Juror Bias Probe Ordered in Boston Marathon Bomber's Case

Facts

A federal appeals court has directed the judge who oversaw Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's 2015 trial to investigate allegations of juror bias and determine whether his death sentence should stand.¹
The Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday concluded that the trial judge didn't adequately probe Tsarnaev's claims of juror bias, with Judge William Kayatta ruling the lower court's investigation 'fell short of what was constitutionally required.'²
Tsarnaev's lawyers claim two jurors were dishonest during the trial's jury selection process, accusing one of lying about discussing the case on social media and another of lying about his friend's Facebook comments on the trial.³
If it's found that the trial judge should have disqualified either juror, Tsarnaev's death penalty will be overturned, and a new penalty-phase trial will be held to determine if he should be sentenced to death.⁴
In 2020, the 1st Circuit vacated Tsarnaev's death sentence after finding that the trial judge didn't sufficiently question jurors about their online statements. In 2022, however, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 to overturn its ruling and reinstate his death penalty.⁵
Tsarnaev's guilt in the 2013 bombing that killed three people and injured hundreds near the marathon's finish line is not in question. The appeal will determine whether he should be executed or face life in prison for his crimes.³

Narrative A, as provided by CBS. These continuous appeals to Tsarnaev's trial and death sentence are a waste of taxpayer money that accomplishes nothing but unnecessarily forcing the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing and their families to revisit their traumas. His guilt has been well established, and while jurors in the original trial may have made inappropriate statements online, it would be wrong to suggest his death penalty should be overturned because of jury bias the defense couldn't prove.
Narrative B, as provided by Arab News. While Tsarnaev is most certainly guilty of the crimes he has been convicted of, it's not unfair for his defense team to question the role of jury bias in his trial. He has been sentenced to the harshest penalty the US has to offer, and since he has been given the death sentence, it would be wrong not to investigate the possibility of wrongdoing in the case. These checks and balances exist in the US justice system for a reason, which is why this investigation should proceed.