EXPLOSION @ Boston Marathon

[sorkoram]

Does human error exist?

How many days do you need to resolve "human error" in minor details? You think intelligence agencies are full of illiterates?

So during press briefs, they're recounting from memory to the best of their ability? And I'll ask again

..when was that affidavit signed?

 

[createdestroy]

Does human error exist?

How many days do you need to resolve "human error" in minor details? You think intelligence agencies are full of illiterates?

So during press briefs, they recounting from memory to the best of their ability? And I'll ask again

..when was that affidavit signed?

what affidavit are you talking about?

 

[deleted]

You're so intent on proving that stuff isn't as it seems that you won't even admit that human error is a thing.

 

[sorkoram]

You're so intent on proving that stuff isn't as it seems that you won't even admit that human error is a thing.

"Allegedly".

what affidavit are you talking about?

There's only been one affidavit.

 

[deleted]

One more time...does human error exist?

 

[createdestroy]

You're so intent on proving that stuff isn't as it seems that you won't even admit that human error is a thing.

"Allegedly".

what affidavit are you talking about?

There's only been one affidavit.

can you link me?

 

[sorkoram]

One more time...does human error exist?

Since you insisted, of course it exists. That's a given when I've mentioned length of time.

How long do you need to get on the same page in joint operations or do they not talk at all?

I guess a sworn affidavit shouldn't reflect published images contradicting the statement. I'll attribute that to human error just for you.

can you link me?

linked above.

 

[createdestroy]

One more time...does human error exist?

Since you insisted, of course it exists. That's a given when I've mentioned length of time.

How long do you need to get on the same page in joint operations or do they not talk at all?

I guess a sworn affidavit shouldn't reflect published images contradicting the statement. I'll attribute that to human error just for you.

can you link me?

linked above.

affidavit signed the 21st of april....

what are the contradictions?

 

[sorkoram]

affidavit signed the 21st of april....

what are the contradictions?

Simple

Eye witness to shootout - his blog on the events

"The shooters were also driving the green sedan on the left. They had the back passenger door open and were going back into the car where they had additional supplies (assumingly, more ammunition and explosives). They also had backpacks at their feet where they also had additional supplies."

View media item 380328

The man with the gun forced the victim to drive to another location, where they
picked up a second man. The two men put something in the trunk of the victim's vehicle. The
man with the gun took the victim's keys and sat in the driver's seat, while the victim moved to the
front passenger seat. The second man entered the victim's vehicle and sat in the rear passenger
seat...

No acknowledgement of the MIT shooting? Cool.
Sticking with the script that there was one car involved? Funny.

 

[createdestroy]

affidavit signed the 21st of april....

what are the contradictions?

Simple

Eye witness to shootout - his blog on the events

"The shooters were also driving the green sedan on the left. They had the back passenger door open and were going back into the car where they had additional supplies (assumingly, more ammunition and explosives). They also had backpacks at their feet where they also had additional supplies."

View media item 380328

The man with the gun forced the victim to drive to another location, where they
picked up a second man. The two men put something in the trunk of the victim's vehicle. The
man with the gun took the victim's keys and sat in the driver's seat, while the victim moved to the
front passenger seat. The second man entered the victim's vehicle and sat in the rear passenger
seat...

No acknowledgement of the MIT shooting? Cool.
Sticking with the script that there was one car involved? Funny.

the affidavit was for

Use of a weapon of mass destruction
Malicious destruction of property resulting in death

I don't think the events that occurred during/after MIT are the focus of that affidavit..those charges will probably be address in another document.
Read it again and see that is is stated for events "on or about the dates of April 15 2013 in the county of Suffolk".

MIT is in middlesex county..... did you even read the affidavit?

 

[sorkoram]

the affidavit was for
I don't think the events that occurred during/after MIT are the focus of that affidavit..those charges will probably be address in another document.
Read it again and see that is is stated for events "on or about the dates of April 15 2013 in the county of Suffolk".

MIT is in middlesex county..... did you even read the affidavit?

..I said "no mention of MIT..cool" as in I understand why that wasn't mentioned.

Explosives weren't thrown from the vehicle? Suspect #1 didn't toss a "weapon of mass destruction" at the cops in the shootout?

 

[createdestroy]

the affidavit was for
I don't think the events that occurred during/after MIT are the focus of that affidavit..those charges will probably be address in another document.
Read it again and see that is is stated for events "on or about the dates of April 15 2013 in the county of Suffolk".

MIT is in middlesex county..... did you even read the affidavit?

..I said "no mention of MIT..cool" as in I understand why that wasn't mentioned.

But then why would you be upset at the lack of detail into the events that happened AFTER MIT?!?!?!

 

[sorkoram]

But then why would you be upset at the lack of detail into the events that happened AFTER MIT?!?!?!

They haven't gone on record and formally charged them of the MIT shooting.

Facts and Circumstances are actually on record about the Boston Marathon Bombing and the following period when the "bombers emerge".

Funny thing is that they were SEALED documents in the first place and he wasn't even indicted.

 

[deleted]

From my understanding, that affidavit does mention 2 vehicles.

"One of the men was severely injured and remained at the scene; the other managed to escape in the car. That car was later found abandoned a short distance away..."

The phrase "THAT CAR" seems to indicate that he was talking about a car other than the green sedan.

 

[sdotc38109]

They haven't gone on record and formally charged them of the MIT shooting.

Facts and Circumstances are actually on record about the Boston Marathon Bombing and the following period when the "bombers emerge".

Funny thing is that they were SEALED documents in the first place and he wasn't even indicted.

Because that's a state case, not a federal case. He is still in the custody of the FBI and probably once the FBI is done questions him the state will be able to get their chance to charge him.

 

[sorkoram]

From my understanding, that affidavit does mention 2 vehicles.

"One of the men was severely injured and remained at the scene; the other managed to escape in the car. That car was later found abandoned a short distance away..."

The phrase "THAT CAR" seems to indicate that he was talking about a car other than the green sedan.

Human error does exist.

Because thats a state case, not a federal case. He is still in the custody of the FBI and probably once the FBI is done questions him the state will be able to get their chance to charge him.

Yes, it says "US vs Tsarnaev. Once again, I understand why it wasn't mentioned and formally charged.

 

[createdestroy]

They haven't gone on record and formally charged them of the MIT shooting.

Facts and Circumstances are actually on record about the Boston Marathon Bombing and the following period when the "bombers emerge".

Funny thing is that they were SEALED documents in the first place and he wasn't even indicted.

Because thats a state case, not a federal case. He is still in the custody of the FBI and probably once the FBI is done questions him the state will be able to get their chance to charge him.

From my understanding, that affidavit does mention 2 vehicles.

"One of the men was severely injured and remained at the scene; the other managed to escape in the car. That car was later found abandoned a short distance away..."

The phrase "THAT CAR" seems to indicate that he was talking about a car other than the green sedan.

View media item 322901

 

[SORIANOTRON]

Simple

Eye witness to shootout - his blog on the events

"The shooters were also driving the green sedan on the left. They had the back passenger door open and were going back into the car where they had additional supplies (assumingly, more ammunition and explosives). They also had backpacks at their feet where they also had additional supplies."

View media item 380328No acknowledgement of the MIT shooting? Cool.
Sticking with the script that there was one car involved? Funny.

i believe the suv on the bottom is a Boston state trooper ford explorer....there was a couple transmissions that came in saying they had "a state trooper suv" on the scanner that night
View media item 380496

 

[jjs07]

Human error does exist.
Yes, it says "US vs Tsarnaev. Once again, I understand why it wasn't mentioned and formally charged.

If you understand that, what exactly are you arguing?

 

[Coupé It]

we need a grainy photo taken at night of a person shot in the head, neck, legs and hand to compare

Ya'll conspirator dudes just need to give up. You're getting owned every other response.

 

[abubakr shaheed]

this dude had gunshot wounds in his throat, head, neck, leg, and hands...crazy he survived

now he deserves to have the book thrown at him. send him to guantanamo bay!! that would be a good use of the space down there

 

[jjs07]

This story is BEYOND wild..

Carjack victim recounts his harrowing night

The 26-year-old Chinese entrepreneur had just pulled his new Mercedes to the curb on Brighton Avenue to answer a text when an old sedan swerved behind him, slamming on the brakes. A man in dark clothes got out and approached the passenger window. It was nearly 11 p.m. last Thursday.

The man rapped on the glass, speaking quickly. Danny, unable to hear him, lowered the window -- and the man reached an arm through, unlocked the door, and climbed in, brandishing a silver handgun.

“Don’t be stupid,” he told Danny. He asked if he had followed the news about Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings. Danny had, down to the release of the grainy suspect photos less than six hours earlier.

“I did that,” said the man, who would later be identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev. “And I just killed a policeman in Cambridge.”

He ordered Danny to drive -- right on Fordham Road, right again on Commonwealth Avenue -- the beginning of an achingly slow odyssey last Thursday night and Friday morning in which Danny felt the possibility of death pressing on him like a vise.

Rest of Article in Link

 

[nikekid6]

This story is BEYOND wild..


Rest of Article in Link

crazy that a cop car even drove by and he couldnt do anything about it

 

[johnson1]

damn homey went thru it!

 

[senorroboto2k5]

crazy that a cop car even drove by and he couldnt do anything about it

Couldn't do anything out what? They probably looked like three dudes hitting up an ATM in a shopping center. It's not like they were holding out their guns. It's coincidental but that's about it.