willing to weigh the option. as you ve been discussing there s this 24-page document, threshold factors initially laid out, called gateway factors and they are basically variations of did he intend to do this? did he intend to do that? various facets of the crime itself and aggravating and mitigating factors. the one thing i want to stress after that long complicated document and first 20 or so pages of the 24-page document this document to essentially even if they have unanimously approved one of these criteria, just move on and decide for themselves. so even all of the extensive requirements that you re all talking about accurately in the studio, this jury could go in another direction right here on the ground. wait and see what the direction might be. we re being told inside the courthouse it will be about 20 minutes before we hear more we actually start a reading of this form to see how they weigh. you re saying 20 minutes
question by question. as they move from one section, it refers them to another. he s going to establish each of the four sections. first being that he was 18 years of age. the second section is the gateway factors. what do the gateway factors mean brooke? they dive a little bit deeper into the level of intent that tsarnaev had in committing these crimes. all they have to do is find one gateway factor. there are four that are listed and all they have to do is find one. i want to point out for everybody that s listening, during the closing arguments, the prosecution was masterful. they spent a ton of time talking about the fact that tsarnaev chose a spot right behind martin richard s family. martin richard is the 8-year-old killed during that attack and his sister had both of her legs
blown off. he stood there and during the closing argument the prosecution was silent for 20 seconds. after 20 seconds went by he said tsarnaev stood just feet away from this family for 12 times the amount of time i was just silent. it was a riveting moment in that courtroom. and the reason why the prosecution did it is because one of the gateway factors that shows the level of intent that you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt was that he killed somebody that was vulnerability. that person was the 8-year-old martin richard. so i would not be surprised if they find that gateway factor for sure if not all four of them. so you ve got the age, the gateway factors on intent. then you move to the aggravating factors. there are six under the statute. they have to do with the cruel and unusual nature. they have to do with the fact
jurors asked for any additional information? reporter: we heard that they hadn t come out today for additional questions however yesterday afternoon as you mentioned earlier they did come out with questions, there was a series of questionses, two in particular, one related to whether aiding and abetting and i say this because it goes to the heart of this case, whether this applied to the relationship between dzhokhar tsarnaev and his brother tamerlan, whether they were judging those intent factors, the gateway factors so-called that i mentioned on the basis of just dzhokhar tsarnaev or the basis of that relationship. that s essential to the case and that s one of the questions they asked. however, this is a dense document. the questions that resulted were so confusing that the judge then went back after consulting with the lawyers on both sides and said, jury, we need this restated and need another run at this question. when the second it race of this came back, the judge screwed u
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