On Jan. 5, jury selection began for the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, one of the men accused of planting a bomb near the end of the Boston Marathon in April 2013. This resulted in the deaths of three people and injured some 260 people. Tzarnaev and his brother Tamerlan also allegedly shot and killed Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Sean Collier. After Judge George A. O’Toole Jr. denied the defense’s request to move the trial out of Boston, the impartiality of the jury has become a concern. Jury selection is a rigorous process that may take weeks, selecting out of a jury pool of 1,200 to make a panel of 12 jurors. Some, like Michael Coyne, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law in Andover, Mass., “have real concerns that no matter who sits on the jury, they have been impacted in some way by the Marathon bombings.” Do you feel that an impartial jury is possible?


Prof. Daniel Breen (LGLS)

O’Toole’s ruling was based partly on the fact that there are over five million people in this federal judicial district. In the case of Enron’s Jeffrey Skilling, the Supreme Court had ruled that given the large population of Houston, there could be no presumption that 12 suitably impartial jurors could not be found. If that was true about Houston, Judge O’Toole reasoned, it is also true about eastern Massachusetts. I think, though, that the judge failed to recognize the differences between a bombing, with its searingly emotional effects on an entire region, and a case of securities fraud. This case seems more similar to the Timothy McVeigh case, where the judge rejected the prosecution’s attempt to keep the trial in Oklahoma. Due process would have been better served by moving the trial.

Prof. Daniel Breen (LGLS) is a lecturer in the Legal Studies program.


Prof. Jytte Klausen (POL)

Actually, I think the Boston area population has been remarkably open-minded about this case. Culpability is not in question. The trial is about the degree of responsibility attributable to the young Tsarnaev brother, and the defense attorney is now trying to avoid the death penalty. There can hardly be a better place in the United States to try this question. The Boston-area jury pool is known to be one of the least supportive of the death penalty anywhere in the country. In my view, the request to have the trial moved is part of a pre-trial effort to sow doubts about procedure and impartiality that can be exploited at a later stage in the case.

Prof. Jytte Klausen (POL) is the Lawrence A. Wien Professor of International Cooperation. She studies domestic terrorism. 


Michael Abrams '15

I fully agree with Michael Coyne’s assessment of the situation. I doubt Tsarnaev’s ability to receive a fair trial in not only Boston, but Massachusetts; or, given the deep cultural sensitivity of the United States to acts of terror, anywhere in the nation. In the international criminal legal system there are no jury trials. Panels of experienced judges preside over trials for acts such as crimes against humanity, war crimes and, in the case of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, terrorism. A similar procedure should be utilized in Tsarnaev’s case. Ideally, a mixture of American and international judges would ensure that only the most qualified, impartial individuals would conduct and decide such a significant case. It is easy to condemn Tsarnaev before his trial, to not care about the fairness of his proceedings given the horror of his alleged crimes. But the only way for America to demonstrate its commitment to the principles of justice is to respect the human rights of Tsarnaev and provide him with a truly fair trial. 
Michael Abrams ’15 is an undergraduate department representative for the Legal Studies program. 

David Alpert '16
I do think an impartial jury is possible but unlikely. It was such an emotional event that those affected would likely be influenced by their experiences during the bombing. There are over 600,000 people in Boston, and a large majority of them were in some way affected by the marathon bombing. Even people who sympathize with Tsarnaev have a strong bias that could affect their decision. I have heard people say that an impartial jury is really just a jury that can put aside these feelings to give an objective opinion. However, in a case where people have personal connections to the events, it will be significantly harder to achieve this objectivity.
David Alpert ’16 is a Neuroscience major. He is originally from the Greater Boston area.