Boston Show Trial: Dzhokhar “Guilty!” On All 30 Counts, (Not Even Probable Cause to Warrant an Indictment, Much Less Proof to Justify a Conviction)

Fake footage from Boston marathon

by Jim Fetzer and Dr. Eowyn

How dumb are we supposed to be? Apparently, the authorities think we have the IQ of a turnip. Consider some of the basic elements of the situation are being ignored:

* We have the Boston police calling out on bullhorns, “This is a drill! This is a drill!”

* We have Boston Globe tweets saying an explosion will be set off  at the marathon

* We have a feeble explosion that could not kill or main anyone as part of the drill

* A Hollywood producer identifying a key player as an actor cast in one of his films

* He explains this is “hyper-realistic filming” to create very realistic appearing scenes

The Boston bombing was as amateurish as it gets, out the basics here:

* Dzokhar could not have written his confession on the inside of a fiberglass boat

* The backpacks they were wearing were not the two black backpacks that exploded

* Tamerlan had a beard before and after the marathon but not in the official footage

* You can see his beard in his arrest videos and it is even visible in his death photos

* Dzokhar’s attorney admitted his guilt in her opening statement to judge and jury

Dzhokhar _Guilty!_ on all 30 counts.jpg460

John Remington Graham, a former professor of law, who has served as both a public defender and a public prosecutor, has spoke with their aunt, Maret Tsarnaeva:

«Maret Tsarnaeva, a Russian lawyer, and paternal aunt of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, has revealed to me in writing, on which she waives confidentiality, that she is aware of the communications in June 2013 and June 2014 between the federal public defender’s office in Boston and Dzhokhar’s family in Dagestan. She says that the public defender’s office in Boston expressed awareness that Dzhokhar is innocent; but that, due to pressure on their office, they have decided to defend on other grounds, — that the crime was engineered by Tamerlan, but that Dzhokhar mere followed his big brother. Maret has expressed willingness to submit an affidavit or to testify under oath inopen court concerning what she knows about these communications.

In fact, still-frame photos taken from public surveillance videos on which the FBI relies, photos from the FBI crime lab, andreports of FBI findings show that Dzhokhar cannot possibly be guilty of carrying one of the black backpacs identified by the FBI, and containing one of the pressure-cooker bombs identified by the FBI. But counsel for Dzhokhar did not even ask the jury for a verdict of not guilty, evidently in the belief that only in this way can they save Dzhokhar from the death penalty. It is plain enough to me that the best way to save Dzhokhar’s life is to get a verdict of not guilty by use of FBI-generated evidence.

It is a sad day for our country when pressure can induce counsel for the accused not to defend his client fully fromavailable evidence in the possession of public authority. It is not enough to condemn counsel for the accused in such a situation. Those responsible for the pressure are also guilty of grievous ethical wrongdoing. Those culprits, whether in the public sector or the private sector, have betrayed our system of justice. — John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)»

My research on the Boston bombing, which I regard as the most blatant “false flag” attack in history, has completely disillusioned me of any belief in the integrity of the judicial system in America. Here is my own conversation with Meret, in which she explained that where I learned that even the marathon footage of the boys was fake:

Jack Graham has concluded, based on the backpack evidence alone, that there was not sufficient proof to establish probably cause for an indictment, much less for the conviction for a crime that they obviously did not commit. And I am far from alone in drawing the very same inference, where Dr. Eowyn has drawn that conclusion as well.

Boston Bombing: 2 reasons to doubt jury’s guilty verdict
by Dr. Eowyn

Yesterday, April 8, 2015, in a U.S. district court in Boston, after only 12 hours of deliberation, the jury convicted 21-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on all 30 counts of the Boston Marathon bombings on April 15, 2013. 17 of the 30 counts carry the death penalty. The same jury will now decide whether to sentence Tsarnaev to death or give him life in prison without possibility of parole.


Tamerlan (left) and Dzhokhar (right) Tsarnaev

Incredibly, Tsarnaev’s defense team didn’t say he was innocent. Instead, the defense admitted he had carried out the bombings, but blamed Dzhokhar’s older brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan, for having “masterminded” the bombings. Tamerlan Tsarnaev didn’t make it to trial because, we are told, he was gunned down in the evening of April 18, 2015, in a shoot-out with police in Watertown, a suburb of Boston, then run over by his younger brother in a stolen SUV.

I wrote “we are told” because there’s this video showing what appears to be a naked, unwounded and very much alive Tamerlan being handcuffed and escorted into a Boston Police Department vehicle. According to 21stCenturyWireTV that uploaded the video to YouTube on April 20, 2013, the video had appeared on Brazilian TV earlier that day (April 20).

Please make a note of the image of “Tamerlan” with a well-trimmed beard at the 0:17 mark. Here’s a screenshot I took.


There are at least two reasons for us to be skeptical of the culpability of Dzhokhar and his older brother Tamerlan.


Remember this much-publicized image of the Tsarnaev brothers at the marathon?


The image is from an FBI video​ and was widely circulated in the media. Note that the Tsarnaevs were not actually depicted as depositing their backpacks that presumably contained the bombs. But just the image of the two was enough to convince us they had been present at the marathon.

The only problem is the FBI video doesn’t exist.

On April 18, 2013, Richard DesLauriers, Special Agent in charge of the Boston Division of the FBI, gave a press conference in which he asked for the public’s help to identify two suspects (who later were identified as Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev) for the bombings. DesLauriers said:

After a very detailed analysis of photo, video, and other evidence, we are releasing photos of the two suspects. They are identified as Suspect 1 and Suspect 2. They appear to be associated.

Suspect 1 is wearing a black hat. Suspect 2 is wearing a white hat. [Jurors at Dzhokhar’s trial were told he was the one wearing the white hat.]

Suspect 2 set down a back pack at the site of the second explosion just in front of the Forum Restaurant….

As you can see from one of the images, Suspects 1 and 2 appear to be walking together through the marathon crowd on Boylston Street in the direction of the finish line….

Further, on, we have videos of the suspects. The photos and videos are posted for the public and media to use, review and publicize.

Here’s the video released at the press conference:

Note that, although Special Agent DesLauriers clearly said at the press conference that “Suspect 2 set down a back pack at the site of the second explosion,” the actualimage of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev setting down his back pack was never released to the public, nor does the surveillance video above depict Tsarnaev setting down the back pack.

Why is that?

The New York Daily News reports that in a pre-trial hearing on March 2, 2015,Dzhokhar’s defense attorney David Bruck made a “stunning assertion” that avideo billed by the FBI as a caught-in-the-act piece of evidence “does not exist.”From the Daily News:

The feds claimed the video, which was never made public,showed Dzhokhar Tsarnaev dropping a backpack concealing a homemade bomb next to a 6-year-old boy who was killed.

At the time, FBI officials only released still photos of Tsarnaev mingling with finish-line revelers near where little Martin Richard was standing. Other photos made public showed both Tsarnaev brothers walking through the crowd before the explosions carrying backpacks.

So how is it that so many people believe they’ve seen a video that doesn’t exist — a video showing the Tsarnaev brothers dropping a backpack at the marathon? Indeed, on April 21, 2013, I had asked about precisely that video in my post, “Where is the video showing the Tsarnaev brothers placing the bombs?”

WhoWhatWhy points out that what we’d seen is merely a TV re-enactment in a National Geographic docu-drama entitled, “Inside the Hunt for the Boston Bombers.”The National Geographic video, however, was not actual footage of the Tsarnaevs, but a re-enactment of the video the FBI claimed to have but never released. To add to the irony, the National Geographic’s reenactment wasn’t even shot in Boston—actors created the scene on the streets of Phoenix, Arizona.


As presented by Professor Jim Fetzer for Veterans Today, Tamerlan Tsarnaev had a well-trimmed beard when he was seen in a video working out at the Wai Kru gym on April 12, 2013, two days before the Boston Marathon. But FBI images of Tamerlan on April 15 depicted him as clean shaven. Three days later, however, when he was killed in a shoot-out with the police on April 18, Tamerlan again had a well-trimmed beard.

A friend of Tamerlan, Manatov Khairullozhon, said he had dinner with the Tsarnaev brothers at the Somerville Cafe on the evening of April 15, 2013, where he observed Tamerlan was wearing a beard. Khairullozhon went to the authorities when he saw the FBI images of a clean-shaven Tamerlan at the marathon to inform them that he and Tamerlan, sporting a beard, had had dinner the night before, but they did not want to hear it. For coming forth, Khairullozhon has been targeted and abused and is being prosecuted for obstruction of evidence.


Tamerlan’s now-you-see-it now-you-don’t beard is why his aunt, Maret Tsarnaev, believes the surveillance video and the images of the two brothers at the Boston Marathon are fake.

There are so many questions we can ask Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s defense team:

* Why wasn’t former CIA agent Robert David Steele, who says Boston bombings were a false flag, called as a defense witness?

* Why wasn’t Hollywood producer Nathan Folks, who says Boston bombings were a false flag, called as an expert witness for the defense?

* Why weren’t Boston police witnesses asked why Catholic priests were turned away from ministering to the bombing victims?

Was it because if the priests were allowed, they would discover that the victims were crisis actors?

For all the posts FOTM has published on this subject, go to our “Boston Marathon Bombings” page. H/t 21st Century Wire, WhoWhatWhy, and FOTM’s josephbc69.

Dr. Eowyn is one of four professors who have collaborated in research on Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing. She maintains her blog at Fellowship of the Minds.


See article here:

TLB recommends that you read other great/pertinent articles at:  Veterans Today

2 Comments on Boston Show Trial: Dzhokhar “Guilty!” On All 30 Counts, (Not Even Probable Cause to Warrant an Indictment, Much Less Proof to Justify a Conviction)

  1. the same thing with my internet happened but it was 2000.00 i had the guy who was there at the first dzhohar trial living with me and he had come out with alot of evidence that he was innocent and actually zubeidat had paid for him to go to boston and check things out and funny things happened when he got home our internet even on my phone and his phone they shut off our data and peopke were following us it was just ridiculous



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.