Who
is Timothy McVeigh
A shy college dropout, McVeigh worked as an armoured car guard whilst he accumulated
the guns and food that supported his survivalist philosophy. He stockpiled them, convinced
that one day American society would break down and only the well prepared would survive.
In 1988 he bought some rural acres that he used as a shooting range - perfect training for
the army, where he enlisted in 1988 and became (predictably) a gunner. Eventually promoted
from corporal to platoon leader, he was obsessed with cleaning his guns, racist
literature, and defending the rights of citizens to enforce their constitutional right to
bear arms. He saw action in the Gulf War, where he received a Bronze Star for heroism, and
was later discharged. In 1993 he travelled to Waco, Texas, and observed the stand-off
between the FBI and a survivalist cult called the Branch Davidians - it ended in a
terrible fire.
The trial
The jury found him guilty, and later decided that he should die by lethal injection as
punishment for the worst terrorist crime on American soil. Most of the evidence was
circumstantial - in other words, the jury was asked to reach conclusions that can be
reasonably inferred from the evidence, even though there can be no certainty about the
conclusion (for instance, there was no eye witness to McVeigh's involvement).
But once found guilty, the testimony of the relatives of the victims ensured the jury
would invoke the death penalty. The decision for death was unanimous, which is important
in itself, because under American law anything less than a unanimous decision for
execution would have meant the lesser sentence of life in prison without parole.
The FBI botches it
Four weeks before execution day, in a botch-up almost beyond belief, the FBI admitted
it had "lost" and now suddenly "found" 3,135 documents that had never
been seen by McVeigh's defence team.
In the meantime McVeigh had admitted his role in the crime, cruelly calling the death
of the 19 children "collateral damage". So there could be no doubt that this was
the killer - but now, due to a monumental bungle, the legal process had been subverted.
It is not hard to imagine McVeigh having a good laugh over this mess. Here he is, an
agitator against Government interference in the private lives of Americans, the
beneficiary of a Government stuff-up!
The Attorney General was forced to order the postponement of the execution. As he said,
"if any questions or doubts remain about the case, it would cast a permanent cloud
over justice, diminishing its value and its integrity".
What does it matter?
So why all the fuss? After all, if McVeigh has admitted to the crime since the trial,
what difference does it make that some documentation was not available at the time of the
trial?
But this is not the point. The system of justice requires fairness, and the right of
the defence to make the best case they can on behalf of their clients. The words we most
often hear in praise or condemnation of the law is "just"(or
"unjust"). But that doesn't mean that we should look for morality in the law -
as the lady holding the scales above many courts tells us, justice is blind. What is
required, however, is a fair system. To execute McVeigh now, before the new
evidence has been looked at, is to fall into the trap he has laid for the justice system.
There is another aspect of this case, however, that gives pause for thought. Once again
it makes us wonder why the death penalty continues to be applied when mistakes can so
easily occur in the prosecution of a capital case.
The death penalty
In Australia the death penalty has been abolished and replaced by life imprisonment -
in fact, America is the only Western democracy that maintains the death penalty. In
America both the death sentence and the verdict can be appealed, and this can take
anything up to ten years. But the verdict was popular, as polls showed that about 80% of
Americans wanted McVeigh to be executed.
Nowadays American executions are so common they hardly make the newspapers, but real
questions are being asked about the racial makeup and backgrounds of death row inmates
(overwhelmingly black or Latino and poor). Most importantly, the defence is not always (as
in the McVeigh case) "gold-plated" (it cost $10m). The American Bar Association
has said that "the administration of the death penalty is…a haphazard maze of
unfair practices with no internal consistency". It is worth noting that in the last
twenty years about 70 death row inmates have escaped execution because their convictions
were overturned on appeal - that should give any person reason to tread carefully in this
continuing debate, because it means that under the law they were innocent.
Sure, McVeigh is a self-confessed mass murderer. But if the prosecution botched the
case when it had all the money in the world to spend, how often are mistakes made when the
defendant is provided a defence hampered by lack of money and resources?
By Geoffrey Winn
Creative Director
www.law4u.com.au
Read this: The legal information contained above is
intended to be general information about the law. It is not a substitute for legal and
other professional advice. Lawscape Communications P/L does not accept responsibility for
loss to any person, who either acts or does not act because of this information.
Want us to tell you when we put
out another news item?