$93.00 donated in past month
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Attorney General Eric Holder will announce a decision before January 31, 2014, as to whether the death penalty will be an option in the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in Federal Court, Boston. One of the most damning charges involves alleged admissions made during an alleged carjacking of an individual known as Danny. Because of the dire consequences of these accusations, "Danny's" narrative must be carefully scrutinized. Here are some of my thoughts on "Danny's" stories.
It’s been on my mind for a long time to try and write something about my feelings about the Danny story, and then move on. I’m using basically two widely read media reports one very lengthy one from the Boston Globe called “102 Hours in pursuit of Marathon suspects” 4/28/13, and Boston.com., “Carjack victim recounts his harrowing night” 4/25/13, Eric Moscowitz, Globe Staff. So, here goes.
The carjacking is a crucial part in case against Dzhokar Tsarnaev. This incident is prominent in both the the Grand Jury Indictment and also the Criminal Complaint, in which Tamerlan Tsarnaev is said to have admitted to the bombing.
Some of the charges arising from the carjacking include kidnapping and carjacking of Danny (GJ Count 1); the serious bodily injury to Officer Richard Donohue (GJ Count 19); the use and brandishing of a Ruger p95 9mm semiautomatic handgun (GJ Count 20); robbery of D.M. (“Danny”) of his ATM and PIN number to obtain $800 from his Bank of America account (GJ Count 21); and possession and brandishing of the firearm with threats and violence in furtherance of the carjacking (GJ Count 22).
Because of the serious consequences of these charges, Danny’s story bears close scrutiny, and those of us in the support/research community have diverse theories on the subject, as is natural and healthy when attempting to exercise reason to arrive at the truth.
Some feel that that the carjacking is a fiction and it never occurred at all. Others, that it happened and the Tsarnaevs participated, but only as actors in a Homeland Security, or other agency urban warfare drill. Others thought the carjacking happened, but the carjackers were government agents impersonating the Tsarnaevs, tasked with setting them up as patsies for the Marathon bombing. This scenario could explain why Danny saw “Tamerlan” as a “thin” young man, when he is not. Danny, himself, might even have been an unwitting patsy in the operation.
The inconsistencies within the several accounts of Danny’s experience on the night of April 18th, 2013, are a laughing stock among researchers – or would be if the outcome were not literally a matter of life and death for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. For instance, in one interview, Danny describes the man who first accosted him while texting in his Mercedes, as “a thin young man in dark clothes”. According to his own chronology, he must be referring to Tamerlan, not Dzhokhar. Tamerlan, a large man with an athlete’s physique, and weighing around 200 lbs, cannot be considered thin. Eric Moscowitz, the Globe writer and interviewer of Danny tries to minimize that detail and say Danny was mixed up, but, he did, in fact, call the man “thin”.
As an aside, I find it highly peculiar that Danny, other than in his interview in shadow with John Miller, (former FBI agent, now Chief Senior Something Or Other for some mainstream news network), never speaks himself. He’s either “channeled” by Eric Moscowitz, reporter for the Boston Globe, or James Alan Fox, a criminologist from Northeastern University, Danny’s Alma Mater, who is said to be a kind of “councilor” to Danny. These two individuals present themselves as being so well versed in the saga, Danny need not even be present to speak of his own experience.
Both these articles set out the official narrative, point by point, making sure to incriminate the Tsarnaevs as much as possible at every turn. First, the Tamerlan character, while brandishing a silver handgun, admits to the bombing. “You know about that bombing in Boston? I did that.” ( Somebody on a support site pointed out that in a recent movie called Ironmen 3, one of the characters makes almost the exact same statement while showing someone a picture of a bombing.) Tamerlan then admonishes Danny not to look at him. Why? He just told him exactly who he was!
Danny also tells (in one of the stories) that Tamerlan also said “I just killed a policeman in Cambridge.” Interestingly, although “I did the bombing” makes it into the Criminal Indictment, neither that statement nor the cop murder admission is included in the GJ Indictment. The indictment charges the Tsarnaevs with threatening to kill Danny, but not one word about the alleged confessions. Why is that? Maybe some legal thing I don’t know, or maybe because it’s a tissue of lies.
Tamerlan directs Danny to drive to a location where Dzhokhar, recognized by Danny “100%” as the man on the TV news as Suspect #2. There, the two suspects transfer some “heavy objects” from a Green Honda into the Mercedes. These might include some of the “arsenal of weapons” including machetes and machine guns we were told of by early overheated news reports. Danny thinks they are pieces of luggage, and they may still turn out to be just that. We are not told so many things. Someone once remarked that the public tends to be treated like mushrooms – fed shit and kept in the dark.
As the three drive off into the darkened streets, Tamerlan turns on the car radio, seeming (to Danny), to avoid the news. Why would he do that? The suspects had already brazenly announced to Danny that they had committed two heinous crimes. Wouldn’t they be anxious to know details of the manhunt that would certainly be underway at that moment?
Early on, before the brothers were described as right wing conspiracy nuts, or, more recently, in the case of Tamerlan, mentally deranged, we were told that the motive for the Marathon bombing was their hatred of our American freedoms, and government crimes against Muslim countries, much like the 9/11 attack of 2001. This scenario plays so well with Americans, that I suspect we’ll soon be back to that theory. To underline the foreignness , Danny is able to recount some details to impress upon the public that these individuals are, indeed, Muslims most likely on a mission of violent jihad. First they put in a music CD that Danny characterizes as religious call to prayer. Tamerlan also tells Danny that he is a Muslim. Danny cozies up by telling how much the Chinese love Muslims. (The Uyghurs, maybe not so much, but the conversation doesn’t go there.)
After Dzhokhar joins the outing, Danny overhears them speaking in a foreign language, and he can only make out the word: “Manhattan”, and thinks they may be heading there to commit more mayhem with their heavy objects. But in another version, Danny says they talked “openly” about driving to N.Y., asking him the absurd question of whether his car can be driven to NY. To me, this question is for the purpose of catapulting the propaganda about terrorizing New York. At any rate, Danny has dreams that have not come true yet, including a secret sweetheart in NY, and he begins to plan how to escape and save himself and New York City.
At this time, a trip to the ATM is planned, where Dzhokhar allegedly robs Danny’s card and “attempts” to withdraw $800. The word “attempts” is used in the Criminal Complaint, but is not used in the indictment. There seems to be some waffling in this part of the story. In the Globe stories, Danny “estimates” that $800 was withdrawn. Why estimate? It’s so easy to look at your bank records. I don’t think it’s quibbling to ask why, in a major news report, they don’t verify how much money was taken. In other stories, I’ve read that they forced Danny to drive to other branches of the Bank of America in an attempt to draw money from those accounts, but, of course, if you reach your limit at one branch it won’t do any good to go to another branch. As he waits at the ATM, Danny sees a police car drive by with its lights off. He tries to telepathically contact those policeman for assistance, but they don’t return his call. Fortunately for Danny, the Globe won’t be reporting that he hears voices in his head. The whole bank story is about as solid as j-e-l-l-o.
As the story ends, Danny prays. Then he flees. Why didn’t Tamerlan go after him? It might alert the convenience store clerks that something is amiss, but it couldn’t be worse than letting Danny escape to a location where he was sure to contact the authorities, this time on a real telephone. The clerk, in an early TV interview, describes Danny as a “white guy”. We are told specifically that Danny is Chinese. What’s going on here?
Personally, I think Danny might have been a patsy in this charade for one reason. The clerk at the Mobile station where he took refuge, indicated that Danny was “shaking all over”. Once I talked to a clerk immediately after he was robbed at gunpoint, and he was shaking all over. There was no mistaking his terror and shock. I think it would be hard to simulate that bodily reaction, but that’s just my hunch.
The police question Danny for more than an hour, then take him in a squad car to do a drive by identity line up of suspects they’ve picked up during the night. This might be where the “naked man” comes in. If so, why would the police keep him naked for the lineup? Certainly the carjackers were clothed during the incident. The naked man - so strikingly similar to Tamerlan that Maret Tsarnaev, the paternal aunt of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar, believes it to be her nephew - must be the subject of a lengthy investigation on its own.
In closing, Danny is a man with a remarkable memory for events, and is well able to recount details of his ordeal for a 2 ½ hour interview with Boston Globe reporter, Eric Moskowitz. Danny has, by his side the whole time, his “councilor” James Alan Fox. We’re never told precisely what Fox’s function is. Funnily enough, the same James Alan Fox hovers by the side of the Mobile convenience store clerk, Tarek Ahmed, during his TV interview with Piers Morgan. The segment available on Youtube may not include a prologue that could tell us the reason Fox is there on the scene with the witness. Maybe there’s a reasonable explanation for Mr. Fox’s omnipresence but until I see it, he remains on my list of “people of interest”.
We are told that Officer Sean Collier of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Police, was gunned down in his patrol car at around 10:30 p.m. by the Tsarnaevs. The most reported speculation as to motive, was given by MIT Chief of Police John Di Fava. Chief Di Fava was the last person to see Collier alive, other than the murderer. He speculates that the Tsarnaevs wanted another gun, and decided to murder an armed policeman to obtain it. The gun was not found on Officer Collier’s body, but several minutes later and some distance away from his body. The gun may or may not have been its holster – information is not readily available to the public. Di Fava further says that the locking mechanism of the holster is what prevented the murderers from having access to the gun.
To shoot six bullets into a man creates a bloody scene. This can be verified by looking at an aerial view of the crime scene. Officer Collier suffered massive blood loss and it is all over the pavement in gruesome quantity. In order to wrest the holster off a man covered in blood, the murderer must have transferred a good deal onto his own clothing. Danny, with his incredible attention to detail never once says anything about seeing even a drop or a smear of blood on either of the Tsarnaevs, nor have we heard of any bloody clothing being found that would link the Tsarnaevs to the slain policeman. The same night at about the same time, there was a robbery reported at a story approximately a 15 minute walk from the murder scene. The robber was photographed by store cameras, and was said to have brandished a handgun. Regarding that robbery, there are other descriptions of the robber coming across police scanners, ranging from a black male, 120 lbs, to a 200 lb. white man in a cowboy hat. Why are these details not put before the public and explained away or investigated further?
To finally end up, I’ll tell you something I learned years ago before I killed my TV. My favorite show used to be called “Homicide, Life on the Streets”, and it was a cop show with the Baltimore Police as the subject. I remember a big white board they had up in the station. On it were a list of cases and assigned officers to each case. As a case was closed, it would be erased from the board. If a case lingered on the board for more than a short time, the policeman would find himself in very hot water with his boss, because those kinds of stats got the boss in hot water with the police commissioner, who would get in hot water with the mayor, and so on up the food chain. It was politically necessary to “clear” these cases if you wanted to stay out of hot water. How you cleared them, was not as important as just wiping the damnable things off that glaring white board next to your name. I think of that concept a lot, when I see a case where the first suspect arrested takes the fall, whether or not he did the crime. I believe it happens all the time out of a combination of good intentions to get the crooks off the street, and the political necessity of keeping your ass out of hot water. I think that’s what has happened here, as concerns law enforcement. The criminals are still out there, while the fall guy languishes in a cell. It’s almost too much to bear.