saxmaster

This whole story makes much more sense if you believe that the Boston bombings were a simulated event by the FBI, and the FBI doesn't want friends and acquaintances to expose the innocence of the Tsarnaevs. That's why they've intimidated anyone with any connection to the brothers, and tryied to make them look like extremists themselves. Okay, time to go clear my search history.

Level126

he would support the bombings if the reason were just or the attack had been done by the Taliban.”

Though I don't think he's a terrorist this is just plain stupid and clearly displays dangerous qualities.

Anther

As always, it seems the best defense is to never get involved with the law in the first place. If you upset the powers that be, they can do whatever they like to you; publicly or otherwise. Scary stuff indeed.

Meechum

Friends of the younger Tsarnaev brother did make mistakes that seem trivial on the surface, but when you try to get the upper hand on the FBI especially as a young adult...it isn't going to work. It doesn't seem the content that was on his computer was related to plans or images dealing with the attack. I wonder what the content is.

madmaddiemim

How is this not clearly a violation of the Fifth Amendment? He's being charged with 'destroying evidence' that he owned that would incriminate him. Isn't that him exercising his right not to incriminate himself?

downtherabbithole

The Fifth Amendment only applies to witness testimony.

voatergoater

Let's say a doe in heat since we are here at voat and the mascot is a goat. Have you ever seen a doe in heat? It's impressive! Male visitors to the goat pen better watch out. They don't care what species the dick is at all. ;-)

jiveinthehive

This is one of those seemingly less and less rare instances of sometimes what you post on social media, harmless to you or meaningless to you or not, can come back to haunt you. Just because he associated with an alleged terrorist and posted having similar political and philosophical affiliations does not make him a terrorist, but it will be rough talking to investigators for quite some time to make sure you won't avenge your friend.

mr_skeltal

He’s also charged with clearing his search history on Google Chrome.

That's a crime in America?

Edit: I just read the next paragraph, this is why you shouldn't prematurely comment.

voatergoater

Good catch and question.

mr_skeltal

But really, that is some twisted way to use that law. I can understand it in a business setting but this is abusing a loophole to punish people that have done very little wrong apart from piss off police.

downtherabbithole

Ultimately, I think they just throw as many charges as possible at a person, knowing that the overwhelming majority wouldn't stick if they actually went to trial. I feel it's a way to scare a person into pleading guilty and taking a deal; it's probably extra effective on those who aren't familiar with US customs in general and the justice system in particular. The prosecutors would rather make the conviction the easy way, rather than taking the risk that a jury will acquit due to sparse evidence and stretched interpretations of legal precedents like Sarbox.

voatergoater

Agree. Best to steer clear of Johnny Law in every way. I wonder if that is in Chrome's terms of service? I don't use it but who reads all that fine print anyway?