BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Lighter
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 01:31 PM

Yeah, but that would be murder, a state charge, and it wouldn't matter what weapon they used.

We're talking about terrorism, which is defined to be a federal crime.

The JFK assassination led to jurisdictional conflicts because in 1963 a presidential assassination was just another murder to be prosecuted by the state it was committed in. The FBI and the Secret Service were kept out of the loop, and the prosecution was to be handled by Texas authorities only.

Then the law was changed.

The charge of terrorism is similar in principle, I imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 02:14 PM

But it doesn't matter what he says so far as the murder trial is concerned. In fact any admissions would only get in the way. The other evidence is what is significant.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 02:18 PM

MCGrath is right They have him dead to rights. What he says won't matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Lighter
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 02:30 PM

It could matter, though not to his own case, if he has terrorist contacts unknown to the Feds.

But so far he seems not to.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 02:41 PM

Going on about WMDs on the other hand could mess things up, since a pressure cooker improvised bomb is not what many people (indeed, anybody?) would be likely to class as a Weapon of Mass Destruction. A jury could quite justifiably refuse to accept the redefinition of the term.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 02:45 PM

"Weapons of mass destruction refers to any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious physical harm through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors,a weapon involving a disease organism or biological agent ,or a weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life.

The following is an example of a state laws dealing with weapons of mass destruction:

Unlawful possession or use of a hoax weapon of mass destruction.

(A) No person, without privilege to do so, shall manufacture, possess, sell, deliver, display, use, threaten to use, attempt to use, conspire to use, or make readily accessible to others a hoax weapon of mass destruction with the intent to deceive or otherwise mislead one or more persons into believing that the hoax weapon of mass destruction will cause terror, bodily harm, or property damage."



http://definitions.uslegal.com/w/weapons-of-mass-destruction/





I would not consider the bombs they made to be WMD, just destructive devices.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 03:39 PM

I've always understood Weapons of Mass Destruction to be things like nuclear weapons, toxic gasses, and biological weapons, devices and substances intended to kill indiscriminantly and in massive numbers.

Bombs made in pressure cookers, such as the ones used in Boston would definitely fit the "Improvised Explosive Device" catagory, intended to kill or injure as many people as possible, but incapable of killing hundreds of thousands like a nuclear weapon, nerve gas, which can drift on the prevailing winds, or a virus that can infect millions.

An Improvised Explosive Device is obviously a vicious enough weapon without having to resort to some overenthusiastic newsman's hyperbola.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: bobad
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 04:36 PM

From Lighters earlier link:

According to a federal statute, " 18 USC 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction," the term refers to four things.

"(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas - (i) bomb, (ii) grenade, (iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, (iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, (v) mine, or (vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses."

"(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;

(C) any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are defined in section 178 of this title); or

(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life."

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 05:19 PM

So basically, virtually any weapon other than a sword or spear... (After all, the explosives that propel bullets are pretty toxic chemicals.)

I just don't get the point of bringing the term into play - it's inviting needless trouble. If it's a matter of wishing to define it as terrorism, that's not a matter of the weapon used, it's about the motivation.   A political assassination using a knife, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: bobad
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 05:38 PM

From the same link:

The section goes on to exclude devices not intended to be used as weapons, as well as rifles used for "sporting, recreational or cultural purposes."

With a broad definition like that, prosecutors seem to be on solid legal ground in describing those shrapnel-loaded Boston bombs as "weapons of mass destruction."

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Apr 13 - 06:46 PM

Boston bombs as "weapons of mass destruction."

Not. Hyperbole R Us

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 27 Apr 13 - 12:11 PM

And remembering a school in Connecticut, is an assault rifle a WMD?

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Apr 13 - 12:42 AM

Don Firth: "I've always understood Weapons of Mass Destruction to be things like nuclear weapons, toxic gasses, and biological weapons, devices and substances intended to kill indiscriminately and in massive numbers."


In other words, navy bean soup!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Boston bomb suspect in custody /hospital
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 28 Apr 13 - 07:17 PM

The suspect isn't out of the hospital, he was moved to a different hospital. The Federal prison system has several hospital facilities for those who are incarcerated who need the medical care. I live about five miles from one of those hospitals in Fort Worth, TX. We've had some high-profile folks here over the years.

SRS