ari. i talked the people covering this case, people over past two years in this case i live here. no one thought he wouldn't speak today. didn't go on trial and speak during the course of the proceedings. and that was understandable. but he had two yours just about to issue even a statement of apology to the people of boston and the united states. and he did not do that. and then today shortly after the lunch break his attorney judy clark made it known that he was going to address the court. >> ron? you look at this ron, and we have been covering it today, so much of what he said extraordinary claiming to be sorry, saying i'm sorry for the lives i have taken. i'm a muslim. my religion is islam. i pray to allah to show his mercy in the bombing. the people he murdered. my question to you is do people there buy this at snaul do they see this as at all credible from this murderer? >> reporter: no. i mean a lot of people will say too little too late.

may have been more impressive had you said the same thing two, three, four five six months after the boston marathon bombing and a chance to sit in the jail cell and reflect on what happened to your life. but to get it two years plus after this and then to not explain i think a lot of people are going to be upset he made no attempt to aexplain his actions. if you believe the defense strategy throughout the trial, was that the big brother hatched the plan and dragged the reluctant stardzhokhar tsarvaev into this conspiracy and frustrated that he did not try to explain why he did what he did, even if it was on religious grounds at least make an attempt to explain to people why you did the unthinkable, place a bomb in a book bag behind a group of people including children one of whom martin richard, the 8-year-old who died.

extraordinary awful stories of victims about how tough their lives have been past two years and one strikes me the most is a gentleman who was standing behind martin richard, the 8-year-old saying he's got marital probables because his wife was right next to him and he went to pick up the child jane richard, the sister of martin richard, after the bomb exploded in the chaos forgetting that his wife was there and in his words left to fend for herself and i thought that was so poignant that he spoke in front of this condemned killer this is what you caused in my life that i now have marital troubles because of you. >> ron, talk a little bit more about the victims and the family members who spoke today. what did they seem to want to convey? >> i think for a lot of them and there's been a mix because a lot of victims were like we're never going to get closure. they showed up for trial and some of them came almost every day but they didn't want to talk to the media and just wanted to be a part of the proceeding but

didn't want to speak out. others very much wanted to speak out. rebecca gregory, one of the 17 people who lost limbs. she ran the last three miles this year and she was the last victim to get up today and was very sharp in her words and her condemnation of dzhokhar tsarvaev and she brought back to the courtroom that picture that we all remember that was introduced two thirds of the way through the proceedings of the trial where there was a still picture of dzhokhar tsarvaev in a holding cell waiting for a proceeding here at the courthouse and he fusses with the hair and extends the middle finger to the camera. she said when you do that it's funny, we do that every time we put on these prosthetic limbs and we are boston strong, american strong. you picked the wrong people to pick on. back to you. >> what an emotional room that must have been. stick with us. ari, a question that i have heard a number of people asking today and that is so now he's

been sentenced to the death penalty but why's it take so long, that f that's what they decided with why not this weekend and the cost of it if he had life in prison that could be less expensive than waiting it out for years. >> well, that goes to something else we learned today. the defense counsel saying really for the first time that they sought to have a life sentence with remorse, with some of the remorse he's expressed and they wouldn't take it. the government rejecting that given that they wanted to pursue the death penalty for the serious terrorist charge and there is an automatic mandatory appeal in these kind of matters so it is a long process. that is in addition to the death penalty in the united states and the debates of the lethal injection process itself and it goes to the federal government's interest in treating this as the highest possible offense regardless of how long it takes. toure, weigh in as well. >> yeah. ari, i'm not the chief legal krobt like you but, of course

we know that this country put to death people who are innocent so i would went to rush to put them to death right after the first court judgment but, ron, i want to go back to you and, you know i really don't care what this killer had to say and has you sort of remarked what he said was relative unremarkable. what he spoke is remarkable and what he said left more questions and answers and the judge said about the heroism and bravery we saw of the people of boston after this monster created this situation and, you know the judge and the court talked about the bravery of the boston police and the watertown police. he spoke about you want a real life example of looking far needle in a haystack that police looking far backpack and a landfill and talking about the victims who were themselves wounded being searched about others taking care of others who were wounded. we saw the heart and soul of boston throughout this

situation. and we saw that boston is indeed very strong. >> right. and judge o'toole, his remarks there basically in essence saying that you saw the best and worst of humanity. that day. two years ago here in this city where the two brothers came and wanted to kill and maim as many people as possible and then instantly you saw the best of humanity, people helping one another. didn't know one another, doing extraordinary things to save lives and limbs and one of the people to testify today was the transit cop who was involved that shootout. a couple days after the bombing. who was severely wounded and shot himself in that shootout just a few seconds from losing his life and would have left behind a 6-month-old and he says one of the hardest things to do was to watch sean collier the m 2i officer ambushed by dzhokhar tsarvaev and his brother and killed on the campus of mit and said it was hard to watch that funeral from the hospital bed

and said that the country and people here welcomed you and your family to the united states and the open that you would turn on us and do what you did to us was really an act of treason. he felt it should have been regarded as such as the highest act against this country that you can commit which is an act of treason against the country. an enso that kind of emotion pouring out of that courtroom today is going to be interesting to see how the victims respond to seeing him and hearing him. this is the first time really hearing his voice and we're human beings all of us. you can form an opinion about a person even the worst of people by listening to them and hearing words from them and maybe it changes how you feel about them. >> el be very interested to see what some of the victim vs to say. going back to what you guys were talking about and ari mentioning why the government did not accept a plea here a lot of people here in massachusetts and i spoke to them coming to the camera positions in the trial, thought it was a royal waste of united states treasury to put

the man on trial for something we all know that he did. there was video evidence of it. and now that we have lernled that he in fact tried to get a plea deal with the government the government said no to that, i think people are going to be frustrated to hear that for two months the court was tied up with this court. a lot of money spent on the prosecution here. the government did get what it wanted which was a death sentence. >> great point, ron. goes to that debate. stay with the special coverage. there were no cameras allowed in the courtroom but nbc news producer tom winter was there today and in the courtroom since the beginning of this notable trial an joins us on the phone. what was it like in the courtroom today when people heard from tsarnaev? >> well i think and i'll kind of probably maybe cut myself shortment the victims on the way to the podium and see that soon and some of the family members to speak about today's proceedings. but just quickly i'll say i think there had been some question. we have heard the folks talk about how their lives impacted the injuries they faced,

everything they have gone through. throughout the past several months. and today the question of what was in tsarnaev's head through all this was answered it was tense. it was quiet. everyone the jurors that came back, the victims, everybody was focused and wanted to hear would he show any apology at all, showing any sort of remorse and his statement is what it is. i think soon enough we'll find out if it's something they'll willing to accept if it helps at all, it's hard to imagine given the injuries they face but it was certainly an unusual and certainly a tense moment in court. >> tom, talk to us about what the judge, the message the judge wanted to send to tsarnaev as we await this news conference. i know some of what he said is no one will remember the teachers were fond of you. what will be remembered is you murdered and maimed innocent people. >> well, judge o'toole is very

direct, very measured on the stand. and he was clearly affected at points by testimony in this case and throughout the trial. and i think today was an opportunity for him to reflect on that and to provide some summary -- >> tom, i'm sorry. we'll go live to this news conference now. >> but the victims can't be with us today and they'd be here to speak for themselves. i just wanted to vent a little bit about the first time we heard his voice today. nobody really realized that we didn't know what he sounded like after two years. and after we heard it we wished we hadn't because the things he had to say were sort of shocking. he talked at first about allah an enthis being the month of forgiveness. and implying that we should all forgive him. and the last thing we wanted to hear was about allah and why he did this in the first place and changed all our lives forever. and then he went on to give a

sort of oscar-type speech thanking the judge and thanking the jury and thanking his legal team and those who couldn't be here and his family for testifying and making and i quote making my life easy for the past two years. well our lives have been anything but easy and our lives will never be the same again. i live a block from the finish line and my neighborhood is changed forever. he threw in an apology to the survivors that seemed insincere and just thrown in because he was supposed to and then ended again with allah talking about leniency. implying that we should now be lenient to him. because allah says so. and i just was unaware that he would get up and say whatever he wanted and that's the law. and i regret having ever wanted

to hear him speak because what he said showed no remorse. no regret. and no empathy for what he's done to our lives. >> can you spell your name? >> lynn julian. lynn julian. >> where were you standing when the bombs went off? >> i live a block from the finish line so i was at the first explosion. and i have traumatic brain injury. permanent hearing loss in both ears. and a back injury and the worst of all is post traumatic stress. >> do you think he should get the death penalty or life? >> i don't think that either of those things are going to change anything for any of us. it's never going to bring back our old lives. i lived in perhaps a false bubble of security that i would go to all the boston events just like so many people and never feel unsafe never worry.

now we feel like we're the police. we are the judge and jury of everyone around us grading their safety level and how much threat they might cause us at any given time just riding the "t" and i'm never going did look at boston or the world again the same and none of us are because they took so much more than innocent people's lives. they took our sense of security. they took our sense of safety. we can never leave our homes again and just take a walk without wondering and judging everybody else that walks by us. >> why -- >> why do you think he spoke today? >> so i would like to speak. my name is scott weissberg. i'm one of the survivors, as well. and i'm from birmingham alabama. i'm a family physician and i specifically came up today to tell my story. i as a family physician have

hidden an invisible injuries which most of the media are not aware of. those injuries for me are bilateral hearing loss for which i wear hearing aids and since august of 2013. i also have a mild traumatic brain injury. and in addition ptsd as well. and part of today for me was to explain what it's been like to live with for the last two years these injuries to all of you i look completely normal. but inside i have significant injuries that i have been living with and going through. and as a physician, and having to go through the struggles of getting diagnosed and having to convince medical professionals what it's like to have injuries and to seek the proper care part of my treatment has been to

make the public aware and also to be an advocate for other survivors so one of my goals and missions ever since this -- since i've been diagnosed which took 16 months to get my diagnosis is to be an advocate for other survivors and for other future events where if somebody has a hearing loss or brain injury where they do go to be treated effectively right from the beginning. and that is one of my main purposes for being here today. and this courtroom and coming from alabama. >> did you want -- >> tsarnaev's speech what did you think of the statement? >> so i was surprised that he spoke. i think most of the survivors were. that he spoke today. he said that he was remorseful. i find that hard to believe since i've come to a lot of the trial. and never really saw that at all

from him. it really does not change anything for me because what he took from me i'm never going to be able to regain. nor what he took from my family. nor from any of us. as well. >> why do you think he spoke? >> i think he spoke because people were sort of expecting that from him. since the -- everybody during the trial was commenting on him not making any comments and his lack of remorse and not -- no facial expression so this was that one last moment for him to kind of just put things aside. >> did he do it for the right reasons? >> i don't think it was genuine but that he will say otherwise. and that's not going to change my impression of him or what he did to us.

basically, as was said by you know, people this morning is what this tragedy has done is it's made us stronger as a survivor community and more importantly, it has made us more resilient and we are still alive. there's four people that aren't but the rest of us are and we as a community are stronger and we are going to continue to heal through this and the main thing for me and speaking was that we will not be forgotten. >> you talked in the court about how your life is completely ruined and in a split second the aftermath of that is -- your life as you knew it what did you it mean to you to be able to stand up in court and say that and he heard you. what did that mean to you? >> to me being able to finally express what i've been holding in for two years was very powerful. it gave me the opportunity to

let not only the media, the defense, the judge, even the jurors have an opportunity to hear from a survivor that basically has these hidden and invincible injuries. when you see me on the street i look completely normal. you know? if i pull out my hearing aids you will see that i wear hearing aids. you know in the brain injury you can't see. it's not something that's visible. the ptsd you are not going to see that. so for me it was the idea of actually being able to physically express all of those feelings that i've been dealing with for two years and verbally being able to express it to the public. >> marathon, you said you're a marathon runner. have you run marathons since boston? >> i have. i came back in 2014.

ran the 2014 marathon with the 415 group which was the group of survivors and i did it again this past year and after the 2014 i started running again marathons like i did before. >> is there anything that you guys wanted to do -- [ inaudible ] >> sincere apology would have been nice. a simple believable apology would have been great. and there was nothing simple about what he said and there was nothing sincere. one thing that we have done you were talking about being proactive and moving forward, scott and i are both on the board of the massachusetts resiliency center so we are taking positive steps to unite the community and what we call our marathon family to continue to grow and continue to heal long after this trial is over. >> the defense said that they had tried to come to a resolution on this issue back in

october and that this thing proceeded and that is to say would have pleaded guilty at that time. do you think that the -- that that should have been accepted? that government offer? i mean that offer from the defense team to the government and such that -- prevented a trial and perhaps some of the -- some of the experience of the trial? >> you know what? today was actually the first day that i learned of that. i was not aware of that before today. and i know that the government had a good reason for going to trial. so i can't fully answer your question. i would like to make my own statement. my name is henry borgard. i'm from chicago, illinois specifically downers grove. and i was out here living out here attending suffolk university at the time of the marathon and i wasn't trying to

be there. i wasn't trying to specktatespectate. i didn't have any friends running. i was walking home from work and i was a victim of circumstance. that being said, i've made a host of friends within our survivor community. they're going to be lifelong friends. they're people that i continually rely on and lean on. and i really want to thank a couple of people or groups i should say. first is my family specifically my mother who as you heard in my victim pact statement today received a phone call from me just three minutes after the explosions went off and i scared her half to death. so i'm sorry, mom. and, thank you for your support. and i also want to thank war dogs of chicago which their organization gifted me my service dog. her name is friday. she's a ptsd service dog. and they generously donated her to me after hearing about my

story. i want to thank the people that have worked tirelessly to get this whole trial to a resolution to capture dzhokhar tsarvaev during the manhunt and i also want to give a sincere thank you to the prosecution staff because they have been absolutely phenomenal. the attorney general's office has been wonderful to all of the survivors. in regards to dzhokhar tsarvaev's statement, my personal opinion is a little bit different than my two compradres here. i was happy he made the statement. i as i said in my personal impact statement, i have forgiven him. i have come to a place of peace and i genuinely hope he does as well. and for me to hear him say that he's sorry, that is enough for

me. and i -- i hope because i still do have faith in humanity including in him, i hope that his words were genuine. i hope that they were heartfelt. i hope that they were as honest as the statement that is you heard today in court from the victims and the survivors. i obviously have no way of knowing that but i take it on faith what he said was genuine. there was a little bit of rhetoric in there. i agree with what you said, absolutely. some of it was hard to hear. you know? but i really -- i was really profoundly affected deeply moved that he did do that because whether we like to acknowledge it or not, his statement like ours takes courage because the entire world is watching us right now and the fact he made a statement and didn't have to do gives him a little bit of credit in my book. so i will answer any questions that you have. >> are you for the death penalty or the life sentence?

>> i'm against the death penalty. i don't believe that someone should be punished for killing people by killing that person. that doesn't make sense to me. i would have rather seen him get a life sentence. that being said i am happy that justice has been served. >> obviously you -- [ inaudible ] speaking to you. >> you know i -- i made the mistake of looking over at him while i was giving my statement and he was looking right at me which is a little disconcerting and i had to resort to reading directly off of my little script i had in front of me after that. i wasn't expecting that being that he hasn't had any real reaction in court except for his aunt. >> what did that feel like? >> you know, he's a human being. i don't know to what extent my forgiveness extends but what i do know is that i believe in second chances and i -- when i

made eye contact with him, it wasn't like looking in the face of a criminal. it was like looking in the face of a boy because i'm going to be 24 in a couple days. happy birthday. and i -- he's younger than me and that's been something that's really been a hang-up for me to reconcile the fact i was at the second explosion. to reconcile the fact that the man, the boy who planted that bomb, that blew up in front of me, is younger than i am. so that's something that's been very difficult to process. >> last question. >> is there anything for your victim statements that you thought could save -- [ inaudible ] >> i just feel like that the bubble has burst. perhaps we didn't know we lived in a bubble before.

perhaps we took our security an our sense of safety for granted every time we went out to fenway park or td garden or just to boston common. and now, we take nothing for granted. every time we go out, we are in flight or fight. we are hyper aware of everything going on around us an it's both embarrassing and exhausting. >> agreed. >> and so basically, in my speech basically as a family physician which is what i am as a marathon runner that day, i emphasized the idea that my injuries that i suffered and continue to are invisible and hidden, what it's like to live with those and the challenges of basically presenting myself as like one of you. and what's really going on on the inside on a day-to-day

basis. and how this is going to be a lifelong process of relearning and reinventing myself and refiguring out my new identity and not only mine but as a survivor community. and that's my main mission is so that we're not forgotten. because you can't see those injuries. and that we need resources that we're going to need to continue to seek medical care professional opinions and if the one good can come out of this from this event is there's recognition of how to diagnose sudden hearing loss mild traumatic brain injury and how to get the care so people don't have to search and struggle where to turn to for that medical care and expertise. >> we hope our work with the massachusetts resiliency center continues for education.

>> and that is the mainstay for the survivor community going forward. >> thank you guys. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> you've been listening to really quite an extraordinary press conference there of several survivors of the boston bombing, lynn julian scott weissberg and henry bo reregard. the reaction to the sentencing of dzhokhar tsarvaev and his decision to speak up in court today. ron mott is still with us. and, ron, you had predicted that they would feel like that apology from dzhokhar tsarvaev was too little too late and you were largely right based on what we just heard. >> reporter: they said it fell flat. at least two of the three folks that spoke that the apology itself especially because i think it started with allah and in reference to the god that he serves that i think some of these victims and their families are probably offended by that

and instead of having him directly first thing out of his mouth they probably say should have been an apology. i'm sorry to you and then perhaps close with his allegiance to his god. the one gentleman that you heard speak there from alabama who young man himself and says he's always been struck by just how young dzhokhar tsarvaev he is about three years younger than he is. he was 19 at the time it happened two years ago and i think people were left with the impression what in the world happened to young people not just here but around the world, who have been driven to do such criminal acts of killing people. we're obviously dealing with that down in south carolina. aechb as we speak today. but again, you saw the mix of opinions. a couple of people thought that the apology fell flat and then the third gentleman said he was happy to hear from him and should be given some credit for standing up and making a statement to the people and certainly could have used that opportunity as timmy mcveigh did

when he had an opportunity to rant about why he did what he did. he offered an apology. however if they felt it fell flat and extraordinary day of emotion. we have heard a lot of emotion throughout the course of the trial. it was especially poignant today because now you're looking at a man that 12 men and women have voted to send to his death which probably will occur sometime in the next ten, 15 years given the length of time for the average execution. so there's a lot left here to be said about dzhokhar tsarvaev. what the defense was trying to get the jury to vote for life without prison says if you want to forget about him, the best way to do that to vote for life with prison without parole and go to colorado and never to be heard from again. guys? >> ron, you're right that the opinions were mixed in that trio of lynn scott and henry. but i was noticing the body

language and the facial responses as the others were talking and they seemed to be -- they seemed to be very much a community. you know, you guys at the table, i think you probably saw this too, they spoke about the word phrase survivor community over and over. i heard the 415 group and the marathon family. this survivor community seems very deeply bonded very much relying on each other to get them through the difficult times. ron, have you been out there, have you seen this sort of survivor community in action being together supporting each other through all of this trial? >> reporter: oh this was very much a life defining moment for these survivors. there is a fraternity, a family now, a large extended family of people touched by the tragedy and absolutely conferring with one another, probably on a daily basis some of them about how this changed their life and helping each other go through these tough times and many of them face. you can see from some of these

just the few of these witnesses who spoke today how their daily lives have been made so much more difficult because of what happened here, especially for those who suffered from emotional trauma and brain injuries as the young man says you can't see those. we can clearly see the folks who were -- who have lost limbs. about 17 of those. and hundreds of others who had deep gashes in their skin taken out because of the shrapnel and the like and a lot of those folks bonded and become friends for life because of what happened to them. some of them shied away from the media. they didn't want to express publicly how they felt about all of this and some of them very much felt it's ka that are tick to go before the media and camera and tell people what it means to be victimized in this way but someone who's on a mission that a lot of us can't understand that killed people and severely changed the lives of many others. negatively. but a lot of them feeling that as they come together they're going to be even stronger as a result of what happened to them.

they won't get their legs become. >> i'm going to cut in to go to the scene of the attorney general speaking now. >> the judge imposed a sentence in this case. and so we have arrived at the end of another chapter in this long process. and in these criminal proceedings. many of you who listened to what was happening in the courtroom today, today really was a day not just for the conclusion of this peacefully but for the victims to have a voice and many of them had submitted victim pact statements but they also had submitted, made oral statements today so i just want to say that today was an incredibly powerful day. the judge formally imposed his sentence, the death penalty for certain counts as well as then consecutive life sentences on other counts. but critically important was the voices that we heard from the

victims who talked an't the impact of the crime. and what they have been through and what this has meant to them. and from the very beginning, and i just recently came from a -- we had a meeting with many of the victims i noted and i said from the very beginning, i have been so touched and so moved and inspired by their strength their courage, and their resiliency. and also voices of hope. in that courtroom today, i felt proud that not just to be a boston ian but an american because you heard a number of victims say not only are we boston strong but we're america strong. i hope that the presentation of this case in terms of viewing all of the evidence has really exhibited again what a fair and impartial jury system we have in this country. and we believe that at the end of the day the punishment that was rendered by the jury

appropriately fitted the crime. a crime of terrorism. a crime that was not religiously motivated. and a crime that was intended to coerce and intimidate the country but the response is otherwise. finally, i just want to conclude by thanking the fbi, my colleague here, special agent in charge vince lizzi as well as the atf, state police boston pd, all the other law enforcement agencies that we have worked with from the very beginning. they've worked tirelessly along with my prosecution team. the assistant u.s. attorneys who presented the case in court and have done tremendous work. and we hope that that was really on display for all to see our system of justice. thank you, vince. >> thanks. good afternoon, everybody. you know from the moment those bombs detonated on boylston street, the victims, survivors and their families have had to deal with unthinkable pain and

overcome countless obstacles. and while there's no one size fits all healing process i do think that there are certain events that help them move forward from you know that horrific day. we all know that there's nothing in the world, nothing at all to take away their pain or return things things to the way they were including today's sentence but i hope that today's proceedings can serve as a milestone as they continue in their healing process and let everybody know who was impacted by the savage attack the fbi family we'll keep them in our thoughts and prayers. thank you. >> yes? >> what do you think about what -- >> well i don't want to venture a personal opinion on this but in general, what i was struck more was by what he didn't say. he didn't renounce terrorism.

he didn't renounce violent extremism and he couched his comments in line with allah and allah's views which give it a religious tone and there was nothing as you heard judge o'toole say in the courtroom, there was nothing about this crime that was islam associated. and so that's what i was struck by more. >> what can you say there was nothing religious that motivated this crime given all of the references to allah, to mohammed koran has was made by others -- >> that is a skewed view of the religion of islam. that is not what islam is all about. and so when individuals utilize that, it is a radicalized view of that ideology. it is a radical ideology which really isn't at the heart of what is truly a peaceful and loving religion. >> is it true that the defense did offer to have him plead

guilty and apologize prior to the start of the trial? >> she mentioned that in court and i don't want to get into discussions that attorneys have behind the scenes not only in this but in many criminal cases. what i will say is that statement as it was made in court was not cleatly accurate and it was incomplete. >> was the part about the apology inaccurate? >> i really don't want to specify what that comment referred to. really. >> carmen -- >> it wasn't an apology. >> is this case made the case for cameras in federal courtrooms? >> in terms of would it be more appropriate? i wouldn't want to voice my own opinions on cameras in the courtroom. i will say that because of our limitation that is we don't have cameras in the courtroom, you

all do an amazing job of tweeting the process so someone outside the courtroom feels as if they're inside the courtroom reading, you know, your messaging and in terms of the testimony, the evidence that's being presented but, yeah it would be best to have a public display but i'm not speaking for the department right now. >> -- april 15th, 2013? are we in more danger than ever? >> no. what people do see is the concern that we have with you know, the threats coming from jaefr seas. i mean those continue to exist and we continue to chase those down so you know i would say that the fbi just locks that the as yet another reason to make terrorism a top priority and we don't take our foot off the gas pet pedal. >> do we know where the bombs were made? do we have a fbi accounting of the gun powder was -- >> no.

i think the only thing that's out there is what was introduced in court as evidence. anything beyond that -- >> forthcoming -- >> no. i don't see a report forthcoming getting into speculation and anything factual was presented in the courtroom. >> given -- >> next for tsarnaev? >> well when's actually next is post-trial motions so those will be considered next. they'll probably file a notice of appeal certain time frame in which i believe to do it. i believe the 14 days after the judgment on the sentence. and then after the decisions are made on the motion the post-trial motions, motion for a new trial, motion set aside the verdict, so forth, and i'm sure others they will then file -- it will enter the appellate process and file a brief and then the government will have an opportunity to respond and oral arguments will be set and then the presses will go on. >> if you don't press here -- some survivors outside of the court said they were

disappointed that that has to happen. they have to hear from him again and see from him and if he would fade away from this point on. can you talk to the folks that express those feelings? >> sure. i think for those folks really concerned about the appellate process, i like them to understand that the appellate process is very very different from the pril process. you know the jury trial system. it's a written process so it's really the lawyers filing the briefs and the responses to those briefs. there's one real public proceeding which is an oral argument and it's between the parties, the government and the defense arguing the appellate issues that occurs in the first circuit. which is here at the federal courthouse. usually each side given 15 minutes, 20 minutes, the issues are lengthy as they decide the pel lat court rules and then the appellate judges take time to

decide the case and write an opinion. and then the opinion issues so it's a lengthy written process where there really isn't this kind of opportunity for a lot of public and media presence so it's very different and i hope that that will bring some degree of comfort to them in terms of the process being different. >> did the team ever get to -- question tsarnaev on the stand. had to say -- >> well like the u.s. attorney i was struck more by what he did not say. it's one thing to apologize or to say that you feel bad about the suffering you caused. but he did this for political reasons. this was a politically motivated act and at no point in his statement did he renounce the reasons for which he committed this act. he never renounced terrorism. he did not repudiate violent

extremism. it's important to keep in mind this is somebody when's being sentenced to death for the acts that he had taken against specific individuals. he had addressed the remarks to the individuals and we didn't hear a word about the reasons for why he did this crime. >> did you ever think he would take the stand? >> take the stand and testify? >> yeah. >> that was something that was entirely up to him and to his -- in consultation with his counsel. we -- we were ready for him to take it or not. as he saw felt. >> did you -- can you speak to the incident in front with the man with the meat cleaver? any connection it might have. >> he's in bpd custody right now. today's threat environment as we mentioned earlier, we can't overlook anything. so we have sent some people from the joint terrorism task force down there and they'll work towith them to figure out a terrorism

nexus if at all. >> it's unclearsome. >> yeah. we sent them down there and we'll work with them as we have in the past. >> -- with resources so focused on islamic terrorism and -- inspired terrorism, we lose sight of the -- likely terrorism, such as -- [ inaudible ] >> no. there's no concern. i can tell you that whenever we sit down and look at the threats and prioritize and decide how to an i allocate the resources, domestic side receives just as much attention. we won't divert any resources from that. >> where is tsarnaev now physically going to be held now that the sentencing -- does he immediately go to a different location? where is he? >> do you know? yeah. go ahead. >> he will be held in custody and at the -- handed over to the bureau of prisons who will take

him to an institution where he'll begin serving his sentence and that will begin right awe. >> is that indiana now? >> it's up to the bureau of prisons where he goes. eventually he will go to the institution in terre haute. whether he goes there immediately or after a period of time is up to the bureau of prisons and that's a decision that they make according to their own criteria. >> what would be the alternative for now? where would he be until he goes to terre haute? >> maybe in florence for a period of time as was discussed at the trial. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we have been listening to federal authorities from the u.s. attorney's office in boston and the fbi discussing today's hearing regarding the death sentence for dzhokhar tsarvaev. we turn now to caleb mason, a former federal prosecutor. welcome. we wanted to go to you discussing this from the perspective of victims. we've talked to reporters on the

ground there. now, heard from the u.s. attorney herself carmen ortiz. one, yes or no question to you, legally, would you advise the defendant in this position to have given that testimony today, yes or no? >> yes. and i would expand on that. as i suggested i think talking about this during the trial, i would have put him on to apologize in the guilt phase. if he wanted he to do was apologize, that would be the time to have done it. as to whether or not he speaks today, doesn't have an affect on the outcome. i don't think the attorneys have an objection. >> caleb, the other news out of the press conference that we just heard that's legally important is all news channels covering the fact that the defendant's counsel here said in court, hey, we tried to plea bargain for life from the beginning with remorse with apology and reported out a factual statement of one side. as we know it's often more

complex than that. they hold a job not unlike the one you held and she said in the press conference essentially that statement was not completely accurate. it was incomplete. the notion of a life sentence plea. tell us your view of this back and forth. >> well, based on what we know about judy clark's prior case that is what she has done in similar cases with other clients. and she has been successful in other cases with other clients. jared laufer in in arizona is the other one. she's persuaded the government to agree to a guilty plea. without having to go through the trial. and thus avoid the death penalty. now, i have no idea exactly what was said in those initial negotiations. we do know that it is up to according to department of justice policy it is up to main justice, that is officials in

the justice department washington, d.c. to make final decisions in death penalty cases so certainly the decision about how to proceed was vetted at the very highest levels of the department. if there is ever a dispute about how and exactly what was said about how that negotiation went down and exactly what was said my guess is that earliest we would see it would be in some sort of a post-conviction motion based on alleged ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to negotiate a plea deal. that's a common claim made in such petitions. but as i said here before i have a hard time seeing how that one flies when judy clark is your lawyer. >> yep. >> i would imagine if she wants to -- if she wants to allege that there was any kind of bad faith on the part of the government, i mean she's probably free to do that. if she wants to in a press conference.

i doubt she will to be honest. i think we may have heard the last word on this for a while. >> yeah. as we have mentioned, dzhokhar tsarvaev did issue a form of apology today. we heard from survivors earlier. two of whom said essentially too little too late particularly taking issue with the fact that he framed this in a sort of religious context starting off with his praise for allah and the u.s. attorney also mentioning that piece of his apology. would the language that he chose to use today, is that something that his lawyer would have vetted or would this have really just been coming directly from him? >> well as far as the legal advice that he would get from his attorneys prior to this proceeding, it would be you have the right to make a statement. prior to sentencing. i mean pretty much that's it. >> because that the point, it's a done deal nothing can help him. >> that's right.

i mean he's going to be sentenced one way or another. every defendant has the right to stand up and speak to the judge prior to sentencing. as to the contents of that statement, i of that statement, i mean i think it would be wise certainly if you intended to pursue an appeal to advise your client not to include inflammatory language, you know regarding his martyrdom or anything like that. but otherwise no it really doesn't change the legal facts regarding the sufficiency of the evidence for conviction. i mean again, i think if you were talking to your client about potentially apologizing the time to do it would have been when the jury had a chance to hear it. one of the things we've heard consistently from the jury is they found his lack of apology, lack of apparent remorse and lack of testimony at the sentencing phase to be quite disturbing and a significant factor in their reasoning. i mean if this is what the guy

thought, you know, i'm sorry and i feel really bad for the hurt i've caused. he should have said it to the jury. >> you know, caleb one of the comments -- >> it is conventional wisdom not to do that. >> one of the comments made really stuck out to me. death won't make this any easier for her. and a i know many in the community are saying the same thing. it seems studies say the death speblt penalty is not a deterrent to crime. and keeping them on death row is much more expensive than a life sentence. seems like a lot of the reason we do it is to make survivors and other citizens feel better. and when you see something like lynn julian says this is not making me feel better. what he took i cannot regain. so maybe we should send him to a super max where life will be much harder for him. >> the arguments for and against

the death penalty, based on statistical evidence do not seem to support any kind of broad deterrent argument. it does not appear based on the data we have comparing jurisdictions that have had and then abolished the death penalty that that has much of an effect. the traditional argument that supported it was the pure retribution argument. that this is simply the right the state has to exact this punishment for these particular types of crimes. and that i would emphasize is based on a right that the state asserts. it is not based on any sort of psychological satisfaction that the victims might gain. so while i certainly understand the point that you might question the validity of the death penalty when even the victims are saying that it does not improve their situation psychologically, that has not historically been the purpose of the death penalty.

retribution and vengeance enacted by the state. which is why the cases are captioned united states versus tsarnaev or the people versus tsarnaev. this is a great example of why the country is having a conversation regarding the death penalty and why over time and i'm talking the last few decade t number of jurisdictions applying the death penalty has contracted and the number of executions actually carried out in a given year keeps going down. and this is a case if there was ever a case that was a clear candidate for the death penalty, it was this one. and even in this case, even the people most directly affected some of the victims are saying we just don't see that it makes that much of a difference. >> thank you as always for your insight. we appreciate it. >>. let's now bring in tom sanderson. center for strategic and international studies. tom always good to see you. it has been quite an emotional

day. we all just heard from some of the victims there in a very powerful few minutes and for many of them today is some closer. but the big takeaway is none of them will ever be the same. we heard from jillian who lived a mile from the bombing when it happened and she talked about now she has a loss of hearing, p ptsd among other things. and she said i will never walk out of my house again and not question everything around me. is this the new reality we live in that we always have to have our guard up? >> certainly in big cities we do that are targets of terrorists like this whether home grown or people coming from overseas or returning fighters. it is important to think about the ripple effects. it is not just the three individuals that died and their families or even those who lost limbs there. it goes way beyond that. and i did read all the comments tweeted out by the "new york times" reporter there. it's quite impactful. yes people do think about this.

it changes the way you think about immigrants, your neighbors. so it can have never negative effects and of course not something we're going to see an end to for a long time. >> that comment was so powerful to me. her bubble is burst. she used to take her safety for granted. now she cannot. she is hyper aware. and it is exhausting. and this seems to me to represent what americans from coast to coast have felt post 911. we are doing the best we can do put that egg back together. but how can we do a little bit more to restore that sense of peace that americans once had? >> well certainly by reducing the number of individuals who could potentially attack us again either at home or from overseas. that is an ongoing effort. we're doing it i think fairly well on the u.s. homeland front. not so well overseas where it is much more complicated. you know but following 911 we've all had discussions with

lots of meshamericans in different parts of the country. people feel the vulnerability in uneven ways. in smaller towns i think they feel less of a threat. but in the bigger cities especially on the east coast, the prime target offenses of new york washington people feel any day there could be another major attack along the lines of the 911. that is far less likely but it doesn't have to be that likely to give people a sense of the vulnerability. an attack any place could really just rock the country. >> someone who thinks a lot about the mind set of terrorist, i was wondering what you thought of the tsarnaev's statement today in court expressing remorse. some of the survivors we heard earlier weren't buying it. but others are grateful that he expressed at least a little bit of remorse here. is that unusual to see any sort

of apology issued from a terrorist murderer? >> it is. and i'm surprised that he did say it in fact. and i don't think a lot of other folks could do this. i don't know if this was a last ditch effort for him, certainly naive in that respect to maybe get clemsy here. but obviously he's already been sentenced here and that was the jury's recommendation though the judge obviously has some influence there. so maybe it was an effort to do that. i'm very surprised he did to that. i don't think we would see that hard core isis fighter or hard core al qaeda fighters. thank you but this individual who lived for a time in boston and the neighborhoods and maybe he felt this is something that would be useful and maybe his attorneys encouraged him to do this. but it was uncommon i think to see that. >> you mentioned hard core jihadis and fbi talking about the priority of the terrorism.

but we're speaking here on a day when the "new york times" reports that more americans have been killed on the home front since 911 by the hate groups than by jihaddy terrorism. they are likely to go forward with a hate crimes charge in charleston. not necessarily terror. but a lot of concerns about other types of terrorism and domestic threat that doesn't come from people using the name of islam, however incorrectly. >> absolutely. i read that article in the times today. and it is a good reminder that in fact beyond charleston we do have a lot of domestic terrorists here and extremists who are targeting immigrants and targeting minority groups and we do have to be very mindful and the police indicate in the polling they referenced there that they co-feel these domestic groups in the u.s. are the bigger threat and the numbers bare that out. so we have to maintain watch for

any kind of extremism whether muslim orient order right wing white supremacist oriented. there are lots of people out there who seek to use violence against people they feel are their enemies. >> and the detection and disruption. and then arm in arm with the federal prosecutors who decide how to pursue these cases. tom, thank you for joining our special coverage today on the boston marathon bombing. this is the skl. we'll have a lot more on this story coming up. now with alex wagner starts right now. we're following breaking news this afternoon out of boston. after a judge formally sentenced boston bomber dzhokhar tsarnaev to death, tsarnaev broke his two year silence. in a major surprise he addressed the court this afternoon apologizing for the terrorist

attack that killed three and wounded more than 260 others. he told survivors and family members, i'd like to now apologize for the victims and their o survivors. i am guilty along with my brother. i asked allah for --. victims and families listened to his statement. afterwards survivors of the bombing addressed the media. >> the last thing we wanted to hear was about allah and why he did this in the first place and changed all of our lives forever. what he said showed no remorse, no regret and no empathy for what he's done to our lives. >> he said that he was remorseful. i find that hard to believe since i've come to a lot of