person, that this would be a slam-dunk for the prosecution. what does the prosecution need to do here, beth? listen to what they have right now. they have physical evidence of the explosive device. they have photograph and video of the one defendant now carrying a device. there is an eyewitness of his brother placing the device right next to him. one of the victims of the bombing. there are statements that they allegedly made to the man whose car was car jacked admitting that they were the boston bombers. it looks like ample evidence for a grand jury, for example. you don t only need probable cause to charge them at this point. you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt later on. but when dzhokhar can finally go to trial and be prosecuted and can communicate with his lawyers, i suspect his lawyers are going to say he was influenced by his brother and he was less complicit. however, he carried one of these
their case. joining me now from new york, in session correspondent, beth care r careas. let s talk about this possibility designating the suspect an enemy combatant. talk to me about that. i really don t see that right now. we don t have all the information. if this is something broader than these two individuals working alone in the united states, then they are not enemy combatants. i would argue. however, if it is something more global, if they are working in conspiracy with others in another country shall maybe so. enemy combatants are basically unlawful combatants. usually, there is some sort of war going on. these are at least one american citizen committing an act on american soil against americans. it might be a stretch right now. however, we don t have all the facts. so we need to keep the possibility open. is this going to be one was thinking. it may not be, though. just looking at this as a lay