You are on page 1of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
)
v. ) Crim. No.13-10200-GAO
)
DZHOKHAR A. TSARNAEV, )
Defendant )


OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO FILE
REPLY BRIEF, TO SUMBIT SUPPLEMNTARY MATERIALS,
AND TO DELAY DOING BOTH UNTIL AUGUST 7, 2014

The Uni t ed St at es of Amer i ca, by and t hr ough i t s under si gned
counsel , r espect f ul l y opposes def endant Dzhokhar Tsar naev s
mot i on ( 1) t o f i l e a r epl y t o t he gover nment s opposi t i on t o hi s
mot i on t o change venue, ( 2) t o submi t suppl ement ar y mat er i al s,
and ( 3) t o del ay f i l i ng bot h unt i l August 7, 2014.
INTRODUCTION
Havi ng pr evi ousl y asked f or and been deni ed an ext ensi on
unt i l August 3, 2014, t o f i l e a change- of - venue mot i on suppor t ed
by var i ous suppl ement ar y mat er i al s, Tsar naev now seeks t o f i l e
t hat ver y same mot i on on August 7, 2014, onl y t hi s t i me i n t he
gui se of a r epl y br i ef . Hi s mot i on i s t hus a t r anspar ent at t empt
t o ci r cumvent t he Cour t s ear l i er r ul i ng t hat a f i l i ng dat e i n
ear l y August i s t oo l at e and t hat t he suppl ement ar y mat er i al s he
wi shes t o submi t ar e unnecessar y. Tsar naev s ef f or t t o
ci r cumvent t he Cour t s or i gi nal f i l i ng deadl i ne i s under scor ed by
hi s t act i cal deci si on t o omi t any suppor t i ng mat er i al s what soever
Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 418 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 5

2

f r omhi s or i gi nal mot i on - - even mat er i al s al r eady i n hi s
possessi on or r eadi l y avai l abl e t o hi m- - ef f ect i vel y f or ci ng t he
Cour t i nt o an al l - or - not hi ng choi ce bet ween r el yi ng on hi s
unador ned or i gi nal mot i on or capi t ul at i ng t o hi s i nsi st ence on an
ear l y- August f i l i ng dat e. The Cour t shoul d not r ewar d t hat
t act i c by al l owi ng Tsar naev t o f i l e a new change- of - venue mot i on
di sgui sed as a r epl y br i ef t hat wi l l necessar i l y t r i gger a new
r ound of l i t i gat i on on t he venue i ssue and concomi t ant del ays.
ARGUMENT
Tsar naev i s not aski ng f or l eave t o f i l e a genui ne r epl y t o
t he gover nment s opposi t i on; he seeks i nst ead t o f i l e t he ver y
same change- of - venue mot i on he want ed t o f i l e i n t he f i r st pl ace
on r oughl y t he same dat e he i ni t i al l y r equest ed, namel y, a mot i on
i n ear l y August suppor t ed by an exper t anal ysi s of t he pol l i ng
dat a, and a qual i t at i ve and quant i t at i ve eval uat i on of t he medi a
cover age. ( Def t . Mot . at 1) . When t he Cour t f i r st deni ed t hat
r equest on J une 13, 2014, i t wr ot e t hat Tsar naev had al r eady
i nvest i gat ed and consi der ed t he per t i nent i ssues suf f i ci ent l y
t o [ set ] f or t h t he f act ual and l egal r easons why a change of
venue i s necessar y or advi sabl e. ( Dkt . 368) . Ther e i s no r eason
f or t he Cour t t o r evi si t t hat r ul i ng. On t he cont r ar y, now t hat
t he change- of - venue i ssue has act ual l y been br i ef ed by bot h
par t i es, t her e i s ever y r eason f or t he Cour t not t o r evi si t t hat
r ul i ng.
Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 418 Filed 07/15/14 Page 2 of 5

3

Tsar naev made a t act i cal deci si on t o omi t f r omhi s or i gi nal
mot i on any suppor t i ng mat er i al s what soever - - even t hose al r eady
i n hi s possessi on or at l east r eadi l y avai l abl e t o hi m- -
ef f ect i vel y f or ci ng t he Cour t t o choose bet ween t hat unador ned
or i gi nal mot i on and t he over due, f ul l y annot at ed ver si on he now
seeks t o f i l e i n t he gui se of a r epl y br i ef . Tact i cs l i ke t hat
shoul d not be r ewar ded. At t he t i me Tsar naev f i l ed hi s or i gi nal
mot i on he necessar i l y had i n hi s possessi on ( and t hus coul d have
i ncl uded) f undament al i nf or mat i on about hi s pol l i ng dat a such as
t he number of r espondent s sur veyed i n each venue, t he speci f i c
quest i ons t hat wer e asked, t he met hods used t o ask t hem, t he
per cent age of peopl e who r esponded, and t he i dent i t y of t he
exper t who desi gned and admi ni st er ed t he sur vey, among ot her
t hi ngs. Had Tsar naev i ncl uded t hi s basi c i nf or mat i on, t he
gover nment coul d have cr i t i qued i t ( i f necessar y wi t h t he hel p of
i t s own venue exper t ) , j oi ni ng t he i ssue f or t he Cour t . Tsar naev
al so coul d have i ncl uded a r epr esent at i ve sampl e of t he medi a
cover age he cl ai ms i s pr ej udi ci al . I nst ead, Tsar naev evi dent l y
deci ded t hat i f he coul d not submi t all of t he suppor t i ng
mat er i al s he want ed t o i ncl ude, he woul d i ncl ude none of t hem.
Havi ng made t hat t act i cal deci si on, he must l i ve wi t h i t ;
per mi t t i ng hi mt o f i l e hi s or i gi nal mot i on on hi s own deadl i ne i n
t he gui se of a r epl y br i ef woul d si mpl y make a mocker y of t he
Cour t s schedul i ng or der .
Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 418 Filed 07/15/14 Page 3 of 5

4

Tsar naev s pr oposed r epl y br i ef wi l l necessar i l y t r i gger
anot her r ound of l i t i gat i on over t he venue i ssue, f ur t her
del ayi ng a deci si on on t he i ssue and per haps t he t r i al dat e as
wel l . That i s because Tsar naev s suppor t i ng mat er i al s ar e l i kel y
t o r ai se numer ous f act ual and l egal i ssues r equi r i ng a gover nment
r esponse. I t woul d obvi ousl y be unf ai r t o t he gover nment , not t o
ment i on t he publ i c, f or t he venue deci si on t o t ur n on a one- si ded
pr esent at i on of exper t anal ysi s and t est i mony by t he def ense.
Accor di ngl y, t he gover nment wi l l be f or ced t o r espond t o
Tsar naev s r epl y as i t woul d t o a mot i on, meani ng an addi t i onal
r ound of br i ef i ng and f ur t her del ay. None of t hat i s necessar y
or i n t he i nt er est s of j ust i ce.
The absence of a r epl y br i ef wi l l not pr ej udi ce Tsar naev
because he cannot demonst r at e pr esumed pr ej udi ce no mat t er what
hi s suppor t i ng mat er i al s mi ght show. The Supr eme Cour t has set
an except i onal l y hi gh st andar d f or concl udi ng t hat pr ej udi ci al
publ i ci t y and negat i ve communi t y sent i ment ar e so per vasi ve t hat
a cour t l acks di scr et i on even to try t o seat an i mpar t i al j ur y
usi ng scr eeni ng quest i onnai r es and voi r di r e. And i t has never
f ound t hat st andar d t o be met i n a di st r i ct t he si ze of
Massachuset t s. I ndeed, i t has not f ound t hat st andar d t o be met
i n any case f or near l y 50 year s. Thi s Cour t i s al r eady equi pped,
based on i t s own member shi p i n t he l ocal communi t y, t o concl ude
t hat negat i ve sent i ment and pr et r i al publ i ci t y have not
Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 418 Filed 07/15/14 Page 4 of 5

5

ef f ect i vel y di spl aced t he j udi ci al pr ocess, as r equi r ed f or a
f i ndi ng of pr esumed pr ej udi ce. Mor eover , t he Cour t has
di scr et i on, r egar dl ess of any pol l i ng dat a or exper t eval uat i on
of medi a cover age, t o at t empt t o seat an i mpar t i al j ur y f r omt he
f i ve mi l l i on r esi dent s of t he East er Di vi si on of t hi s di st r i ct .
I n f ai r ness t o bot h par t i es, t he vi ct i ms, and t he publ i c, i t
shoul d endeavor t o do so.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, t he Cour t shoul d deny Tsar naev s mot i on f or l eave
t o f i l e a r epl y t o t he gover nment s opposi t i on t o i t s mot i on t o
change venue, t o submi t suppl ement ar y mat er i al s, and t o del ay
doi ng so unt i l August 7, 2014.
Respect f ul l y submi t t ed,
CARMEN M. ORTI Z
UNI TED STATES ATTORNEY

By: / s/ Wi l l i amD. Wei nr eb
WI LLI AM D. WEI NREB
ALOKE S. CHAKRAVARTY
NADI NE PELLEGRI NI
Assi st ant U. S. At t or neys

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I her eby cer t i f y t hat t hi s document , f i l ed t hr ough t he ECF
syst em, wi l l be sent el ect r oni cal l y t o t he r egi st er ed
par t i ci pant s as i dent i f i ed on t he Not i ce of El ect r oni c Fi l i ng
( NEF) and t hat paper copi es wi l l be sent t o t hose i ndi cat ed as
non- r egi st er ed par t i ci pant s on t hi s dat e.
/s/ William D. Weinreb
WI LLI AM D. WEI NREB
Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 418 Filed 07/15/14 Page 5 of 5