>> the accused marathon bomber. the verdict had been expected about 15 minutes ago. for various and sunday sundry reasons these things can take time. we have our analyst jamie floyd with us. there are reasons even knowing that there is a verdict it takes time for the jury to return to the courtroom and the jury foreman to present it to the

judge for public reading. >> in my previous life at court tv, we had something called verdict watch. that was this period of time. we knew that the verdict was coming down. sometimes you would have a whole night, they would tell you the night before that the verdict was coming down in an intensely high profile case. thethe simpson case comes to mind. we knew the night before that that verdict was coming in the next morning. crazy the interest in that case. but to have an hour or so notice before this case so intensely watched, so devastating for the city of boston, the state of

massachusetts, and very political trial in many ways. and significant for the federal government. it's reasonable to give people time to prepare emotionally and physically around the courthouse. >> can you give us a sense strategy where by the acknowledgment, the admission was made early on. he did it. >> right. >> then what? >> i've seen a lot of those cases. you have a death penalty case. you have a client who is guilty. you have a client who is guilty. that's number one. you can't as an officer of the court very easily stand before the court judge and juror and argue innocence. first of all you have ethical issues there. but you have to make a strategic decision.

you lose legitimacy as a juror you do better in cases if if you acknowledge the responsibility and focus all your attention on preservation of life. >> well, to that point were the reports that i have read and that i have watched he doesn't--he has not demonstrated the kind of physical presentation the kind of affect that one would, a defense attorney would hope for. >> right right. >> a sense of remorse. >> you want to see him sobbing when victims' families are testifying. you want to see him wretching. the perfect defendant was oscar

pistorius. he showed great emotion. most defendants are stone faced or they're medicated to get through it or psychologically impaired. rarely do you have a defendant connected to the process or they're in some state of shock. masawi comes to mind because it became apparent in the course of the trial that he was crazy. >> repeating well, the only one accused of the 9/11 hijacks. >> that has been tried since. >> he was tried in washington. >> tried in washington, d.c. everybody thought he would get the death penalty. but he didn't. i went back and looked at some of the facts. he was almost deemed not competent to stand trial. and ultimately they reticently

found that he was competent to stand trial but the jury felt enough sympathy, i think to let him live, unbelievably. sometimes if you handle the guilt phase probably with the jury and accept the responsibility for the act even if your client isn't crying, sobbing, and heaving at the table, the jury will come around to the death penalty phase. look sometimes death would be a relief. and they can think about their crimes for every day for the rest of theirs lives. >> we're following another story today. as you know, the anger in south carolina and the demands there for justice one day after police arrested one of their own for murder.

a quite police officer shot and killed a black man over the weekend. the mayor and police chief spoke moments ago. that was interrupted by by protesters. [ chanting no justice no peace ] the mayor made a number of announcements saying that while the officer was tired-- >> the officer was terminated. his wife is eight months pregnant. and while she--he's been terminated, the city is going to continue to cover the insurance on her for the baby. until after the baby is born. we think this is the humane thing for us to do. >> he said that there would be no befores give to national medianational media until after

the funeral but his mother called the video of the shooting of her son shocking. >> when i looked at that tape, that was the most horrible thing i've ever seen. i'm very very upset concerning it. i almost couldn't look at it. to see your son running defenselessly, and being shot just tore my heart to pieces. and i pray that this never happens to another person. this has got to stop. >> scott had been arrested ten times mostly for failling to pay child support. the confrontation that resulted in his death had to do with a traffic spot. ferguson missouri, will soon have the most minority

representation on its city double. theycouncil. james knowles was not up for re-election but some people wish they could have voted against him. >> voters in ferguson, missouri, cast ballots for three new council members. but barbara said she wished she could elect a new mayor. >> i'm not happy with him. i have not had a chance to sign a petition but if someone comes to my door i will sign a petition. >> she cod get her wish. >> a group of residents are electing names in a petition drive to recall mayor james knowles. >> i'm an advocate for good government in ferguson. in order to get good government in ferguson some things are going to have to change. the mayor is one of those things

things. >> knowles in his second term as mayor angered some last summer when he said there was not a racial divide in the community when a white officer shot a black teen. the investigation report led to the resignation of other city officials, and the city remains divided on whether knowles should stay or go. >> i don't think anybody could have done much better with everybody attacking him on a constant bases. >> he had to know of the discriminatory culture. or else he's incompetent. there is no way around this. >> he has been the voice and sometimes i haven't thought that he had a good voice. >> they've worked so hard, and

they've been under so much pressure that i just--i think that it's an insult to the community. >> knowles said that he has no intention of stepping down. he said he does not take this recall effort seriously. diane estherbrook al jazeera, ferguson missouri. >> of course, we're keeping watch on another story. the jury has reached a verdict in boston at the trial of sow car tsarnaev. this happening without two full days. deliberations. did you think that it would take longer? >> i actually thought--you know, my gut was that they would come right back. when you take a look at the counts consider--they have to choose a foreman. that takes an hour. and then they have to walk through the 30 counts deliberately. and despite the defenses concessions that takes time.

if they're going to be methodical and follow instructions. it will take a day at least. and they're in their second day. i'm not surprised it has taken a little bit of time. >> we know that the defendant dzhokhar tsarnaev is now in the courtroom. presumably his presence suggests that those security measures that you were talking about earlier have been put in place. others he would not have been brought in. i suspect that what do we see next? >> the other thing that we think, everybody is sitting in the courtroom waiting for a verdict. that's not what happens. the judge the lawyers the defendant is taken back to either his holding cell. usually a holding cell near the courtroom. the lawyers go back to their offices to do their work. they're not just going to sit there in the courthouse. everybody disperses.

that's what's happening. everybody has to reassemble. as i say family members who have interest in the outcome are also assembling. >> and the audience that was in the courtroom i presume if they left the courtroom they would probably have to be cleared again. >> oh, yes absolutely. you have to go through the metal detecters. the only people i would imagine who would be anywhere near that courthouse for the journalists they never leave and even they have to go through security measures. my concern in covering federal trials you're not permitted to be in that courtroom when proceedings are not under way. in civil litigation and state court trial it's relaxed considerablying, but in the federal court-- >> the reading under way. so far we have guilt on one

two, three. >> security conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction. use of a weapon of mass destruction. that was the pressure cooker bomb that they built. and possession and use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. they're obviously making their way down the prosecutions account. that's one two and three. the next one would be use of the weapon of mass destruction resulting in death. and aiding and abetting the use that have weapon of mass destruction. again, that's the pressure cooker bomb that they built. >> 30 counts in all. we now have the verdict in three of those counts with 27 to go. >> it will take a while to read all of those. >> and each one is handled individually so the judge asks how do you find. >> as is required. >> as is required by law. they can't say we find them guilty of everything. and be done with it.

>> they're required to read through all of them by all and find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and they may poll the juror. >> for each count? >> no, but are thesous versuss. that would be unsufferable. >> each guilty finding requires an unanimous verdict? >> yes because this is a verdict trial in a death penalty case. something very interesting. we're talking about this, but we can't see it. it's worth pointing out that there are no cameras in the federal courtroom. that's why you get the sketches that you get. there are some states in which you presumptively have a camera florida being-- >> the first. >> and most open state. and other states in which a judge can decide whether or not a camera is permitted. new york is one. there are some states that

cameras don't ever come in. >> there is audio. >> and some think there should an camera, but most of them don't. they think it's okay if some states want to do it, but we want the dignity of no camera in chamber. so we can't see what is happening in this very important case as people have mixed feelings about whether that is good or bad. >> how many counts do you have to be found guilty-- >> he's already eligible. conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death, counts one. >> that's all it takes. he's eligible. >> he's eligible. >> we're not in the penalty phase yet. we're still listening to the jury deciding whether they're going to find him guilty on all 30 counts. for practical purposes they could stop right now? >> well, they could. but the prosecution has charged them with these 30 counts. the jury has made its finding. the judge is required by law to

heard the jury's verdicts. and once these verdicts come in, there will be some instructions the judge gives the jury about the next phase. there will be some housekeeping, as we call t and then move on. he's not going to begin this afternoon. they've got to be exhausted. he'll decide when to start the next phase. i don't know if it will be tomorrow morning or if they'll give a break of some sort. i'm guessing it will be tomorrow morning. >> will there be an opportunity for relatives of the victims to speak in advance of the penalty phase? >> the role of the victim will testify either threw the penalty phase or make statements during the sentencing. they don't get up and speak extemporaneously. the penalty phase in a case like this depending on what your preferences are as a trial

watcher, there were some very emotional moments in this phase when some of the victims and witnesses spoke. and even during the testimony of the medical examiner who described what happened to some of the victims including an eight-year-old boy who lost his life. and a lot of emotional reaction on the part of the people in the audience including the parent, the father of that boy. i think in the penalty face you'll see a lot of emotion impact from this event. >> now we have word that the jury has found him guilty of the next five counts. we have guilt of counts one threw through eight. >> this is what people can relate to. we're talking about conspiracy to place a bomb in a place of public use. bombing a place of public use. that is, obviously the

marathon. we all engaged in that moment and event in some way. either completely we were there. or as witnesses in the nation. and so that gets you through counts eight and count nine goes through that same point. then they go on to the use of firearm because of all the exchanges with police there after. >> you're referencing the death of that little boy who was standing right at the curb as we saw in that video and the prosecution saying you can't blame tamerlan because it was dzhokhar who deliberately placed that bomb, seeing who was in the vicinity and seeing-- >> to acknowledge that in his defense, the medical examiner

testified there was not a limb on that child's body, not an organ on that child's body not devastated by that bomb. it's absolutely devastating testimony, and the folks i know who were in the courtroom journalists, hardened, cynical people say it was incredibly powerful and moving testimony and everyone was affected by it, including the jurists and the judge and the judge moved by that testimony with the possible exception of the defendant. >> that's what i was going to ask you. while this devastating emotional testimony is being delivered he still continues to remain stone faced. do we know whether it's because he's receiving medication? >> we don't and we never do. unless the defense chooses to reveal that in the course of the penalty phase. you may get some psychiatrist or psychologist who gives testimony about any treatment he's receiving. sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. i always, having been an

criminal defense attorney i always help my viewers and listeners understand that you can't fully appreciate the psychology of the defendant. why would we extend any empathy or sympathy to someone who has done such a horrific act? do we need to? do we have to? what is there in the human conditions that requires us to think about this young man as anything other than a monster? but having represented defendants i know there is always so much more to the story than the single act. i can't tell you why he doesn't react emotionally when he hears the stories of these victims. i don't know what conversation are had with doctors, with the defense team, i don't know anything about the young man other than what i've read in books and newsprint coverage and online, of course.

i do know enough in my experience that i don't know the whole story none of us two do. >> now we have guilty verdicts on ten and 11. >> conspiracy to maliciously destroy property resulting in death. people were in the vicinity of the massively destroyed property. this pressure cooker bomb was resulting in death. these are all death pent charges. everything. count one through 12 death penalty charges. he's death eligible on all of those. and none of this is a surprise, randall, right? this is not one of those cases--i wish i could say that we're on the edge of our seat. we can't wait to see what happens. none of this is a surprise for dzhokhar tsarnaev's lawyers for the defendant himself. for anyone sitting in the courtroom, for anyone watching

rights now. perhaps it's a measure of satisfaction for the victims but you know what i have learned is that closure and satisfaction don't come from the victims through the criminal justice system. they may get some measure of justice, but sadly closure only comes over time and sometimes never. >> i've tried to avoid using that terminology in my coverage because if you lose a loved one even in the course of just an illness let alone a violent unexpected act the pain remains with you just as if the person is-- >> and people i've known who have lost loved ones, not in a terrorist act, but in who have wound their way through the horrific death penalty process

waiting for that moment of closure, and then they go and watch the execution are terribly disappointed when the closure doesn't come with the execution. it will be interesting to hear from those directly affected whether they want the death penalty in this case. >> will that have a bearing? >> it does not. it has a bearing on whether or not the government chooses to act for the death penalty. it can affect their decision to pursue it, but not the jury. >> at that point will dzhokhar tsarnaev have the opportunity to speak. >> if he's called to testify in the sentencing phase. usually you don't call your defendant because they have too much baggage. you know, your guy has been arrested ten times and if i

call my defendant who has been arrested ten times to the stand you're going to ask him--when he says i'm a good guy. don't excuse me. oh you're a good guy? let me ask you about your ten arrests. generally we don't call our defendants to the witness stand because most often our defendants have long and lengthy rap sheets. but there are two reasons from what i'm told of people who are covering this case very closely even in my own assessment, this kid will take the stand. even though you have not seen an emotional dzhokhar tsarnaev. number one he has nothing to lose. he's most likely to get the death penalty even in massachusetts. two, he's likable. everybody who knows this kid says he is likable. he was loved as a little kid. he was loved in high school, extremely popular. and in fact, when he chose not to go to a very competitive and social college people were very surprised.

that's when he was starting to make his turn. but even at the college he chose he was well liked. can he be charming and likable on the witness stand? if his defense attorneys think so they might put him on there to see if they can get some sympathy. and he has--his whole argument was i was manipulated into this. well who can convince the juror of that other than dzhokhar tsarnaev. only he can convince the jury that this is not my choice. i was under the influence of my older brother. i'm sorry. if you send me to prison i will make up for it. i will do this, that, charity penance. let me see my mother again. no one can convince the juror of that but the defendant himself. those are my reasons why they may put him on the juror stand. he's not a bad candidate for testimony. >> have we per receiverred any indication that tsarnaev really wants to be a martyr?

not that i have seen. i've read this book "the brothers," she does an exhaustive history-- >> let me tell you why i ask that. >> he may not want, i'll make my last march. >> i've done what i wanted to do. i've accomplished my purpose. >> no, i think if that were the case--you're right why didn't he just well, i'm not going to testify because i'm happy to go down for my cause. we've had cases like that. we've had cases where the defense attorneys are fighting for appeals and the defendant will write a letter to the prosecutor and judge saying, please ask my lawyer to stop fight forgive my appeal. i'm ready to die. not necessarily for martyrdom but they are tired of fighting.

these are lawyers who are very well-known. they'll be doing what their client wants. >> you heard about the ability to get-- >> i've heard that the lawyering in this case has been superb on both sides. i've covered so many cases i mean, i would say hundreds of cases in my career. i've been in so many courtrooms, i'm very sad that i didn't sit in on this case. you know, i'm a history buff, so i studied the boston massacre case in the 1770s john adams very unpopular defendants, there were seven. and again this is a very unpopular defendant in boston, which i think is the cradle of our revolution. boston, a great city. i wish i had been interest to

watchthere to watch this trial. i heard there is fantastickic lawyering on both sides. you play the cards you're dealt. i think they've done the best they can with this defense and this defendant. >> we're waiting now on the jury to come in on the verdict of counts 12 through 30. we heard one through 11. guilty on all of those counts. one through 18. >> what do they do, stop and take a break? they must have moved on to 18. >> okay. >> firearm counts. >> all of those are firearms. >> all those lugar p 95, that's the semiautomatic handgun he was carrying. remember his brother he rolls over on his brother which the prosecution said is evidence of his independent intent to affect his escape and continue with his

terrorist action. >> now we're up to count 19. >> carjacking. >> the miraculous driver. >> unbelievable. >> escaped death. >> unbelievable. >> after they had killed the people at the boston marathon. killed the police officer. then they hijack this guy and he gets away. >> in some sort of hollywood escape. he gets away. even with everything--at this point they know it's their if they're caught they're going to go down and be executed, if they care. but the carjacking itself is a federal offense. is not a death-eligible fence in and of itself. but carjacking resulting in dangerous bodily injury, and aiding and abetting. >> was the running over of his

brother. is that what killed his brother. >> i believe that is what killed his brother. i don't know that. that's an excellent question. i don't know that because there are bullets flying. and i know that their main focus in the trial about the brother was about the evidence of his intent. they focus on the intent of dzhokhar and the fact that they rolled over on his brother and continued on the escape plan and that shows independent intent from the brother. that's the focus that i was paying attention to. but you know, cause of death of the brother. >> we're seeing pictures of tamerlan wearing the baseball cap and the other cap with the shades. we're now at count 22, guilty on counts through 11.

>> on counts 1 through 22. >> they were throwing those pressure cookers at the officers as they were trying to make their go ahead away. >> now we're getting close to the end now. we've just got noun 24 through 30 left. it's incredibly. it's incredibly frightening. because when you start walking through the counts, you know, time starts to heal the wounds. when you walk through the counts it sort of takes you back to the horrific events that have day. and you remember social media was free netcally reporting the events. some of it incorrectly. >> yes yes. >> there were people who were suspected and questioned that had nothing to do with it, do you remember that? >> yes yes. >> and people were reporting from the scene some quite accurately. but it was very terrifying.

>> i was in boston the day when everybody thought that an arrest had been made and it had not. we're now hearing that dzhokhar, throughout the readings so far. >> yes what have you heard so car. >> he has kept his head down, staring at the defense table with his hand folded. if i can imagine this, a placid kind of reception. we don't know if there is--if there is any evidence of tears or emotion. >> from the audience. >> or from him. >> he could be praying. we don't know. >> we don't know. but you saw just now those images of the havoc of that day. and of course, we know now it was the two brothers, and i pointed out earlier we don't know if there was anyone else involved. we had the same situation in the oklahoma city bombing. we had mcveigh, a and then there was the question of two other people.

there was john doe number three. and there was another friend, michael fortier, who was questioned and helped to provide some of the evidence against them. there are always questions in events like this where there is a lot of havoc and a lot of confusion about whether you've gotten everyone connected with the conspiracy. because they want pin down where these bombs were made, and one of these two are dead--i mean, i'm not a conspiracy theorist, but this kid is quiet. >> so what else does he know? >> now we know about the brothers but we didn't know what was happening that day which made it all the mortify more foster flyingmortifying mortifying. >> we're going in chronological

order of the day. we're at possession and use of the firearm that semiautomatic handgun, no, the pipe bomb is in there. that's what they're talking about. the pipe bomb in relation to the crime of violence, aiding and abetting and the best way to go through the arguments is lay it down with the counts. so the jury would be able to go back through the jury room, walk through the counts, guilty, guilty guilty, you essentially give the jury what it needs to find for you the prosecution. >> and obviously they have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution 1 through 26--the big counts are

these first counts, 1 through 9. because those are the ones that link directly with death and serious bodily injuries. those are the death penalty charges. >> any one of them. >> any one of them would have led to the death penalty. but those are the ones, the weapons of mass destruction resulting in death linked directly with people who lost their lives or limbs. >> we're showing a live picture outside of the courthouse in boston and obviously at some point this afternoon we would expect that the defense attorney will be speaking possibly although not always. >> generally. >> the prosecution the u.s. attorney. may have something to say. we never know. >> i don't know because they have a second phase. they may feel that they can't speak. you tonight want to get the judge angry. but they might.

>> guilty on all counts. no surprise there. >> it would be big news if you were not guilty on one of these counts. >> so now we'll prepare for the judge to go to the penalty phase, but there is going to be a little break at this point. >> if he makes those jurors start listening to evidence this afternoon. >> that may be--there might be another rebellion in boston. >> i think what they'll do is take a break this afternoon. i would not be surprised if they come back and begin first thing tomorrow morning. everybody is anxious to get on with it. >> we did hear as the counts move towards the end the reading of the verdict and they move towards the end that dzhokhar he did begin fidgeting a bit. whereas earlier in the reading of the first 20-odd counts he was sitting quietly. head facing the defense table hands folded.

the kind of demeanor that he has demonstrated throughout the trial. >> when you're a defense attorney you say to your clients don't do too much over here at the table that's going to agitate the jury. you don't want the defendant slamming the table saying that's not true when when the witness is testifying. you don't want them making faces or grimacing or raising their hands defiantly. you want them to stay as passive as they can. some of them take it too much to heart. they're not actors, and they tend to be pretty stoned face, if not in shock. >> the talking about who else may or may not have been involved. early on i recall--i think i was covering the story at the time. i don't know if i read this.

>> yes. >> there was some question about how could the spouse of tamerlan not know--they went out and bought these boilers and then they had to fashion them with the explosives in apparently the apartment. do you know what happened with that? >> i know she was questioned quite extensively. but i don't know. i remember thinking at the time they must have done it at the brother's house meaning the defendant's house. but that could not be the case because he had roommates. >> he was a student. >> and in fact, it was at tamerlan's house. she was questioned extensively but not roped into the conspiracy at all. that's a good supposition. why not a woman. >> before we go to recap the jury in the boston marathon bombing trial, they have found

the defendant dzhokhar tsarnaev guilty on all 30 counts. guilty on all 30 counts. we'll be back after this on al jazeera america.

>> the jury in the trial of dzhokhar tsarnaev in the boston marathon bombing case has come in the first verdict of phase of the trial. he has come in guilty of the 30 counts. now they'll move into the second phase of the trial.

but we don't expect it to begin today. >> i think that the counts that rematter are the ones that relay to the loss of life or serious bodily injuries. >> conspires to use weapons of mass destruction. >> yes. >> the first count. >> found guilty on that. possession and use of a firearm guilty of that. possession and use of a firearm guilty of that. >> and actual use of the weapon of mass destruction. it's interesting that their count one was conspiracy to use the weapon of mass destruction resulting in death and then use of the weapon of mass destruction resulting in death and aiding and abetting with the brother.

he's convicted of those two right at the top. he could have been acquitted of everything else, and he would be death eligible. of course they march through all 30 and he was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt regarding the bombing the carjacking there after the fire fight with police, which famously erupted in a fury that just wild chase to the boat. >> u.s. federal district court. >> yes. >> is there any likelihood of an appeal? >> oh, yes there is always an appeal in america. there is always an appeal. yes, there is an appeal. as i said, the case was marvelously tried on both sides. when the case is tried well you leave few openings for an appeal because the appeal comes out of

errors of the trial either by the judge the prosecution or even your own lawyer made a mistake. i don't see grounds for an appeal but you can look for them and very often defendants do. that assumes a desire on the part of the defendant to pursue an appeal. some defendants, i mean, i can't really think of any that don't want to do something while they're in jail, and one of the things that they spend their time doing is appealing but this young man may not want to appeal. of course, if he gets the death penalty he may appeal that to try to achieve a life distance instead. >> now we've heard too that at the conclusion of the reading of the verdict dzhokhar tsarnaev slumped in his chair possibly the first visible sign of the

gravity of the fate he now faces. >> you reported that he had his hands folded and he had his hands looking down through the reading of the verdict and i'm told that he was reading the verdict form. so that as each verdict came in he had the same form that they have. they don't just write it on a scratch of paper. it's on a form, and they have to march through it and check off each count guilty or not guilty and he had that same form in front of him apparently, and that's what he was looking at when he was looking down. i speculate maybe he was praying praying. >> maybe he was doing that as well. >> yes but apparently he had had that form while he was looking down. >> with you heard throughout the trial that one of the motivations was that he wanted to punish the u.s. for

participateing in wars in muslim countries. to what extent do we know how politicized he was or was he just mouthing something that he had seen--that his older brother had told him? >> the brother went back. he didn't--as far as i understand. >> the younger time. >> from the brooks i read and the reporting on t the older brother went back for a period of six months, also there was some radicalization going on, an over-used term, but applicable in this case, going on here in their community and online. the older brother actually made a trip, and during that trip he became intensely dissatisfied not just with the united states, but ironically with russia. which is where they were from. the angry over u.s. political forwards muslims and the russian

political forwards muslim, that's the irony is what fueled that ready radical radicalization and brought it back to his brother. the sisters were not involved because they're women that's how the little brother was brought into the fold of this plan this plot to re retaliate against citizens not necessarily the government, because as shared in their private writings not their public writings online, but to make your point you don't engage against the state. you engage against the citizenry. that's the purpose of terrorism. on a deliberately patriotic day. >> yes right the marathon. the mention of russia also recalls to mind that an official

notification that these--that he was rear rather, not both guys but tamerlan was there and where he had gone, or had allegedly gone. some how that was one that you never know. >> you never know. you can't follow everyone. you can't expect everyone, and you certainly can't railroad everyone. you need more than a reasonable suspicion to arrest. you have to have probable cause. tamerlan was an exceptional boxer. he dame to the united came to the united states at the age of 16 he couldn't enroll in high school but he was his parents' golden son and he took up boxing

and he rose immediately in this sport. at the last minute the olympic committee changed the rules. you couldn't just be a resident, he had to be a citizen. although they lived here they weren't illegal. but he didn't have the right papers to be on our team. he certainly go back to russia to do it, and this made him very angry. his dream that he had worked on for many years was dashed. that is when he became very angry, took the trip, the six-month trip, and all of his psychology according to much of what i read changed dramatically. >> we're looking at the split screen the file footage of the horrific day the bombing of both bombs going off near the finish line of the boston marathon and on the left side of your screen you see the exterior

live shot of the courthouse where the jury just announced its verdict that dzhokhar tsarnaev guilty on all 30 counts. we see some people coming out of the courthouse, and the presence of well, we were seeing the presence of police officers as we flip to another shot there. we don't know who, if anyone will speak to reporters but we expect comments as we're now drawing close to the official formal end of phase one of the trial. then, of course, we'll move into phase two. we expect that to take place possibly as early as next week. >> oh, thank goodness. give these people a rest. >> not tomorrow. next week.

now the same jury will be handling the penalty phase and i assume the same rules that applied for phase one that is they'll speak to the press --that they'll not speak with the press they're not is sequestered, are they? >> no. the thing is--i think its critically important that they not talk to anyone. it's not about keeping the press out of everybody's business. it's about keeping them from deliberating with anyone other than the juror. jury. if they start speaking to their neighbors, they'll say hang 'em, what neighbor won't have that reaction. maybe that will be the result. maybe it should be the result, but we want the jury to make that decision from the evidence they hear in the courtroom not from what they hear at the could have any shop at joe's diner there in boston. >> i'm probably not going to use the right correct term, but

what are the elements that the jurors will be considering in phase two of the trial. >> phase two is not reasonable doubt. it's about weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances. and here the aggravating circumstances are extraordinary and we all know what they are. it's incredibly difficult for the defense to present the mitigation. one mitigating say nay be that he's a younger brother with an older brother. >> the younger with the older dominating brother. that isthat's an unusual mitigation. i was forced to do this.

maybe with charles manson. that's an unusual mitigation. the usual mitigation is i was dropped as a child and my brain is broken. or my brain chemistry is different from everybody else he is. >> you don't like that argument? you're going to take a break? >> i want to pursue it because what i'm wondering is whether in fact, his sanity for phase one would carry over to phase two. don't answer. we'll be right back on al jazeera america. on the verdict. in the boston bombing trial. joedzhokhar tsarnaev found guilty on all 30 charges.

>> al jazeera america brings you a first hand look at the environmental issues, and new understanding of our changing world. >> it's the very beginning >> this was a storm of the decade >>...hurricane... >> we can save species... >> our special month long focus, fragile planet >> no nonsense new york city police commissioner

william bratton >> they just respected this department >> restoring trust... >> it's going to be difficult... >> modernizing the force... >> this is going to be a revolutionary year >> protecting lives... >> the technologies we have available to us are phenomenal >> every sunday night. >> i lived that character. >> go one on one with america's movers and shakers. >> we will be able to see change. >> gripping. inspiring. entertaining. talk to al jazeera. only on al jazeera america. >> the jury in the trial of dzhokhar tsarnaev the suspect in the boston marathon bomber, found guilty of all 30 counts. many of those counts will result could result in the death penalty. phase one of the trial is over. our legal analyst, we were talking about the insanity. there was no insanity defense in phase one. is it possible that that could

become a factor in phase two the penalty. >> no, it's not really insanity. i love the insanity defense but it rarely works. i'm sure that they considered it and quickly dismissed it. nor did they decide he wasn't competent to stand trial, as we see. it's a little different when you talk about mitigating factors and you say i'm not saying that they will in this ways, but they are clearly going to talk about the psychology of his brother. but sometimes in mitigation they'll say there is something about my brain chemistry. >> that's not insanity. >> or the organics of my brain no, it's different. that affects my ability to make decisions and therefore i make bad decisions here. then they'll talk about what happened in his childhood. well his family was forced to move five or six times in russia because of their ethnic background. they were persecuteed as muslims. they came to the united states and granted

asylum, and all of this affected his childhood and childhood and made him supportable susceptible to radicalization. >> if you were the defense attorney would you want to call him to the stand to make this assertion? >> i never want to call my client to the stand but sometimes you have to. but you bring in all the experts, anybody who knew the family. anybody who knew him as an expert and possibly the defendant himself. >> so to recap dzhokhar tsarnaev, on trial for the boston marathon bombing found guilty by the jury of all 30 counts. the jury will be moving to the penalty phase. we expect that to happen sometime next week, of course we'll have more on this story later tonight on al jazeera america. my thanks to our legal analyst our legal expert jamie floyd. thank you for joining us on this

broadcast. you can always find more on www.aljazeera.com.

>> the battle to deliver aid in yemen. medical supplies start trickling in to the south as saudi-led airstrikes continue. >> this is al jazeera live from london. also coming up on the program. guilty on all counts. the u.s. jury returns its verdict in the boston bombing case. making new friends the greek prime minister meets the russian president as the two countries push to improve economic relations. and-- >> as