The Supreme Court on Monday said it would review an appeals court’s decision that threw out the death sentence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was convicted of helping carry out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings.

Last year, a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Boston, upheld Tsarnaev’s convictions on 27 counts. But the appeals court ruled that his death sentence should be overturned because the trial judge had not questioned jurors closely enough about their exposure to pretrial publicity and had excluded evidence concerning Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Dzhokhar’s older brother and accomplice.

“A core promise of our criminal justice system is that even the very worst among us deserves to be fairly tried and lawfully punished,” Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson wrote for the panel.

“Just to be crystal clear,” Thompson wrote, “Dzhokhar will remain confined to prison for the rest of his life, with the only question remaining being whether the government will end his life by executing him.”

The bombings, near the finish line of the marathon, killed three people and injured 260, many of them grievously. Seventeen people lost limbs. A law enforcement officer was killed as the brothers fled a few days later. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout with police.

Thompson wrote that the trial judge should not have excluded evidence that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been involved in a triple murder in 2011, which could have bolstered an argument from defense lawyers that he had dominated and intimidated his younger brother.

Lawyers for the federal government urged the Supreme Court to hear the case even though it did not satisfy some of the usual criteria for review.

“Although the court of appeals’ errors are largely case-specific, the context of this case makes them exceptionally significant,” the government’s brief said.

“To reinstate the sentences that the jury and the district court found appropriate for respondent’s heinous acts, the government will have to retry the penalty phase of the case; the court will have to conduct (and prospective jurors will have to undergo)” questioning “that will presumably be much longer and more onerous than the original 21-day proceeding; and the victims will have to once again take the stand to describe the horrors that respondent inflicted on them.”

Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge who now teaches at Harvard Law School, said the Biden administration should consider whether it wants to pursue the appeal, noting that the Trump administration had sought Supreme Court review.

“Given that Mr. Tsarnaev will never leave prison,” she said in a statement, “the government should consider whether continuing to pursue a death sentence for him is unnecessarily traumatizing for the victims’ families and the city of Boston.”

The Supreme Court on Monday said it would review an appeals court’s decision that threw out the death sentence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was convicted of helping carry out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings.

The Supreme Court on Monday said it would review an appeals court’s decision that threw out the death sentence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was convicted of helping carry out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. Last year, a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Boston, upheld Tsarnaev’s convictions on 27 counts. But the appeals court ruled that his death sentence should be overturned because the trial judge had not questioned jurors closely enough about their exposure to pretrial publicity and had excluded evidence concerning Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Dzhokhar’s older brother and accomplice. “A core promise of our criminal justice system is that even the very worst among us deserves to be fairly tried and lawfully punished,” Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson wrote for the panel. “Just to be crystal clear,” Thompson wrote, “Dzhokhar will remain confined to prison for the rest of his life, with the only question remaining being whether the government will end his life by executing him.” The bombings, near the finish line of the marathon, killed three people and injured 260, many of them grievously. Seventeen people lost limbs. A law enforcement officer was killed as the brothers fled a few days later. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died in a shootout with police. Thompson wrote that the trial judge should not have excluded evidence that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been involved in a triple murder in 2011, which could have bolstered an argument from defense lawyers that he had dominated and intimidated his younger brother. Lawyers for the federal government urged the Supreme Court to hear the case even though it did not satisfy some of the usual criteria for review. “Although the court of appeals’ errors are largely case-specific, the context of this case makes them exceptionally significant,” the government’s brief said. “To reinstate the sentences that the jury and the district court found appropriate for respondent’s heinous acts, the government will have to retry the penalty phase of the case; the court will have to conduct (and prospective jurors will have to undergo)” questioning “that will presumably be much longer and more onerous than the original 21-day proceeding; and the victims will have to once again take the stand to describe the horrors that respondent inflicted on them.” Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge who now teaches at Harvard Law School, said the Biden administration should consider whether it wants to pursue the appeal, noting that the Trump administration had sought Supreme Court review. “Given that Mr. Tsarnaev will never leave prison,” she said in a statement, “the government should consider whether continuing to pursue a death sentence for him is unnecessarily traumatizing for the victims’ families and the city of Boston.”

Supreme Court to consider death sentence in Boston Marathon bombing case

The US President Donald Trump has called for a re-sentencing of Boston Marathon bomber&nbsp;Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Sunday.

"Rarely has anybody deserved the death penalty more than the Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev," Trump tweeted.

"So many lives lost and ruined. The Federal Government must again seek the Death Penalty in a do-over of the original trial. Our Country cannot let the appellate decision stand," he added.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Rarely has anybody deserved the death penalty more than the Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The court agreed that this “was one of the worst domestic terrorist attacks since the 9/11 atrocities”. Yet the appellate court tossed out the death sentence. So many lives lost....
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290011569657610240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The statement came after&nbsp;an appeals court overturned the death penalty of the 27-year-old.&nbsp;

Tsarnaev was sentenced to death in 2015 for planting two homemade bombs near the finish line of the race in 2013, killing three people and injuring 264 others. The sentence was overturned this week by a US appeals court.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/boston-marathon-bomber-wins-death-penalty-appeal-317391">Also read:&nbsp;Boston Marathon bomber wins death penalty appeal</a>

He had admitted carrying out the attack at the age of 19 with his older brother,&nbsp;Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who reportedly died four days after the attack in a gunfight with police.

Tsarnaev's lawyers argued that he was less responsible one and had no prior history of violence. They tried to convince the court that the plan was made and executed mainly by his older brother. However, the three-judge bench assured that Tsarnaev, who came to the US from Soviet Union as a child, will be serving his rest of the life in the jail even with the new sentence.

The US President Donald Trump, however, feels that the process of re-sentencing needs to start as soon as possible.&nbsp;Trump has regularly called for increased use of the death penalty, which is rare in the United States. However,&nbsp;in the last 30 days, three of such sentences have been carried out and the fourth one is scheduled soon.

No comment has bee given by the bomber's team of attorneys.

The US President Donald Trump has called for a re-sentencing of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Sunday. "Rarely has anybody deserved the death penalty more than the Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev," Trump tweeted.

The US President Donald Trump has called for a re-sentencing of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Sunday. "Rarely has anybody deserved the death penalty more than the Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev," Trump tweeted. "So many lives lost and ruined. The Federal Government must again seek the Death Penalty in a do-over of the original trial. Our Country cannot let the appellate decision stand," he added. Rarely has anybody deserved the death penalty more than the Boston Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The court agreed that this “was one of the worst domestic terrorist attacks since the 9/11 atrocities”. Yet the appellate court tossed out the death sentence. So many lives lost.... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 2, 2020 × The statement came after an appeals court overturned the death penalty of the 27-year-old. Tsarnaev was sentenced to death in 2015 for planting two homemade bombs near the finish line of the race in 2013, killing three people and injuring 264 others. The sentence was overturned this week by a US appeals court. Also read: Boston Marathon bomber wins death penalty appeal He had admitted carrying out the attack at the age of 19 with his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who reportedly died four days after the attack in a gunfight with police. Tsarnaev's lawyers argued that he was less responsible one and had no prior history of violence. They tried to convince the court that the plan was made and executed mainly by his older brother. However, the three-judge bench assured that Tsarnaev, who came to the US from Soviet Union as a child, will be serving his rest of the life in the jail even with the new sentence. The US President Donald Trump, however, feels that the process of re-sentencing needs to start as soon as possible. Trump has regularly called for increased use of the death penalty, which is rare in the United States. However, in the last 30 days, three of such sentences have been carried out and the fourth one is scheduled soon. No comment has bee given by the bomber's team of attorneys.

Donald Trump calls for death sentence of Boston marathon bomber

A US appeals court overturned the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Friday and ordered a lower court to hold new sentencing hearings.

Tsarnaev, 27, was sentenced to death in 2015 for planting two home-made bombs near the finish line of the race in 2013, killing three people and injuring 264 others.

He has admitted carrying out the attack as a 19-year-old with his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died four days after the atrocity in a gunfight with police.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/fauci-concerned-about-proper-testing-for-covid-19-vaccines-by-russia-and-china-317384">Also read:&nbsp;Fauci concerned about proper testing for COVID-19 vaccines by Russia and China</a>

Lawyers for Tsarnaev had asked for a new trial, claiming that it should not have been held in Boston because the city was so traumatized by the attack.

They also questioned the neutrality of two jurors, who lied during jury selection about whether they'd had conversations about the case on social media.&nbsp;

The federal appeals court in Massachusetts upheld most of Tsarnaev's convictions but instructed a district court to hold a new penalty-phase trial to determine his fate for crimes that carried the death sentence.

"Just to be crystal clear... Dzhokhar will remain confined to prison for the rest of his life, with the only question remaining being whether the government will end his life by executing him," the three judges said.

Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson wrote that a presiding judge "fell short" in ensuring that a fair jury was selected, noting that some jurors had "already formed an opinion he was guilty."

Attorneys for Tsarnaev, a US citizen who came to the United States from the former Soviet Union as a child, have always claimed that his brother was more culpable of the two, saying Dzhokhar had no history of violence.

Federal death penalty cases are rare in the US, although three inmates were executed this month after President Donald Trump ordered a resumption of federal executions following a 17-year hiatus.

A fourth is scheduled for late next month.

A US appeals court overturned the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Friday and ordered a lower court to hold new sentencing hearings.

A US appeals court overturned the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Friday and ordered a lower court to hold new sentencing hearings. Tsarnaev, 27, was sentenced to death in 2015 for planting two home-made bombs near the finish line of the race in 2013, killing three people and injuring 264 others. He has admitted carrying out the attack as a 19-year-old with his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died four days after the atrocity in a gunfight with police. Also read: Fauci concerned about proper testing for COVID-19 vaccines by Russia and China Lawyers for Tsarnaev had asked for a new trial, claiming that it should not have been held in Boston because the city was so traumatized by the attack. They also questioned the neutrality of two jurors, who lied during jury selection about whether they'd had conversations about the case on social media. The federal appeals court in Massachusetts upheld most of Tsarnaev's convictions but instructed a district court to hold a new penalty-phase trial to determine his fate for crimes that carried the death sentence. "Just to be crystal clear... Dzhokhar will remain confined to prison for the rest of his life, with the only question remaining being whether the government will end his life by executing him," the three judges said. Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson wrote that a presiding judge "fell short" in ensuring that a fair jury was selected, noting that some jurors had "already formed an opinion he was guilty." Attorneys for Tsarnaev, a US citizen who came to the United States from the former Soviet Union as a child, have always claimed that his brother was more culpable of the two, saying Dzhokhar had no history of violence. Federal death penalty cases are rare in the US, although three inmates were executed this month after President Donald Trump ordered a resumption of federal executions following a 17-year hiatus. A fourth is scheduled for late next month.

Boston Marathon bomber wins death penalty appeal

A <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/about-200-us-companies-seeking-to-move-manufacturing-base-from-china-to-india-usispf-213845&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwj0sYOSkvfhAhVz6XMBHfnxD4YQFjABegQIDxAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw3r0_1uAhbyPzb0s4HFlgmy">US</a>&nbsp;combat veteran of the war in Afghanistan who prosecutors say plotted to detonate multiple nail bombs at a Los Angeles-area white nationalist rally, seeking to cause mass casualties, was arrested in an FBI sting operation, federal prosecutors said on Monday.

Mark Steven Domingo, 26, a <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/us-places-india-china-among-others-on-priority-watch-list-for-ip-rights-violations-213493&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwj0sYOSkvfhAhVz6XMBHfnxD4YQFjAHegQIBBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw2UlTtNJHwiMwIGDO_4mIuC">US&nbsp;</a>Army infantryman who recently converted to Islam, was taken into custody on Friday after undercover FBI operatives furnished him with what he thought were live bombs to be used in the attack, law enforcement officials said.

Authorities said Domingo, who had no prior criminal record, came to their attention because of a series of violent extremist messages he posted in online chat rooms, one of which called for "retribution" for the massacre of 50 people at mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, by a gunman in March.

"Often we are asked what keeps us up at night. This is a case that keeps us up at night," Ryan Young, special agent in charge of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force, told a news conference in Los Angeles.

Domingo, who had purchased several hundred long nails to serve as shrapnel in the homemade pressure-cooker bombs, had also suggested attacks on Jews, police officers, churches, a military facility, Southern California freeways and the Santa Monica Pier during internet conversations with the FBI operatives, Young said.

He was charged in a federal criminal complaint with providing material support to terrorists and was ordered held without bond during a brief initial appearance in US&nbsp;District Court in Los Angeles on Monday.

“This investigation successfully disrupted a very real threat posed by a trained combat soldier who repeatedly stated he wanted to cause the maximum number of casualties,” US Attorney Nick Hanna said in a statement.

According to the criminal complaint, an FBI operative established contact with Domingo in a private online chat room in March, leading to discussions in which Domingo expressed support for Islamic militants and the desire to seek revenge for attacks on Muslims.

'VIOLENT JIHAD'

In one of his earliest posts, he suggested that "America needs another Vegas event," an apparent reference to the 2017 mass shooting at a country music concert in Las Vegas where a lone gunman perched in a nearby hotel killed 58 people and wounded hundreds, the complaint alleged.

Domingo, who said he wanted to become a martyr, also made reference to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, according to the complaint.

During one meeting in person with an FBI operative, he arrived carrying an AK 47-style assault rifle, telling the informant: "I just wanted to show you that I'm serious."

According to a law enforcement database, Domingo is the registered owner of three semi-automatic rifles.

An FBI spokeswoman said received a less-than-honourable discharge from the Army.

Prosecutors say Domingo contemplated drive-by shootings and detonating a bomb at the Santa Monica pier before deciding to bomb a rally scheduled for Sunday, April 28, in the Los Angeles suburb of Long Beach that he believed was organized by white nationalists.

Domingo and two FBI informants visited the planned site of the rally to scout the best location to place explosives to cause the greatest casualties, authorities said, agreeing that they would leave the scene separately to throw off suspicion.

He was arrested shortly after placing one of the mock bombs into the vehicle of an informant.

The white nationalist rally ended up not happening, although a number of counterdemonstrators assembled at the site, the Los Angeles City News Service said.

The announcement of Domingo's arrest came two days after a gunman opened fire in a San Diego-area synagogue, killing one woman and wounding three others, including the rabbi. John Earnest, 19, was arrested.

There was no indication the two incidents were connected.

A US combat veteran of the war in Afghanistan who prosecutors say plotted to detonate multiple nail bombs at a Los Angeles-area white nationalist rally, seeking to cause mass casualties, was arrested in an FBI sting operation, federal prosecutors said on Monday.

A US combat veteran of the war in Afghanistan who prosecutors say plotted to detonate multiple nail bombs at a Los Angeles-area white nationalist rally, seeking to cause mass casualties, was arrested in an FBI sting operation, federal prosecutors said on Monday. Mark Steven Domingo, 26, a US Army infantryman who recently converted to Islam, was taken into custody on Friday after undercover FBI operatives furnished him with what he thought were live bombs to be used in the attack, law enforcement officials said. Authorities said Domingo, who had no prior criminal record, came to their attention because of a series of violent extremist messages he posted in online chat rooms, one of which called for "retribution" for the massacre of 50 people at mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, by a gunman in March. "Often we are asked what keeps us up at night. This is a case that keeps us up at night," Ryan Young, special agent in charge of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force, told a news conference in Los Angeles. Domingo, who had purchased several hundred long nails to serve as shrapnel in the homemade pressure-cooker bombs, had also suggested attacks on Jews, police officers, churches, a military facility, Southern California freeways and the Santa Monica Pier during internet conversations with the FBI operatives, Young said. He was charged in a federal criminal complaint with providing material support to terrorists and was ordered held without bond during a brief initial appearance in US District Court in Los Angeles on Monday. “This investigation successfully disrupted a very real threat posed by a trained combat soldier who repeatedly stated he wanted to cause the maximum number of casualties,” US Attorney Nick Hanna said in a statement. According to the criminal complaint, an FBI operative established contact with Domingo in a private online chat room in March, leading to discussions in which Domingo expressed support for Islamic militants and the desire to seek revenge for attacks on Muslims. 'VIOLENT JIHAD' In one of his earliest posts, he suggested that "America needs another Vegas event," an apparent reference to the 2017 mass shooting at a country music concert in Las Vegas where a lone gunman perched in a nearby hotel killed 58 people and wounded hundreds, the complaint alleged. Domingo, who said he wanted to become a martyr, also made reference to the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, according to the complaint. During one meeting in person with an FBI operative, he arrived carrying an AK 47-style assault rifle, telling the informant: "I just wanted to show you that I'm serious." According to a law enforcement database, Domingo is the registered owner of three semi-automatic rifles. An FBI spokeswoman said received a less-than-honourable discharge from the Army. Prosecutors say Domingo contemplated drive-by shootings and detonating a bomb at the Santa Monica pier before deciding to bomb a rally scheduled for Sunday, April 28, in the Los Angeles suburb of Long Beach that he believed was organized by white nationalists. Domingo and two FBI informants visited the planned site of the rally to scout the best location to place explosives to cause the greatest casualties, authorities said, agreeing that they would leave the scene separately to throw off suspicion. He was arrested shortly after placing one of the mock bombs into the vehicle of an informant. The white nationalist rally ended up not happening, although a number of counterdemonstrators assembled at the site, the Los Angeles City News Service said. The announcement of Domingo's arrest came two days after a gunman opened fire in a San Diego-area synagogue, killing one woman and wounding three others, including the rabbi. John Earnest, 19, was arrested. There was no indication the two incidents were connected.

US Army veteran charged with plotting to bomb white nationalist rally

2017 has, as always, been a year of paradoxes for the judiciary. The Apex Court driven by the intellectual strength of its judges delivered some phenomenal judgements. Right to privacy was firmly established in our constitutional jurisprudence. In the process, a significant part of the affront involved in Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was corrected. Triple Talaq was not only rightly held to be an unintegral part of Islam but constitutionally untenable, a bold step to take in a country where misogyny often passes off as a divine mandate. Firecrackers were banned, but in the process, the limits of enforcing orders in public interest litigations was exposed. The Indian judiciary though not known for its expeditious disposals, has never the less made significant strides in policy level adjudications and commercial matters. On the other hand, the Talwars were found to have spent time in prison unnecessarily and turns out the 2G spectrum scandal, was not truly a scandal.

We aced the policy challenge but failed to improve our record with trials. Where are we going wrong?

What does Vijay Mally tell us about Indian courts?

The World Bank, in its June 2017 study of the Indian subcontinent, found that in terms of contract enforcement, India ranks 164 in the world with an average time of 1445 days involved in the process coming at a cost of 31% of the value of the claim. In terms of how bad this is, one will see that Iraq ranks 144, twenty ranks better than India with an average time of 520 days involved for the case to be decided,&nbsp;coming at a cost of 28.1% of the claim.&nbsp;

In other words, in Iraq, I can enforce my contract sooner at a cost lesser than in India. No doubt the quality of adjudication appears to be much better in India. At 10.3, India ranked on par with many developed economies. The result,&nbsp;in our experience, is that while litigants secure good verdicts eventually, often their ability to enforce the verdict is frustrated. Thus, while the banks secured good verdicts against Mr. Vijay Mallya, it is too late to enforce them considering he is no longer here by the time the walls could close in.&nbsp;

One can dismiss the troubles of businesses with the judiciary as the superficial complaints of a bourgeoise elite.&nbsp; But the criminal justice system which is the poster child of the ordinary common man&rsquo;s experience with the criminal justice system, things are no better. The concept of a day to day trial as required under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 remains a distant dream. Time-bound disposals of criminal cases mandated by special laws like the Protection from Children from Sexual Offences Act, 1973 and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are never achieved.&nbsp;

But what happens after such a long and lengthy trial?

Besides making the accused and victim feel like they are being punished, the result of criminal trials is abysmal. Approximately 76% of sexual assault cases and 94-98% of corruption cases result in acquittal. In private complaints, involving a petty offence like dishonour of cheques, should the accused decide to avoid service of summons by absconding, the probability of the criminal justice system securing his presence is slim to none.&nbsp;

On an assessment of the overall performance of the Indian judiciary, what emerges is that despite the many trials and tribulations, we continue to remain steadfast in our fundamental values and philosophy. However, we are slow to ideate, slower to implement and averse to innovation. To my mind, while the need to increase the number of judges is definitely one solution, the larger solution lies in unlearning and relearning.

The number of judges or quality of judges?

In the N.R. Bhat v. State of Karnataka by CBI, Justice A.V. Chandrashekar introduced the concept of a pre-trial conference by reading it into the day to day trial requirements of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Such a pretrial conference, taking the judge, the prosecution and the defence into confidence while setting out the days of the trial in advance, would go a long way in arresting frivolous adjournment pleas. The Supreme Court in Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab, categorically laid down that cross examination of witnesses must be concluded on the very same day of their examination in criminal cases. Putting these two judgements together, a pre-trial conference followed by non-negotiable insistence on concluding the cross-examination of witnesses in criminal cases on the same day as their examination would effectively end the culture of prolonging the trial of criminal cases in India.&nbsp;

I cite these two judgements to highlight an important point, a creative and pragmatic approach is necessary to ensure procedures aimed at fairness don&rsquo;t end up becoming counterproductive. While a fundamental review of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is critical, the example of judicial creativity demonstrated in the N.R. Bhat and Vinod Kumar judgements shows that effective adjudication has less to do with quantity of judges and more to do with the quality of judges.&nbsp;

Furthermore, even before the procedures are fundamentally re-written, I think it is time, we measured the use of our procedures. For example the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides room for the court to secure the assistance of family welfare experts in matters involving family disputes. In Australia, visitation orders for children are monitored by outsourced agencies trained and vetted in order to ensure the court has a neutral report of the welfare of the child, making the determination of guardianship and visitation much easier and faster. But in India despite the concept of such outsourced persons and agencies being contemplated in the law, it is seldom utilised. Perhaps the time is ripe for a manual to be provided identifying existing innovations within our law and mandating their use by the court system. &nbsp;

To summarise, our procedures need to be revisited. One part of it involves changing the procedures altogether. But the other part of it involves reading the procedures in a manner which is jurisprudentially sound and yet capable of solving fundamental problems.&nbsp;

Nepotism and poor pay

Commercial courts, though required to be established by law, are yet to begin operations in several states, including Karnataka and their absence has inflicted cynicism in the minds of businesses. Special courts under beneficial legislations like the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 are nothing but existing courts donning an additional hat under a POCSO Act. What we need is not just special courts, but exclusive courts. In other words, we need exclusivity for our special courts and not just special court status under special legislations.&nbsp;

Secondly, no effort is being made to attract the right talent in our prosecution and government pleader ecosystem. The private sector offers much better compensation packages for the right legal talent and this is as true in India as it is in other countries. However, for those who may consider government service, they will be part of an ecosystem where nepotism remains a problem.

I have had the unfortunate experience of facing government pleaders who oppose much needed medical termination of pregnancies for minor children, simply because they think their job is to oppose every writ petition that comes before the Karnataka High Court. Our Advocate Generals and Solicitor Generals are often the best and the brightest, but the grassroot government pleader and the public prosecutor suffer from poor pay, poorer training and even poorer access to critical resources like staff and case law databases. Unless the government invests money in their careers, in building their capacity and their skill set and training, we can neither expect expeditious disposals nor can we expect more conscious prosecutions and convictions.&nbsp;

Big data and machine learning to nab criminals

Investigation of Criminal cases is fundamentally challenging. Even the Federal Bureau of Investigation with all its sophisticated technology failed to apprehend the Unabomber for close to 17 years. Yet, what ultimately made the apprehension possible was a little-known technique back in the day called forensic linguistics. Based on the letters and publications of the Unabomber, what emerged was a unique approach to language, almost a linguistic signature of the bomber. A profile developed by FBI profiler James Fitzgerald using forensic linguistics ultimately led to the publication of the manifesto of the Unabomber, which was recognised by the Unabomber&rsquo;s younger brother. The result was the identification of Ted Kazynsky as the Unabomber. A Harvard educated mathematician with an IQ of 167, the Unabomber was an Intellectual elite, but even he could not evade the law all because he wrote and spoke in a unique manner.

After the Boston Bombing, when conventional facial recognition software could not provide a clear picture of the accused, an experimental technology of the University of Carnegie-Mellon&rsquo;s Cylab Biometric Center which analysed the low-resolution picture released by the FBI, was able to identify the accused in a controlled experiment. What made this technology work when existing facial recognition software failed? The answer lied in a concept called machine learning, a process by which computers are &ldquo;trained&rdquo; to perform tasks. In this case, the Center&rsquo;s technology was made to analyse thousands of faces in low resolution and high-resolution images, so that it can determine the bridge between low resolution and high-resolution images. The rationale of that bridge is then interpreted in the form of an algorithm which can then be used to develop high-resolution versions of low-resolution images. Image analytics and machine learning combined could greatly enhance the way suspects are identified using facial recognition software.

The Department of Mathematics and the Department of Anthropology at UCLA, USA, published a paper in 2017 highlighting the utilities of using Deep learning methods for real-time crime forecasting. The paper titled &ldquo;Deep Learning for Real Time Crime Forecasting&rdquo; by Bao Wang, Duo Zhang, Duanhao Zhang, P. Jeffrey Brantingham and Andre L. Bertozzi suggests that using deep learning methods, pilot experiments in Los Angeles revealed &ldquo;highly accurate predictive power&rdquo; of the models developed using deep learning methods.

I cite these case studies to make an important point- in India we don&rsquo;t know what we don&rsquo;t know. Forget forensic linguistics or offender profiling, machine learning or deep learning, I am yet to come across investigating officers in my training programmes who have some background in basics of criminal investigation, such as victimology and criminology. In an era of big data and analytics, India&rsquo;s use of statistical methods in crime solving is limited to the National Crime Records Bureau Statistics published every year.&nbsp; But these statistics contain rich information that could throw light into patterns, motivational classification for criminals, modus operandis and signatures in crimes, etc.

Machine learning and Deep Learning methods can enhance facial recognition software, enabling us to identify suspects from CCTV camera footage much faster and better. Analytics methods can help us reverse engineers crime scenes and victimology to determine the age profile, job profile and psychological characteristics of the suspect involved in the crime. Yet, we remain leaps behind in leveraging the full power of data analytics, machine learning, deep learning, behavioural sciences and artificial intelligence in investigating and prosecuting criminals in this country.&nbsp;

The need of the hour is to do away with the age-old classification of law and order, crime and traffic within the police and instead have a dedicated investigation cadre with further specialisation in specific offences like homicide, sexual assault, robbery, theft, etc. A dedicated think tank is necessary within law enforcement circles to explore the use of data analytics, behavioural sciences and other modern technologies to aid the investigator in deciphering clues and apprehending suspects. Unless we fundamentally redo investigating agencies in this country, conviction rates are unlikely to go up nor will we find closure in many critical cases.&nbsp;

A better Indian justice system in 2018?

The problems within the judiciary in the year 2017 are not fundamentally different from the problems faced by the judiciary in 1997 or 2015 even. Overworked, underpaid, delayed disposals and poor conviction rates have remained the common themes associated with our justice system. Yet, we have remained slow and unwilling to accept the problems in our fundamentals. In the year, 2018 I hope that as a population we move away from demanding different laws and instead petition for a reformed system. As proud as I am of all that we do every day in the justice system, I have seen the potential to do better, in the good intentions and passion of judges, prosecutors, policemen, lawyers, bench clerks and stenographers among others every day in the court system. Let us enable them to produce results by giving them the right training, tools and manuals. We owe it to them and we owe it to ourselves.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

In the year, 2018 I hope that as a population we move away from demanding different laws and instead petition for a reformed system.

2017 has, as always, been a year of paradoxes for the judiciary. The Apex Court driven by the intellectual strength of its judges delivered some phenomenal judgements. Right to privacy was firmly established in our constitutional jurisprudence. In the process, a significant part of the affront involved in Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was corrected. Triple Talaq was not only rightly held to be an unintegral part of Islam but constitutionally untenable, a bold step to take in a country where misogyny often passes off as a divine mandate. Firecrackers were banned, but in the process, the limits of enforcing orders in public interest litigations was exposed. The Indian judiciary though not known for its expeditious disposals, has never the less made significant strides in policy level adjudications and commercial matters. On the other hand, the Talwars were found to have spent time in prison unnecessarily and turns out the 2G spectrum scandal, was not truly a scandal. We aced the policy challenge but failed to improve our record with trials. Where are we going wrong? What does Vijay Mally tell us about Indian courts? The World Bank, in its June 2017 study of the Indian subcontinent, found that in terms of contract enforcement, India ranks 164 in the world with an average time of 1445 days involved in the process coming at a cost of 31% of the value of the claim. In terms of how bad this is, one will see that Iraq ranks 144, twenty ranks better than India with an average time of 520 days involved for the case to be decided, coming at a cost of 28.1% of the claim. In other words, in Iraq, I can enforce my contract sooner at a cost lesser than in India. No doubt the quality of adjudication appears to be much better in India. At 10.3, India ranked on par with many developed economies. The result, in our experience, is that while litigants secure good verdicts eventually, often their ability to enforce the verdict is frustrated. Thus, while the banks secured good verdicts against Mr. Vijay Mallya, it is too late to enforce them considering he is no longer here by the time the walls could close in. One can dismiss the troubles of businesses with the judiciary as the superficial complaints of a bourgeoise elite. But the criminal justice system which is the poster child of the ordinary common man’s experience with the criminal justice system, things are no better. The concept of a day to day trial as required under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 remains a distant dream. Time-bound disposals of criminal cases mandated by special laws like the Protection from Children from Sexual Offences Act, 1973 and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are never achieved. But what happens after such a long and lengthy trial? Besides making the accused and victim feel like they are being punished, the result of criminal trials is abysmal. Approximately 76% of sexual assault cases and 94-98% of corruption cases result in acquittal. In private complaints, involving a petty offence like dishonour of cheques, should the accused decide to avoid service of summons by absconding, the probability of the criminal justice system securing his presence is slim to none. On an assessment of the overall performance of the Indian judiciary, what emerges is that despite the many trials and tribulations, we continue to remain steadfast in our fundamental values and philosophy. However, we are slow to ideate, slower to implement and averse to innovation. To my mind, while the need to increase the number of judges is definitely one solution, the larger solution lies in unlearning and relearning. The number of judges or quality of judges? In the N.R. Bhat v. State of Karnataka by CBI, Justice A.V. Chandrashekar introduced the concept of a pre-trial conference by reading it into the day to day trial requirements of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Such a pretrial conference, taking the judge, the prosecution and the defence into confidence while setting out the days of the trial in advance, would go a long way in arresting frivolous adjournment pleas. The Supreme Court in Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab, categorically laid down that cross examination of witnesses must be concluded on the very same day of their examination in criminal cases. Putting these two judgements together, a pre-trial conference followed by non-negotiable insistence on concluding the cross-examination of witnesses in criminal cases on the same day as their examination would effectively end the culture of prolonging the trial of criminal cases in India. I cite these two judgements to highlight an important point, a creative and pragmatic approach is necessary to ensure procedures aimed at fairness don’t end up becoming counterproductive. While a fundamental review of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is critical, the example of judicial creativity demonstrated in the N.R. Bhat and Vinod Kumar judgements shows that effective adjudication has less to do with quantity of judges and more to do with the quality of judges. Furthermore, even before the procedures are fundamentally re-written, I think it is time, we measured the use of our procedures. For example the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides room for the court to secure the assistance of family welfare experts in matters involving family disputes. In Australia, visitation orders for children are monitored by outsourced agencies trained and vetted in order to ensure the court has a neutral report of the welfare of the child, making the determination of guardianship and visitation much easier and faster. But in India despite the concept of such outsourced persons and agencies being contemplated in the law, it is seldom utilised. Perhaps the time is ripe for a manual to be provided identifying existing innovations within our law and mandating their use by the court system. To summarise, our procedures need to be revisited. One part of it involves changing the procedures altogether. But the other part of it involves reading the procedures in a manner which is jurisprudentially sound and yet capable of solving fundamental problems. Nepotism and poor pay Commercial courts, though required to be established by law, are yet to begin operations in several states, including Karnataka and their absence has inflicted cynicism in the minds of businesses. Special courts under beneficial legislations like the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 are nothing but existing courts donning an additional hat under a POCSO Act. What we need is not just special courts, but exclusive courts. In other words, we need exclusivity for our special courts and not just special court status under special legislations. Secondly, no effort is being made to attract the right talent in our prosecution and government pleader ecosystem. The private sector offers much better compensation packages for the right legal talent and this is as true in India as it is in other countries. However, for those who may consider government service, they will be part of an ecosystem where nepotism remains a problem. I have had the unfortunate experience of facing government pleaders who oppose much needed medical termination of pregnancies for minor children, simply because they think their job is to oppose every writ petition that comes before the Karnataka High Court. Our Advocate Generals and Solicitor Generals are often the best and the brightest, but the grassroot government pleader and the public prosecutor suffer from poor pay, poorer training and even poorer access to critical resources like staff and case law databases. Unless the government invests money in their careers, in building their capacity and their skill set and training, we can neither expect expeditious disposals nor can we expect more conscious prosecutions and convictions. Big data and machine learning to nab criminals Investigation of Criminal cases is fundamentally challenging. Even the Federal Bureau of Investigation with all its sophisticated technology failed to apprehend the Unabomber for close to 17 years. Yet, what ultimately made the apprehension possible was a little-known technique back in the day called forensic linguistics. Based on the letters and publications of the Unabomber, what emerged was a unique approach to language, almost a linguistic signature of the bomber. A profile developed by FBI profiler James Fitzgerald using forensic linguistics ultimately led to the publication of the manifesto of the Unabomber, which was recognised by the Unabomber’s younger brother. The result was the identification of Ted Kazynsky as the Unabomber. A Harvard educated mathematician with an IQ of 167, the Unabomber was an Intellectual elite, but even he could not evade the law all because he wrote and spoke in a unique manner. After the Boston Bombing, when conventional facial recognition software could not provide a clear picture of the accused, an experimental technology of the University of Carnegie-Mellon’s Cylab Biometric Center which analysed the low-resolution picture released by the FBI, was able to identify the accused in a controlled experiment. What made this technology work when existing facial recognition software failed? The answer lied in a concept called machine learning, a process by which computers are “trained” to perform tasks. In this case, the Center’s technology was made to analyse thousands of faces in low resolution and high-resolution images, so that it can determine the bridge between low resolution and high-resolution images. The rationale of that bridge is then interpreted in the form of an algorithm which can then be used to develop high-resolution versions of low-resolution images. Image analytics and machine learning combined could greatly enhance the way suspects are identified using facial recognition software. The Department of Mathematics and the Department of Anthropology at UCLA, USA, published a paper in 2017 highlighting the utilities of using Deep learning methods for real-time crime forecasting. The paper titled “Deep Learning for Real Time Crime Forecasting” by Bao Wang, Duo Zhang, Duanhao Zhang, P. Jeffrey Brantingham and Andre L. Bertozzi suggests that using deep learning methods, pilot experiments in Los Angeles revealed “highly accurate predictive power” of the models developed using deep learning methods. I cite these case studies to make an important point- in India we don’t know what we don’t know. Forget forensic linguistics or offender profiling, machine learning or deep learning, I am yet to come across investigating officers in my training programmes who have some background in basics of criminal investigation, such as victimology and criminology. In an era of big data and analytics, India’s use of statistical methods in crime solving is limited to the National Crime Records Bureau Statistics published every year. But these statistics contain rich information that could throw light into patterns, motivational classification for criminals, modus operandis and signatures in crimes, etc. Machine learning and Deep Learning methods can enhance facial recognition software, enabling us to identify suspects from CCTV camera footage much faster and better. Analytics methods can help us reverse engineers crime scenes and victimology to determine the age profile, job profile and psychological characteristics of the suspect involved in the crime. Yet, we remain leaps behind in leveraging the full power of data analytics, machine learning, deep learning, behavioural sciences and artificial intelligence in investigating and prosecuting criminals in this country. The need of the hour is to do away with the age-old classification of law and order, crime and traffic within the police and instead have a dedicated investigation cadre with further specialisation in specific offences like homicide, sexual assault, robbery, theft, etc. A dedicated think tank is necessary within law enforcement circles to explore the use of data analytics, behavioural sciences and other modern technologies to aid the investigator in deciphering clues and apprehending suspects. Unless we fundamentally redo investigating agencies in this country, conviction rates are unlikely to go up nor will we find closure in many critical cases. A better Indian justice system in 2018? The problems within the judiciary in the year 2017 are not fundamentally different from the problems faced by the judiciary in 1997 or 2015 even. Overworked, underpaid, delayed disposals and poor conviction rates have remained the common themes associated with our justice system. Yet, we have remained slow and unwilling to accept the problems in our fundamentals. In the year, 2018 I hope that as a population we move away from demanding different laws and instead petition for a reformed system. As proud as I am of all that we do every day in the justice system, I have seen the potential to do better, in the good intentions and passion of judges, prosecutors, policemen, lawyers, bench clerks and stenographers among others every day in the court system. Let us enable them to produce results by giving them the right training, tools and manuals. We owe it to them and we owe it to ourselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL).

Opinion: What judiciary can learn from Vijay Mallya, Big data and private sector in 2018

boston-bombing

Boston Bombing, News on Boston Bombing, stories on Boston Bombing, articles on Boston Bombing, Boston Bombing stories at Wion, Boston Bombing news, Boston Bombing latest news

boston bombing

Supreme Court to consider death sentence in Boston Marathon bombing case

Donald Trump calls for death sentence of Boston marathon bomber

Boston Marathon bomber wins death penalty appeal

US Army veteran charged with plotting to bomb white nationalist rally

Opinion: What judiciary can learn from Vijay Mallya, Big data and private sector in 2018