BOSTON — Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was convicted on all charges Wednesday in the Boston Marathon bombing by a jury that will now decide whether the 21-year-old should be executed or shown mercy for what his lawyer says was a crime masterminded by his big brother.
The former college student stood with his hands folded, fidgeted and looked down at the defense table in federal court as he listened to the word “guilty” recited on all 30 counts against him, including conspiracy and deadly use of a weapon of mass destruction. Seventeen of those counts are punishable by death.
The verdict, reached after a day and a half of deliberations, was practically a foregone conclusion, given his lawyer’s startling admission at the trial’s outset that Tsarnaev carried out the terror attack with his now-dead older brother, Tamerlan.
The defense strategy is to try to save Tsarnaev’s life in the upcoming penalty phase by arguing he fell under Tamerlan’s evil influence.
In the penalty phase, which could begin as early as Monday, the jury will hear evidence on whether he should get the death penalty or spend the rest of his life in prison.
Defense attorney Judy Clarke argued at trial that Tsarnaev was led astray by his radicalized brother, telling the jury: “If not for Tamerlan, it would not have happened.” She repeatedly referred to Dzhokhar — then 19 — as a “kid” and a “teenager.”
Clarke is one of the nation’s foremost death-penalty specialists and an expert at keeping her clients off death row. She saved the lives of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski and Susan Smith, the South Carolina woman who drowned her two children in a lake in 1994.
Tsarnaev’s lawyers tried repeatedly to get the trial moved out of Boston because of the heavy publicity and the widespread trauma. But opposition to capital punishment is strong in Massachusetts, which abolished its state death penalty in 1984, and some polls have suggested a majority of Bostonians do not want to see Tsarnaev sentenced to die.
The 12-member jury must be unanimous for Tsarnaev to receive a death sentence; otherwise the penalty will be life behind bars.
During the penalty phase, Tsarnaev’s lawyers will present so-called mitigating evidence to try to save his life. That could include evidence about his family, his relationship with his brother, and his childhood in the former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan and later in the volatile Dagestan region of Russia.
Prosecutors will present so-called aggravating factors in support of the death penalty, including the killing of a child and the targeting of the marathon because of the potential for maximum bloodshed.
Dan Collins, a former federal prosecutor who handled the case against a suspect in the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, said Massachusetts’ history of opposition to capital punishment will have no bearing on the jury’s decision about Tsarnaev’s fate.
“When you ask people their opinion of the death penalty, there are a number who say it should only be reserved for the horrific cases,” he said. “Here you have what is one of the most horrific acts of terrorism on U.S. soil in American history, so if you are going to reserve the death penalty for the worst of the worse, this is it.”
Liz Norden, the mother of two sons who lost parts of their legs in the bombing, said death would be the appropriate punishment: “I don’t understand how anyone could have done what he did.”