John Remington Graham

Tsarnaev, Amicus Intervention (brief)


For reasons already stated in their motion for leave to appear as friends of the court, Dr. James Fetzer, Dr. Mary Maxwell, and Dr. Cesar Baruja urge this Court to review the papers covered by and including electronic order #1469 in the federal district court in Boston (filed on May 29, and disposed of on June 17, 2015), and displayed in the addendum to this submission. And by virtue thereof they ask this Court to reverse the conviction below and enter a judgment of acquittal, or order granting a new trial with directions for appointment of new counsel for the appellant Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, motivated to defend him on the merits of his plea of not guilty. The most essential facts are properly referenced to this record in the pro se argument of the Russian aunt of Mr. Tsarnaev (pages A18-A25 and A28-A29 of the addendum to this submission). Dr. Fetzer, Dr. Maxwell, and Dr. Baruja wish to add certain comments concerning events since Dzhokhar was sentenced to death and not mentioned in their motion for leave to appear as friends of the court:

Sentencing occurred on June 24, 2015, during which the transcript indicates that, before he was sentenced to death, Mr. Tsarnaev made certain bizarre statements, including suspicious statements of Islamic piety, and about his lawyers who, he says, were “lovely companions.” These comments are wholly uncharacteristic for an Americanized youth, and thus seem to have been scripted for him. Be that as it may, Mr. Tsarnaev went on at sentencing to make statements purporting to confess to the charges in the indictment. We dismiss these and other acts or comments in the nature of a confession, and urge this Court to do likewise, because, if they were true, Dzhokhar would have carried a heavy-laden black backpack on Boylston Street, as charged in paragraphs 6, 7, and 24 of the indictment, although he actually carried a light-weight white backpack (exhibit 4 on page A29 of the addendum hereto). In other words, there would have been natural proof of the corpus delicti, which was wholly lacking here. Compare the comments of the Russian aunt of Mr. Tsarnaev on the corpus delicti rule (on pages A25-A26 in the addendum hereto).

We wish to acknowledge objections which we have heard from certain newspaper-influenced lawyers in New England who tried to explain away the decisive evidence that Mr. Tsarnaev cannot be guilty in this case:

One eminent criminal lawyer in Massachusetts told us that the contention about black backpacks was only an evaporating investigation hypothesis, as sometimes happens in criminal cases, and that evidence concerning events after the explosions on Boylston Street (e. g., the testimony of Den Meng) was enough to convict Mr. Tsarnaev. But this lawyer did not know that the allegation of blackbackpacks came from the FBI crime lab on the basis of undeniable facts (exhibit 3 on page A29 of the addendum hereto), was incorporated into the indictment (paragraph 7), was part of the government’s case-in-chief at trial, and was decisively disproved by the white backpack carried Mr. Tsarnaev over his right shoulder (exhibit 4 on page A29 of the addendum hereto).

Another practitioner, in Boston, told us that between the time of the still-frame photo (exhibit 4 on page A29 of the addendum hereto) and the time of the explosions, Dzhokhar might have switched backpacks. But there is no evidence for, or even consistent with this far-fetched scenario, nor was the suggestion ever made by anybody at trial. The very street video used by the FBI to identify Dzhokhar Tsarnaev excludes him as a suspect.

Others in Maine have said that the white backpack cannot be used except in post-conviction habeas corpus or writ of error coram nobis. This procedural point is answered by Rule 29(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and the opinion of Judge T. S. Ellis (cited on page A4 of the addendum hereto), which allow us to proceed, if the Court please. Dr. Fetzer, Dr. Maxwell, and Dr. Baruja do not represent Dzhokhar. They represent the public interest. And we do not have to wait until wrongful conviction. We can proactively prevent wrongful conviction by amicus intervention under positive law here and now.

It has even been suggested by persons with axes to grind that the white backpack (exhibit 4 on page A29 of the addendum hereto) is not compelling evidence. What can be more compelling than the difference between black and white? Why should we not believe our own eyes? We understand that injury to our country and profession will follow a miscarriage of justice in this case, for England lost her territories in France after the judicial murder of Joan of Arc and her free Constitution after the judicial murder of Charles the First. Hence, we dare not conceal the facts from ourselves. We must obey conscience!

The sad story of Anders Brevig in Norway reveals that the death penalty is not the worst of punishments. If Dzhokhar was guilty and had a fair trial, let justice be done. But since Mr. Tsarnaev cannot be guilty here (as appears in the contrast between exhibits 3 and 4 on page A29 of the addendum hereto), the American people need to know what really happened in this case, and this Court must tell them. Our major news and entertainment media will not.

Wherefore, Dr. Fetzer, Dr. Maxwell, and Dr. Baruja ask in behalf themselves and their countrymen that this Court examine the documents in the addendum hereto, and corresponding parts of this record, then do justice.


JOHN REMINGTON GRAHAM of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)
180 Haut de la Paroisse
St-Agapit, Quebec G0S 1Z0 Canada
TEL-FAX 418-888-5049
Counsel for Drs. Fetzer, Maxwell, and Baruja


The undersigned certifies that the foregoing argument, including greeting and signature material, was prepared in 14-point Times New Roman font, consists of 961 words, and thus complies with the rules of this Court.

Dated:______________November 10, 2017_________________________

JOHN REMINGTON GRAHAM of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)

Author Since: Apr 19, 2019

Related Post