jury in terms of what the charges are, the gateway factors, et cetera. there is a section that deb feyerick referred to a few times about mitigating factors. these are reasons why dzhokhar tsarnaev could be not sentenced to death. they have to deal with the fact he was 19 at the time of offenses no prior history of violent behavior. deb has said that two of the jurors thought he did feel remorse, and three of them felt he was under the influence of his older brother. what is the practical application of mitigating factors when the jury is pommed on these issues? well it s an interesting way they set it up because the opening questions, the aggravating factors, were essentially, you have to commit the aggravating offenses in order to even qualify for the death penalty. but then what they do is under the mitigation section, is essentially they re listing all the defense argumentses as to
jury has found dzhokhar tsarnaev not just guilty but have sentenced him to death in six of the counts because prompted by the terrorist attack on april 15th, two years ago. so two years and one month ago. i want to go to deb feyerick inside the courtroom, and deb, you ve had more time to digest the directions to the jury and the counts on which they convicted him and sentenced him to death. why, do you think, the jury convicted him of these six counts and not the others? reporter: i think probably because of his proximity to the bomb. because of the fact he was the one responsible for dropping the second pressure cooker bomb outside of the forum restaurant. the count four as you mentioned, there are six counts. he was found guilty of six counts. rather than sort of enumerate them, use of weapon of mass destruction resulting in the deaths of lingzi lu and martin richard, death, unanimous. count five possession of a firearm. pressure cooker bomb resulted in
rested their cases and that means it s all over by the closing arguments. that is set to begin on wednesday now. the defense wrapped its case with a celebrity witness, the nun made famous by her book and kwents movie dead man walking. today we learned that sister helen met with dzhokhar tsarnaev five different times since march and much to the surprise of many, she testified that the 21-year-old who has appeared untouched, uninterested and at times really just bored in that courtroom, showed the sister a much different side, something she described as remorse. i ll repeat it, remorse. deb feyerick joins me live outside of the courthouse in boston and with me in studio in new york, hln legal analyst and defense attorney joey jackson. first to you, deb, get me up to speed, they ve rested, what did we learn? well, they rested, but the final witness for the defense
that point in addition to which we ve seen the picture of the finger to the camera and that exactly is what the prosecution will do. now this is a big moment, though, for the defense, make no mistake about it. the judge, of course, limited the testimony, did not allow the nun to get into the more underpinnings of the death penalty, why it s not appropriate, why it s not proper for society, but she, that is the nun, wrapped herself up in his testimony in as much as this was him testifying on the stand without the benefit of cross-examination. she s saying in her discussions he appeared remorseful. no one should have to suffer like this. in her discussions he was approachable and easy to talk to. the character impact is impactful, but when you weigh that what the jury sees with the lack of emotion that tells another story about who and how he is. secondhand information and they ve had weeks and weeks of firsthand visual affirmation. process to evaluate, sure. and deb feyerick, are
death penalty. i have to describe dzhokhar tsarnaev who is sitting in that court. his hair is longer. it is significantly more disheveled. his beard is longer. his family had testified earlier in the week. he seemed to have a connection with them. he looked tearfully at them. there s been a string of characters vouching for what an incredible person he was before this crime took place. and whether they were able to reach him because he s shown so little emotion or whether he was able to connect in a way he now realizes it s done, it s out, it s over, whatever he gets, whether it be the death penalty or life in prison. it s very interesting to watch his demeanor. because he just doesn t care. well, he may not care but he s about to care because his life is about to change radically for the worst. deb feyerick, thank you for that. i want to take a legal view now. defense attorney joey jackson and cnn analyst dan yny sevelas.