05/18/15 05/18/15 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] amy: from pacifica, this is democracy now! >> even the wake of horror and tragedy, we are not intimidated by ask of terror or radical ideals. on the contrary, the trial of this case is showcased in important american ideal, that even the worst of the worst deserve a fair trial and due process of law. today, the jury has spoken and dzhokhar tsarnaev will pay with his life for his crime. amy: a federal jury has sentenced 21-year-old dzhokhar tsarnaev to death by lethal injection for setting off bombs at the boston marathon that killed three and injured more

than 260. the sentence was issued in massachusetts, a state which has banned the death penalty since 1987 and has not carried out an execution since 1947. polls show 85% of bostonians oppose the death penalty for zorn avenue as well as 80% of massachusetts residents. we will host a roundtable discussion with denny lebouef eric freedman and go to boston to speak with james rooney president of massachusetts citizens against the death penalty. all that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. the self-proclaimed islamic state has captured ramadi, capital of iraq's anbar province. the last of the iraqi forces fled on sunday as isil forces swept the city, killing

government loyalists and seizing military equipment, including u.s.-supplied weapons. local officials say around 500 civilians and soldiers were killed in just two days of fighting. and thousands have fled their homes. the fall of ramadi comes despite weeks of u.s. airstrikes and is considered one of isil's biggest victories since it seized territory across iraq last june. speaking today in south korea, secretary of state john kerry said he expects isil's gains to be reversed. >> in addition, their communications have been reduced, their funding and financial mechanisms have been reduced, and their movements by a large and most certainly where there are air patrols and other capacities have been reduced. at that is not everywhere. and so it is possible to have the kind of attack we've seen in

ramadi, but i'm absolutely confident the days ahead that will be reversed. amy: the iraqi government has asked shiite militias to deploy to anbar to help recapture it as they did in tikrit earlier this year. a u.s. military raid inside syria has reportedly killed scores of islamic state militants, including a midlevel leader. the pentagon says the operation killed islamic state defense minister abu sayyaf and about a dozen others. sayyaf's wife was captured and a woman said to be the couple's yazidi slave was also freed. the u.s. says it did not coordinate with the syrian regime. the saudi-led coalition has resumed bombing yemen after a five-day ceasefire expired. strikes were reported in the province of aden as houthi fighters battled rival forces across the south. the five-day pause was to allow for the delivery of urgently needed humanitarian aid, but several cities failed to receive any assistance. the u.n. envoy to yemen, ismail ahmed, urged all parties to renew the truce.

>> we've seen how this humanitarian truce has given us a glimpse of hope by allowing aid to reach the yemeni people at a time when they boast -- most desperately needed. in light of the spirit come i heard all parties to renew their commitment to this humanitarian truce for at least five more days. amy: saudi arabia is hosting a gathering of yemeni political leaders, including the internationally recognized president abd-rabbu mansour hadi, but the houthis have refused to attend. the airstrikes continue. a federal jury has sentenced 21-year-old dzhokhar tsarnaev to death by lethal injection for setting off bombs at the 2013 boston marathon that killed three and injured more than 260. u.s. attorney carmen ortiz welcomed the decision. >> today, the jury has spoken and dzhokhar tsarnaev will pay with his life or his crimes. make no mistake, the defendant

claimed to be acting on behalf of all muslims, this was not a religious crime and it certainly does not reflect true muslim beliefs. it was a political crime designed to intimidate and to coerce the united states. amy: the sentence was issued in massachusetts, a state which has banned the death penalty since 1987 and has not carried out an execution since 1947. after tsarnaev was found guilty in april, a boston globe poll found less than 20% of massachusetts residents believed tsarnaev should be killed. but the death penalty was allowed because it was a federal trial. we will have a roundtable discussion after headlines. amtrak says it has installed technology that slows trains on the stretch of track where last week's deadly derailment occurred. federal officials say the positive train control system could have prevented the crash had it been operational. full service is resuming on the northeast corridor train line today after repairs were made.

federal officials continue to investigate the derailment's cause and conflicting accounts surrounding the engineer. after interviewing crew members, robert sumwalt of the national transportation safety board said one may have heard the engineer reporting the train was hit by an object. >> she recalled an engineer have reported to the train dispatcher that he had either been hit by a rock or shot at. and the septa engineer said yet are broken windshield and placed his train into emergency stop. she also believed that she heard the engineer say something about dust shell so believe she heard her engineer something about his train being struck by something. amy: another crew member says he doesn't remember -- recall

hearing anything hitting the train. the engineer himself has spoken to investigators but says he , doesn't recall the moments before crash. nine people have died in a gun battle involving rival biker gangs and police in waco, texas. authorities say a dispute over a shopping mall parking space descended into a fight between three different gangs. police had been stationed at the mall in anticipation of criminal activity and moved in when gunfire began. the resulting shootout left behind a gruesome scene of blood and bodies. waco police urgent -- police sergeant patrick swanton said it was the worst crime scene he has ever seen. >> i can confirm we still have a dead on scene, one has died at the hospital for total of nine. those numbers may rise. i told you earlier we had at least 16 that were transported to the hospital, many of those had gunshot wounds and stab wounds. i will tell you and 34 years of

law enforcement, this is the worst crime scene, the most violent crime scene that i've ever been involved in. there are dead people still there. there is blood everywhere. amy: all of the dead were bikers, and no officers were hurt. president obama is curbing the flow of military style gear to local police departments following criticism of the militarized response to protesters in ferguson missouri . obama is banning the federal government from providing weaponize aircraft or vehicles, grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, and tank-like armored vehicles which run on tracked wheels. president obama is also expected to restrict other military style gear including humvees, drones explosives, and battery rams. he is expected to announce the measures today during a speech in camden, new jersey. columbia is whole thing the long-running u.s. backed toxic fumigation of its coca plant fields.

it has sprayed vast swaths of land with chemicals into the tube curb the production of cocaine by the government cited concerns the herbicide involved causes cancer. an egyptian court has sentenced ousted president mohamed morsi and more than 100 others to death. the ruling comes in the case of a 2011 prison break, one year before morsi became egypt's first democratically elected leader. he has been imprisoned since being overthrown in a 2013 coup. the death term must now be confirmed by egypt's grand religious authority, and could still be appealed to egypt's highest court. in a statement, amnesty international called the trials "nothing but a charade based on null and void procedures." the partnership for civil justice fund has announced an unprecedented settlement with the obama administration to change the way the u.s. park police conduct mass arrests. it follows 12 years of litigation over the arrest of nearly 400 demonstrators tourists, bystanders and legal , observers during protests against the world bank on

september 27, 2002, when the d.c. metropolitan police department trapped and arrested everyone inside pershing park. the new policies agreed to by park police under the $2.2. million settlement prohibit police lines to encircle protesters, require specific probable cause for each arrest and mandate fair notice and multiple warnings before arrests are made. in a statement, the partnership for civil justice fund said -- "if these reforms can be enacted here in the nation's capital, they can and should be implemented in cities across the nation." about 500 environmentalists and indigenous leaders took to kayaks in small boats in seattle saturday to protest shell's plans to drill for oil in the remote waters of the arctic. the so-called paddle in seattle game as shell's massive drill rig arrived at the port of

seattle despite local opposition. the protests are expected to call many today with nonviolent civil disobedience to disrupt shell's operations. the obama administration recently defined environmentalists by granting shell conditional approval to drill in the arctic this summer. and three peace activists who infiltrated a nuclear weapons site have been freed from prison after their convictions were overturned. in 2012, the self-described "transform now ploughshares" broke into the y-12 nuclear facility in oak ridge, tennessee. they cut holes in the fence to paint peace slogans and threw blood on the wall, revealing major security flaws at the facility, which processes uranium for hydrogen bombs. the three were convicted of damaging a national defense site. two of the activists, michael walli and greg boertje-obed, received five-year sentences while 84-year-old nun megan rice received nearly three years. after two years behind bars, a

federal appeals court recently vacated their convictions, saying the prosecution failed to prove the three intended to "injure the national defense." all three were released this weekend until their resentencing on a remaining charge of damaging government property. defense lawyers say they have likely already served more time than they are set to receive. and those are some of the headlines. this is democracy now, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. we begin today's show in boston where on friday a federal jury sentenced 21-year-old dzhokhar tsarnaev to death by lethal injection for setting off bombs at the 2013 boston marathon that killed three and injured more than 260. the sentence was issued in massachusetts, a state which has banned the death penalty since 1987 and not carried out an execution since 1947. polls show 85% of bostonians

oppose the death penalty for dzhokhar tsarnaev as well as 80% of massachusetts residents. but the death penalty was allowed because it was a federal trial. in a statement, the aclu of massachusetts said -- "today's verdict does not reflect the values of the majority of people in our commonwealth. it is an outlier, and does not change the fact that americans increasingly reject capital punishment." during the sentencing phase of the trial, tsarnaev plus lawyers focused on presenting witnesses who could convince jurors he should be sentenced to life without parole instead of death. they argued tsarnaev was a "good kid" who fell under the influence of his radical older brother, tamerlan, and that he is now remorseful. one of the witnesses called was sister helen prejean, a catholic nun whose story was told in the 1995 movie "dead man walking." she met with tsarnaev five times and said he told her of the bombing victims "no one deserves to suffer like they did."

ultimately, prosecutors prevailed in convincing jurors tsarnaev should be put to death. after the jury deliberated for more than 15 hours and announced its verdict friday, u.s. attorney carmen ortiz addressed the media. >> our goal in trying this case was to ensure the jury had all of the information that they needed to reach a fair and just verdict. we believe we accomplished that goal and that the trial of this case has shown the world what a fair and impartial jury trial is like. even in the wake of four and tragedy, we are not intimidated by acts of terror or radical ideals. on the contrary, the trial of this case has showcased an important american ideal that even the worst of the worst deserve a fair trial and due process of law. today the jury has spoken and dzhokhar tsarnaev will pay with

his life for his crimes. make no mistake, the defendant claimed to be acting on behalf of all muslims. this was not a religious crime and it certainly does not reflect true muslim belief. it was a political crime designed to intimidate and to gores the united states -- hours the united states. amy: at least one juror was reportedly in tears when the verdict was read. the jury was death qualified meaning each member had to be open to considering the death penalty, and anyone who opposed it could not serve. tsarnaev's lawyers are expected to appeal. the process could take more than a decade to finish. since the federal death penalty was reinstated, just three federal prisoners have been executed, none since 2003. those still on death row include ted kazynski, known as the unabomber, and jared loughner, who killed six people when he tried to assassinate congresswoman gabrielle giffords.

well, for more, we are joined by three guests. in boston, james rooney is president of massachusetts citizens against the death penalty. in march he helped organize a symposium called "the tsarnaev , trial: the federal death penalty in abolitionist massachusetts." here in new york, eric freedman is a professor of constitutional law at hofstra law school, who has worked on many death penalty cases. and in new orleans, denny leboeuf is the director of the aclu's john adams project and former director of its capital punishment project. she has 26 years of experience as a capital defense attorney. welcome all of you to democracy now! i wanted to begin in massachusetts or the boston marathon was. james rooney, you are with massachusetts citizens against the death penalty. i can you explain -- i think there's a lot of confusion around the country right now why if in massachusetts where there is no death penalty, the death penalty was considered. and the response this weekend in

boston and massachusetts overall to dzhokhar tsarnaev getting the death penalty? >> as you explained earlier, amy, this is a federal case and the federal government because it is its own sovereign, gets to have its rules applied in any state, even states that don't have the death penalty. so this year with the death qualified jury, as you mentioned, you had 12 people from the community who said they were willing to impose the death penalty if the prosecution showed it. in terms of the reaction here, i think it is somewhat of a surprise given the poll numbers that you mentioned showing that so many people in the state oppose the death penalty, not simply generally, but in this case. so it doesn't reflect community sentiment here and it also -- the jury appears to have acted without knowing that the family

of the young boy, eight-year-old martin richard who was killed in the bombing, and who seems to been the focus of a number of people i talked to who thought if there was a reason to sentence dzhokhar tsarnaev to death, it was because of the killing of a young child, but the richard family, after the guilt version portion of the case had ended wrote a letter which was published in "the boston globe" saying the preferred a life sentence in this case. the prosecution in this case emphasized its view that the victims of this crime deserved to have dzhokhar tsarnaev put to death, including, particularly for the killing of this young child, and so the jury acted with that in mind but without knowing that the richard family opposed capital sentence. amy: so in fact, denny lebouef the pool that was chosen of

jurors, can you explain how that took place? because you're talking about choosing from a true minority of people in massachusetts. if 85% of bostonians are against giving the death penalty, how many jurors came out and what was the pool that was chosen from? >> it is part of the unfairness of this system, and that sort of convoluted position that the prosecutors have to put this jury in and how this process occurred. you have to as the jury, a process called death qualification. you have to ask the jury, can you consider a death sentence? they are told, don't tell us how you're going to vote, but tell us that you can seriously make a death penalty a possibility if

at the end of this process you have convicted him of a death eligible sentence. having picked some death qualified jury's in a very catholic city, new orleans, you watch as you lose a lot of catholics, most of your african-american and other people of color -- you lose all of the people who even, for nonreligious reasons, don't have a strong sense that the authorities, that the government is always right and always tells the truth, and always gives you the straight angle on what is going on and what the facts are. instead, you're picking a jury from a very small, up route -- unrepresentative conviction-prone pool. and it is the central unfairness of this process that could not be more dramatic in this case.

amy: is this grounds for appeal? >> no. i mean, it certainly -- i answered to fast. it is not grounds under current eight the managers riddance. it should be. it is a basic unfairness. i think is the numbers get stronger, as the united states is closer and closer to abolition of the death penalty which we will get, there may be reason -- revisiting of some of the decisions and we've certainly seen that in the process of fighting this penalty for many, many years. the court has looked at a lot of issues and come away with a need. amy: we're going to take a break and then come back to this discussion. we're speaking with denny lebouef in new orleans, with the aclu and in boston massachusetts, james rooney is with us with massachusetts

citizens against the death penalty. and we will be speaking with eric freedman professor of , constitutional law at hofstra law school. about the sentencing a conviction to death of dzhokhar tsarnaev in the depths of three people and the injury of over 260 and the 2013 boston marathon. stay with us. ♪ [music break]

amy: we're hosting a roundtable on the federal jury's decision in boston to sentence dzhokhar is our next to death by lethal injection -- dzhokhar tsarnaev to death by lethal injection. with us is eric freedman professor of constitutional law at hofstra law school. he has worked on many death penalty cases, and has written extensively on capital punishment. in new orleans denny leboeuf is , the director of the aclu's john adams project and former director of its capital punishment project. we welcome you all to democracy now! some of the survivors of the boston marathon bombing expressed relief at the verdict. this is karen brassard. >> it feels like we can take a breath and kind of actually breathe again, without even

realizing it, you're holding your breath. once the verdict came in it was like, ok, now we can start from here and go forward and really feel like it is behind us. >> are you happy with the verdict? >> happy is not the word i would use. there's nothing happy about having to take some of these life. unsatisfied. -- i'm satisfied. i'm grateful that they came to that conclusion because for me, i think it was the just conclusion. but there's nothing happy about any single bit of the situation. amy: the youngest victim of the boston marathon bombings was 8 year old martin richard. his parents wrote a front page opinion column for the boston globe last month in which they urged the federal government to drop its pursuit of the death penalty for tsarnaev on the grounds that the appeals process would prolong their mourning. bill and denise richard wrote -- "we hope our two remaining children do not have to grow up with the lingering, painful reminder of what the defendant

took from them, which years of appeals would undoubtedly bring." they conclude by saying -- "we believe that now is the time to turn the page, end the anguish, and look toward a better future -- for us, for boston, and for the country." eric freedman, your constitutional lawyer, hofstra law school, can you talk about the instructions to the jury? flex yes, that is not a technical problem. it builds on what denny lebouef was saying about the very unrepresentative nature of the jury in this case. in light of that, it is incredibly important for the jury to know that a single holdout juror can block the imposition of the death sentence and make it be that there will be life without any further proceedings on the penalty. the judge was asked to instruct the jury specifically that so

they would know the rules that apply, and refused. amy: say that again. >> the rule is different in guilt -- at guilt and penalty. guilt, if there's a hung jury, they can be retried under to the whole thing all over again. penalty is not like that in a death case. if a single juror insists on life and therefore the jury cannot unanimously come to death, then it is life. period. do9nene. and of story. that gives a huge incentive to someone in the jury to hang tight as opposed to thinking this is useless because they will be retried to get them probably be sentenced again to death, who needs that? if the juror knows, i can stand firm and there will be live, the jurors have incentive to do that

and yet, although that is the role, the judge refused to tell the jury it was the role -- which takes an unrepresentative jury and has it make it said to's decision in the dark. amy: explain what the judge said. >> he did not tell them what would happen if they feel to agree. he said, you need to agree. period. i left him so speculate, oh, if we don't agree, eventually, they will just have to do this again. you refused to give them the correct and true answer as to what would happen if they did not agree, leaving them to speculate. amy: denny lebouef can you talk more about the significance of this, instructing the jury what happens if they vote for the death penalty and what happens if they vote for life in prison and what it means if there is a holdout? >> typically tells the jury -- the united states supreme court

has said the decision in a penalty of a capital case is a reason to, moral judgment. it calls on an individual juror to examine the whole life, short though it has been, of the offender as well as the circumstances of the crime and to make a moral judgment based on their own morality, on their own perception of what is the appropriate punishment, is this person, as young as he is, the worst of the worst? and what the instruction that professor friedman is talking about, it tells the jury, simply the state of affairs. that is, if one juror, for reasons that are good to her good, important to her, meaningful to her says, no, life in prison without provision without parole, without release that is the appropriate

punishment, and if i simply tell respectfully mother jurors i disagree, that will be the sentence. and that is a matter of law. jury instructions are supposed to tell the jury, here is the law. amy: was that raised with the judge? and explain how much of this trial was public and how much of it was sidebar. how much do you know what happened? >> i really can't comment. amy: eric freedman, can you comment? >> this particular issue is so important that defense lawyer david brooke went out of his way in open court to repeat to the judge this test said, your honor honor, we reiterate our demand for this instruction and read it in a vain effort to catch the attention of the mainstream press, which failed to pick up on this point. and the judge said, i've already ruled on that in chambers.

we had long arguments about that, as we now know, away from the press and out of the public eye in which you refused to give the instruction -- he refused to give the instruction. but we know from the transcript that and from what was said in court that the defense expose subtly asked for this and it was extensively refused by the judge on the basis of considerations which he did not tell is coming to said, what i told you in chambers. amy: is this grounds for appeal? >> no question. the failure to give that instruction in a situation which it has been given 71 times of federal death penalty cases, including the only two other severed try to massachusetts will suddenly be made prominent in the appeal. amy: and that would be of the sentence, not the verdict. >> that pursuit -- specific portion will go to defense. amy: the age of dzhokhar tsarnaev, 21 years old now.

if you, denny lebouef, can talk about the significance of his age and he committed this act. >> he was 19 years old. he was a kid. it was a terrible act. but the united states supreme court has recognized recently, when we belatedly joined the world and saying you can't execute or death sentence people under the age of 18, they recognized that we have advanced in the neuroscience of understanding what every parent who is raised teenager knows, that it some point, you look at the best gets in the world and say, what were you thinking? we now know the answer to that is, what was he thinking with? and what he was thinking with was a 19-year-old brain. it is an undeveloped brain. it is not fully -- we not fully developed at that age.

you look at these actions and you look at the horror of them and the terrible consequences of his acts, but that is precisely one of the problems that kids have is that they can't gauge consequences of their act. there not equipped to do that yet. the other point about his that it is very hard for those of us who have lived for decades on this planet to ever say that someone as young as this has no redemptive possibilities. that there is no way that this person could never redeem himself and have a life that is worth living, even though that life will always be behind bars. and the supreme court recognized that in fairly recent decisions. the universal understanding of the neuroscience is -- i was look at it this way. if you compare a kid at 19 with

me, he is better reflexes, better hearing better everything is better about his physical being, but he can't rent a car for another six years. and i can rent one anywhere want to because my judgment is better. amy: the issue of the sams. if you could explain what they are, special administrative measures, and how we have come to know who dzhokhar tsarnaev is. i mean, there were a number of people who spoke in the sentencing phase. his teachers, people talking about his life. but for most people in this country, i think there is very little understanding of what was allowed to be said in court -- the major issue in the sentencing part of this trial was whether he was remorseful.

we only know this from one person, from sister helen prejean who said that tsarnaev -- she had met with tsarnaev five times and she said they spoke about his crimes as well as his victims, and that he said "no one deserves to suffer like they did." she said tsarnaev lowered his eyes, his voice sounded pained. she said she could see the emotion in his face and says she came away believing that he is "genuinely sorry for what he did." talk about the significance of what was allowed to be said in open court. >> well, i think my friend eric may be better equipped to talk about the legal effect of the sam's on this trial, but i do say to some extent, the characterization of him as a

terrorist and that extra designation is -- it is a bit of a red herring. we are very familiar, those of us who have been looking at capital cases for many years with seeing our clients, the defendants portrayed as some sort of monster because you can kill monsters. you can kill the nonhuman. and terrorism is another description to throw at somebody you want to say is a monster and extra that person, the worst of the worst because he is a terrorist. as far as the legal effects of the sams on this case, professor freedman may know more than i do. >> it is more psychological than legal. the special administrative measures, the sams, was invented

by the u.s. government in a few days after 9/11 when they suddenly decided that if you are suspected of a terrorist offense , then attorney-client privilege is not for you and as you know subsequently silver inclination rights are not for you and many other things if you pose a threat to the united states good old due process, which got us to the revolutionary war isn't going to make it in the new age. thereby, insidiously expanded to anything that could be possibly called terrorism. which is, just as denny said, another epitaph to hurl at people so that the kabuki drama reinforces itself. you produce all of these guards with machine guns and you make the world think the guy's is very dangerous in terms of what could be said at -- in the

penalty phase of this trial, that is something which is now buried deep in the record on appeal. we talk about, well, there will be an appeal about failure to change venue, an appeal about the failure to give this instruction. all of the other stuff that is buried in this record is going to result in a brief of over 1000 pages on appeal. we don't know about yet. many of the things that the defense may have been complaining about that they weren't given access to put together that mitigation case because they could not get a visa to russia, hypothetically or because other efforts were made to block evidence -- a must by definition, we don't know about yet, we don't know because , in many cases, lawyers have not been allowed to say and second of all, it just hasn't come out yet. and so -- amy: explain the logic. the weight it is argued, the special ministry to measures you don't want terrorists

sending out a message to his followers. but when you're talking about the issue of whether he was remorseful or not, if he expressed great remorse in the defense team, or they allowed to convey this? and who was setting the rules? the defense team versus the prosecution? is the prosecution, the ones trying to show he has no remorse, the once resetting the sams saying they he cannot say this? >> i believe from what is public the attempt to keep sister helen off the stem was made on a completely different set of grounds. we know there was passionate close toward arguments as to whether she could testify or not. i don't think it had anything to do a national security. i mean, i don't know but it would appear that the judge decided as a matter of death penalty law that is much more

risky to keep the defense from putting on some testimony that they want to put on about remorse than to give in to whatever the prosecutors argued. whether the prosecutor was arguing national security were arguing a relevance hearsay, we don't know. but on that small point -- amy: which was in a small point. this is an ugly was the point the jury was when, how much remorse he had. >> the defense one that point. amy: and the prosecution are the ones who are setting the rules on what can be said about this. >> no. the sams relate to access to the prison and to the prisoner, but not -- amy: and what can be conveyed. >> know, in court, that is the judge's ruling. you saw the judge had the final

word on that. amy: venue. let's put this question to denny lebouef, the issue of boston, the scene of the crime being the venue for this trial. the attempt to move it out of boston, other venues were put forward. what about this? is this grounds for appeal? >> it certainly is grounds for appeal. the defense took a fairly extraordinary action of trying to use the process to get this in front of the appellate court ahead of time. it was observed from the outside, it was just an inexplicable ruling. when you combine that was sort of saying, if the community does suffer the greatest harm is supposed to be the community -- for some reason, they're going to suffer the fear of prejudice for the defense into a fair trial, by having it in the

community where no one was unaffected by the hunt for the bombers and for the ensuing lockdown of the whole city or by the horror of the consequences of the bombing, if you're going to do that and then you turn and take it totally unrepresentative portion of that community to weigh in on the conviction and the penalty, it stands fairness on its head. so the people who have religious opposition to the death penalty the 2 million australians got enough item sells as roman catholics -- lost tony and's who identify themselves as roman catholics, then you should say to those people, we're going to have this trial here, you get to say whether or not you think he was guilty. and if the prosecution can't find 12 jurors who can examine

guilt and innocence but cannot consider the death penalty, then i guess they can't get a death penalty in this community. because this community doesn't have a death penalty. massachusetts hasn't had one. so i think saying we're going to do it in massachusetts, we're going to do it in boston, but we're going to pick a jury from boston that doesn't represent this city in a very important way, is unfair. clearly, unfair. amy: we will leave it there and continue as information comes out from what the jurors thought and what happens next. of course, continue to follow this case. denny lebouef is of the aclu's john adams project. thank you, james rooney and professor eric freedman from hofstra law school here in new york. when we come back, ralph nader.

stay with us. ♪ [music break]

amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. in the last few weeks, a new person has thrown his hat into the ring and the democratic party, and that is independent senator bernie sanders of vermont. since sanders announced his can you see an april am a polls in iowa show support there for him has to 15% among democrats up from 5% in february. this compares to about 60% backing for former secretary of state, senator and first lady hillary clinton. senator sanders is the longest-serving independent member of congress in u.s. history, yet he is going to run in the democratic party for the democratic nomination. he says he will run as a democratic socialist. well, juan gonzalez and i recently discussed sanders' plans with former presidential candidate, ralph nader, who has new book out, called "return to sender: unanswered letters to the president, 2001-2015."

we began by asking ralph nader who ran several times a , third-party candidate, for his response to sander's decision to make a bid for the democratic nomination. >> that is always been a dilemma. he is been deliberating for the last year or so. if you runs as an independent he can go to november. if you runs as a registered democrat, he is done in april or may, assuming he doesn't defeat hillary clinton or others. but he gets on the televised primaries whereas an independent, he could be marginalized as a democrat he will get on quite a few debates in the primary. but he will be asked, if not very soon, he will be asked will you endorse the nominee of the democratic party if it is hillary clinton? and if he says no, he may be caps off the debates. the debates are controlled by a

corporation known as the democratic party. it kept dennis kucinich off some of the debates, completely within their power to do that. juan: did you have any discussions with him about that choice and did you give him any advice? >> bernie sanders does not answer my calls. 15 years, he is never answered a telephone call, never reply to a letter, never replied to a meeting that i want to go down and see him. i even had to write in article on this called "bernie, we thought we knew ye." one of the problems he is going to face other than his good graces in vermont, is that he doesn't have good political antennae. he doesn't have political social graces. he is going to have to change that. a lot of friends have told me that is a problem. most progressive senators don't really respond to any progressive group that tries to push him to do more than they

want to do. i wrote nine letters to nine progressive senators like sherrod brown, elizabeth born, bernie sanders saying, look, your lone rangers doing good things but you're going nowhere. so what are you get together into a caucus of 9, 10, 12 senators in the senate and push your unified agenda on poverty on labor, on the environment, on trade come on military policy, and you might really get somewhere. at the least, you'll raise these issues more prominently. not a single response. not a single response. i did finally have to go down and meet with the general counsel for senator warren. but by and large, that is the problem of the left. that is the problem of progressives will stop they don't link with one another. you never see all these right-wing groups tolerate members of congress treating them that way who are supposed to be on their side. amy: ralph nader, bernie sanders

tweeted on thursday that he looked ford to debating clinton on "the big issues, income inequality, climate change, and getting big money out of politics." hillary clinton had tweeted in response to him announcing for presidency, the first formal democratic candidate against her, she wrote -- "i agree with bernie. focus must be on helping america's geo class. i welcome him to the race. your response." >> he is a very good 12 point program, which i'm sure he is going to talk about all over the country. and you can see what hillary's response and strategies going to be. she is going to agree on a general basis like him a yes, we should have better wages for the american people. she's going to try to neutralize it. she's going to try to, in effect, appear like she is going along with progressive policies.

his counter strategy has to be very specific. ok, hillary clinton, do you support a wall street transaction tax? there are sales taxes on the necessities of life all over the united states, 6% a percent, but not a penny sales tax to someone today buying $100 billion worth or $100 million worth of exxonmobil derivatives. that will really get it specific. he cannot allow her to generalize agreement with him to try to neutralize him. juan: ralph, you mention all of these progressive senators that respond and the president doesn't respond. what person did respond -- one person did respond, michelle obama. can you talk about that? >> this is an important letter i wrote. i wrote it actually three times. you read about president obama going to chambers of commerce, going to business gatherings all over the country, but he is never addressed the voluntary

nonprofit sector. the groups a deal with charity deal with children's needs, environment, labor groups, religious groups, groups that are advocacy groups. when jimmy carter was elected president, we gathered 1000 of these leaders who have millions of members like the national council of churches, have a lot of members around the country or labor unions, etc., in a hotel about two blocks from the white house. it was a very successful meeting with jimmy carter. it raised the profile of these groups. so i wrote these letters to barack obama saying, why don't you do that? it is just two blocks away, logistically, very easy. you walk across lot hit park to pay homage to commerce, but what are you do that? if they get more visibility,

more charitable contributions, they're going to hire more people. i tried to appeal to him on the job basis. but he never answered. so i sent it over to michelle's office and back came a letter, basically, saying, thank you for doing that, but he is just too busy. he is just too busy to respond to the nonprofit voluntary sector of america. that every day keeps this country going. juan: the former community organizer. now president. >> he of all people, he should've recognized this. is also an expert in constitutional law and he is violated statutes in terms of his drone warfare and other foreign policies right and left. the lesson, it really doesn't matter. it is the power structure -- it doesn't matter who is in office. it doesn't matter what ethnic racial background. it doesn't matter how much they

know, how much they don't know. there are all molded by the corporate power structure that controls washington from wall street, to use the symbolic tour. juan: ralph, i want to ask you about the issue of empire, which you mention a progressive like bernie sanders doesn't want to question. we have a president who was elected to office as a candidate of peace, of ending the wars in afghanistan and in iraq. he pulled the ground troops out, but he has expanded air wars in yemen, in pakistan, in libya and in syria. so your assessment of this issue of how president obama has them with the question of empire? >> well, he is expanded. he is broken every international law relating to national sovereignties.

he has broken some of the geneva conventions -- all of which the u.s. is a signatory to. u.n. charter. no wars are permitted under international law in the u.n. charter unls they are for strictly defensive purposes. obviously, we attacked iraq that never threatened us. and we are attacking all kinds of other areas around the world. what are we getting for it? we're getting massive cliff ration of violent groups, offshoots and sub offshoots of al qaeda. their summit of these groups in africa and asia spreading southeast asia, that the pentagon is having trouble indexing them. but they have all of this kill list, of course, every tuesday in the white house. and what people in this country don't understand is that the drones may take a few dozen lives here in a few dozen lives there, but when you're living, when millions of people in asia and africa are living under

drones, they hear that whine 20 for hours a day, it is terror. they don't know whether their homes are going to be blown up from this lightning bolt from the sky. then we wonder why people are hating us and what to do as in. and it is only a matter of time. as we push these fighters to become more skilled, more bold greater in numbers, it is only a matter of time. when the suicide belts are coming to this country. and our country is totally unable to withstand preservation of the civil liberties and democracy with these attacks. and the whole process of democratic processes, allocation of public budgets, completely turned upside down in this country with a couple of violent terrorist attacks. amy: ralph nader would you like to read one of your favorite letters that did not get a response in your new book,

"return to sender: unanswered letters to the president 2001-2015"." preface what you think letters are important. what is this tradition of letters you were talking about. why is this the form that you feel is important to communicate with the president? >> because it is totally in control of the citizenry to write what he or she believes the elected officials should listen to. when i was a child youngster, i read the adams jefferson letter and i read later the homes last he letters and i like the personal nature of it, the initiative for a nature of it, the command of the writer and i used letters years ago to make a lot of news. the press would look at the letter and say it doesn't say

something important, is it newsworthy? who doesn't go to? and when these letters were publicized in the press, members of congress could not ignore the issue. they often would have congressional hearings. so what are we left with? a few giant we did conglomerates dominating everything. a little indy media, democracy now!, pacifica. what are we really left with for people to breathe and to have a voice? and so that is why i wanted president bush and obama to address large gatherings of citizen groups in washington, make it easy for them, who represent the fount necessity's of our times whether it is dealing with poverty, bigotry or education or environment consumer protection, the integrity of government, the integrity of elections.

in one of the letters, i will read an excerpt, in 2009 and again in 2011, i wrote to urge you, president obama, to address a large gathering in a convenient washington venue for the leaders of nonprofit civic organizations with tens of millions of members throughout the united states. not receiving a reply, i sent my request to first lady michelle obama whose assistant replied saying you were too busy. you were, however, not too busy to address many business groups and also to walk over to the oppositional u.s. chamber of commerce across from the white house. well, it is his second term and such a civic gathering could be scheduled at your convenience. amy: that is ralph nader, reading from a letter he wrote to president obama, one of the many leaders who features in this new book called "return to , sender: unanswered letters to the president, 2001-2015." you can watch part one of the interview and the rest of his reading at democracynow.org. democracy now! is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed

captioning. e-mail your comments to outreach@democracynow.org or mail them to democracy now! p.o. box 693 new york, new york 10013. [captioning made possible by democracy now! - from the editors of cook's illustrated magazine it's america's test kitchen with your host christopher kimball, featuring test kitchen chefs julia collin davison bridget lancaster, becky hays with adam ried in the equipment corner and jack bishop in the tasting lab. discover the secrets of america's foremost food testers and tasters today on america's test kitchen. today on america's test kitchen doc visits hi rise bakery in cambridge, massachusetts, to learn all about brioche from a pro. then in the test kitchen bridget shows chris how to make no-knead brioche at home. next, gadget guru lisa reviews brioche pans

and jack challenges chris to a tasting of bacon. and finally, julia shows chris how to make the ultimate lemon ricotta pancakes. that's all right here, on america's test kitchen. america's test kitchen is brought to yo