US appeals court directs probe of juror bias in Boston Marathon bomber's case

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stopped short of granting Tsarnaev's latest bid to overturn his death sentence for his role in the 2013 attack that killed three people and wounded 260 others. But on a 2-1 vote, the panel concluded that a trial judge did not adequately investigate Tsarnaev's claims of juror bias.

A federal appeals court on Thursday directed a trial judge to assess whether two jurors in Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's 2015 trial were biased and should not have been seated, creating grounds potentially to overturn his death sentence. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stopped short of granting Tsarnaev's latest bid to overturn his death sentence for his role in the 2013 attack that killed three people and wounded 260 others.

But on a 2-1 vote, the panel concluded that a trial judge did not adequately investigate Tsarnaev's claims of juror bias. Tsarnaev had argued that two jurors at his trial lied about whether they discussed the case on social media before being seated. The U.S. Supreme Court had not addressed that argument when it restored Tsarnaev's death sentence in March 2022, after the 1st Circuit set it aside in an earlier ruling in 2020, prompting a new round of arguments before the appeals court.

Lawyers for Tsarnaev, 30, said one juror was told by a friend on Facebook to "get on the jury" and send Tsarnaev "to jail where he will be taken care of," while the second juror retweeted a Twitter post that called Tsarnaev a "piece of garbage." U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta, writing for the majority, said a trial judge's earlier investigation into Tsarnaev's plausible claims of juror bias "fell short of what was constitutionally required."

He said that conclusion on its own does not necessarily mean a new trial was needed to determine whether Tsarnaev deserved the death penalty or life in prison for his crimes, but did necessitate an inquiry into whether either juror should have been excused. "If and only if the district court's investigation reveals that either juror should have been stricken for cause on account of bias, Tsarnaev will be entitled to a new penalty-phase proceeding," Kayatta wrote.

Prosecutors and defense lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Tsarnaev and his older brother Tamerlan detonated two homemade pressure-cooker bombs near the Boston Marathon's finish line on April 15, 2013. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died four days later after a shootout with police.

Jurors found Dzhokhar Tsarnaev guilty on all 30 counts he faced and said six warranted the death penalty, which was later imposed. The U.S. Department of Justice has defended Tsarnaev's death sentence despite President Joe Biden's opposition to capital punishment, and Attorney General Merrick Garland's July 2021 moratorium on federal executions.

The 1st Circuit had overturned Tsarnaev's sentence in 2020, saying evidence about his brother's influence over him was wrongly excluded, and prospective jurors were not questioned enough about their exposure to news about the bombings. In reinstating Tsarnaev's death sentence, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for a 6-3 Supreme Court majority that the constitution "guaranteed him a fair trial before an impartial jury. He received one."

Kayatta's opinion on Thursday was joined by U.S. Circuit Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson, a fellow appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama. U.S. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Howard, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, dissented, saying that given the relative weakness of Tsarnaev's juror bias claims, it was within U.S. District Judge George O'Toole's broad authority to not subject the jurors to further questioning.

Victims of the bombing have been split for years over whether Tsarnaev should be put to death, and Thursday's opinion reexposed those divides. "My stance is he should already be dead," said Marc Fucarile, who lost his right leg in the second blast. He said further court proceedings would be a waste of time and money.

Mikey Borgard, who sustained hearing loss and a brain injury in the attack, agreed with the ruling, saying further investigation was needed "to ensure that justice has been fairly rendered and the Constitution and law has been upheld."

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)