Tsarnaev Trial Testimony: When the Wrong Word Goes in the Right Ear One Thing Leads to Another

My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. If they say “Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood, let us ambush the innocent without cause; let us swallow them alive like Sheol, even whole, as those who go down to the pit; we will find all kinds of precious wealth, we will fill our houses with spoil; throw in your lot with us, we shall all have one purse.” My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from the path, for their feet run to evil and they hasten to shed blood. Indeed it is useless to spread the baited net in the sight of any bird; but they lie in wait for their own blood; they ambush their own lives. So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; it takes away the life of its possessors.   Proverbs 1: 10-19

Four years after the fact, we’re still working to figure out the hidden purpose behind the faked bombing at the 2013 Boston Marathon. Some have looked very far afield to other countries and other governments for possible reasons. Some have surmised, and I, in part, agree with them, that the reason was to test martial law and justify the removal of certain rights and freedoms Americans have always enjoyed.

Yesterday, before sunset, I took a walk in the woods near my apartment. The woods is small, smack in the middle of the city. This translates a feeling of safety for those who prefer to walk alone. A trail of sand and shells, trucked in for that purpose, winds through it.

While watching the path under my feet, I stopped upon seeing the top of a large specimen of shell I like to collect. Only the top quarter of the shell was visible; I had no way of knowing if the rest was intact. I had to dig.

This is what it’s like when I read certain transcripts from the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and why I continue to do it. Like the perfectly intact shell that lay partially hidden at my feet last evening, a little digging in the trial transcripts can expose larger truths from seemingly unrelated statements made by various individuals under oath.

The deception, with tact… Just what are you trying to say? 

  from the song “One Thing Leads to Another” by The Fixx

The Boston Athletic Association, or BAA, is an organization that was formed in 1887 to promote health and fitness. Today, this is still its principle aim. One area of BAA operation is the conducting of running and racing events, most notably the Boston Marathon.

Thomas Grilk, BAA executive director, was the first person to testify for the prosecution at the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. His testimony provided a detailed description of the marathon from an organizational and historic viewpoint.

Following opening statements as it did, wherein Tsarnaev’s own attorney had inexplicably and inexcusably said of her own client “it was him,” I doubt anyone on the jury was even listening.

Although I found Grilk’s testimony dry and tedious, it was informative. I didn’t appreciate just how informative until another witness who testified that same day said a little too much. Her words gave added significance to some of the facts presented by Grilk.

The government had a reason for every person they put on the witness stand and the order in which they did so. It just didn’t always work to their advantage.

Q.  All right. Now, had you ever been to the marathon before 2013?

A.  No; it was my first time going.

Q.  But are you familiar with that area?

A.  I’m very familiar with that area. My mother works on Newbury Street.  She’s worked in Boston for a long time, and I usually — I made a habit of going into work with her and just shopping in the district. So I was very familiar with the area.

Q.  All right. But you had never been to the marathon before?

A.  No.

Q.  All right. So what made you go that year?

A.  My Aunt Carmen Acabbo was running, and it was the first time she’d ever ran. And it was her first marathon ever. And we just wanted to support her. We were so proud of her. She had never done anything like that before.    –Sydney Corcoran 

Thomas Grilk’s testimony is rather lengthy, so for time’s sake I’m just going to include certain questions, in the order in which they were asked at trial. Omitting some questions/answers in no way changes the meaning or impact of his testimony.  Anyone who wishes to read his entire transcript can do so as it is readily available on the web.

Q.  And what was the general layout of the course back then?

A  The course is largely unchanged since 1897. It’s a little bit longer now because the marathon distance was standardized in the 1920s at 26 miles, 385 yards, the distance we know today. It first started in Ashland, Mass., and followed the route that it follows today. When the course had to be lengthend to meet the standard distance for a marathon, that moved the start out to Hopkinton, Mass., which is where it starts today.

Q.  And so in describing the history of the marathon, what else has changed over the years in terms of the layout or organization of the marathon?

A.  Well, as I say, the course itself hasn’t changed really very much, but the size of the race, I suppose, is the most notable change. It has grown from 15 runners in 1897 to tens of thousands each year now. If we go back to around the year 2000, it had grown to about 17K runners, and over the ensuing decade grew to 27K runners. So it is a much bigger event than it once was.

Q.  How would you describe the significance of the Boston Marathon?

A.  The marathon has a different significance, I’m sure, for a great many different people. For runners, it is the only marathon outside of the Olympic Games and the World Championships for which one needs to qualify in order to run, for the most part. For in excess of 80 percent of the field, it is necessary for somebody to have run a marathon somewhere else, and done it in a time standard that is set for their age and gender. So it’s an aspiration for a great many people. And the qualifying standards are difficult, so it’s a challenge for someone to do, and it is seen as quite an accomplishment by people who do it.

My Aunt Carmen Acabbo was running, and it was the first time she’d ever ran. And it was her first marathon ever. And we just wanted to support her. We were so proud of her. She had never done anything like that before.”  – – Sydney Corcoran, under oath

Grilk continues answering:

The significance is different for others…

Instead of saying what I would have expected him to say after that sentence, Grilk seems to take his answer in another direction. You’ll understand what I believe he left out as you continue reading this post.

The significance is different for others. There are people who come out every year to work on the race, to volunteer. There are between 8500 and 10K people, depending on field size, who come out and volunteer each year. And many of them come back year after year. There’s a great commitment to it there.

For people who live along the route, it is a day to come out and have one of the first days of spring when one can get outdoors and perhaps cheer for an event and for some athletes that are going by their door.

Attorney Chakravarty then asks Mr. Grilk what day of the year the race falls on and what the significance is of the race being on Patriot’s Day.

And then this:

Q.  You mentioned that it was one of the – – the Boston Marathon is one of the few that requires a qualification. Are there other distinguishing aspects of the Boston Marathon versus other marathons around the world?

Here, again, is another juncture where I would have expected Grilk to say something I know he is leaving out. It is the same information I alluded to having been left out earlier. I will point out what this information is when Grilk finally says it.

A.  Well, it is among the largest and it is also one that attracts some of the finest competitors in the world. So it is a combination of being an elite race with professional runners competing for prize money, as well as a mass-participation race for a great many people, for those who are able to qualify. And there are very few such races around the world that have that combination of size and high-performance participation. (And for a third time, Grilk leaves out some information that would have been perfectly appropriate to say here.)

Q. Can you describe a little bit about what that balance is, the ratio is of competitors in terms of whether they’re elite runners or just competitive runners who are running for time or other runners?

A.  The number of elite runners is rather small. So each year for the men’s and women’s open division, the people who are competing for prize money, there are 15 to 20 in each of these categories who might have some chance, not necessarily of winning but of winning some money. Maybe 30 would have an opportunity to win money. There’s a wheelchair competition as well, and there is a slightly smaller number of elite athletes competing for money there. About 80 percent of the field, a little more than that, is made up of people who have come in through open registration, which is to say that they have run another marathon in the past, and within the preceding 18 months or so, that meets the qualifying time for their age and gender.

And finally, Grilk says what would have been appropriate and would have made more sense to say much sooner in his testimony. He says it – and he does not elaborate, nor is he asked to:

About half of the rest of the field is made up of charity runners who are running either in the charity program operated by the BAA or that operated by our principal sponsor John Hancock. Other runners who are in that additional percentage come from running clubs here, from cities and towns along the way, international runners coming through tour groups. In general, many of the people who are instrumental in allowing the marathon to go forward by providing that assistance, it seems fair that they should have some opportunity to designate some of the people who will run.

Now, I want you to notice how Chakravarty starts off wording his next question as well as what the question ends up being while keeping in mind Grilk’s last answer:

Q.  So, just on that point, do you – – can you describe generally what that course is from Hopkinton to Boston?

Did you catch that? “Just on that point” means the attorney is still going to have Grilk talk about this same subject: the makeup of the field of runners. But then Chakravarty stutters – – and takes the question in a totally different direction, asking about the route again for the third time after Grilk has already said, when asked about the course: 1) “The course is largely unchanged since 1897” and 2) “Well, as I say, the course itself hasn’t changed really very much…”

This topic of charity runners and the Boston Marathon is big and it is touchy. The more I read about it, the more it spoke to me of motive. After all, as Winston Churchill once said, “Never let a good tragedy go to waste.”

image

 

So a record amount, nearly double in fact, was raised in 2014, the year after the alleged bombing. How interesting.

I’m willing to bet many, if not most, are not aware of the ugly side of fundraising for charity. I, unfortunately, am. Here it is: many who host and work tirelessly for charities are, simply put, narcissists. Fundraisers and charity events allow people to rub shoulders with important, powerful and wealthy individuals. This field of endeavor is a magnet for narcissists, both overt and covert types. Charity events can provide a smorgasborg of narcissistic supply, for those of you who have studied psychology and or lived throught the hell of a narcissistic family member or two whose charity work makes you want to vomit.

Don’t get me wrong and think I am sour grapes toward anyone who tries to raise money for the less-fortunate. We all know what I am talking about here. Look at the Facebook pages of the people who now fundraise fulltime for Boston Marathon victims. I did and it was eye – opening not only for the amount of “Look-at-me-and-how-awesome-I-am photo-op moments” but for the date when said Facebook pages fade to nothing. These people seem to have come into existence with the Boston Marathon “bombing” and I’ve made no secret as to why I believe that is.

I found multiple articles about the tension and resentment that exists between qualified runners who get shut out of the race because of the growing number of charity runners who can raise the thousands of dollars, yes – I said thousands – who then take their spots instead. Money not only talks, it now runs marathons too. I found comments about how the BAA keeps it quiet how much they skim off the top of all these donations.

I would love to see proof that Sydney Corcoran’s aunt raised the 5K minimum (I believe the amount is now even higher for the next marathon) for one of the list of approved charities in 2013 that provided entrance into the Boston Marathon wouldn’t you? I would love to know why the defense didn’t cross examine Sydney Corcoran and point-blank ask her. A real lawyer, remembering Grilk’s testimony earlier in the same day, would have.

Grilk explained just how hard it is to qualify for the Boston Marathon. Sydney explained that her aunt not only had never run a marathon before, she had never run before – period. That leads me to believe Sydney’s aunt must be the original bionic woman.

And what does the bionic woman’s Facebook page say she does fulltime now? Fundraising for the Corcoran charity of course. See how that works?

Only an entity as big and well-financed as the government could plan and carry out something like the faked bombing of the Boston Marathon. An individual, lone-wolf terrorist or two could never hire crisis actors. This is why proving the alleged victims were all prior-amputee crisis actors is so critical.

I say this, in closing: To all those who can’t wait to send me a hateful comment for victim-bashing after reading this post: there is an innocent young man sitting on death row for not just a crime he did not commit, but a crime that never even happened. Reversing that fact is my focus and all the hateful comments in the world will never change that.

Let your character be free from the love of money, being content with what you have.  Hebrews 13: 5

For the love of money is the root of all evil.  1 Timothy 6: 10

One Thing Leads to Another  – – The Fixx

The deception, with tact

Just what are you trying to say?

You’ve got a blank face, which irritates

Communicate – pull out your party piece

You see dimensions in two – state your case in black or white

But when one little cross leads to shots, grit your teeth

You run for cover so discreet

Why don’t they do what they say, say what they mean?

One thing leads to another

You told me something wrong, I know I listen too long but then

One thing leads to another…

The impression that you sell passes in and out like a scent

But the long face that you see comes from living close to your fears

If this is up, then I’m up, but you’re running out of sight – 

You’ve seen your name on the walls

And when one little bump leads to shock, miss a beat

You run for cover and there’s heat

Why don’t they do what they say, say what they mean?

One thing leads to another

You tell me something wrong, I know I listen too long but then

One thing leads to another, yeah, yeah…

Then it’s easy to believe somebody’s been lying to me

But when the wrong word goes in the right ear, I know you’ve been lying to me

It’s getting rough,

Off the cuff I’ve got to say enough’s enough – bigger the harder he falls

But when the wrong antidote is like a bulge in the throat,

You run for cover in the heat

Why don’t they do what they say, say what they mean?

One thing leads to another

You tell me something wrong, I know I listen too long but then

One thing leads to another…

 

 

 

 

Published by: iwasleah10years

Winston Churchill said no crime is so great as daring to excel. I am ready to take that dare. An unexpected and somewhat unexplainable compassion for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has drawn me out of my comfort zone.

8 Comments

8 thoughts on “Tsarnaev Trial Testimony: When the Wrong Word Goes in the Right Ear One Thing Leads to Another”

  1. Thanks for that post. I agree with you that no hate comments would make me or you or others stop working on this case. We are right about the innocence of the Tsarnaev brothers and the proof lies in the government exhibits that they have introduced during the trial. I wish more people would take the time to read those transcripts and really look at the evidence. They would know and feel the same way we do. Sometime I wonder how they would feel if it was their own son or daughter in the same predicament as Jahar. What would be their reactions. There is a program on TV called Orange is the new Black. Well in this particular case White is the new Black. I really don’t understand why people cannot see it. It is right there in front of them! I can think of many other reasons why the Tsarnaev were picked to take the blame for the Boston Marathon bombing: covering-up for the Waltham police department for the triple murder; a test trial to bring to Justice the Guantanamo prisoners; a test trial to remove citizen’s rights; a test trial to be able to justify a genocide against Muslims. I can go on and on for a week. I am also convinced, at 98% that no one was injured or died at the Marathon, and it is because when you look into this you can see evidence that there was no real bombing – perhaps smoke bombs. There is also the very weird attitude of the victims. But for now I still have to look into this. I also know that the US government would not hesitate one minute to kill its own citizens for a political agenda. Mind you I am sure my own country would not hesitate to do the same. Money speaks loudly!

    1. I appreciate your commitment to the truth in this case! I am glad you are now at 98% about the fact that no one died and no one was injured when twin smoke bombs went off at the marathon. I am surprised you have not yet reached 100% but am sure you will get there because the evidence is readily available on the internet. And I am sure more will be revealed as time goes on! Anyone who still insists Jahar was coerced by Tamerlan to participate in a real bombing where people really died and others were really injured I see as a plant – a government-hired fake supporter whose job it is to sow discord amongst supporters and discredit us.

      1. I researched this topic at length before writing this post. You must provide the proof with official documentation you receive after running a marathon which shows your time. And you must qualify to run the Boston Marathon with one exception – if you are selected to run for charity. If you are selected to run for charity it means you were able to fundraise the amount required per person for that particular year. And even then you still may not be selected to run if too many people applied to be charity runners. I tell you it is BIG BUSINESS and Grilk really seemed to want to say as little as possible about it during his testimony, choosing to strategically sandwich it in at the end between other facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s