The 11 Most Mystifying Things the Tsarnaev Brothers Did

 

Thank God for stupid terrorists

==================================================

The 11 Most Mystifying Things the Tsarnaev Brothers Did

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/eleven-most-mystifying-things-tsarnaev-brothers-did

 

-By Tim Murphy

| Mon Apr. 22, 2013 1:53 PM PDT

 

Dzhokar and Tamerlan's motive-or motives-is is still unclear. But that's not

the only unknown. Many of the Tsarnaevs' actions last week seem baffling in

retrospect. Here are some of the most confounding things they did:

 

    Wear a backwards hat and no sunglasses. Unlike his older brother,

Dzhokhar made little effort to prevent cameras from capturing his face,

making him easier to identify when the FBI released security camera photos

on Thursday. Indeed, classmates at UMass-Dartmouth did see him in the

photos, but dismissed the similarity because it seemed so far-fetched.

    Not react to the explosions. For three days, investigators pored over

all available photos and surveillance videos of the blast area searching for

abnormal reactions. The complaint filed in federal court on Monday

specifically cites Dzhokhar's reaction to the first explosion as a giveaway;

per the complaint, he glanced in the direction of the first blast only

briefly.

    Leave the car in the shop. The Wall Street Journal reported that

Dzhokhar stopped by an auto-body shop in Watertown on Tuesday to pick up the

Mercedes he'd brought in for repairs.

    Stay in Boston. The second bomb exploded at 2:49 p.m. last Monday.

Dzhokhar and Tamerlan carjacked a Mercedes at 10:30 p.m.* on Thursday. What

did they do in the interim three days? Go to the gym, check in on their

busted car, and, in Dzhokhar's case, go to a party on the UMass-Dartmouth

campus. During the three-day window in which their involvement was unknown,

they made no attempt to flee.

    Kill an MIT police officer. Why did the brothers shoot 26-year-old Sean

Collier? The murder at 10:30 p.m. on Thursday set in motion the events that

would ultimately lead to their capture.

    Run out of cash. When Dzhokhar carjacked a Mercedes on Thursday night,

he and his brother had one thing in mind: Get cash, and fast. They emptied

$800 from an ATM using their victim's PIN number, before they reached the

account limit. Holding up a stranger for money suggests either a woeful lack

of planning on their part (they hadn't budgeted) that helped alert them to

the authorities.

    Not understand how ATMs work. After reaching the daily withdrawal limit

at one ATM, the Tsarnaevs, apparently not realizing that the machines are

part of an interconnected system, decided to try their luck at two different

machines. The quest to find a working ATM was how they ended up,

coincidentally, at a 7/11 in Cambridge around the same time it was the scene

of an armed robbery, and were spotted on the store security camera.

    Confess to the hostage. According to the complaint, when Dzhokhar got

into the Mercedes, he immediately told the driver, "Did you hear about the

Boston explosion? I did that." That meant their cover would be immediately

blown if the driver escaped. Which brings us to...

    Stop for snacks. The Los Angeles Times reported that the hostage escaped

after the brothers stopped at a gas station on Memorial Drive to buy snacks.

    Keep the hostage's phone. The Tsarnaevs continued on without their

hostage-but they did have his phone, which allowed police to track their

location via GPS.

    Bring a BB gun. The weapons used by the two suspects, according to

police: a pressure-cooker bomb, seven IEDs, an M4 carbine, two handguns, and

a BB gun. Why a BB gun?

 

==========================================

(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this

message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to

these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed

within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with

"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.

The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The

Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain

permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials

if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,

teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria

for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies

as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four

criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is

determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not

substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use

copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you

must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS

PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.