, Dan Biondi (a former pro-wrestler of all things) shouting questions at the FBI and Deval Patrick about a ridiculous false flag operation.

        This the most unpatriotic nonsense I’ve come across lately. Please tell me your comment was a mistake.

        • danvalenti
          April 23, 2013 at 7:55 pm #

          No, I am not kidding. All I said was a natural extension of the fact that, legally, this young man is presumed innocent. And WOULD he have a chance in the courts if (if, mind you) that were the case? Don’t jump ahead of what I said or read more into it. As for my “moments of attention,” I have long ago learned to give much of what comes my way as a consequence of debate, discussion, and deliberation — especially where there is yet a finding — needs to be considered. That’s all part of my philosophy of listening to EVERYONE. It’s not the same as accepting everything. Rather, it’s all about an open mind. Fact is, the young man is being given due process. He is alleged to have committed crimes. That has not been proven, and until it has, any serious minded person who is willing to step back from emotion will grant him the presumption of innocence.

          • Relax
            April 23, 2013 at 9:09 pm #


            Inclusiveness for the sake of inclusiveness is rather unprincipled. It’s akin to claiming that there’s a debate between evolution and intelligent design, or between astrology and astronomy. It give rise to false equivalencies, and lets any crackpot link to a website run by a doofus who thinks 9/11 was an inside job.

            If you want to to listen to these ravings so that you widen your readership (which is the only real reason to do so) then so be it, but at least call this doggerel out for what it is.

            As for the presumption of innocence, that is a presumption the jury will duty bound to afford the defendant as it considers the evidence against him. I doubt testimony from the likes of Alex Jones will be of any help to this cold blooded, evil man.

            He will likely argument that he was brainwashed by his brother; that he was unaware of the destructiveness of the bombs; that his brother misled him, etc. It will come down to the death penalty or life in prison.

            But, we will still have to contend with the FPRs of the world, who lazily think everything is connected; that the government is behind it all to scare the citizenry into becoming comfortable with the tentacles of the security state reaching ever so further into our lives…blah, blah, blah. I’ve already seen this movie, and I give it a thumbs down.

          • danvalenti
            April 24, 2013 at 8:30 am #

            It is not “inclusiveness for the sake of inclusiveness.” following due process is a matter of upholding the validity of the criminal justice system in America, one that is premised on a presumption of innocence. As for your examples, there IS a debate between evolution and intelligent design, between astrology and astronomy. There are formal and informal discussions on these and a myriad of other topics in which opposing arguments are put forward. By definition, then, you have debate. Debate is good, because, when properly done, the truth has a better chance of winning out. You see, the appearance of truth in a discussion does not preclude a debate, as your statement would imply. You may consider alternate explanations of the assassination of JFK, that is, those that reject the Warren Commission findings, as “ravings.” That does not preclude that you have a debate on your hands, however, since there are advocated who advance opposing points of view. Same goes with astronomy and intelligent design. The truth is in there somewhere, and debate is a good way to find it. The intelligent debater listens carefully to all, ALL, the evidence. He studies especially carefully the argument of his opponents. He should walk into the arena knowing his opponent’s arguments almost as well as he knows his own.

            I have no idea who this “Alex Jones” dude is, although you keep referencing him. From what you say, I doubt he would add much to this discussion. As for the “FPRs” of the world, we need to listen to then, take their points seriously, and add them to our considerations of the topic du jour, just as we do the RELAXes of the world. As to your last point, there is a undeniable movement in America from freedom on one end of the scale toward a Security State on the other. The movement is heading in the wrong direction. The greatest safeguard of freedom is education.

    • FPR
      April 23, 2013 at 7:58 pm #


      No, I don’t believe he’s got a chance to survive this.

      If he does get the death penalty, they will be putting to death an innocent man.

      • Charles
        April 26, 2013 at 4:15 pm #


        You’ve gone ahead and tried the defendant and found him innocent. What happened to the Jury?

  13. FPR
    April 23, 2013 at 9:25 pm #


    I resent this “Relax” trolls constant attacks on me and viewpoints. I’ve asked him to refrain or it would get ugly.
    He’s brought his “Topix” mentality and trash into your forums now.

    This is the same man who posed as a Greylock credit union representative and “scammed” you and then went on and bragged about how easy it was to deceive you.

    This the same troll who Mr. Glenn Heller has been desperately trying to find and bring to justice for libel. He has been maliciously interfering in Mr. Heller’s personal life.

    He has been banned from Topix and his account there was deleted. Now he comes here to pollute your forums.

    I don’t have a problem with him disagreeing with me but the name calling and “laziness” crap it just that. Crap.
    I can’t stand the man.

    • Relax
      April 23, 2013 at 9:48 pm #

      Just who in the hell do you think you are? I have not, and do not, post on Topix.

      Your constant links to purveyors of hate and bile like Alex Jones are disgusting and pathetic. Now, you’re telling lies about me after I pointed out the source of your paranoia. Anyone who regurgitates Alex Jones’ bile deserves to be mocked.

      By the by, I recall you telling Dan that, after sleeping on the matter, you would no longer post on this site. What happened?

      • FPR
        April 24, 2013 at 4:22 am #

        You are Praxis33, aka Andrew Stevens, aka Solons that does post on Topix and you know it. You are the liar here.

        Who the hell do you think you are?

        This is your final warning to stop your attacks.

        Dan has invited my to post here.

        I never said a word about Alex Jones. You keep screaming out that name with paranoid delusions. You are a complete AzzHole.

        • Relax
          April 24, 2013 at 7:14 am #

          I have no idea whom that it is. You are lying.

          The videos you linked to come from Dan Bidoni’s youtube channel. Biondi works for Alex Jones.

          I am criticizing the videos and you for posting them because I consider them asinine. You need to develop thicker skin.

          • Scott
            April 25, 2013 at 4:07 am #

            What do you make of the photographic evidence? It does seem pretty compelling why did those guys have such large backpacks and leave with out them? Who are those people were they ever even questioned? Even the mainstream media said the bombs were pretty sophisticated. Maybe too sophisticated for a couple immigrants but maybe he learned when he went home for a visit. These terrorist do seem pretty resourceful when it comes to making IED’s. Never know what to believe and I find it highly suspicious that there are all these similar false flag ops during these attacks.

      • danvalenti
        April 24, 2013 at 8:16 am #

        Both you, RELAX, and FPR are here at my invitation and the granting of the privilege of commenting on our various issues. We invite both of you because, generally, you both have meaningful and constructive things to say. Occasionally, it boils over, as it has in this case. I can only ask that both of you respect each other’s differences and keep the attacks focused on the ideas and not the personages. Many thanks in advance for your continued cooperation.

    • danvalenti
      April 24, 2013 at 8:17 am #

      See my comments to RELAX and you. Thanks.

  14. jlo
    April 23, 2013 at 10:26 pm #

    Dan – I agree with you on the presumption of innocence. Having aid that, I really do appreciate that you posted the entire Federal Affidavit. I learned a lot from reading it. Remembering that its a sworn affidavit, it is a mater to be taken seriously, even if it is unchallenged and unexamined. Having written many Court affidavit’s myself, I understand that EVERYTHING submitted is subject to vigorous cross examination and judicial review. The public should also understand that everything submitted is subject to the “Pains and Penalties of Perjury.” This is a serious matter, which should be given considerable weight in our assessment of the situation.

    Anyone who does not agree with the presumption of innocence should Google “the Star Chamber” and the “Spanish Inquisition” to fully understand what the “presumption of guilt means.”

    Of course, news reports indicate that our suspect had essentially “confessed” to being the bombers.

    • danvalenti
      April 24, 2013 at 8:12 am #

      Well said. When I prepared my affidavit for my court appearance last July, I studied the nature of these documents. It is as you said: Every word, literally, has a legal consequence. As a writer, I found the writing exciting, since I knew each word would be legally loaded.In short, it is as you say: A serious matter. Calls for a lynching of the accused disgust me, as an American. The strongest thing we can do is give the suspect every right in the book and bend over backward to show him full due process. I hope people who don’t know history will look up “Spanish Inquisition” and “Star Chamber” — Most will not know these references. As for the suspect’s “confession,” until that is legally entered, the presumption of innocence stands.

  15. Scott
    April 24, 2013 at 4:35 am #

    Can someone please tell me if there is any validity to gov’t mock scenarios and these tragic events? I mean I find it very suspicious that every time something happens people are saying the gov’t was involved in a similar drill enactment are these people just making this stuff up? I don’t think the entire gov’t is involved in a huge conspiracy but I do believe that there are corrupt gov’t agencies acting with their own agenda. Would they kill and terrorize Americans? I like to believe they wouldn’t.