home

Two Friends of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Indicted

Azamat Tazhayakov and Dias Kadyrbayev have been indicted by a federal grand jury in Boston on charges of Obstruction of Justice and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice. The Indictment is here.

Robelo Philliipos was not indicted. His lawyer says he is still negotiating with the Government.

What's missing from the Indictment? Any reference to what the two told the FBI during their early interviews. Did DOJ conclude their statements were inadmissible? The Complaint against them had alleged: [More...]

KADYRBAYEV, TAZHAYAKOV, and PHILLIPOS were each interviewed during this investigation. As set forth below, all three have admitted that on the evening of April 18, 2013, they removed Tsarnaev's backpack from Tsarnaev's dormitory room, and KADYRBAYEV and TAZHAYAKOV have admitted that they agreed to get rid of it after concluding from news reports that Tsarnaev was one of the Boston Marathon bombers. (my emphasis.)

There is no reference in the overt acts portion of the Indictment to their statements. Nor is Tsarnaev's roommate, who was at the dorm room when the three friends arrived to gather Jahar's things identified. (The roommate, as far as I know, has never been linked to any misconduct or involvement. He let the three friends into the dorm room and then left.)

The Government has to prove the two friends acted with the intent to impede the investigation. If Phillipos cooperates, perhaps the Government will rely on his testimony, along with the physical evidence retrieved from the landfill and phone records, to make the case, rather than their statements.

One more witness was taken into custody along with Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov when police went to the Carriage Drive apartment. She was later identified by Azamat's father as Dias Kadyrbayev's girlfriend.

Here is a photo of Azamat Tazhayakov being taken in the first time. This is the second time.
Here is Dias Kadyrbayev the second time.

< Lynne Stewart Hearing for Compassionate Release | WaPo: Individual Section 215 Searches Not Subject to FISA Court Review >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    20 years? Wow! (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Teresa on Thu Aug 08, 2013 at 09:45:28 PM EST
    Just think how easy Scooter Libby got off. That's ridiculous. I know what they did is wrong, but what they did didn't change the outcome of charging Jahar. They did cooperate and the goverment did get the evidence.

    I didn't realize they'd been held all this time.

    As I have commented many times (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 09, 2013 at 09:02:17 AM EST
    on this site, the sum of the (theoretically possible) legal maximum sentences is no predictor of an actual outcome at sentencing, assuming conviction.  Throwing around the maximum sentence that is allowable in the most aggravated possible instance of a person violating the same statute(s) is not a valid basis for comparison with the actual sentence imposed (much less a sentence that was reduced by Presidential commutation) in another particular case.  The actual sentence to be imposed here -- again, assuming conviction -- will be decided by a judge, after hearing from both sides and considering all the case-specific circumstances, in that judge's discretion.

    Parent
    is wadda buncha maroons.
    On April 18, the FBI posted pictures of Tsarnaev and his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev, an alleged co-conspirator who died the next day during the manhunt. According to the indictment, Kadyrbayev later received a text message from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev suggesting that he go to Tsarnaev's "room and take what's there."

    The indictment alleges that Kadyrbayev, Tazhayakov, and another conspirator, who was not named in the indictment, went to Tsarnaev's dorm room and removed several items, including Tsarnaev's laptop computer and a backpack containing fireworks. The indictment says they brought the items to Kadyrbayev's and Tazhayakov's apartment and later put some of them in a trash dumpster.



    I Believe... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Aug 08, 2013 at 03:15:33 PM EST
    ...they went to visit him and he wasn't there so they started watching TV where they learned he was either wanted in connect to, or was the bomber.  That is when they decided to help their friend.

    I agree, I can't imagine finding out someone I knew did that, but I would never try and destroy evidence.  I would do a lot of dirty deeds for my friends and I love them, but damn, if they kill innocent people they can go F themselves.

    The problem IMO is they won't get a deserved punishment, which a year seems reasonable, certainly they parents will be broke after the trial.  But the government is going do what they always do, throw the book at them.

    They made an extremely dumb decision on the spot, but in no way effected the capture of the accused and they had no connection the plot.  they helped recover the laptop and seems like they have been cooperating.  But you just don't try and destroy evidence in case that involves people getting killed.

    Parent

    I too... (none / 0) (#15)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 09, 2013 at 08:08:55 AM EST
    would have no qualms about breaking laws to help a friend in need.  I think this is one of those situations where you never really know what you'd do until you're in that very tough spot.  Thinking about it...I'd be hard pressed not to help and try to keep a loved one out of prison no matter what they'd done...but then I'd disown them if it was something heinous.  The only exception being if I was convinced they'd hurt more people reoffending.

    Parent