Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has now been sentenced to death; 3:30-4p ET

Aired June 24, 2015 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:30:00] MEL ROBBINS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: And so he could accept the apology at face value, but when you are not ready to forgive somebody and you're not complete and you're not ready to move on, any small thing is going to be infuriating. You know, I personally found -- I didn't hear it. I only read the complete script. I thought it was insincere. I'm sure he just stood up based on lawyers that he had. He had to say something, and this is what he muttered out. I don't buy it. But that's just me.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Listen. I was talking to Kevin Colon. I don't know if you know Kevin with the "Boston Globe." We have been inside that courthouse every single day and he did say to me earlier before we had to go to the survivors, he said, you know, it did look like it was a prepared statement. He was glancing down. But, you know, he did say that he appeared mid-statement to sort of pause and almost -- almost appear emotional, but I don't know if that almost is enough.

ROBBINS: Well, it actually doesn't matter. He's getting sentenced to death anyway and what he says in court actually has no bearing whatsoever on what's going to happen to him. The only thing that it could possibly do is help a survivor down the road of moving on. I mean, it's very -- it's much easier to hate a monster, much easier. But there is, and we had a long conversation. I had lunch at a diner a block from the courthouse when this was going on, Brooke.

BALDWIN: wow.

ROBBINS: And we were all talking about it as soon the alerts came in. And most people said I doubt he meant it. And we get into a big conversation at the counter at this diner basically saying, well, why would he apologize? And the fact of the matter is that, you know, if it helps one survivor, even if it just helps Henry get complete, then I'm glad that he did it. If it helps one survivor to say, well, you know what? Even just hearing this monster say that he feels terrible that he took my sister or my son or my brother's life, that at least helps me take one more step forward, then, I'm glad he said something, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Mel Robbins, thank you, my friend.

And speaking of like what is next for him, Tom Fuentes, let me bring you in, former assistant FBI director. What is next? We did Debra Feyerick, our correspondent, was reporting that he will go to Terre Haute, Indiana. You know, talked to Ashleigh Banfield at length about how you have one sort of mandatory appeal. What is his life the next, I don't know, six months, year, five years? What does it look like?

TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, while he appeal is going on, Brooke, he'll be in a jail. I don't know if he'll immediately go to Terre Haute, but once they get ready to carry out execution that's where he'll go because it's the only federal prison that administers the death penalty.

But would I like to add here, that you know, his crime isn't just against the people that died at in a bombing or the survivors that are injured for life or the families or Boston. It's a crime against the United States. It's a crime against the country that took his family --

BALDWIN: Sorry, Tom. We've got to go back to Boston. The U.S. attorney is speaking.

CARMEN ORTIZ, U.S. ATTORNEY: And so, we've arrived at the end of another chapter in this long process and in these criminal proceedings. Many of you who listened to what was happening in the courtroom today, today really was a day not just for the conclusion of this piece but really for the victims to have a voice and many of them submitted victim impact statements, but they also had submitted, made oral statements today.

And so I just want to say that today was an incredibly powerful day. The judge formally imposed his sentence of the death penalty for certain counts as well as to spend consecutive life sentences on other counts. But critically important was the voices that we heard from the victims who talked about the impact of the crime and what they have been through and what this has meant to them. And from the very beginning, and I just recently came from a -- we had a meeting with many of the victims, I noted and I said from the very beginning, I have been so touched and so moved and inspired by their strength, their courage and their resiliency. And also voices of hope.

In that courtroom today I felt proud not just to be a Bostonian but also to be an American because you heard a number of victims say not only are we Boston strong but we are America strong. I hope that the presentation of this case in terms of viewing all of the evidence has really exhibited, again, what a fair and impartial jury system that we have in this country.

And we believe that at the end of the day the punishment that was rendered by the jury appropriately fitted the crime, a crime of terrorism, a crime that was not religiously motivated and a crime that was intended to coerce and intimidate our country, but the response has been otherwise.

And finally, I just want to conclude by thanking the FBI, my colleague here, special agent in charge Vince Lisi, as well as the ATF, state police, Boston PD, all the other law enforcement agencies that we have worked with from the very beginning. They have worked tirelessly along with my prosecution team, the assistant U.S. attorneys who presented the case in court and have done tremendous work, and we hope that that was really on display for all to see our system of justice. Thank you - Vince. [15:35:41] VINCENT LISI, FBI SPECIAL AGENT IN-CHARGE: Good afternoon,

everybody. You know, from the moment those bombs detonated on Boylston Street, the victims, survivors and their families have had to deal with unthinkable pain and overcome countless obstacles. And while there's no one size fits all healing process I do think that there are certain events that help them move forward from, you know, that horrific day.

We all know that there's nothing in the world, not at all, that can take away their pain or return things to the way they are or the way they were, including today's sentence. But I hope that today's proceedings can serve as a milestone as they continue in their healing process.

And I just want to let everybody know who was impacted by that savage attack that, you know, the FBI family will keep them in our thoughts and prayers. Thank you.

ORTIZ: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

ORTIZ: Well, I don't want to venture a personal opinion on this but in general, what I was struck more by what he didn't say. He didn't renounce terrorism. He didn't renounce violent extremism and he couched his comments in line with Allah and Allah's views which give it a religious tone. And there was nothing, as you heard judge O'Toole say in the courtroom, there was nothing about this crime that was Islam associated so that's what I was struck by more.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How can you say there was nothing religious that motivated the crime, all the references to Allah and Muhammad (INAUDIBLE)?

ORTIZ: That a skewed view of the religion of Islam. That is not what Islam is all about. And so when individuals utilized that, it is a radicalized view, that ideology. It's a radical ideology which really isn't at the heart of what is truly a peaceful and loving religion.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is it true that the defense did offer to have him plead guilty and apologize prior to the start of the trial? That's what Judy Clark had said.

ORTIZ: She mentioned that in court. And I don't want to get into discussions that attorneys have behind the scenes not only in this but in many criminal cases. What I will say is that that statement as it was made in court was not completely accurate, and it was incomplete.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Was the part about the apology inaccurate?

ORTIZ: I really don't want to specify what -- what that comment referred to really. It wasn't an apology.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Does this case make the case for cameras in federal courtrooms? ORTIZ: In terms of would it be more appropriate? You know, I

wouldn't want to voice my own personal opinions on cameras in the courtroom. I will say that because of our limitations that we don't have cameras in the courtroom, you all do an amazing job of tweeting the process so that someone outside the courtroom feels as if they are inside the courtroom reading, you know, your messaging in terms of the testimony, the evidence that's being presented, but, yes, it would be best to have a public display. I'm not talking about the department right now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE) than on April 15th, 2013? Are we in more danger than ever?

LISI: No, we are not more danger than ever. I think there We're in the in more danger than ever and who people do see is the threats we have and we continue to chase those down so, you know, I would say that the FBI just looks at this yet another reason why we need to make terrorist more top priority and can't lit up. We are to not to take our foot or the gas pedal.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

LISI: No. I think the only thing that will be out there is what was introduced in court as evidence. Anything beyond that - no, I don't see a report forthcoming because that would get into speculation and anything that was evidenced that was factual was presented in the courtroom.

[15:40:04] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

ORTIZ: Well, what's actually next is the post-trial motions so those will be considered next. They will probably file a notice of appeal, a certain time frame of which to do it I believe 14 days after the judge has entered judgment on the sentence. And then after the decisions are made on the motion, the post-trial motions, motion for a new trial, motion to set aside the verdict and so forth, and I'm sure others, they will then file -- it will enter the appellate process where they will file the brief and the government will have an opportunity to respond and oral arguments will be set. And then the process will go on

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

ORTIZ: Sure. I think for those folks who are really concerned about the appellate process, I would like them to understand that the appellate process is very, very different from the trial process, you know, the jury trial system. It's a written process so it's really the lawyers filing the briefs and the responses to those briefs. There's one public proceeding called oral argument and it's between the parties, the government, the defense arguing the appellate issues that occurs in the first circuit which is here at the federal courthouse. Usually each side is given 15 minutes, 20 minutes. The issues are lengthy or so the appellate judges decide appellate court rules and then the appellate judges take time to decide the case and write an opinion, and then the opinion issues. So it's a lengthy written process whether there really isn't this kind

of opportunity for a lot of public and media presence. So it's very different, and I -- I hope that that will bring some degree of comfort to them in terms of the process being different.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

WILLIAM WEINREB, LEAD PROSECUTOR: Well, like the U.S. attorney, I was struck more by what he did not say. And it's one thing to apologize or to say that you feel bad about the suffering you accused, but he did this for political reasons. So it was a politically motivated act. And at no point during his statement did he renounce the reasons for which he committed this act. He never renounced terrorism and did not repudiate violent extremism. I think that it's important to keep in mind that this is somebody who is being sentenced to death for the acts that he had taken against specific individuals. He expressed his remarks to those individuals, but we didn't hear a word about reasons for why he did this crime.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you ever think he would take the stand?

WEINREB: Take the stand and testify?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

WEINREB: That was something entirely up to him and in his in consultation with his council. We were ready for him to take it or not (INAUDIBLE).

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you spoke to incident out front with the man with meat cleaver and what may be going on?

LISI: Sure. Yes, he's in BPD custody right now. You know, today's threat environment, as we mentioned earlier, we can't overlook anything. So we've sent some people of our joint terrorist and task force down to BPD and, you know, they will work with them and try to figure out what, if any, terrorist nexus there might be, if at all.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

LISI: Right now it's unclear. (INAUDIBLE), we will work closely with them as we have in the past.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Resources focused on Islamic terrorism (INAUDIBLE).

LISI: No. There's no concern. I can tell you that whenever he down and look at our threats and prioritize and decide how we ago go to call case the resources. So we're not going to divert any resources away from that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev now tool been held? Does he go to a different location?

ORTIZ: Go ahead, yes. WEINREB: He will be held in custody and be handed over to the bureaus

of prisons who will take him to an institution where he'll begin to serve his sentence and that will begin right away.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is that in Indiana right now?

[15:45:00] WEINREB: It is up to the bureau of prisons where he goes. Eventually, he will go to the institution in Terre Haute. Whether he goes there immediately or whether he goes there after a period of time is up to the bureau of prisons and that's a decision they make according to their own criteria.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

WEINREB: If he didn't go to Terre Haute immediately he may go to ADX in Florence for a period of time as was discussed at the trial.

ORTIZ: All right. Thank you.

BALDWIN: All right. So you've been listening to special agent in charge of the FBI, the U.S. attorney, lead prosecutor here in this case. And I want to bring in Sunny Hostin and ashleigh Banfield in and we've been listening, we all been talking about ourselves listening this whole thing.

And what really jumped out at me hearing from the U.S. attorney and also to the lead prosecutor talking about what he didn't say, right? The news today is that we heard from the first time from this convicted terrorist, and he said did say, yes, I did it along with my brother and I'm sorry. What he didn't say, because this was obviously a politically motivated ability, he was not, you know, renouncing violent extremism or terrorism. Nothing.

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. I didn't expect him to do that, certainly. I was actually surprised we didn't hear a more radicalized apology. But I know Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. attorney. I think she is a terrific prosecutor, a terrific leader. And clearly, she is very close to this case. So I think we should listen to her observations and take note of that.

Bill Winereb also I believe as a prosecutor is very close to this case. And so, certainly the fact that they know better than most people this case and this defendant, the fact that they noted that he did not say those things, that he did not repudiate terrorism and then also have sort of that religious wording.

BALDWIN: Right.

HOSTIN: I think is very, very significant, and sort of eye-opening for all of us.

ORTIZ: BALDWIN: What did you think?

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR, LEGAL VIEW: You know, I once spilled a drink on a passenger in a plane right beside me, and I apologized more profusely to that passenger than anything I saw in that courtroom, with more heart, with more soul, with more embarrassment. I was truly upset about it.

Dzhokhar spewed off a few lines. And I think, you know, Lynn Julian really put it eloquently. You can feel her pain when she said I hadn't realized I hadn't heard his voice in two years and now I wish I hadn't heard him.

BALDWIN: I wish I hadn't heard him.

BANFIELD: I wish I hadn't heard him. It didn't do anything for her. I think like Sunny just mentioned and like Carmen Ortiz just mentioned the fact that he invoked Allah, a religion of peace to the many millions upon millions of people who follow it, is just hugely offensive. He deserves everything he gets on his way to Terre Haute, if he ever gets there.

BALDWIN: On that, mentioned ADX, a super max in Colorado, what will his life look like? I'm going to come to Tom Fuentes her in a second as well. What will his life be like in the foreseeable future?

HOSTIN: Well, I have certainly as a former federal prosecutor visited federal prisons. They aren't the nicest place to be. Super max is the most difficult, and so his life will be, in my view, it's up to the bureau of prisons, of course. I suspect he will be sent there before Terre Haute, if he ever gets to Terre Haute. I suspect he'll be in isolation for quite some time. I suspect it will be a very small cell. He will be monitored very, very closely. His experience will likely be the worst of the worst in prison.

BANFIELD: By the way, there's very little known about the super max for a reason and there's a lot of criticism about that that we don't know the daily existence and daily routine for a lot of those prisoners. They don't tend to get a lot of the sympathy in terms finding more out about it. But generally speaking, his roommates, well, cell block mates so to speak, are going to be the likes of Ted Kaczenski, the uni-bomber, Richard Reid, the shoe bomber and those types of people. He will likely do 23 hours in a cell with very little stimuli. If he gets out two to three hours a week for exercise, protocols are a little different everywhere. If he gets out for exercise, it's in the dog run. You're effectively still alone in your space in a chain link dog run to do whatever hour exercise that you need or your shower. He will spend his meals, all three of them more than likely in his cell. And did I need to remind everyone he's 21. This will go on for decades upon decades if anything ever happens in terms of his appeal.

BALDWIN: If he doesn't fight it.

BANFIELD: If he doesn't fight it, he can march himself three years or so right to the death chamber at Terre Haute, Indiana. But if he does decide to fight it, it will take a long time. They do, we're careful for a reason in the United States. We don't chop off people's heads for summary execution like they do in Saudi Arabia. We're a higher order when it comes to jurisprudence but it will take time. And in that time, he will be very, very uncomfortable. And if politically, we overturn the death penalty, he will remain very, very uncomfortable for probably about 60 to 70 years. HOSTIN: And I think that's why so many people feel that life in

prison without the possibility of parole, especially in a prison like super max which had the terrible reputation for being the worse of the worst, the most difficult out of the federal institutions, is perhaps a fate worse than death.

[15:50:14] BALDWIN: Tom Fuentes, I want to hear your voice. Forgive me, I cut you off earlier. We have to go out back to Boston. But, you know, you are former FBI assistant director, now here at CNN, you are listening to conversation about, you know, obviously, he was formally sentenced today to death. We don't know, it is up to the bureau of prison where exactly, what institution he will be sent to before ultimately presumably Terre Haute, Indiana. You chime in on all of this.

FUENTES: My fear now, Brooke, is that he has -- trying to achieve some celebrity status, now that he's spoken out loud. You know, when his face appeared on the cover of "Rolling Stone" magazine, he was getting love letters from women all over the world that was thought he was so cool. And I'm just hoping that no matter how long this takes, whether he is executed or not executed, that he is not in the position to do media interviews, written or on camera, that he goes away and stays away.

[15:30:00] BALDWIN: And to these ladies' points about, let's say it is Florence, Colorado, the super-max, which we really don't know a lot about. I mean, we sent a CNN crew there not too long ago, and you can't go inside, you know. You can just sort to talk to people who know about it, a bit of this place. I mean, what -- just your opinion and what you know, what would his day-to-day life be like?

FUENTES: Well, I think Ashleigh did a great job of describing what it would be like and how difficult, but we'll see how long he's actually at that facility. Terre Haute, I've been through Terre Haute prison, its no, you know, walk in the park, either. It is going to be a tough place no matter where he goes. I visited the section where they administered the death penalty after Tim McVeigh was executed. So, you know, I know what a little rage him at Terre Haute. And I'm sure it's not better than super-max.

BALDWIN: Mel Robbins, I hear you can describe Terre Haute, Indiana. You have been there?

ROBBINS: Well, not Terre Haute, but ADX, which is very similar. There's an extremely detailed article for anybody that is interested on this on CNN.com about life in super-max. He's going to spent 23 hours a day in a seven about 12 concrete cells. He'll sleep on a concrete slab with a very thin mattress. He'll eat his meals, as Ashleigh said, alone by having those meals slid underneath the door. He will get out of his cell, if he gets out of the day, for one hour. And he will be shackled both with leg irons, hand irons.

What they say about super max and about Indiana is that the architecture of the building is the control, and that you don't see the sky. You don't have any interaction with anybody during the day. And the isolation and the smallness and the sterilliness (ph) and the concreteness of being in this cell 23 hours a day slowly driving you absolutely bananas, which is why some people feel that the death penalty is the easy way out, because you escape. I've heard Ashleigh say a number of times, Brooke, he could spend 60 years in a super-max if he isn't executed, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Right. Mel Robbins, Sunny Hostin, Ashleigh Banfield, Tom Fuentes, thank you all so much for the coverage here at the Boston, Massachusetts.

Before we go, though, coming up next, as investigators search for the two escaped killers, an update, New York. And new development today and how these fugitive escape and of all things, it involves pastries, baked goods. Yes, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:58:04] BALDWIN: We have some new information right now about the gunmen behind the massacre inside Charleston's historic Emanuel AME church one week ago today. The police chief in Sheldon, North Carolina, where Dylann Roof was captured confirms this, an officer purchased food from Burger King for Roof while he was held there in custody. The chief says officers do frequently provide some type of food for suspects in custody, and as you've been seeing Shelby police released this dash-cam video of this arrest captured here. You can see officers approaching his car with much caution. In the end he cooperates, walking into the patrol car, essentially expressionless. 911 calls indicate Roof's bowl haircut helped convince a bystander that she indeed about spotted the shooter.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Blond hair. It has a circle tag on the front, and the boy has a bowl--looking haircut.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Let's move off him. And today, talk about the victims here. State senator and Pastor Clementa Pinckney will be remembered for who he was, what he did. His body is lying now in state inside state capital there in South Carolina. In fact these are live pictures inside the capitol rotunda. One week ago, he was shot at his church, along with eight others double bible study. Reverend Pinckney, who was 41 years of age, became a lawmaker at the age of 23. Friends say he called himself a public servant instead of a politician. A horse- drawn case on Pinckney's body to the capitol where it will lie for the next few hours. Hos funeral is Friday and the president of the United States will be there and will be delivering his eulogy.

That does it for me here today. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Will see you back here tomorrow. In the meantime, we go to Washington. "The LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts right now.