Anonymous asked: If this latest outburst from Alina affects her being able to visit J (I actually don't think it's a bad thing if he does not have contact with that dysfunctional clan) do you think that Clark can make a case that his only sane relative is Ruslan, therefore he can visit J? I agree with Pandora (formally DL) that Ruslan is the best representative of the family and I also think he is the best for J right now. Btw, I think he would have to distance himself from them BMB or not.

useyourcommoncents:

patsysvodka:

pandora-the-curious:

useyourcommoncents:

pandora-the-curious:

aurora1990:

patsysvodka:

aurora1990:

patsysvodka:

I agree more influence from Ruslan would be a good thing for him, but I’m wondering does Ruslan even want to get involved with this mess?  It doesn’t appear he was particularly close to Jahar before the BMB, so I question if he even wants to take this on or if Jahar wants to see him either.   I’m not even sure if he’s called to testify what side he’d be doing it for, the defense or the prosecution. 

Ruslan did an interview with CNN the day after Jahar was apprehended in which he said that he’d like to speak to Jahar. He expressed interest in taking Jahar under his wing to help him through this difficult time and to help him think clearly about what he did.

I would love for Ruslan to be able to have an influence in Jahar’s life, but there are two problems. Firstly, Ruslan wont be allowed to visit or write to Jahar while ever the SAMs remain in place in their current form. Secondly, if Jahar still holds some or all of his extremist beliefs, and I think it’s probable that he does, then he might not want to see his uncle. (I hope that’s not the case… but it’s a possibility).

Yes, and even if the SAMs can be modified to accommodate visits or any contact from an uncle, I don’t think the defense has the time or motivation to try and make it happen anytime soon.

I’ve always felt that Ruslan’s comment during the CNN interview that he wanted to help out Jahar was insincere and  I don’t think he has any interest in getting involved with him now.   I think we saw the real Ruslan on the 19th.  He was pissed and if he was done with the family before the BMB, he was sure as hell  done with them on April 19th.  I think someone got a hold of him and told him he came off very badly during his driveway rant and he needed to do an interview immediately to contain the damage and present a new image of himself to the public.  It was surprising he sat down for such a lengthy interview so soon after Jahar’s arrest.

I honestly thought he sounded sincere. But you’re right, that interview happened while events were still essentially unfolding and a lot could have changed between then and now. It would be interesting to know if he had any contact with Jahar before the SAMs came into place.


I thought he sounded sincere ranting in his driveway and sincere in the CNN interview. I think it’s completely possible to call someone a loser and basically want to kick their ass, but then to still feel bad for them and want better for them. I felt one with Ruslan. In his place I imagine I’d feel exactly as he did, in both instances.

It’s not question that the defense are interviewing Ruslan, he knows so much about their culture, family dynamic and much more. His input will invaluable - and quite different from the sister’s views. But did you notice the defense talks of interviewing family and the difficulty as some are in Russia…this tells me that his parent have no plans on coming to the U.S.

Can you imagine the shock of learning your nephews are involved with terrorizing a sporting event -  can’t blame his shock and outburst. This is a culture who feel strongly about their roots and family. Ruslan did help them. He certainly steppe in buried T near his own home in VA. If one watches the entire interview, you see how he cried, most men don’t even show this emotion, let alone to millions. He was sad, and said it that T dragged his brother into this, he said “he was just a boy.” The reality is that J may not know Rulsan very well. They did not talk or see each other, even on his trip to D.C. - and bad blood was flowing from each side. I am sure Ruslan would help J if he could, but I don’t see him as person who believes for a moment J and T are innocent of BMB and the aftermath.

The other hot button is that clearly Ruslan does not follow this strain of Islam that J and T did - so clearly Ruslan would have much to say about that as he did with T.

Yep, I’d imagine the defense has talked with Ruslan, and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they are counting on his testimony to be a big part of mitigation. He can talk intimately about the family’s dysfunction and he will have credibility because of his initial reaction during the driveway interview.

I keep thinking about the CNN interview with Ruslan, as well as the angry driveway interview (from which he gained meme status). Between those two interviews, his uncle likely did J the biggest favor that anyone could possibly do under these circumstances. Ruslan will have a big role to play in mitigation.  He may be the star witness during that phase. That’s my prediction. After sentencing, I wish an exception could be carved out so that Ruslan could visit Jahar. Ruslan seemed like a quality person. I like him a lot.

Oh yeah, I definitely agree after just watching the CNN interview again and I’m still a Ruslan fan for sure!   He had a lot to say about Tamerlan’s dramatic transformation with specifics about his extreme behavior and views, and he is certain that Tamerlan was in control of “the plot” and  used Jahar as a tool. 

"Tamerlan had big time influence over Jahar, he tried to be so persuasive with me…  I assumed that Tamerlan was espousing his views to Jahar."

"Jahar should shed light on what really happened, who influenced him, who’s behind it.  The plot is there, Jahar has been used by his older brother not even as an accomplice, but as some kind of instrument.  He used his younger brother, he wasted his life."

"Jahar was used as a weapon."

"If he dared to lecture me, imagine what he could have done to his younger brother?  And we see what he did to him, he made him harm other people, he made him harm other people, he’s not just wasted his life, he’s made him harm other people."

I still think this interview was first and foremost damage control for Ruslan after the shouty news conference he had the previous day.  He and Zubeidat were the two most visible family members on the 19th and I’d assume he didn’t appreciate the comparisons to her in the media.   Also interesting that although he seemed convinced of the brother’s guilt from day one, he was also convinced that there was no way Jahar was an equal conspirator in the bombing plot.  There may be evidence to the contrary, but that was his initial take on it even though he admits to having basically no contact with Jahar since 2006 or 2009 (that’s unclear in the interview.)

Then I was wondering why my feeling that Ruslan would not actually choose to pursue a relationship with Jahar was so strong.  First there’s the bit about meeting Jahar at the train station four months earlier, and Ruslan stayed in the car - “I don’t want to talk to him.”  No reason for this statement is asked or given.  Finally,  the idea that Ruslan might eventually reach out to or help Jahar was presented by the interviewer, it wasn’t offered by Ruslan.

Interviewer: “If Jahar reaches out to you for help or guidance, looking ahead to what he’s about to go through, will you help him?”

Ruslan: “Yes, I’ll certainly help him.  First, I’ll try to help him to relieve himself, by seeking forgiveness and anything else he would need.”  Yes, I would help him. 

Now, I’m no expert in body language, but at this point I thought I noticed hesitation, and Ruslan seemed awkward and uncomfortable.   He seemed a bit caught off guard by the question, and holds eye contact with the reporter for shorter periods of time than earlier in the interview, instead looking down at his lap more frequently.  Could he have said “No, I don’t want anything to do with anyone in this family.”  Not really an option at that point in the interview.   idk, it’s always stood out to me.  His true feelings about helping Jahar get through this could be different now, if he was indeed unsure of them at the time of the CNN interview.

He did seem awkward at that moment but you did notice he said first and foremost that “we must remember the people, the victims” and goes on to name them so I am assuming that hesitation was about making sure he acknowledged the victims, as J was still alive. He was caught in hard position, and being on national TV, well, he had to be careful in choosing his words. After all, this affects his life, and the lives of his 6 children and wife.

The defense has reason to believe that the government seized a
considerably larger number of electronic devices in connection with its investigation than it has produced to the defense so far, including devices seized from important individuals who were close to one or both of the brothers,e.g., Ibragim Todashev, who was shot and killed by the FBI during questioning shortly after he purportedly confessed to participating, with TamerlanTsarnaev, in the September 2011 Waltham triple homicide.

In this case, for example, they include the apportionment of responsibility between the defendant and his plainly dominant older brother. Pursuing this single question—
and there are many others like it—requires that the defense identify and classify thousands of items of circumstantial evidence contained in each of the brothers’ various computers and digital storage devices so as to show precisely when, and in which direction, violent ideological material cited in the indictment flowed between them.

Anonymous asked: do u think any videos/photos will come out during the trial of tamerlan after the brothers got seperated at the marathon? there's so much visual footage of jahar but not him and i find that bizarre. he was more disguised but i feel like there would be something/anything of him putting the backpack down or something...

patsysvodka:

I think more evidence of Tamerlan at the finish line area will come out at the trial, both still photos and video.  So far the only video I’ve ever seen is this one.  There are some problems with Jeff’s description of Tamerlan, he didn’t have a white hat (unless that was a typo in his book!) or a Jansport backpack.  But this video does seem to be Tamerlan standing next to Jeff at site one.

I wonder how many minutes/seconds before the first bomb that video was taken. 

Anonymous asked: Will this dysfunction hurt or help Jahar?

useyourcommoncents:

patsysvodka:

Some think this may be helpful, more proof of the chaos he came from.  I tend to agree with the other opinion that any news that combines Tsarnaev and bomb is not good. I just can’t believe the defense is unconcerned about this situation.

It’s true it can go both ways, but the last thing he needs is any publicity associating him or his family to bombs, or even them facing off with reporters or others. It could work against the creditability of the family.  It questionable if Alaina will even take the stand in the sentencing phase but her info is purely to funnel out the problems in the family to build the mitigation case. After getting the info, they will haul in experts, like Social workers, psychologists and social science types who will testify to those ideas, many of those experts will not even conduct interviews with J. 

An example is this is the Tsarnaevs’ fleeing Russia, (and Chechnya and Dagestan due to the conflict and problems in that region - the impact it had on them and previous generations):

Traumagenic. Don’t know the word? It’s a new adjective found throughout the manual Transforming Historical Harms by David Anderson Hooker and Amy Potter Czajkowski.

Traumagenic refers to events or circumstances – like colonization, civil war, slavery, genocide, systemic discrimination – that cause traumatic reactions and impacts, typically embodied in generation after generation. The victims (and their descendants) of such trauma obviously carry wounds, but so do the perpetrators, though these roles may shift over time, with changing circumstances. Think of the Hutus and the Tutsis of Rwanda and Burundi – at different times each group has been among the victims and each among the perpetrators of violence.

Historically traumagenic circumstances that have not been healed, reconciled or made right can have continuing consequences at the individual, family, organizational, communal, regional, national and even international level for generations,” write Hooker and Czajkowski in Transforming Historical Harms, published in 2011 by EMU’s Center for Justice and Peacebuilding.

The authors emphasize that the mere passage of time does not heal trauma. For this reason, EMU’s STAR program offers trainings centered on the teachings in the Transforming Historical Harms (THH) manual.

“The THH framework requires an understanding of trauma, historical trauma and harms, the mechanisms of legacy and aftermath, and finally a holistic healing approach that’s inclusive of these understandings,” explain Hooker.

Sounds like the judge has already approved funding for “many experts” for the sentencing phase. I hope they have more substance than the last two, Bronson and Martin - both of those se guys were flimsy at best - and the gov torn right into Bronson especially when it comes to the legal part of the change venue question, not to mention he was bias and wrong on several cases - one jury found the defendant completely innocence, even when Bronson said he would never get a fair trial. I was shocked to see Clarke submit this when there was clear problems with him being bias, and his work itself. But I suppose he has the longest and most expansive CV and experience, even with all the problems that surround his views and research.