Two explosions at Boston marathon finish line

[FourthBase]

you're acting like a kitten and the operators have a laser pointer.

Can't you see how easy it is to gin this up? The link shows you that this is a part of normal flight training. Most likely form a nearby smaller airport. The flight plans are no doubt available. In the news story there's not mention one of looking for flight plans. It is not the officials job to hunt down every non-event story and hold hands while they walk who knows how many people stirred up by this rumor through a complete understanding of the world around them.

I have witnessed exactly the same circle flying here in PDX in the late 90s. If I went and stared at the sky for awhile I could probably see the same thing again. They're relatively low and slow and won't be visible unless you have the right vantage in the right parts of the city.

Dude. Good christ.

This story did not originate with the media, first of all.
People along Wollaston Beach noticed something unusual.
Meaning, not like any flight training they'd ever seen or heard.
These are not hayseeds who never done seen a flying truck be-foh!
These are people who hear and see planes every day, every half hour or less.

The only possible explanation I can think of at the moment is...
Tom Brady or some other VIP from Marina Bay is learning to fly.
Only reason why every single official would give a super-firm NTSHMA.
Wouldn't want the plebians gawking all day at the sky, asking questions.
Wait, already are, because they see and hear something strange.
Anyway, totally see that as a reason for local officials to conspire.
Everybody wants to feel like an offensive lineman, lol.

But, again, they are hearing something they have not heard before.
And they are seeing something they have not seen before.
They would have heard and seen practice flight loops before.

[justdrew]

you may have missed the edited tail I added to my last post. check it out. Apparently an IR spotter plane looking for grow ops.

[FourthBase]

you may have missed the edited tail I added to my last post. check it out. Apparently an IR spotter plane looking for grow ops.

Damn. Told you. Leave the herb alone, you hypocrite pigs!

But then, even that explanation is just speculation.
No confirmation or really even any evidence it was just a grow-op hunt.
Could have been some other surveillance. Who knows. Not us. Yet.

FourthBase might be able to tell us if anyone in Watertown could possibly have missed seeing the two brothers repeatedly featured on the TV or internet that night.

Not a chance in frostbitten hell.
Local news, combined, must've had double the local market share of a big Super Bowl.
There are probably ratings stats that could confirm/deny that.
But that was the Television Night of a Lifetime.

[8bitagent]

Vimeo staff pick of the day: "Boston Marathon Timeline". Never saw that footage of the 'courthouse bomb scare' and some of the other stuff.
https://vimeo.com/65430449

There's a lot of 20 something and early 30 something year old film auteur hipster youth in New York and elsewhere who make a lot of documentary shorts on every topic on vimeo.
Surprised none have an interest in diving into some of these events. All the 'conspiracy' videos online these days tend to be idiots talking about "fake" grainy photos and really bad positing.

[FourthBase]

Vimeo staff pick of the day: "Boston Marathon Timeline". Never saw that footage of the 'courthouse bomb scare' and some of the other stuff.
https://vimeo.com/65430449

There's a lot of 20 something and early 30 something year old film auteur hipster youth in New York and elsewhere who make a lot of documentary shorts on every topic on vimeo.
Surprised none have an interest in diving into some of these events. All the 'conspiracy' videos online these days tend to be idiots talking about "fake" grainy photos and really bad positing.

Right, the courthouse! Almost forgot that. Posted about it as it happened.
Somewhere way, way, way upthread, in the 20's or something.

They definitely brought in a suspect through the side where they always bring suspects.
Then the whole fucking courthouse is emptied, except for one magistrate and...? Who?
Maybe they brought in the Moroccan kid, he had said that morning on FB he was going to court.

[Jerky]

Damn that's amazing.

People. Sheesh.

Thanks for sharing that with us.

Jerky

Side bar- I remember working on an elderly lady who coded (cardiac, repiratory failure) we took turns doing CPR and one nurse kept talking to her telling her not to go, we did CPR for 20 minutes (broke a couple of her ribs doing it) and finally got a rhythm(pulse of some sort). The next day she told us the only thing she remembered was the lady telling her not to go, so she didnt.

[compared2what?]

[

Whilst Im no longer big by way of speculation, which is what this all is - Anyone here subscribe to the "drill gone live"? Seem to have a well established history in such scenarios, or at least an extremely good case can be made for many such atrocities being carried out in this fashion.

I do still like that theory, mostly because I just can't really come up with a great reason the FBI would have claimed not to know the identities of suspects #1 and 2 that Thursday evening.

Sting gone wrong. Or, as the case may be, "wrong."


Meaning: That would be also be a reason, also pedigreed.

[MacCruiskeen]

c2w, I have your MO sussed now. Your war-of-attrition shtick is getting old, and it is no kind of dialogue. It is just relentlessly and stupidly insulting. (I knew you would accuse me of thinking I was Zola. I knew you would claim I claimed to have proof of Dzhokhar T's innocence. Etcetera, ad nauseam.) It is worth nobody's time. So stop wasting my time and everyone else's.

-----------------------------------------

Back on-topic. I have a request to anyone who is both serious and honest and not wilfully wasting other posters' time and energy:

***If anyone can find any report anywhere in which Dr. Schoenfeld or Dr. Wolfe ever even hinted that Tamerlan Tsarnaev might have been DEAD ON ARRIVAL at the hospital, please post it here.*** (E.g., "He was clinically dead when they brought him in, but we did our best to revive him", or words to that effect.)

As things stand, they clearly and unambiguously contradict the coroner's statement that TT was DOA. So either they are lying or the coroner is lying.

Thank you.

Also:

37c: Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN

http://documents.latimes.com/tamerlan-t ... rtificate/

WTF??? He can't even say approximately?

Any (serious) thoughts on why the coroner was so completely at a loss about this? After all, TT was (according to the coroner) DOA, and the cops presumably knew at what exact time he was shot by them and at what exact time he was run over by somebody (if he was run over by anybody). So: he died between receiving those injuries and arriving dead (according to the coroner) at the hospital. Determining the approximate time of death should, then, be easy, to within a very few minutes.

So why does the coroner say: "Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN"?

[MacCruiskeen]

From a third news source, the Boston Globe:

At about 1:20 a.m., emergency medical personnel wheeled in Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, handcuffed, unconscious, and near death. His tattered clothes had already been cut away. More than a dozen police officers surrounded him.

Emergency crews were performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation on Tsarnaev, who had massive injuries, including burns on his right shoulder, bullet wounds, and a gaping slash on his torso.

[...]
Schoenfeld said doctors placed a breathing tube in Tsarnaev’s throat and tubes in his chest to release pressure from his lungs.[Not from the lungs of a corpse.]

But Tsarnaev had lost massive amounts of blood from his wounds and was suffering massive cardiac and respiratory arrest. Doctors could not revive him and declared the suspect dead about 1:35 a.m. — about 15 minutes after he was brought in.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/he ... story.html

So, not "DOA". And the approximate time of death is not "unknown".

And those burns, and that "gaping slash"?

Police took Tamerlan Tsarnaev to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center about 1:10 a.m. Friday. He was pronounced dead at 1:35 a.m. Dr. Richard Wolfe said the suspect had been hit by shrapnel from an explosion and that he had died from “a combination of blasts” and “multiple gunshot wounds.”

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/0 ... story.html

"Blasts"? "Explosion"? "Shrapnel"?

Dr. Richard Wolfe saw no injuries suggestive of having been run over by a car. And Dr. Richard Wolfe is chief of emergency medicine at Beth Israel. No doubt he has seen a lot of people run over by cars.

The coroner, Dr. Henry M. Nields, says the suspect was run over by a car, that he was DOA, and that even the approximate time of death is unknown. He mentions no blast, explosion or shrapnel wounds. (Maybe "shot by police" means they fired a tank shell at him.)

It would be good to see the autopsy report.

[barracuda]

[Not from the lungs of a corpse.]

I wish I could get a handle on the exact difference between a person who is unconscious and suffering massive cardiac and respiratory arrest on the one hand, and someone who is dead on the other. If Tamerlan was brought in to the ER not breathing, with no pulse, and not conscious, and he never revives, then wasn't he dead when he arrived there? Or pretty goddamn close? It would seem to be a matter of the issuance of a fiat declaration by the doctors in attendance that they would no longer attempt his revival. But realistically, wasn't he was dead some indeterminate time before that? Like maybe not very long after the police unloaded their sidearms into his prone body after it emerged from the undercarriage of a speeding black Mercedes sport utility vehicle?

What bullshit anyway. Shoot him! Shoot him! I mean, revive him! Revive him!

But Tsarnaev had lost massive amounts of blood from his wounds and was suffering massive cardiac and respiratory arrest. Doctors could not revive him and declared the suspect dead about 1:35 a.m. — about 15 minutes after he was brought in.

I think you bolded the word "suffering" there mostly because it is a widely understood common-sensical notion that a corpse cannot suffer, and so he must have been alive during the act of suffering, i.e. he was undergoing actual suffering right there in the ER. But I'm not sure that what it really intends to convey, because it sounds to me as if he was flatlined from before he even entered the door of the emergency room. I don't know. He might have been suffering from a bad case of dead.

[Iamwhomiam]

MAc wrote,
Any (serious) thoughts on why the coroner was so completely at a loss about this? After all, TT was (according to the coroner) DOA, and the cops presumably knew at what exact time he was shot by them and at what exact time he was run over by somebody (if he was run over by anybody). So: he died between receiving those injuries and arriving dead (according to the coroner) at the hospital. Determining the approximate time of death should, then, be easy, to within a very few minutes.

So why does the coroner say: "Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN"?

It's possible the coroner didn't have access to any of the police who were present where the "shootout" occurred to discuss more specific detail of what transpired and when and therefore he himself had no knowledge of when the doa or then possibly close to doa, now corpse before him, died. An honest answer. (perhaps) And a far different thing from the moment after a physician concludes examination of the assumed once living now corpse and declares it such and announces the time at that moment. That is the time of death reported on death certificates.

If the coroner had issued a statement approximating any time of death would you also find something to question that?

The bruising and at least one other injury apparent in the photo of the (supposed, imagined) deceased indicates extreme close proximity to blast injuries, of course discounting make-up.
Certainly a bullet wound in the side of the corpse (?) that left-faced profile view shows the victim was shot.

But speaking of photos, Mac, why is it you so readily accept it as proof of whom it is we're assuming it is? I mean considering your passionate pursuit of the source of the Lanza photo. How come this time the source of the photo of the accused dead guy entirely of no importance?
Seriously wondering.

One edit: fish, nobody's dead until the Doc says you're dead. It's that simple.

[Burnt Hill]

37c: Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN

http://documents.latimes.com/tamerlan-t ... rtificate/

WTF??? He can't even say approximately?

Any (serious) thoughts on why the coroner was so completely at a loss about this? After all, TT was (according to the coroner) DOA, and the cops presumably knew at what exact time he was shot by them and at what exact time he was run over by somebody (if he was run over by anybody). So: he died between receiving those injuries and arriving dead (according to the coroner) at the hospital. Determining the approximate time of death should, then, be easy, to within a very few minutes.

So why does the coroner say: "Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN"?

[/quote]
I covered this relatively well above. I cant assume the coroner was at a loss at all , but I do know the death certificate is a form letter that leaves no room for "speculation" on time of death. Also from a hospital perspective, if someone arrive via ambulance and the crew is working on him, then the hospital works on him until an MD pronounces, DOA is not a term that is used in this case, at the hospital. In retrospect, the coroner can look at the chart and easily state DOA. As far as the time, it was somewhere between when he suffered trauma at the scene and when the MD promounced.

[Burnt Hill]

and what iamwhomiam said.
There have been instances where a person regains a heart rhythm after pronouncement.fwiw
Not sure the coroner would "care" about the exact time of death anyway. All that matters is he was pronounced.

[hiddenite]

Does there not have to be an inquest, after such a death ? At which details like exactly what wounds the body bore has to be revealed and whether or not he was handcuffed then shot or shot then handcuffed, who shot what and where and an explanation for the burns etc etc .Witnesses called ? How long was it between the shooting and the arrival at hospital and is that accounted for by the distance or clearing the scene ? Is it normal to handcuff a corpse ?

[MacCruiskeen]

37c: Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN

http://documents.latimes.com/tamerlan-t ... rtificate/

WTF??? He can't even say approximately?

Any (serious) thoughts on why the coroner was so completely at a loss about this? After all, TT was (according to the coroner) DOA, and the cops presumably knew at what exact time he was shot by them and at what exact time he was run over by somebody (if he was run over by anybody). So: he died between receiving those injuries and arriving dead (according to the coroner) at the hospital. Determining the approximate time of death should, then, be easy, to within a very few minutes.

So why does the coroner say: "Appx Time of Death: UNKNOWN"?

I covered this relatively well above.

I beg to differ

I cant assume the coroner was at a loss at all ,

Clearly he was. He can't answer an extremely simple and absolutely routine question, a particularly easy one to answer in this case.

but I do know the death certificate is a form letter that leaves no room for "speculation" on time of death.

Nobody is asking for "speculation", or even for speculation. We are asking for what is -- demonstratively -- left room for on what you call the form letter: "Appx Time of Death".

Also from a hospital perspective, if someone arrive via ambulance and the crew is working on him, then the hospital works on him until an MD pronounces [the patient dead]

Precisely.

DOA is not a term that is used in this case, at the hospital.

No? Never? Even if (say) a car-crash victim bleeds out completely en route to the hospital? Even if that person is clearly stone-dead and beyond rescue? What term do they use then?

In retrospect, the coroner can look at the chart and easily state DOA.

Not if the person wasn't in fact DOA (= Dead On Arrival). Not without lying.

As far as the time, it was somewhere between when he suffered trauma at the scene and when the MD promounced.

Precisely. So why doesn't he state it (if not precisely than at least approximately), just as the form requires him to do?

The coroner says "DOA" but he doesn't know when TT arrived? Rubbish. The coroner doesn't know the time of death? Not even approximately? Rubbish. As you yourself acknowledge, and as I had already pointed out:

As far as the time, it was somewhere between when he suffered trauma at the scene and when the MD promounced.

It ain't rocket science, nor is it brain surgery.