The Todashev Report: One Big Question: Why Does The FBI Makes Itself Look So Bad

FBI MaskI finally finished reading and thinking about Florida State’s Attorney Ashton’s thorough report on the killing of Ibragim Todashev.  The basic facts contained in the report were known within hours or days after the homicide. I’ll never understand why we had to wait so long (10 months) for an official report on what happened.

I cannot figure why the FBI did not released an initial preliminary report back in May 2013 stating something to the effect: “An FBI agent and a Massachusetts State Trooper were in the Orlando, Florida, apartment of Ibragim Todashev interviewing him in connection with a triple homicide that occurred in Waltham, Ma. on September 11, 2011, when shortly after midnight on May 22, 2013, Todashev, a well-known martial arts expert, attacked the FBI agent striking him on the head. He then fled from the room in which they were sitting into the kitchen. He returned carrying a stick and wielding it in such a threatening manner that the FBI agent fearing for his life or great bodily injury shot him resulting in his death. Two other law enforcement officers were present at the time but they were standing outside the apartment at the time of the incident. A complete report will follow upon the completion of the investigation.”

What is so hard about that?

To his credit, Florida State Attorney Jeffrey L. Ashton’s report reflects an exceedingly thorough investigation by his office. It was as complete as one could expect. His investigator, Eric Edwards, did not rely on the reports provided by the FBI other than in one case (FBI agent who did shooting refused to be interviewed) but did a thorough investigation on his own going back through the evidence in a professional, systematic and painstaking manner. It was a well done job that left little for me to question.

Given the facts as set out in the report, there is little doubt in my mind that the officers present at the scene acted responsibly and the homicide of Todashev was an act of self-defense by the FBI agent who acted to protect not only himself but the Massachusetts trooper was was in immediate danger of being severely injured.

The officers present knew of the martial arts background of Todashev and through most of the interview acted properly in having him outnumbered by three to one. During that time Todashev acted in control and presented no threat. When one trooper walked outside to contact the DA in Middlesex, the odds had changed as Todashev must have seen it. Then he changed his compliant behavior into one that gave the trooper on the scene cause for concern.

While this was happening Todashev had already implicated himself in the triple homicide in Waltham. Fortunately, the state troopers had recording devices operating which would support the claim that he had done this. Also, there was the partial written statement as further corroboration. I’m sure this is one time the FBI is glad recordings were made; perhaps it will learn from this of the benefit they bring in resolving doubt.

One curious thing happened. The trooper who was in contact with the Middlesex DA was told by the DA not to arrest him until he got a warrant. Fortunately that advise, which I don’t understand, did not alter the situation in any manner. I don’t believe the troopers would have had him arrested (either by them or the FBI agent) at that moment since he was in the process of writing out his confession. I’m sure the troopers were of the mind not to do anything to interrupt the flow of events since all was going their way.

In sum, it was a justifiable homicide conducted by an FBI agent who was working with two Massachusetts state troopers in a professional manner carrying on a proper investigation. There’s nothing I can see that leaves any doubt as to what happened. The physical evidence of the broom stick being under the body; the autopsy report; the bleeding head of the FBI agent; the text messages all corroborate the findings.

The couple of things that people will point to is that the FBI agent who did the killing refused to be interviewed. The agent making that choice and the FBI backing the agent up makes it look like they had something to hide. Then, as I mentioned starting off, the failure to quickly summarize what happened under circumstances where the only witnesses to the event were four law enforcement officers is totally inexplicable.

Well not totally, you must understand the first commandment of the FBI under which all agents fearfully operate is “Don’t Embarrass the Family.” No one in the agency dared get out in front by putting his or her name on any summary report. Thus it allowed questions to rise, speculation to abound and people to wonder why no one would answer why a man was shot dead. All of it could have been nipped in the bud in this case.

Perhaps the FBI can learn a couple of things from this. Long delay in making an official statement in and off itself is embarrassing leading people to believe something is wrong; and, it’s time to start recording interviews. As I pointed out in a recent post, recently the FBI’s reputation for veracity has taken a big hit in this country. Perhaps it should recognize that they way things were done under J. Edgar Hoover are not the way they should be done in the 21st Century. We’re in a day and age of instant communications and the FBI should come along with the rest of us. Being more responsive and less fearful might bring back the good reputation the FBI once had and which most of its hard working agents deserve.

59 thoughts on “The Todashev Report: One Big Question: Why Does The FBI Makes Itself Look So Bad

  1. Matt:
    Just fight off these cold Maine nights.
    From the whisper stream….

    two stories

    1st story

    see link for full story
    March 31 2014

    Official report: Todashev shot 3 times in the back, once to head

    es attorney has concluded that Ibragim Todashev, a friend of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was shot three times in the back and once to the top of the head out of a total of seven shots fired.
    The State of Florida’s official investigation into the shooting by an FBI special agent, at the same time, accepted the scenario put forth by the FBI, that the agent was responding to a frontal charge with a metal pole by Todashev, during which the agent and a Massachusetts state trooper were in fear for their lives. (FULL FLORIDA STATES ATTORNEY REPORT HERE)
    Todashev was a professional mixed martial arts fighter, although his father has told the media that as a result of a knee injury and surgery, Todashev could not move on his feet very quickly.

    Read more:

    2nd story
    see link for full story

    Sarasota 9/11 terrorist connection mystery continues
    browardbulldog.orgApril 1, 2014

    Two Florida newspapers have asked a Fort Lauderdale federal judge to deny the Justice Department’s effort to shut down a Freedom of Information lawsuit seeking records from an FBI investigation into apparent terrorist activity in Sarasota shortly before 9/11. filed the suit in September 2012 alleging the government was improperly withholding records on the matter. The government, after unexpectedly releasing 31 highly censored pages last spring, argued the court should end the case because of national security considerations and asserted a “reasonable search” had determined “there are no agency records being improperly withheld.”

    Court papers filed Tuesday by attorneys for The Miami Herald and the Sarasota Herald-Tribune say they were intervening “to stress that the outcome of this case is a matter of intense interest to the media and the public generally.” The newspapers also argued “government officials charged with investigating terrorist connections in our state must also be held fully accountable.”

    “The Broward Bulldog has provided this court with ample evidence establishing

    that the FBI could not have possibly conducted adequate searches in response to its federal Freedom of Information Act request,” said the joint brief filed by Tampa attorneys Carol LoCicero and Rachel Fugate. “The stakes are simply too great to accept as a matter of law the government’s vague, often second-hand conclusions as to the adequacy of its document searches.”

    The newspapers’ friend-of-the-court brief asks U.S. District Judge William Zloch not to be “too quick” to accept an agency’s claim it conducted “an appropriate search,” citing examples where records that should have been produced were not.

    One cited case involves the conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch, which sued in 2012 seeking records about the Obama administration’s alleged coordination with the producers of “Zero Dark Thirty,” the motion picture about the hunt for Osama bin Laden. Allegations had been made the White House provided the filmmakers with access to highly sensitive national security records to burnish President Obama’s reputation prior to the 2012 election.

    A judge ordered the CIA to produce records about the matter, “but it was only months later that additional ‘overlooked’ documents were produced that included illuminating correspondence among the White House, the Department of Defense and the CIA suggesting a coordinated effort to provide a heightened level of access to the filmmakers and a desire that the administration be portrayed positively.”

    Broward, represented in the suit by Miami attorney Thomas Julin, disclosed the existence of the FBI’s Sarasota investigation in September 2011.

    The story reported how, a decade earlier, the FBI found direct ties between 9/11 hijackers and a young Saudi couple, Abdulaziz and Anoud al Hijji, who appeared to have hurriedly departed their upscale home in a gated community in the weeks before 9/11 — leaving behind cars, furniture, clothing, a refrigerator full of food and an open safe in the master bedroom.

    Anoud al Hijji is the daughter of the homeowner, Esam Ghazzawi, a longtime adviser to a senior Saudi prince. Ghazzawi was also a focus of FBI interest after 9/11 when agents sought to lure him back to the United States from Saudi Arabia to close the transaction when the home was sold, according to a lawyer for the homeowner’s association.

    Agents searched gatehouse logbooks and license plate snapshots and found evidence vehicles used by the hijackers, including ringleader Mohamed Atta, had visited the home, according to a counterterrorism agent who spoke on condition of anonymity. A sophisticated analysis of incoming and outgoing phone calls to the home also established links to Atta and other terrorists, including Adman Shukrijumah, the agent said.

    Shukrijumah, a former Miramar resident, is on the FBI’s “most wanted” list and the State Department is offering a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture.

    The FBI publicly acknowledged its investigation but said it had found nothing connecting the Hijjis to 9/11.

    Former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, who chaired a congresisonal joint inquiry into the attacks, has said the FBI never informed Congress or the subsequent 9/11 Commission about its Sarasota investigation.

    The story has taken several twists since news of the investigation first broke.

    In February 2012, Florida Department of Law Enforcement documents obtained using state public records law showed in April 2004, Wissam Hammoud, a now-imprisoned “international terrorist associate” then under arrest in Hillsborough County, told the FBI that Hijji considered Osama bin Laden a “hero” and may have known some of the hijackers who trained at a flight school in Venice, about 10 miles from the Hijji residence. Hammoud also told the FBI that Hijji introduced him to Shukrijumah at a soccer game at a local mosque prior to 9/11. Hammoud confirmed making those statements in an interview.

    Hijji was reached in London in 2012 where he worked for Aramco Overseas, the European subsidiary of Saudi Aramco, the state oil company. He told The Telegraph he knew Hamalmoud, but denied any involvement with terrorists. He called 9/11 “an awful crime.”

    One year ago, six months after the lawsuit was filed, the FBI suddenly made public 31 redacted pages about its Sarasota investigation. The records flatly contradicted earlier FBI public statements it found no evidence connecting the Hijjis to the hijackers. Instead, the FBI records said the family had “many connections” to “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/1 1/2001.”

    The declassified documents tied three individuals, with names blanked out, to the Venice flight school where Atta and fellow hijacker Marwan al Shehhi trained. One of those individuals was described as a relative of the Hijjis, whose names were also redacted.

    Last June, the Justice Department moved to end the lawsuit, citing national security. A senior FBI official told the judge disclosure of certain classified information about the Sarasota Saudis “would reveal current specific targets of the FBI’s national security investigations.”

    The FBI did not explain how an investigation it previously said had no connection between those Saudis and the 9/11 attacks involved information so secret that its disclosure “could be expected to cause serious damage to national security.”

    Anthony Summers is co-author with Robbyn Swan of The Eleventh Day, an account of 9/11 that was a finalist for the 2012 Pulitzer Prize for History. Broward Bulldog is a not-for-profit online newspaper created to provide local reporting in the public interest,, 954-603-1351.

    Read more here:

    1. MS:

      Thanks – nice to see your still on the job. Any place north of the old Confederacy during the winter months is where you won’t find me. Can’t imagine people spend the winter in Maine.

  2. William: A lot to consider certainly, but sometimes we murder to dissect as the expression goes. In due respect to your forensics and to this young man, who may or may not have been a co-perpetrator in Waltham, that apartment was too small, the contiguous kitchen and living room areas too studio like indistinguishable, and the respective actors too weltered in upon each other perhaps to be so geometrically calculated in your breakdown.

    That said, your take on it is provocative. I agree ; ” They screwed up procedurally and tactically ” as I mentioned in an earlier post. I also mentioned there seemed to be some overkill. I qualify that now, and I implied it when I initially made those remarks that ” Retrospect is an exact science.” If something quite spontaneously bizarre, and let’s acknowledge that Ibragim had a history of being spontaneous and bizarre in striking out at folks, had not occurred, their tactics and procedures would now be a matter of praise and not inevitable criticism.

    Couple of random thoughts : If they wanted to pistol whip him and coerce a confession they would be other than Massachusetts State Troopers and FBI Agents. Imperfect beings we all are, but is that really their style
    ??? Also, all indications are that this was a very public interrogation/confessional moment affair. It was public in the sense that Ibragim was not Shanghaied off to some ” Dark Site” there to be dented on his brow with a black bag over his head …. This notion of wrestling for a stunned Agent’s gun seems more like the sort of trance script, yes trance, we humans are thrown and prone to more often than we consciously realize, than what Reality would seem to be. Was his gun unholstered pre-table flip? Isn’t there usually a locking mechanism on the holster? What is the likelihood that that Glock responds electronically to the Agent’s voice command if he has it taken? … Btw… Ever try to wrestle a gun from a Statie or a Fed. This question rhetoric al of course, but by all reports you will probably wind up pretty F’d up.

    Just some thoughts about your thoughtful post William. Like you I look forward to Matt’s presentation to the Jury on it. Good stuff !!!

    1. John:

      Good points. I’m waiting for someone to tell me why they would have wanted to kill him. it seems to me there is no reasonable answer to that question. If that is the case then the killing had to occur in somewhat of the manner as described where the FBI agent feared for his life. Whether his fear was reasonable is another question. That, of course, can be debated endlessly but it adds nothing to our understanding of events.

  3. Matt: some quotes from the 161 page Official Report and some problems with it:
    1.Todashev “flipped the table he was writing on which was believed to have struck the FBI agent in the head” . . . he ran to kitchen and was heard “frantically grabbing items” he returned holding a “broom or mop handle”; he “took an attack stance”; he was “given verbal commands” then “violently lunged forward” (was he standing in the kitchen entrance listening to verbal orders?) he was hit 3-4 times, went down on his knees, then, “sprang to his feet and violently launched again”, hit 3-4 more times.
    The problem is Todashev’s body was still halfway in the kitchen. He was found and photographed lying half-way in the kitchen entrance: his legs never moved beyond the kitchen entrance; there was no rushing at the cops; there was no lunging forward; there was no standing up after being shot. The standing up changed to “lunged forward” at a 45 degree angle. But the position of the body indicates he didn’t lunge forward beyond the kitchen; if he lunged forward you’d expect all of his body or at least most his body to be in the adjoining room, but most of the body was still in the kitchen and kitchen entrance.
    Another problem is “the broom or mop handle” metamorphosed into a “metal pole” then “a javelin”.
    2.“One projectile entered the head …three entered the back . . .two passed through the left upper arm and entered the left chest . . .an additional projectile also entered the left chest”
    PROBLEM: The ME/ballistic report says two of the bullets into the back cannot be accounted for by the alleged position of the shooter.
    Another Problem: He was Not shot at “close range.” “Intermediate range is 2-3 feet” . The report apparently states all shots were at an “indeterminate range” i.e. beyond 2-3 feet. DA says shots were “at least 2 feet away”, perhaps saying the same thing.
    Another Problem: The Florida DA’s notes say that the head shot and back shots were “not mentioned” in interviews with witnesses (FBI and 2 staties are listed as witnesses; one statie came into room immediately after shootings.) Again, DA or ME says trajectory of two shots to the back “were not consistent” with shooter’s position. The trajectory as described apparently is consistent with someone shooting him from behind. Perhaps the FBI agent had shot him twice more in the back after he was down and as the FBI agent moved closer to him.
    3. ACCORDING TO FBI “TOdashev sat on the floor in front of me.” He was apparently sitting on a mattress, in front of which was a small coffee table. Trooper 1 was sitting on the stairs, texting; his back was turned away from Todashev. He reports “hearing” a loud noise. The FBI agent, sitting on a chair, six feet from Todashev and facing him, had his head down, “reading his notes.” PROBLEM: FBI agent and trooper both stated that Todashev was increasingly agitated, trooper texted an alert to that effect, noting Todashev’s demeanor had changed. Both stated their suspicions and reasons to be on heightened alert, but their actions indicate otherwise.
    4. FBI agent: “Todashev instantly ran at full speed from the kitchen directly at me.” Problem: contradicts Statie’s statement below; it also contradicts the fact that half of Todashev’s body never left the kitchen area; it appears he was shot will still standing in the kitchen area and when he fell forward half his body remained in the kitchen area. He may have fallen on his “hands and knees” but he didn’t advance forward, from all the evidence (photos) I’ve seen.
    State cop “Todashev raised the pole above his head with both hands and charged toward me.” PROBLEM: Contradicted by autopsy (State cop later changes his statement to concur with autopsy) autopsy report states that Todashev was shot in left arm which was not raised. Statie’s claim of being “charged at” is contradicted by FBI agent who says Todashev charged at him.
    5. DA’s questions on looking at photos of scene: “How did table and 2nd table top get to be in their positions?” PROBLEM: This question is never answered. The table is merely turned upside down; the table top is farther away along the wall, far from the table, far from the kitchen, towards the wall at the stairs. No one accounts for this, to my knowledge. If the table were thrown at the FBI agent, hitting him on the back of the head, it would have been found behind the FBI agent or to his side, but it’s simply upside down in front of the agent, between him and Todashev, as if it had been merely turned upside down. Was Todashev hit with the 2nd table top; did that account for the dent in his left temple?

    6. Someone (Michelle)reported Todashev had an unexplained “dent” in the left temple. PROBLEM You don’t get a “dent in the left temple” from a “fall to the ground.” You’d have to strike some protruding object or be struck on the temple with an object—pistol whipped or hit with something hard like a gun. Maybe he fell on the metal pole.
    7. It’s hard to picture how was the FBI agent was hit on the top/back of the head? As I understand the scene: Todashev is sitting on a mattress on the floor; the coffee table is in front of him; he is beginning to write a confession; the FBI agent is on a chair facing him. If the thrown coffee table hit him on the top-back of the head, wouldn’t the coffee table be found behing him? Todashev has to rise and pick up the table; the FBI agent would have reflexively put up his arms to ward off the table, but there is no report of injuries to his arm. He kept his head down reading his notes while Todashev, six feet from him, picks up a table and hurls it at him. It’s difficult to visualize.
    8. Was Todashev stupid? He’s unarmed. He throws a table. Then, instead of grappling with the “stunned” FBI agent to get his gun or grappling with the Statie to get his gun, he allegedly runs into the kitchen, fumbles around in the broom closet OR in the corner of the kitchen, picks up a mop handle (the ”metal pole”) and runs back at two police officers who he knows have had plenty of time, by then, to have their guns drawn.
    9. Todashev signed a Miranda form after we felt he made enough statements to incriminate himself” in the Waltham killings. Problem: Why not put him in handcuffs?

    10. You can execute someone from 2 feet away. Firing squads do it from 10 feet away. The small apartment’s kitchen was next to the living room. Todashev never fully left the kitchen area. He was apparently shot as soon as he brandished the “pole” and while he was still standing in the kitchen area. Having hit the FBI agent with the table, and now wielding a pole, it seems the initial shooting was justified, but the seven shots, four of which hit him while he was down and unarmed—the pole presumably having fallen from his hands (he was “on his hands and knees”)—-seems an unjustified over-reaction.
    11. What’s the effect of being hit three times with FBI-dum dum bullets from a Glock? Do you fall forward or fall back?
    Todashev weighed 155 pounds, stood 5’9” and recently was on crutches post-op on his bad knee. He was an “amateur” fighter. He wasn’t even a pro. The cops might have been justified in their shooting, but in the last minutes of Todashev’s life, they didn’t act like pros. There are far too many irregularities; the five hour interview (Todashev had agreed to be interviewed “for one hour”); the failure to handcuff and arrest; the varying stories; no initial mention of the FBI’s injury; no initial mention of shooting Todashev in the head and back; no initial report of Todashev being armed with a pole; ten months to finalize a report; Todashev’s alleged “admission” of involvement in the Waltham killings, but no mention of exactly what he did: did he merely drive the killers to the apartment?; apparently his description of the Waltham apartment doesn’t jive with the facts (see this week’s Boston Magazine); when the tape recordings were shut off in the last 30 minutes of Todashev’s life, was a “confession” being coerced from him? Who threw the first table? Or the first table top? Too many unanswered questions.

    1. William:

      Good points. That’s why we have a standard for conviction being “beyond a reasonable doubt” and not “beyond all doubt.” Hypothesizing different scenarios can always be done. The big question that must be answered is “why would they kill him?” Give me a logical and persuasive argument for that and I’ll reconsider my post.

      1. Matt, like you, I can not come up with a reasonable answer to the question: “Why would this FBI agent want to kill Todashev?” or “Why would the FBI want Todashev dead?” I can postulate a far-fetched hypothesis: Todashev knew that the Boston Marathon terrorists were FBI informants and the FBI preferred that info be kept from the public. But even so, how would the FBI order an agent to kill? It doesn’t seem likely. And even if Todashev linked the Boston Bombers to the FBI, all the FBI would do is deny it. It already has denied it. It would be Todashev’s word against the FBI; The FBI has some expertise in deniability and withholding info from the public. It seems less far fetched to imagine someone like Fed lawyer Fred Wyshak saying to John Martaorana “if Mr. X talks, we’ll all be in trouble, because X contradicts our key witnesses” and Martorano getting a gangster friend to kill Mr. X. but I can’t conceive anyone in the FBI ordering another random FBI agent to kill Todashev. The agent who shot Todashev was from the Boston Office, and unless someone can tie him personally to the Boston Marathon Terrorist Bombers (i.e., unless he or someone close to him were actually handling the terrorists as TEI -type sources) then neither he nor the FBI has any motive I can imagine to kill Todashev. The Todashev shooting is not like a fictional or factual case of a cop killing a suspect because the suspect might testify against the cop” e.g. both involved in drug trafficking. So, it seems to me that the FBI agent did act in self-defense or in defense of the State cop, and the shooting was justified, but the seven shots, especially the one to the head and three to the back while Todshev likely was on his hands and knees (lunging or not) seems to be excessive. With the first 3 shots Todashev drops to his hands and knees and likely drops the mop handle; the last four shots are the fatal ones; without the last 4, Todashev may have survived. We may have had a live witness if only one shot had been fired. The only caveat I’d make to fully exonerating the FBI agent and cops is that for thirty minutes the tape recorders were off and we don’t know if the FBI agent did anything to provoke Todashev (the cops back was turned) , of if the FBI agent threw the table or table top at Todashev, then Todashev threw the “table top” at the agent (or vice versa). But again, why would the FBI agent hurl the table or table top at Todashev? I don’t have a clue. I do have doubts, but would not indict or convict this agent because I have no proof that he acted or over-reacted except in self-defense or in defense of the state cop or in defense of both. I can see why Ashton did not pursue indictments. But I stick by my earlier points that the Todashev incident was handled badly, negligently, not consistent with top-flight police work, and it is still very difficult to visualize exactly what happened in that very confined first floor of that two floor apartment.

  4. Michelle : Again my mantra is …Be open to everything and attached to nothing. I am discursive in tone at times as there is a rich texture I like to have fun with … to play with …. in my writing , but avoid pedantry and am too unholy a rascal to ever be condescending . Yes … like you … I lucidly present my views and defend them with good humored vigor. If you felt it was rude or condescending or tendentious of me to compliment you on your transluscent prose 🙂 … And I did !!! then perhaps you are defensive about honest praise. I am WATER Michelle. My ” Views ” do not exist in the static form in which you … language .. them. We are dancing in the hypnotic arena … It’s. ALL ABOUT THE DANCE 🙂 .. Namaste

  5. Michelle : was referring to ” Mark ” as a vulgar scatterbrain. His remarks were polluting and puerile. Do me a favor and do not take the time tomorrow to respond to any of my remarks. I will say that when you initially contributed I read what you wrote …. had differing opinions , but noted to myself something like …this chick has some heat and flash in her writing … She’s got a style and wants people to know it. This is something I identify with and can intellectually respond to. And so I did. I chose to carefully and painstakingly formulate an argument to you ; to not just kind of leave you hanging out there on the Blog. …….. Crickets 🙂 ….. So now let them continue to chirp. I have not lost, but chosen to abandon interest.

    Amusingly, the now recognizably sophomoric ” Mark ” chose to weigh in on the blog in an abrasive, overbearing and insulting manner ; Right out of the box. I said to myself …. well his is a rash tone, but clearly he is craving attention and wants to be heard. I responded thoughtfully and cordially and then he snapped at myself and Matt like the junkyard mouth and cur he is. Matt tolerates it. I do not. When someone is trying to kick at me my instinct is one way or another to see that leg broken. I am perplexed that you find his churlish petulant remarks so … sympatico … to your own views. I wish you success in evolving what seems a promising writing style. My life experience taught me though that the more you get down in the mud and wrestle with a human pig like ” mark ” the more you realize just how much the pig enjoys it. If Matt cleans up the blog … and any balanced editorial review of this moronic fellow’s comments … would certainly justify that as a responsible Moderating of this Forum. …. then I may contribute again. One does not cast pearls before Swine. And Swine …. is in da’ House right now !!!!!!!!!! 🙂 …. Ta’

    1. Michelle:

      Thanks for the link but I didn’t question the correctness of your assertion relative to the text message.

  6. Carrie : Water seeks its own level. I hope you find out who these ” three FBI men who flew in from Chicago in SUITS on their SPECIAL MISSION are. . That you endorse the views of a vulgar scatterbrain makes me consider that you are not probably serious in your thought process. A deductive power that reasons …. Gee … Tamerlane, Brandon Mess, Eric Weiss and the third Waltham unfortunate all knew Rich Gannon from Wai Kru and then hangs the trendy tag … the Seven degrees of Rich Gannon on it … clearly insinuating that Rich Gannon is dirty on it in some way, but offering no proof …. is a rotten tactic worthy of any twenty first century Stalinista. But he is a Boston Police Officer so up for automatic character assassination in your bell jar vision of the World. Good Luck in your … Moral Jihad … Sorry I wasted my time responding earlier and regret it more with every word now. No good deed goes unpunished. 🙂

    1. “Endorse the views of a vulgar scatterbrain?” What are you even talking about with that sentence? I have no clue. Are you calling Khusen a “vulgar scatterbrain,” and if so, based on what? Furthermore, what reason on this earth would this man have to lie about agent “Chris” telling him that the new agents flew in from Chicago for a special assignment? What would be the point? The fact of the matter is he would have no reason to pull that out of this air, and it would explain why the FBI is so adamant about keeping the identity of the murderer a secret, why he refused to even be interviewed, and why all hopes of a press conference were squashed. Your unnecessarily condescending and rude tone would suggest you have an agenda of some kind, and anything that doesn’t fit into your preconceived ideas needs to be met with hostility. Perhaps if you felt your take on things was so secure and grounded in truth, you wouldn’t be so defensive.

  7. Amazing list of questions and inconsistencies about the Todashev report that should be answered. The Orlando Sentinel interviewed Todashev’s friend that was there with him, Khusen Taramov. According to Chris the FBI Agent, the three FBI Agents wearing suits flew in that morning from Chicago for the special mission.
    Mark, love your comments too. How is that Tsarnaev and Todashev for that matter, were not questioned about Waltham especially since they were connected to the victims through Wai Kru gym?

    1. Carrie:

      Thanks for the reference to the video. He said FBI agent Chris made up the meetings and he works in Orlando. He said guys from Boston want to see him. Taramov said he and Todasheve were at the apartment and Chris and three others showed up. We know the others were the two state troopers and the FBI agent from Boston.

      He said Chris told him that they were FBI agents from Chicago on a special mission. Clearly he heard wrong or Chris was lying. It is clear who was there and that there were no FBI agents from Chicago.

      Mark is a little over the top with his personal attacks. I doesn’t say much for his maturity. I suggest back in 2011 nothing sinister can be attached to the state police not questioning Tsarnaev, if they didn’t and for all we know they may have.


    1. John:

      I agree Mark was never in the military or a fight, never mind a street fight. Take him with a grain of salt.


    1. John:

      Mark has been warned. You rightly summed up his work as puerile. I’m not going to waste too much time on him.

  10. Running across the room makes no sense for an MMA fighter facing 2 guys with guns. And you both know it. Or you should. I don’t know, maybe if you grew up running away from fights, it makes sense to you. Not if you’re a trained fighter though.

    Watch Todashev’s MMA videos online, watch any MMA videos online, tell me if you see anybody running away from their foe. Maybe there’s a video of Ronald McDonald and his brother running away, but that would be all.

    1. Mark:

      I watched Todashev’s videos and other MMA videos. I didn’t see that one of the fighters had a gun.

  11. Why didn’t Middlesex DA, MSP and FBI investigate Tamerlan in 2011, after the Waltham triple-homicide, after 3 of the deceased friends, including Mess’ girlfriend said Tamerlan was a close friend of Mess’?

    You think nobody thought that was a name worth looking into? Tamerlan Tsarnaev, triple murder, on 10th anniversary of 9/11?

    I don’t, if you like living in a land of make believe where it’s ok for the police and govt shoot to kill whomever they want and to selectively investigate crime, that’s good for you.

    btw, mfc, you never did explain why Ashton never interviewed the shooter. You just glossed over that and said nobody wants to embarrass the FBI. Or was that a book plug? Tell me again how you can pump 7 bullets into someone and you don’t even have to be embarrassed with questions from people asking you what happened.

    1. Mark:

      1. We don’t know what the Ma state police who do the investigations for the Middlesex DA didn’t look at Tamerlan. FBI had no jurisdiction. I cannot think of a reason why they would not have done it if he came up on the radar; nor do I know that they didn’t do it. Even the most suspicious mind can’t read anything into that and make it into some sort of nefarious event.

      2. I don’t like living in a place where any action involving a homicide committed by police is not investigated. Fortunately, the Todashev homicide was investigated and a thorough report written.

      3. The FBI agent refused to be interviewed and Ashton as a state official had no power to require him to do so. He could have called a grand jury and subpoenaed him but the federal court would have suppressed the subpoena. If you’d been here a while you’d understand the FBI is not responsible to anyone other than itself. I didn’t guess at his refusal to be interviewed, that was the fact.

      4. The medical examiner’s report contained in Ashton’s report explains how the bullets went into his back as he was getting back up to attack again.

  12. AND …. THAT’S ….
    …..ENTERTAINNNNNNNNMENNNTTTT !!!!!!!!!!!! 🙂 … You’ve been watching too many movies Kid … Keep your dukes up though … If Matt thinks your Okay that’s at least something in your favor … Ever been shot at close range … I have … AND IT SUCKS !!!!!!!!! … Don’t bring a javelin pole to a Gun Fight 🙂

    1. Shooting yourself due to idiocy does not count as heroic, nor does it interest me in the least.

      Or were you hunting with Dick Cheney? Or did the FBI shoot you?

      No, I’ve never been shot, nor have I ever shot myself, but I was in the military.

  13. I never thought of this before, but riddle me this.

    You state that Todashev was a well-known martial arts expert, and by all accounts he was a fierce fighter with his hands and legs.

    So why did Todashev run across the room and into the kitchen to find a pole or knife, when he already smashed a table on one agent’s head, leaving the agent dazed and confused according to the agent’s own account?

    An expert MMA fighter would’ve finished the agent off with another blow with his hands and turned on the other one or grabbed the first one’s gun. He could’ve cracked the injured agent again, take his gun and shot the second one. The second one claims that he didn’t even have his gun out by the time Todashev came charging back with the pole if I remember correctly. He most definitely would not have run all the way across the room so that one or both agents would have time to draw their guns.

    That’s not believable. He also could’ve tried to flee out the door, but running across the room to retrieve a weapon makes no sense, unless he had a death wish, suicide-by-cop as it were, but that makes no sense either because Todashev could’ve still stood his ground and fought them there, until they shot him. By all accounts, Todashev likes to fight, with his hands. Not a pole.

    Todashev had already laid waste to 2 foes in that parking lot fight, though one foe was 60 years old and apparently did not fight and Todashev did not attack him.

    1. Mark:

      one can think of a thousand different scenarios as to what Todashev could have done. It seems none of them were what he did. How did that pole get under him? Why would the cops want to kill him?

      1. You sound like the FBI. When confronted with the fact that Russia warned FBI/CIA, after initially denying such a warning, the FBI shoots wildly: BUT WE GET THOUSANDS OF WARNINGS!

        We are not talking about thousands of warning, we are talking about one, from Russia. How many times has Russia warned you in the last 5 years? Once?

        Likewise, I am not talking about 1000’s of scenarios, I’m only talking about the one I offered. Instead of addressing the reasonableness and implications of the one I offered, you shoot wildly with 1000’s of other possibilities, none of which I am talking about.

        I don’t know guys, have fun with your circle-jerk echo-chamber. FOX or Limbaugh should be on soon.

        Actually, Limbaugh made me laugh the other day when he said that Obama showed up at St Peters basilica at the Vatican and asked his handlers, “What are we doing here?”. His handlers replied, “We’re here, at the Vatican, to see the Pope.”

        Obama shrieked, “What! I thought I was going on Vacation”. hahaha that was pretty good for a fat idiot like Rush.

        But, anyway, keep thinking about the unlikelihood that Todashev would run across the room when he could’ve just knocked out the injured agent and shot the other one.

        How did Todashev get shot 3 times in the back? Was he running away? Face down on the floor? Standing on his head?

        1. Mark:

          I find it strange your ranting about right wing etc. when it appears you are the one listening to Limbaugh. Best you spend your time there than writing here. Engaging with you is as rewarding as with a 6 month old infant.

  14. Mark … Is that the case ??? … Did Ibragim jump the Son and merely push the irate Father ??? … How very heroic … perhaps the usual disinformation got out as I have heard it retailed in another way. A Son with his sixty year old dad … and I will wager this kid may have been the rather studious type … maybe even nerdy perhaps Mark … a keyboard warrior like yourself who bemoans the …. ignorance of. .. ” Those in this Country ” as opposed to his own smug snotty self assurance and bilious disposition . Yours in many ways is the typical “Spew” of the callow leftist ” Radical” who smears and tears and kicks at the shins of a Society that has humored your silliness into adulthood and that you still despise. He writes his vitriolic prose castigating all his inferiors especially Matt Connolly whose legal pad is gilded with the memories of punks innumerable just like him, and then shouts up the stairs to Mommy …. Is supper ready yet ??? … So, I will not impugn the fellow who was with his dad that day drawing any real comparisons with a shrill overgrown boy like yourself. Suffice to say the point about Ibragim’s … spoiled bullying and opportunistic violence on some poor bastard out with and in a preoccupied and protective mode with his. .. Sixty Year Old Father … still holds. Ok … Dick ??? … If you want to articulately compete in the marketplace of competing ideas and differing opinions … that is respected here. When you choose to bomb a blog with your inanities …and redundant expressions like … ” Superlative Compliments ” … and cliches like ” Spewing Ignorant Nonsense” then I suggest you just say … Mater …. let’s do hop into the beamer and head to the Mall so you can buy me some new … bellbottoms 🙂 … rather than enlighten us further with your weak weak weak…. oh so very insipid jejune and juvenile … OBSERVATIONS !!! … I will respond no further to you. You place yourself outside the pale of an adult, reasoned, and cordial debate. Shunning will not shame, but only incite in your fevered and rabid state I am sure. But I always say … WE MAY NOT ALWAYS BE QUAKERS; BUT WE SHOULD AT LEAST TRY TO ACT LIKE QUAKERS. 🙂 … Good luck pally!

    1. Try to use your brain and apply a bit of logic to the facts. The father was 60 according to your “retailed” facts. If that’s true, do you really think the son was a “kid”? You’re an idiot. The son, Lester Garcia Perez, was 36. The father did not speak English, so one of the sheriffs “transcribed” the father’s version of events. How nerdy are Spanish 36 year-olds whose fathers don’t speak English? Todashev was 160 lbs.

      Yes, indeed, I bemoan ignorant, judgmental Ronald McDonald clowns like yourself. Be man and own up to your subject matter ignorance and stop with your fruitcake drivel.

      I know from previous postings that Connolly can be a loopy right-wing defender of heroic Whitey Bulger and crusader against Whitey’s FBI and prosecutorial foes one moment, and defender of the FBI’s and prosecutorial misconduct and crusader against violent, muslim Todashev the next. In a word: hypocrite. Typical for a former prosecutor and most lawyers. That’s what legal education produces: trained hypocrites, which is why Shakespeare said what he said.

      Two of the supplements to the Orange County Sheriffs arrest report for that fight are unavailable.

      Nothing like a keyboard warrior who refuses to accept responsibility for his error(s), runs his mouth, refuses to continue, and then runs away.

      Typical for a chickenhawk, right-wing Republican though.

      1. Mark:

        You are not welcome at this site if you post any more ad hominem vitriol. The use of “idiots” and “clowns” etc add little to our discussions. I find your posting to be, as John said, quite puerile (look it up) – as for suggesting I’m a chickenhawk (look it up) shows you have no idea what that means but that’s just one ignorant statement that’s added to the many others. Go somewhere else. I’m not interested in persons who can’t discuss things in a mature fashion.

  15. International
    Follow this story Print Email this RSS Feed ePaper share this

    FBI wanted Boston bombing suspect ‘to be informant’

    March 29, 2014 10:11 AM

    Agence France Presse

    FILE – This combination of file photos shows brothers Tamerlan, left, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings on April 15, 2013. (AP Photos/Lowell Sun and FBI, File)
    FILE – This combination of file photos shows brothers Tamerlan, left, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings on April 15, 2013. (AP Photos/Lowell Sun and FBI, File)

    A+ A-

    NEW YORK: The defense for accused Boston marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev say the FBI approached his brother and fellow suspect Tamerlan about becoming an informant on the Chechen and Muslim community.

    The United States is to seek a rare federal death penalty for Dzhokhar after three people were killed and about 260 wounded on April 15 last year when two bombs made of explosives-packed pressure cookers went off near the finish line of the Boston marathon.

    Dzhokhar, then 19, and his 26-year-old brother Tamerlan were cornered by police after a four-day manhunt. Tamerlan died after an exchange of fire with police and Dzhokhar was wounded.

    In court filings Friday, lawyers for Dzhokhar demanded that all information about alleged FBI contacts be made available for the court.

    “We seek this information based on our belief that these contacts were among the precipitating events for Tamerlan’s actions during the week of April 15, 2014, and thus material to the defense case in mitigation,” the filings say.

    The FBI “questioned Tamerlan about his Internet searches, and asked him to be an informant, reporting on the Chechen and Muslim community.

    “We further have reason to believe that Tamerlan misinterpreted the visits and discussions with the FBI as pressure and that they amounted to a stressor that increased his paranoia and distress.”

    In October the FBI said in a statement that “the Tsarnaev brothers were never sources for the FBI nor did the FBI attempt to recruit them as sources.”

    The defense is attempting to save Dzhokhar from the death penalty — if he is found guilty — by arguing that Tamerlan was the main instigator behind the attack.

    Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s trial begins in November.

    The one-time student from a Chechen Muslim family has pleaded not guilty to 30 federal charges related to the bombings, including 17 serious charges that can carry sentences of death or life in prison.

    These charges include using a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death, as well as conspiracy and bombing of a place of public use resulting in death, and carjacking.

    He is also charged in connection with the fatal shooting of a campus police officer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology during the brothers’ wild overnight getaway attempt.

    Home International

    Read more:
    (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News ::

    1. Khalid:

      If the FBI wanted Tamerlan as in informant, then this is an explosive element in the case. As the article notes it has already denied it. At least now with the defense filing we will get something on the record – at a minimum the FBI will be forced to reveal the extent of its contacts with him. Nothing about the FBI/Tamerlan matter is settling well – think again of the FBI teams being in Cambridge the night Tamerlan got killed. FBI says they were there for another reason. When head of FBI puts finding the marathon terrorists as maximum priority why would some teams be doing something else.

  16. Random thoughts Mark :

    MSP are not Mall cops. Their presence there mandated by the circumstances of interrogating an apparently likely homicide suspect in a triple murder in which state charges would necessarily issue. The respective roles State and Fed played in the interrogation especially as to who was doing the talking was probably tightly choreographed . Usually I believe the Fed is winningly and confidently insinuating and questioning away while their State Police Detective counterpart asks the random question, arches the eyebrow now and then, and busies themselves texting everyone from Marian Ryan up past midnight I wager in Massachusetts, or their colleague(s) in the kitchen, parking lot, or up Chris Christie’s ass. Forgive my levity in the last instance, but ( again forgive my levity) , it was really the old college try to conflate your Matt Connolly ADA criticism with Chris Christie and Bridgegate. You also lapsed into a vagueness regarding these myriad Prosecutors who were part of the Christie Cabal. This was a failure of specificity you earlier charged, quite rightly, Michelle with, regarding some of her sources. So your post rambled over the terrain as like a midnight highwayman shooting up the countryside you were hitting as often as missing.

    Where you may have missed the mark Mark is accusing Matt of fawning where I have only ever known him to foment regarding the FBI. Throughout the history of this blog he has seriously and consistently cracked on them for their well documented … Monolithic Inscrutability …. my expression …. their : secrecy, institutional intransigence, opacity, marked capacity for intriguing with the iniquitous to further investigative ends and so on. Too many superlatives perhaps ??? … I assure you that in the Context Context Context of the River of this blog Matt has been coxswain of the whale on the FBI Scull pulling down the Charles. So … fawning … and specious thinking airily floated on a raft of … superlatives … for the FBI and the Ashton Report just does not row my boat.

    A real favorite of mine, actress Tilda Swinton, interviewed recently by Charlie Rose was asked by him if something or another was in the ” Mainstream.” … She responded ” I do not really think that there is such a thing as the ‘ Mainstream,” It seems to me that one man’s Mainstream is another man’s dirty little brook! ” …. Well … whether we are pulling along in the Mainstream or into a dirty little brook, pulling together or alone, at cross purposes or riding a current together that gets us to some … Truth … in this Todashev matter … Time will tell. Meanwhile … everyone grab an oar !!!!!!!! 🙂 … Mark, I enjoyed your comments.

  17. Extracted silliness in Mr. Connolly’s fawning analysis:

    To his credit

    exceedingly thorough investigation

    complete as one could expect

    thorough investigation

    professional, systematic and painstaking manner

    well done job that left little for me to question


    That’s just thee 1st paragraph. No real analysis from Mr. Connolly, just a bunch of the most superlative compliments he could conjure. Alarm bells should be going off in any reader’s head, because this is going to be a doozy. I can’t bear anymore of that foolishness. From an attorney? And you were going to bat for Whitey too? You must know very well how the FBI operates. They work with the mob a lot, whether Irish, Italian, Russian or Chechen. Chinese and Korean mob is harder to infiltrate as they are far more nationalist and isolationist.

    It’s not worth anymore of my time. I’m embarrassed for you. Public Defenders are always thought to be the least capable attorneys, but where do prosecutors rank? A little above or a little below. After all, they receive a govt check just like people on welfare.

    1. Mark:

      Where ever did you get the idea I was going to bat for Whitey? If you have some time perhaps you want ot go back over my posts on Whitey and the FBI to get a feel for what I really thing. Yes, there were superlatives for the Ashton report because I thought his investigator did a banged up job that far exceeded what I thought was coming out.

      If you went back you’d see I am a hard critic of the FBI and the way it operates. I think its system of working the mob and the others you write about is abhorrent as I have suggested. True prosecutors receive a government check as does the president, governor, and cop who work for the benefit of the public. Never felt bad about doing that. As for being capable attorneys, I happen to think we rank up there with any others. I did spend the first part of my career in private practice in a small law firm doing everything from soup to nuts.

  18. De mortuis nil nisis bonum … Do not speak ill of the dead … This is an admonition I try to live by and so I say this about Ibragim … He was clearly a tough little bastard. He was the oldest of twelve kids who grew up in a wartorn country and he struggled with the language and culture when he got here, preferring a small circle of Chechnyan friends, signally Tamerlane Tsarnaev, to socialize in. He had attractive personal qualities and was lovable to many especially his fiance Ms.Gruzdeva. He is not to be short shrifted as to a humanity he shared with us all or the tragedy of his violent death. I would prefer he had lived. My instinct about him is that if he was your friend he was a fast and loyal one, but if not he could probably be a real serious pisser. He displayed that pisser side of his personality in the Mall lot when he punched out an old man over a parking space. That was … a punk move. So Ibragim was composed of many parts … not all of them endearing.

    He was also not Jason Bourne . MMA produces some genuine articles : Couture, The Shamrock brothers Ken and Frank, Tito Ortiz, Anderson Silva, Dan Henderson, The entire Gracie Clan and even as well at Wai Kru Gym in Central Square where he trained, his Coach, Boston Policeman Rich Gannon who is a genuinely skilled and rough bastard. Ibragim was somewhere on a cintinuum here but it seems that for reasons that ultimately do a disservice to a balanced … Threat Assessment … his Rep was rather belied by his actual fighting record.

    Yep … He was not as Jeffrey Ashton pointed out a … ” Person with any quit in him “… It appears he went down … to his absolute credit … Swinging !!! … But to treat the kid as if he was just a crazy Chechnyan Pit Bull in evaluating the actual circumstances of his death helps no one. He is beyond help now, but not understanding. If he was as alleged involved in the Waltham murders then his capacity for sheer carnage made the Manson tribe and the Tate LoBianca murders look like a blood frenzy warmup act. The Troopers and FBI Agents who were there that night had some pretty gory visions of what was Ibragim’s handiwork sizzling in their brainpans one would think. They were certainly wary but elected to eschew restraining him , which parenthetically they are rather expert at, because to use Matt’s predicate, they were …. Massaging … a Confession out of him. At some point the … Massage …. went helter skelter. And it was not …. A Happy Ending.

    1. John:

      Excellent comment. I think you give us a full picture of the man and I agree with your portrait. Well done.

  19. Just because a criminal defense attorney requests info about the FBI informant angle doesn’t mean it is true. It would, however, explain so much about the entire episode from beginning to present. It completes the picture perfectly.
    Right now, the only witness who would know anything about this angle is in special administrative solitary confinement in a federal prison and soon to be put to death by the DOJ. Everyone else has been deported or killed by the FBI. Perfect.

    1. Patty:

      I’m waiting for the government’s response to the motion. Can the FBI hide that it tried to flip Tameralan? I’m sure it can but will it dare in such a notorious case involving the death penalty. If the FBI did try to make him an informant, it makes this a different case since it would not follow that it closed him down in three months. As you know the agents don’t ask once but try to persuade a person over time.

  20. Defense filed docs today that confirmed your theory that they asked Tsarnaev to be an informant.

    1. OMG, thanks for this info.

      That’s exactly what I’ve been saying since 10 months ago.

      That’s why they shot Todashev. FBI and CIA were in bed with Obshina Chechen mob, which Todashev knew about.

      1. Mark:

        Assuming that Todashev knew the FBI and CIA were in bed with Obshina Chechen mob, why do they bring in the MA state police to silence him if their intent was to murder him. Also, who would ever have believed anything Todashev said about his knowledge of the CIA or FBI?

    2. Jim:

      I’m glad that they did. Let’s see what the government response to it will be. Thanks for the information.

  21. Seems like an overly elaborate and elaborated ” Plot ” to deliberately dispatch three Troopers and an FBI Agent to deliberately dispatch Ibragim Todashev. In a post 9/11 era of CIA rendition of terrorist suspects who as EX-CIA Agent Sabrina DeSousa clearly indicated were hapless innocents in her 2011 Reveal and mea culpa, we should have a thicker skin about these things. Even ex CIA Corporate Counsel John Rizzo has gotten in trouble with his Killer Drones candor and admits that under Bush Admin , Intelligence Agencies got pretty ” Dark! ”
    There are troubling aspects to Todashev shooting, but I see no features so lucidly presented by Michelle as not being as susceptible to being fit into the Official version as well as the Conspiracy version. What strongly militates for this entire case kind of flying around on a broomstick, though I believe Jeffrey Asheton’s Report clarified it as a pointed javelin type pole, is how outlandish so many features of it are, the most outlandish being the character and personality of …. Mr. Ibragim Todashev !
    This was an extremely volatile. …. and here I employ an Old School expression …. Punk! …. He was not on crutches when he ” Beat” on a Sixty year old Father in the parking lot. Well Done Man indeed. He wss a real little badass alright. This little Wai Kru Mixed Up Martial Artist hothouse flower possessed Martial Skills overstated by the Police as PR now dictates that, and no real Martial Spirit at all. I am not impressed by demented sucker punch artists who break the noses of Senior Citizens over parking spaces.
    This does not mean I consider it Mission Accomplished that he got killed. The second and fatal fusillade was possibly excessive. But I WAS NOT THERE !!! Deadly Force is the Order of The Times but in this case I strongly doubt that it was an Order that was issued by Anyone at Anytime. !!! … C”mon Michelle … IT’S CHINATOWN. MICHELLE. … IT’S CHINATOWN.

    1. John King McDonald:

      Check your facts before you spew nonsense and make yourself look foolish.

      Todashev did not beat the sixty year-old father at all. He beat his son, allegedly. He pushed the old man, after the man got in his face and screamed at him, according to Todashev’s account. Either way, the police report does not state that the old man received any injuries at all.

      God, why are people in this country so ignorant?

    2. John:

      Good points. I was troubled by the killing of Todashev and can point to things where there are minor contradictions but overall the picture seems clear to me. As you so aptly note, there are other ways to carry this off in a less obvious manner if there is a plot to murder the man. if the confession exists on tape and in partial written form, then Todashev aside from his volatility was also one who wasn’t bothered by butchering three people. Not one to have many feelings of sympathy for.

  22. “There’s nothing I can see that leaves any doubt as to what happened.”

    With all due respect, I’d say you probably need to look a little harder then.

    For example:

    The shots to Todashev’s back and the angle of the shot to the head do not
    jive with the FBI agents account of what happened.

    The FBI agent never mentioned being hit with a table, nor the use of a pole, in the statement he gave the day after Todashev’s death.

    The statement given by the state trooper the day after Todashev’s death varies greatly from the agent’s account on important details.

    The medical examiner’s report states that there were TWO shooters.

    The refused to release the autopsy report despite it being complete.

    The cause of the dent in Todashev’s left temple is not explained in either of the reports, but it is mentioned in the autopsy report, and visible in the autopsy photos.

    The so-called “confession” does not fit any of the details of the actual crime.

    The FBI broke protocol and had the second police officer leave the apartment, which is never supposed to happen.

    Todashev’s friend, who had been waiting for Todashev for 4 hours outside in a parking lot in the company of the second FBI agent, was forced to leave the area less than 30 minutes before Todashev was killed.

    A private investigator noticed a piece of the floor had been pulled away in Todashev’s apartment, leaving a hole the size of a bullet. The report mentions a bullet that was taken from the scene without being photographed.

    All Todashev’s friends who would likely have first-hand knowledge of Todashev’s lack of involvement in the crime, and who would be capable of serving as a potential witness regarding the FBI’s conduct, have all been deported or not allowed to re-enter the country.

    Prior to the night he was killed, Todashev got into an altercation with a man and his grown son over a parking space. In the police report, it states that Todashev explained how the man came toward him swinging, and he acted in self-defense while trying to protect his recently operated-on knee ( he was on crutches at the time of this altercation.) The FBI, who had been following Todashev, secretly watched and filmed him beating up the man. They did nothing to intervene in this “chance encounter.” The man and his son did not press charges.

    Todashev was still on crutches the night he was killed.

    FBI agents from Chicago flew in specifically for the final interrogation of of Todashev. Todashev’s friend, Khusen, who was the one waiting outside for him that night, was told by the Boston FBI agent, Chris, that the Chicago FBI were there on a “special mission.”

    The state trooper present in the room when Todashev was killed sent a text message to the agent who killed Todashev one day after his death. The message reads: “Well done this week, man..well done. Joy (sic) some time at home. will talk soon.”
    The agent had shot and killed this very important person–someone who was so important to them that they followed him for over a month, and questioned both him and his friends for countless hours on a continual basis. He was supposedly just about to sign a confession which would finally solve a huge case, the Waltham murders, as well as implicate Tamerlan Tsarnaev in this crime. JUST before this was about to happen, and have all their hard work pay off, they wind up having to shoot and kill their suspect, just before he can actually confess. The only way one would describe this as “Well done,” is if Todashev’s death was the plan all along.

    Taking everything we know into account, it seems rather odd that Todashev would suddenly decide to confess his involvement in a triple murder ( a murder which he refers to as a “robbery” in his confession, despite the fact that5 grand in cash and 8 pounds of pot were left behind and nothing was taken from the house), and just as he’s about to get to the good stuff, he decides not to just refuse to confess and demand a lawyer, but instead, suddenly decides it’s a better idea to try and murder an FBI agent and a State Trooper with a coffee table and broomstick. I cannot think of anything more illogical and far-fetched. It’s rather clear to me that Todashev was “coerced” to confess, and when he tried to escape, perhaps fearing he might be killed after completing he “confession,” he was murdered, which is exactly what the plan was. Mission accomplished, or as the State Trooper would say, “Well done, man.”

    1. Michelle:

      What is your source for this: “Well done this week, man..well done.”

      I saw twitter pics for that, but I’m not sure if it’s real or photoshopped, because nobody has offered a source.

      And what is your source that Todashev was on crutch both at the fight and in his apt that fatal night?

      And the father did not press charges while the son did, unless he later refused to, but the Orange County Sheriff’s report says that the son did want to press charges and testify on court. After all, Todashev was arrested that day so they must have pressed charges.

      I was unable to locate the supplement mentioned in that report though which details the report of the other arresting officer.

      And what is your source that FBI agents came from Chicago and that they told Todashev’s friend that they were on a “special mission”, which could be true without being nefarious? But what is your source for that?

      But otherwise I agree with most of your criticisms and I am rather shocked and appalled that this site’s author offered such a fawning and lazy analysis of Ashton’s report.

      Also, there is no mention of DNA testing of Waltham crimes scene and Todashev, even though FBI agents told Todashev’s wife that they had DNA evidence proving he was there. They must not have been able to match DNA evidence otherwise they would have mentioned it. It would’ve been the central piece of evidence tying Todashev to the crime.

      Mr. Connolly, it’s more than a little strange and curious how you went out of your way to apply so many superlative adjectives to this report when in fact the shooter was never even questioned.

      “The agent making that choice and the FBI backing the agent up makes it look like they had something to hide. Then, as I mentioned starting off, the failure to quickly summarize what happened under circumstances where the only witnesses to the event were four law enforcement officers is totally inexplicable.

      Well not totally, you must understand the first commandment of the FBI under which all agents fearfully operate is “Don’t Embarrass the Family.”

      The best way not to embarrass the FBI would be to cooperate with FL’s investigation and to tell the truth.

      Your post is nonsensical. You’ve lost all credibility with any critically thinking person.

      Past and present, prosecutors are some of the most corrupt charlatans on the planet. Take a look at Christie’s cabal of lying former prosecutors. Last I counted there were at least 8 former prosecutors lying their asses off to save Christie’s ass. Take a look at Blago, Sptizer and Rudy.

      So on to this prosecutor who told the trooper not to arrest until he/she got a warrant. At midnight s/he was going to get a warrant? It happens I guess, but one possible reason to not arrest Todashev right away is because it’s really hard to explain and really, really embarrassing when you shoot someone when they are in handcuffs, or worse, when they are at the police station.

      And who was that prosecutor? The report doesn’t specify, but states DA’s OFFICE I think. You claim in this article it was the DA, but I don’t remember the report specifying who it was. I thought FBI took control of the case from the Middlesex DA. After all, the FBI seems to have been the lead investigators and the MSP appears to have just been there to witness and provide security. Anyway, I don’t think Marian Ryan was on the phone. So are they saying that Middlesex was awake monitoring the final interrogation? There are a lot of unanswered holes there.

      I see you’ve spread this silly analysis to a few other sites. Your should feel embarrassed and ashamed for posting such foolishness. I haven’t even parsed your article line by line yet because I am still in a bit of shock at how bad it was. And it’s strange that you are spreading this whitewash of a whitewash to so many places. My hunch is that you are using your weight as a former ADA to lend credence to it, as a favor for someone perhaps. Sorry to seen so rude, but this post of yours is really that bad. It’s worse than Ashton’s report, and that’s saying a lot.

      1. Mark:
        Thanks for the comment. Sorry that you are “shocked and appalled” at my post but perhaps I can explain myself more fully by answering some of your criticisms. As for Michelle’s post, I’ve responded to her which you can check on.
        It seems to me that it isn’t the DNA evidence that ties Todashev to the crime in Waltham but his confession, both the partial written one and the recorded one, which exist according to the Ashton report. I happen to believe him when he states that. I’ve written in the past that one of the great failures of the FBI is to record interviews; here, as you can tell in the Ashton report, the FBI agent professed not to know the interview was being recorded by the MA state police. They’d get jammed in if they knew it so they denied the knowledge. But the MA state police being under no restriction wisely recorded it so we have verification of Todashev’s confession, which I had doubted until I learned it was recorded.
        I suppose I used so many superlative adjectives because I was prepared to see Ashton do a rubber stamp type approach to the investigation just regurgitating what he got from the FBI. That was not the case. His investigator started back at the beginning and checked out everything. That impressed me as did the report itself.
        You are right in that I did contradict myself in a way. I was always bothered that the FBI didn’t quickly tell us what happened. Calling it inexplicable in the light of my knowledge that the FBI seeks to avoid embarrassment at all costs was probably a poor choice of words. I guess I meant to convey the idea that the better way to avoid embarrassment would be to quickly come out with the story if all was done according to the final report.
        As for my losing credibility among critical thinking persons and the post being nonsensical, I’m sure the proof will be in the tasting of it.
        I assume some former prosecutors would fit your idea of “corrupt charlatans.” I found that very little of the ones I associated with would fit that profile. The ones you cite are those who have gone on to become lawyers in private practice or defense counsel. Their job is to work for their clients, like Christie, and to put a spin on everything relating to him. Being a former prosecutor in my mind doesn’t change the core of the person; it only means that at one time the person worked for the state or the government in enforcing its laws and hopefully did it in a fair and conscientious manner. It also means that one, depending on experience, has an insight into criminal investigations and trial procedures. Not much more.
        As for the prosecutor telling the MA trooper to wait until getting a warrant, I said that was about the worst advice one could give in those circumstances. Probable cause existed for Todashev’s arrest at the time and the FBI agent could have arrested him. I’m not sure the MA state police have the power to make an arrest in Florida but even had they not had the power it would not have tainted the overall prosecution. Had I been in contact with them I would have told them to take him into custody once they had his confession on tape.
        As far as getting bum advice from prosecutors, that’s not unusual. Some prosecutors have little idea what is going on in certain areas and don’t have what I call a feel for the law. I found that a lot in the area of the 4th and 5th Amendment.
        When I said the trooper was in contact with the Middlesex DA I did not mean to imply he spoke with the DA herself; to more precise I should have said the Middlesex DA office. The FBI did not control the case. It was a Middlesex murder investigation over which the FBI had no jurisdiction.
        I hope by now you have recovered from you initial shock. I’m not doing anyone a favor as you suggest but calling things as I see them. I don’t know what other sites you refer to since all I do is post here and sometimes I am picked up by the Patriot Ledger but I have no control over that.
        I didn’t find your comment rude but rather enjoyed it. Like with Michelle, I want to be challenged since it makes me consider my first post more deeply. I don’t claim to be perfect although I try not to make too many mistakes. I do however have no agenda for anyone else; I’ve been around too long for that.

    2. Michelle:

      Great post. Thank you for taking the time to challenge me. I really, truly appreciate it. I’ve always questioned what happened to Todashev so I didn’t go into this as a cheerleader for the FBI. Let me try to answer your questions;
      1. Ashton found the bullet wounds to Todashev’s body were consistent with the statement of the shooting as did the medical examiner. It seemed to me that there was no other way they could have happened. They all came from more than two feet away so it wasn’t an execution. They came in two bursts which seems to confirm the statement of a man falling down and getting up.

      2. There is little doubt the FBI agent was struck on the head and was bleeding profusely. Whether he said he was hit with a table it is clear he was hit with something. The pole, that is in the pictures under the body of Todashev so his failure to mention it doesn’t get it out of the scene.

      3. The statements of people at a scene of a shooting being at variance with one another is good in that it shows they were independently made based upon memories that happen during a traumatic event. Were they exactly alike would make me worry. Nothing in any of the statements contradicted the overall findings of Ashton.

      4. There was confusion over how many shooters were there. I thought Ashton covered that pretty well showing how some people (not those present at the time) said there were two shooters. The wounds in the body show it was only one which is consistent with the weapon found and the bullets discharged.

      5. Refusing to release the autopsy was part of what I believe made the FBI look bad – it held it while the matter was under investigation – this was part of Florida law – but there’s no evidence it was changed. I thought it was suggested the dent in his forehead came from his fall to the ground.

      6. I thought the confession did fit the details of the crime. We still, as far as I know, have not seen either the partial written confession or the verbal confession that was recorded. I’ve read they exist and corroborate what was at the scene. I don’t know for sure on that but I am taking it on faith that it does exist.

      7. The second FBI agent was along for the ride. This was basically a Mass State Police interrogation of a MA murder where FBI had no jurisdiction. I see nothing unusual in other FBI agent wanting to stand outside so he wouldn’t get involved in writing reports of interview and also to provide a less intimidating environment for Todashev. Todashev friend left at 10:30, the killing occurred after midnight. I find nothing unusual in that.

      8. As for Todashev’s friends, none of them could tell us what happened in the apartment at the time of his killing. Todashev’s encounter with others and the FBI actions prior to the murder bear little light on what happened in the apartment. I was not speaking to any of that when I wrote about Ashton’s report.

      9. There’s evidence from neighbors that Todashev was no longer on crutches at the time of his death.

      10. I never heard of the Chicago FBI flying in. Don’t see how it plays into any of this even if it is true.

      11. The state trooper who sent that message was way out of line. But some of them want to act like that at times. That boorish comment doesn’t change what happened. It’s a sad part of the job that some cops get into that mindset.

      12. I agree with everything you said about the importance of Todashev and have written in the past that I would have done everything possible to keep him alive if he had that information on the triple homicide. I never understood until this report why that didn’t happen. I just don’t see any reason why there would be a plan to execute him – none. If there were, the last group of people who would have planned it would by the MA state police and the FBI.

      13. I agree it seems odd he confessed. I don’t understand it. BHowever, how can you ignore the taped conversations and partially written confession. The tapes would show the environment in which the confession was made.

      14. You suggest his confession was coerced – but the text messages and involvement of the ADA seem to tell another story. You suggest he fled because he feared he would be killed after confession but at most of the time he was next to an open sliding door going outside. He could have easily gone that way rather than into the kitchen and returning with a pole.

      Thanks again for setting out your doubts. They will allow others to consider them and make up their own minds.

  23. I dunno Matt. Isn’t this what we expected as soon as we heard of the shooting? I remember thinking. “I can’t wait to see how the FBI explains this one.”

    Now we know. Should we believe the camera was turned off near the time the killing occurred?
    Why should we believe this Matt?

    1. Ernie:

      As you can tell I have no trouble with Ashton’s report. I read it and it seems to tie everything into place. The camera being off doesn’t bother me – no investigations ever go perfectly. I just don’t see any reason for the cops to want to execute Todashev. The external evidence – the text messages to the ADA and among the cops – all seem to verify their story. I was a skeptic but not any more.

Comments are closed.