16 episodes
United States v. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Heather Frizzell
-
- True Crime
-
-
3.5 • 11 Ratings
-
A supplemental podcast for the website USvTsarnaev.org, dedicated to discussing the Boston Marathon bombing and the court case United States v. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Frequent topics are developments in Dzhokhar's appeal, new findings on our independent investigation into the case, legal opinions from an in-house defense attorney, and more.
-
Appealcast - First Circuit Decision Extravaganza, Pt. 2
Continuation of Part 1. Heather and Tom Frizzell further discuss the July 31, 2020 First Circuit Court decision to overturn Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev's death sentence. In this episode, we talk about the remainder of the appellate rulings and the significance of the "smaller" issues, including the far-reaching consequences of anti-Muslim bias, new case details revealed by the decision, and the vacation of three of Jahar's convictions in the guilt phase. We also discuss the political reaction to the decision, next steps for the appeal, and what you can do to help.
Read the First Circuit decision here: http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-6001P-01A.pdf
http://usvtsarnaev.org
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
Episode music: "The Complex" by Kevin MacLeod
http://www.incompetech.com -
Appealcast - First Circuit Decision Extravaganza, Pt. 1
Heather and Tom Frizzell discuss the July 31, 2020 First Circuit Court decision to overturn Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev's death sentence. In this episode, we talk about the issues the defense won on, as well as the four biggest takeaways from the decision: Judge O'Toole's failure to properly vet jurors for bias during voir dire, the debate over failure to change venue, new revelations about Tamerlan Tsarnaev's involvement in the 2011 Waltham triple murders, and Tom's theory that Jahar was denied effective assistance of counsel. We also discuss why it's important that Jahar never pled guilty, the special defenses of duress and undue influence, Heather's critique of "radicalization" as a concept, why the taint of inaccurate pretrial publicity is still haunting this case, the First Circuit judges' own anti-Muslim biases, and more. Continued in Part 2.
Read the First Circuit decision here: http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/16-6001P-01A.pdf
http://usvtsarnaev.org
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
Episode music: "The Complex" by Kevin MacLeod
http://www.incompetech.com -
Appealcast #3 - Jahar's Appeal Hearing
Tom "Attorney Dad" Frizzell joins Heather for a legal breakdown of Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev's December 2019 appeal hearing. We discuss the most potent of the appellate team's legal arguments, including the Patriarca rule, the failure of Judge O'Toole to ask potential jurors content-based questions about their exposure to pretrial publicity, and the two seated jurors who lied during voir dire. No ruling has been made yet, but we also talk about potential steps forward, whether or not the First Circuit judges rule in Jahar's favor.
http://usvtsarnaev.org
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
Episode music: "The Complex" by Kevin MacLeod
http://www.incompetech.com -
Orientalism, Islamophobia, and the Tsarnaev Case, Part 3: The Micro, Continued
In this three-part podcast miniseries, Tom "Attorney Dad" Frizzell plays host and invites his daughter Heather to share what she learned in her Master's program in International Studies at the University of Washington. She discusses how writing her academic thesis on Dzhokhar "Jahar" Tsarnaev's case helped her better understand not just the Boston Marathon bombing, but the War on Terror, American foreign policy, and systemic discrimination against Muslims.
In the final installment, she wraps up her discussion of the "micro": how the mainstream media coverage of Jahar's case fanned the flames of misinformation, which aided prosecutors in their bid to sentence him to death in 2015. Topics covered include bias from journalists, particularly from disgraced Boston Globe columnist Kevin Cullen and in the controversial July 2013 Rolling Stone article "Jahar's World;" understanding Jahar's so-called "jihadist rhetoric" as an invention of Western law enforcement; solving the riddle of the boat note, the most damning piece of evidence used against Jahar at trial; why his legal team leaned into Orientalist stereotypes to defend him; how national American politics influenced the Obama administration's stance on pursuing the death penalty for Jahar; the dubious nature of "terrorism experts" and their use by the government at trial; the dangers inherent to private intelligence firms; a hot take on "jihadists" in general, and more.
(Correction: I misspeak in the episode, saying Dr. Matthew Levitt was employed by the Center for Middle East Policy. He was employed by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.)
Read Heather's thesis here: https://usvtsarnaev.org/2019/10/29/regimes-of-truth-why-everything-known-about-the-boston-marathon-bombing-is-wrong/
http://usvtsarnaev.org
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
Episode music: "The Complex" by Kevin MacLeod
http://www.incompetech.com -
Orientalism, Islamophobia, and the Tsarnaev Case; or, What I learned in Grad School, Part 2: The Micro
Heather dives into her process for writing her thesis, the hospital confession notes, prejudiced FBI protocols, the dubious nature of the High Value Detainee Interrogation Group, how the politics of policing Jahar relates to Guantanamo, and just how far the devastating effects of Orientalism reach.
Read Heather's thesis here: https://usvtsarnaev.org/2019/10/29/regimes-of-truth-why-everything-known-about-the-boston-marathon-bombing-is-wrong/
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
http://usvtsarnaev.org -
Orientalism, Islamophobia, and the Tsarnaev Case; or, What I Learned in Grad School, Part 1: The Macro
In this three-part podcast miniseries, Tom “Attorney Dad” Frizzell plays host and invites his daughter Heather to share what she learned in her Master’s program in International Studies at the University of Washington. She discusses how writing her academic thesis on Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev’s case helped her better understand not just the Boston Marathon bombing, but the War on Terror, American foreign policy, and systemic discrimination against Muslims.
In Part One, she tackles the “macro”: how the big picture issues influenced the US government’s treatment of Jahar as a suspect in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing. She discusses colonialism’s legacy in modern geo-politics, definitions of Orientalism and Islamophobia, Orientalist perceptions of the Russian-Chechen conflict, the flawed definition of “terrorism,” how the policies of America’s War on Terror were specifically crafted to oppress Muslims, and more.
Read Heather’s thesis here: https://usvtsarnaev.org/2019/10/29/regimes-of-truth-why-everything-known-about-the-boston-marathon-bombing-is-wrong/
http://twitter.com/USvTsarnaev
http://facebook.com/USvTsarnaev
http://usvtsarnaev.org
Customer Reviews
Could be great but falls way short
The first 15 min of a podcast that is an in depth investigation into a bombing doesn’t need to be a content warning or statement of journalistic intent. You teach writing professionally?! Do what good writers do and show us not tell us.
Phenomenal Work
I’ve been extremely interested in this case since Covid woke me up about the media lies. I’ve searched for podcasts about the Boston False Flag for 3 years. The media suppressed the truth about the brothers. Wake up people. This podcast should have way more views. It’s sad that Obama’s Netflix is how state propaganda is being laid. Michele McPhee has done great work but she thinks the brothers are guilty. She knows they aren’t but can’t say that.
Don’t waste your time
I really wanted to enjoy this podcast as the subject matter is of interest. Unfortunately, there’s not much to like. I made it to two episodes and could not bear it any longer. I should have known when her first “expert” was her father. Not a terribly objective way to start. This podcast presents itself as some type of objective analysis of the case but is entirely filled with her one-sided commentary. There’s no attempt to explore both sides, only an attempt to make whatever arguments she can make for her side. To boot, she is educated as a creative writer and appears to have no investigative journalism skills and it shows. She makes interpretations of law and evidence that she has no qualifications to make and questions seasoned attorneys on grounds that it “didn’t make sense” to her and little more. Just not worth your time unless you’re looking for a largely uninformed, uneducated, and singular viewpoint discussion about an interesting issue that deserves much better.