Boston bomb jurors face tough task

Two decades have passed since Timothy McVeigh set off a truck bomb outside a federal office building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people, but the memory remains vivid for Tonya McCabe, who sat on the jury that sentenced him to die.

“I still want to think the best of people, but there is a part of me that was changed,” said McCabe, who was 24 in 1997 when Gulf War veteran McVeigh was sentenced to death. “That natural instinct I had to think that people had the best intentions; after the trial, I didn’t feel that way anymore.”

Jury members in the Boston Marathon bombing trial may be in for a similarly formative experience on Monday. That’s when they will begin their formal deliberations over whether Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is guilty of killing three people and injuring 264 at the race’s finish line on April 15, 2013, and fatally shooting a police officer three days later.

About six out of 10 jurors who sit on capital trials describe the experience as “emotionally upsetting,” according to a 2008 study by Michael Antonio, a professor of criminal justice at West Chester University of Pennsylvania.

More than a third of 1,198 jurors who sat on 353 capital juries also experienced physical symptoms of stress during or after the trials, he said.

“It’s not an easy job,” said Jim Manspeaker, who retired in 2003 from a 41-year-long career as clerk of the federal district court in Denver, where McVeigh’s trial was held. “Jury duty is a big responsibility. There is no question.”

During the 16 days of testimony, the 12 jurors and six alternates heard gripping, and sometimes graphic, accounts of how the twin pressure-cooker bombs ripped through the crowd at the marathon, causing 17 people to lose limbs.

They saw autopsy photos of the mangled bodies of restaurant manager Krystle Campbell, 29, and Chinese graduate student Lingzi Lu, 23.

They also heard from William Richard, who described making the decision to leave his wife with his dying son, eight-year-old Martin, so he could try to save their seven-year-old daughter, Jane.

The jurors will now decide whether Tsarnaev, 21, is guilty of the 30 criminal counts he faces. Their conclusion will likely be made easier by the fact that Tsarnaev’s lawyers opened the trial on March 4 with the blunt admission: “It was him.”

Defence lawyers contend that Tsarnaev’s older brother, Tamerlan, who died following a gunfight with police three days after the attack, was the driving force behind the bombing.

But deciding guilt is only the first half of this jury’s job. If they find Dzhokhar Tsarnaev guilty, they will then hear another round of testimony, before deciding whether to sentence him to life in prison without possibility of parole or to death.

The toll of sentencing a person to die can often hit jurors heaviest after their service ends, said West Chester University’s Antonio.

“During the trial, it’s a struggle, but they have the other jurors that they’re doing this with,” Antonio said. “It’s after the trial that the reality hits. We have lots of accounts of people who get to the parking lot, and then it hits them, ‘Wow, I just sentenced someone to death.’”

While anger runs high against Tsarnaev, the death penalty remains unpopular in liberal-leaning Boston.

The jurors will be “criticised no matter what they do,” Antonio said.

DISCOVER MORE CONTENT LIKE THIS