A federal court rejected the fifth attempt by Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, aka the Boston Bomber, to move the trial out of Boston, thus allowing opening statements to finally begin this Wednesday.

The appeals court’s jury was divided two to one on whether or not to move the trial. The heart of the issue was possibility of finding impartial jurors among the five million people of eastern Massachusetts. Ultimately, the jury decided that mere knowledge of the case does not imply prejudice.

“Any high-profile case will receive significant media attention,” said the jury panel of the federal appeals court. “It is no surprise that people in general, and especially the well-informed, will be aware of it. Knowledge, however, does not equate to disqualifying prejudice. Distinguishing between the two is at the heart of the jury selection process.”

Judge George A. O’Toole Jr. of the Federal District Court stated that Tsarnaev failed to prove that he would be facing serious and irreparable harm by the case remaining in Boston. “In the case before us, we cannot say petitioner has met these onerous standards and so relief must be denied,” wrote the panel.

He added that, in the event of a conviction, having the trial remain in the city would be possible grounds for appeal.

In 2013, the 21-year-old Tsarnaev allegedly planted explosives at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing three and wounding over 260 people. There are 30 federal charges against him, 17 of which carry the penalty of death. Tsarnaev has pleaded not guilty to all 30 counts.

Over the better part of a month, Judge O’Toole has overseen the selection of 75 potential jurors. He had personally questioned over 250 candidates. Tuesday, the defense and prosecution will select 12 jurors and six alternatives from among the 75. The trial will begin on Wednesday and Judge O’Toole says that it could last well into the summer months.

The defense has tried four times before to move the trial. Three times the motion was rejected by Judge O’Toole and once it was rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This time, the appeals court responded in a detailed 34 page report as to why they were denying the move.

Judge Torruella concluded that, by failing to move the trial, “the majority is only furthering the perception that this whole trial has a preordained outcome and that our ‘guarantee of due process’ is nothing but an empty promise.”