Man told transit police the Boston Marathon bomber 'was my best friend'
BOSTON — A man linked to a gun used to kill a university police officer days after the Boston Marathon bombings told police he smoked marijuana every day because, in his words, “my best friend was the bomber,” according to court documents.
Stephen Silva was arrested Monday on charges of heroin trafficking and possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number. The same gun was used to kill MIT police Officer Sean Collier during a manhunt for the bombing suspects, according to two people with knowledge of the case who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the investigation.
Silva, 21, was a high school classmate and a close friend of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, a suspect in the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombings that killed three people and wounded more than 260. Collier, 26, was ambushed several days later and shot multiple times in his car.
Silva was arrested on marijuana charges at a train station in Boston's Dorchester neighborhood in November. According to court documents, after transit police found two bags of marijuana and a wad of $555 in cash in Silva's pockets, he repeatedly told them, “I smoke a lot of weed every day because my best friend was the bomber.”
Jonathan Shapiro, an attorney for Stephen Silva (pronounced STEF'-an) did not immediately return a call seeking comment Wednesday. On Tuesday, after Silva made his initial appearance in court, Shapiro said he had received the case only a few hours earlier.
Shapiro said in a statement that he was in the process of meeting with his client and reviewing evidence in the case.
According to the indictment, Silva received the gun in or around February 2013.
Silva was ordered to remain in custody, and a bail hearing was scheduled for Aug. 6.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.