May 12, 2001

8:06 AM

This guy - Timothy McVeigh, mass murder - wins a stay of execution even though hes admitted several times his guilt. So the FBI mislays a couple thousand documents, from my P.O.V i cant think of anyone who wouldn't want to see him wearing two intravenous lines in his arms and watch the Potassium Chloride flowing as free as a bird......
posted by monkeyJuice (58 comments total)

Amen!
posted by funky_jm at 8:07 AM on May 12, 2001

Don't want to argue: will just register my opinion that the death penalty is barbaric. In all cases.
posted by andrew cooke at 8:11 AM on May 12, 2001

i cant think of anyone

I can. Try Europe. For them, the abolition of the death penalty is an indicator of a humane and civilized society. We are on the fast track to becoming (even more) isolated from the rest of the world.
posted by fleener at 8:25 AM on May 12, 2001

Don't want to argue: will just register my opinion that the death penalty is barbaric. In all cases.

Except for genocide and terrorist acts against a government that result in the deaths of many.
posted by tomcosgrave at 8:27 AM on May 12, 2001

Oh by the way - I'm from Europe.
I'm not alone in my thoughts. Far from it. Most people oppose the way it's done in the US for homocide cases, but I don't think there is a massive majority against the death penalty, in principle, for certain types of crime.
posted by tomcosgrave at 8:28 AM on May 12, 2001

I agree that he should die for the barbaric horror he unleashed on the people of Oklahoma City and the nation. As repulsed as I am by violence and guns in general, I would be happy to pull the trigger on this evil person. HOWEVER...as an American, he is entitled to the full force AND protection of our legal system. Those "missing" documents may or may not have a bearing on the case, but the point is that the defense must be afforded the opportunity to review them. On a related note, there has been much chatter regarding McVeigh's admission to the killing of 168 people...as if his admission alone should result in a guilt verdict & punishment. Please remember, however, that whenever there is a "glamorous" crime, or serial killer on the loose, the police often get INNOCENT (or at least "not guilty")people (usually with mental problems) who confess to the crime/s in order to get publicity, deal with guilt, etc. Simply confessing to a crime does not and should not preclude the process of a fair & proper criminal trial.
posted by davidmsc at 8:33 AM on May 12, 2001

Just a data point: I'm against it. MonkeyJuice, try reading a few days of MF before you post.

Thing about this is, the material that wasn't turned over relates to the FBI's investigtion of the so-called "John Doe Number 2" that was the focus of so much speculation for a while. Eventually the FBI's official position was that there was no John Doe Number 2 and that McVeigh had the sole responsibility for the actual bombing. But the defense *could* have used the materials to make a case that there was at least a reasonable possibility that there was another person involved, and this directly impacts the punishment phase of the trial.

The defense was entitled to all documents the FBI generated, and they didn't get them. It's that simple, and the system *should* automatically review whether the documents were relevant before they commit an irrevocable act.

There also seems to be a larger pattern here in which the FBI decides which documents it will turn over to Justice (its own parent body), thus determining possible courses of prosecution. This is just wrong. The FBI's loose cannon days may be mostly behind it, but there are still some poretty questionable things going on there.
posted by rodii at 8:38 AM on May 12, 2001

Death penalty aside, is it coincidental that thousands of records were discovered (wow! good bookeeping) a short time after Louis Freeh, director, announced his retirement?
posted by Postroad at 9:19 AM on May 12, 2001

According to this article on the BBC, "Trying To Explain McVeigh", 80% of Americans think McVeigh should die. I doubt that number is accurate though. In fact, the article is vague about the origin of the number, citing "recent opinion polls".

If it is accurate, count me in the minority. The entire circus surrounding this and the execution itself is a pacifier to justify our schizophrenic morals in this country.

If you really want to punish him, let him sit in that 6x10 foot cell for the rest of his life. That sentence is apparently one of the reasons that he has chosen the execution route. In this case, I say give him what he does not want. Killing him will not accomplish anything for anybody, except Timothy McVeigh.

A related article, "Militias In Retreat" examines some of the fallout in the militia movement since the bombing. Whether he lives or dies, it appears that militia membership is falling and, anti-government activities are waning, or at least finding other avenues of demonstration.
posted by perogi at 9:23 AM on May 12, 2001

When you're dealing with a case where the culprit is ostensibly driven to react (obscenely) against perceived government cover-up and conspiracy, then it's really not helpful to handle the prosecution in a way that conveys precisely that perception.

You'd have thought that the Waco enquiry might have at least taught the FBI a few things.
posted by holgate at 9:28 AM on May 12, 2001

Maybe somebody could explain what's the point in death penalty in any given case.
Does it prevent people from committing murder? Obviously not, as demonstrated by the huge amount of violent deaths in USA. If crime rate increases, a government will hire more cops, harden laws, murder more people.

Do you believe that when a person is killing somebody he's thinking of electric chair? No, he/she won't think about getting caught, he/she will just do it. What sense of future could have someone that arrived to that sort of situation?. We must think of what made him/her take that action, not of how we can punish it.

What about poverty, exclusion and guns? What about equality and education? Why don't we need death penalty here in Europe?

[sorry about my english]
posted by fonso at 9:44 AM on May 12, 2001

Anyone is pretty sweeping. I can think of a few people who'd rather see the Fed follow due process: Jefferson, Madison, Monroe....

Wanting McVey dead is one thing; wanting him killed Stalin-style is another.

Suppose the buried evidence points to a wider conspiracy? Your Potassium Chloride enthusiasm, which is a little nauseating by the way--have you ever actually seen an execution?--would harm future investigations.
posted by steve_high at 9:54 AM on May 12, 2001

i cant think of anyone who wouldn't want to see him wearing two intravenous lines in his arms and watch the Potassium Chloride flowing as free as a bird......

Well, you can think of me monkeyJuice.

PS: What an odd choice of words: Potassium Chloride flowing as free as a bird?
posted by Dick Paris at 9:59 AM on May 12, 2001

i cant think of anyone...

you obviously haven't been doing much thinking lately, then.
posted by will at 10:08 AM on May 12, 2001

fonso: [sorry about my english]

Off Topic Alert: Fonso, please don't apologize for your English - your comments are understandable and you made your point. I'd say your command of the language is admirable, as it appears not to be your mother-tongue. Keep on posting! Cheers/davidmsc
posted by davidmsc at 10:26 AM on May 12, 2001

i absolutely agree with gore vidal's statement that had he blown up the fbi building (with nobody in it), he would be considered a national hero.
posted by billybob at 10:36 AM on May 12, 2001

"I am repulsed by guns but I'll pull the trigger". what a poge statement. Also, until youve been a cop, or had a gun pointed in your face a least once, SHUT UP. someone should railroad you and we'll see how calm and flexably moral you become (I hate Mcviegh, he should fry, but only after the last shread is brought to light) and steve, last i checked, those presidents are no longer with us.
posted by clavdivs at 10:37 AM on May 12, 2001

clavdivs: "I am repulsed by guns but I'll pull the trigger". what a poge statement. Also, until youve been a cop, or had a gun pointed in your face a least once, SHUT UP.

Easy there, big fella...there's no inconsistency in not liking guns and being willing to pull the trigger on a decidedly evil person who has committed a gruesome crime and ended the lives of so many. I do believe that McVeigh is guilty of the crime, but that does not mean that I don't want a fair legal process to come to the same conclusion with as little doubt as possible.

And although I've never been a cop, or had a "gun pointed in my face," I serve proudly in our nation's military. Does that count?
posted by davidmsc at 10:51 AM on May 12, 2001

As much as I'd like to see McVeigh executed ASAP, I'd prefer to wait a while and let the process crawl on instead of giving the militia wackos more propaganda material. Louis Freeh should have to answer for this though.
posted by owillis at 10:57 AM on May 12, 2001

time to rear my ugly head and defend my comments....

ok - this is a very generalised thought - i understand that the thought of killing someone for a crime is a very 'frowned upon' subject to say the least.
One of the last cases of capital punishement - in the UK - (hanging) was shadowed in a little controvosy and the defendent who died, later had his conviction quashed by the court of Appeal.

This is a strong argument for the abolishment of it. You got to be pretty sure that the guy/gal is 100% guilty of the crime - which Timothy McVeigh has admited his is of.

Reading through most of these comments i get the feeling that i may have rattled a few cages - but these are just my feeling on the subject - oh and Dick Paris i was just getting a little colourfull and descriptive with the free as a bird comment -

..and steve_high i haven't watched an execution and i doubt u have

fonso: The point of capital punishment is the ultimate deterent (suposidly) that should deter anyone from a hanous crime.

i wonder how many of you would change your comments on this if one of your family / friends was affected by this monster -
posted by monkeyJuice at 11:06 AM on May 12, 2001

Clavdivs, TAKE A PILL. You are coming across as a complete fool here with these scattershot rants at any and all targets. Stop, think, spell (WTF is "poge"?), address people with some respect, try to be a participant. Otherwise people will think you're just a moron and treat you likewise. If I want some wack street-person facsimile screaming in my face I can always go downtown.

I've had guns pointed in my face, so I guess I'm permitted to speak, although what that non sequitur was all about escapes me. David's point seems to be merely that attention to due process is important here. Not unlike your position, if I can filter it out from the noise.
posted by rodii at 11:07 AM on May 12, 2001

had he blown up the fbi building (with nobody in it), he would be considered a national hero.

Frankly, I'd be pissed off that the government would then have to spend more of my tax dollars to build a new one.
posted by kindall at 11:07 AM on May 12, 2001

MonkeyJuice: that was a defense?

i wonder how many of you would change your comments on this if one of your family / friends was affected by this monster

Speaking of non sequiturs. Is this about whether people would ever be angry enough to wish someone else ware dead, or is it about whether capital punishment should be permissible under law? We had a recent thread about a bus driver who shot and killed a junkie who was breaking into his car. Clear he was angry enough to kill--does that mean breaking into a car should warrant the death penalty?
posted by rodii at 11:12 AM on May 12, 2001

Hint: Peer pressure is not a legitimate argument.

Though "peer review" has a lot to recommend it.
posted by holgate at 11:13 AM on May 12, 2001

Nothing like the hit you get watching the life leave someone's body when they know they're getting it, know it's coming. . . . Real family entertainment. Let's all gather 'round the stepped pyramid now, watch the beating heart ripped from his . . . what? just an injection and he falls asleep? wait a minute. I want a Real Death!

yodel-ay-ee-oo.
posted by aflakete at 11:19 AM on May 12, 2001

hmm, although roddi seems to be arguing a fair point, i feel that u lost the plot a bit on your last comment -the guy who shot by the coach driver for stealing his car has got absolutley nothing to do with capital punishment - that was cold blooded murder - I feel u may be a victim of your favourite word u seem to be using non sequiturs
- hope we can still be friends
posted by monkeyJuice at 11:28 AM on May 12, 2001

No, your argument--insofar as it is an argument--seems to be that a victim's rage somehow justifies killing. If that's not it, what was i wonder how many of you would change your comments on this if one of your family / friends was affected by this monster all about?

As for my favorite "word" (try counting above 1), it's the mot juste, or would be if there weren't two of them, y'know?
posted by rodii at 11:46 AM on May 12, 2001

To me the death penalty is not justice. It is revenge. Nor is it a deterrent. States with the death penalty do not have a lower murder rate.
I'm glad that they stayed his execution so at least can get the fullest possible consideration under the law.
I despise what he did.
posted by keithl at 11:47 AM on May 12, 2001

Justice has revenge at it's core, although it is influenced by other factors, such as societal good and deterrence...but ultimately, revenge is the motivator - the desire to punish someone for causing harm to person and/or property. That is not necessarily a bad thing - it is a natural thing.
posted by davidmsc at 11:57 AM on May 12, 2001

we've all got books that help us out. y'know
posted by monkeyJuice at 1:20 PM on May 12, 2001

(Bill Nye announcer voice:) Uh huh.
posted by rodii at 1:28 PM on May 12, 2001

Is it me, or is a large percentage of the American public acting like pig ignorant peasants? Watching CNN cover this story, I saw people crying because they felt Timothy McVeigh deserved to die regardless of the documents, and that the government was now protecting him. They have absolutely no idea how our legal system works, or what a fair and democratic justice system should be. I wouldn't be surprised if the people got together and came after McVeigh with pitchforks and torches.
I think we need better civics classes in our schools.
posted by Doug at 1:53 PM on May 12, 2001

being from UK I never heard of this Bill Nye - done a seatch and found his web site - now wheres my science kit... acid attack looks like fun -

cheers rodii :-0 ( dont know what his voice sounds like thou)
posted by monkeyJuice at 1:55 PM on May 12, 2001

davidmsc, great point. Although I don't agree with it, it made me stop and think.
Isn't society supposed to be bigger than its problems?
posted by keithl at 2:03 PM on May 12, 2001

i wonder how many of you would change your comments on this if one of your family / friends was affected by this monster -

oh right! i forgot to use my emotion instead of that pesky old reason when dealing with matters of justice.

ok, here we go:

forget this sissy execution, let's stone the monster! i want to spin on his body after too! yeah! after lets go kick the crap out of his family!
posted by will at 2:20 PM on May 12, 2001

Isn't it odd that USA, were they a european country, couldn't become a EU member - whereas Romania and Croatia can?
posted by Hjorth at 3:34 PM on May 12, 2001

The initial post only stated a fact then the postee's opinion, then it (comments)gets apple and oranges with death penalty issuance and a splay into guns,crime, and BIG SAMS thirst for gunnery. Heck you'd rant too. As one commenting, I chose to use a diogenian approach. Its works for me. I live for the moment to be proven wrong. The issue is rather small. A stay for one month for a person who deserves to be let loose upon the fine people of Oklahoma. The people voted to juice the guy. The one thing that alarmed me about Mcveigh was the seriousness of his beliefs. I believe in the maximum penalty for a multiple capital offence. death. The stay was to guarentee that no doubt can be raised in the appeals process Qua,no timmy-no appeal from something HUGE and STUPID like leaving out Documents that the defence did not get to see.exit one bru-ha-ha. But alas,we "Gabacho Loco's" once again tread into the murky film of missing the point. thank you for the slap
posted by clavdivs at 5:55 PM on May 12, 2001

The point of capital punishment is the ultimate deterent (suposidly) that should deter anyone from a hanous crime.

That's the theory, but usually the people that commit these unspeakably heinous crimes don't think too much about the consequences, which is why the death penalty never works as a deterrent and why terrible crimes keep happening.
posted by MegoSteve at 7:02 PM on May 12, 2001

Monkeyjuice, my point was that even those who do it for a living are not eager to see an execution. If you listen to this real player documentary, pay attention to Kenneth Dean, an officer with the Tie-Down Team in Huntsville Penitentiary, who has secured more than a hundred prisoners to the gurney just before that lethal injection you are cheerleading for.

By the way, I think the person or persons responsible for Oklahoma City should get the death penalty. This is a clear case of national self-defense in which an act of war was committed against a U.S. civilian population center with a flag flying over it.
posted by steve_high at 7:04 PM on May 12, 2001

I think we need better civics classes in our schools.

Finally someone says something I can agree with here.
posted by donkeymon at 8:06 PM on May 12, 2001

I may have read the intelligent MeFi posts re: the death penalty too fast, because I still haven't seen anybody refer to an argument I saw a while ago in the National Post. (Sorry, the link is dead, but in an attempt to make up for that, here is an argument against calling the death penalty 'barbaric'/'uncivilized') The argument against the death penalty that I favour is that it gives the murderer in question huge media coverage (witness McVeigh's upcoming interview on 60 minutes) and celebrity, shifting away from the celebration of life to the celebration of death.

And why is McVeigh looking forward to dying? Martyrdom.
posted by youthbc1 at 8:58 PM on May 12, 2001

Hjorth: Why would we want to join the EU? Borg mentality isn't for us, and apparently not the Brits either
posted by owillis at 9:23 PM on May 12, 2001

steve_high, you're right, I wouldn't want to see an execution. So what? There's an old saying about two things that people should never see being made: laws and sausage. I don't have to be a bloodthirsty sadist to believe this guy should die. I'm not, and I do. I've never seen an execution, but I've talked to and counseled plenty of prisoners doing life in San Quentin - have you?

I applaud the AG for stepping in and delaying the execution just to make absolutely sure that this document incident has no material impact on the verdict or the sentencing. Even though McVeigh's admitted his guilt. Given that we have death penalty statutes on the books in this country and given that the FBI has committed an error (two things that you are free to object to- but they are givens), isn't this exactly how you want your government to handle it? I don't see any reasonable alternative.

I think monkeyJuice just stirred up a few people with his opening "I can't think of anyone..." comment. Well, he can't say that any more, can he? As for me, I'm having sausage in the morning.
posted by JParker at 11:53 PM on May 12, 2001

The most intriguing issue about this is that McVeigh seems to have his hands on the controls more firmly than anyone else. I think martyrdom must be his goal, with a barbaric punishment acting as his stepping stone.

On an NBC report yesterday they interviewed the families of victims. A mother of one who was killed stated that she didn't want to see him killed because she felt that she would feel sorry for him.

I think that that one statement was more telling of McVeigh's mindset than anything I have ever heard.

Killiing in the name of revenge is still killing.
posted by ttrendel at 5:22 AM on May 13, 2001

martyrdom. Are you kidding. perhaps to nut bags."revenge in the name of killing is still revenge". You all should really go back to philosophy class.
posted by clavdivs at 7:28 AM on May 13, 2001

fonso - Maybe somebody could explain what's the point in death penalty in any given case. Does it prevent people from committing murder? Obviously not...

I'm so tired of hearing this argument against the death penalty. Putting some criminals to death does prevent "people" from committing murder. Don't beleive me? Go read some statistics about the number of murders that happen inside prisons. I can guarantee that after we put McVeigh to death he will never kill another person. If we leave him in prison, can you make the same guarantee? Or maybe we aren't concerned about one prisoner killing another?

The death penalty is not some huge social engineering program designed to keep everyone from killing everyone else. It is an extreme penalty for an extreme crime designed to keep that one person from ever violating anyone elses civil rights. Thats all it needs to accomplish to be successful. If it has any other collateral effects, such as keeping others from committing murder, thats a bonus.
posted by schlyer at 7:50 AM on May 13, 2001

"i wonder how many of you would change your comments on this if one of your family / friends was affected by this monster -"

There you have the difference between the personal and the social. Good work. People who don't support the death penalty aren't immune from faults. This makes their decision not to support the death penalty more rational, not less.
posted by lucien at 8:20 AM on May 13, 2001

Go read some statistics about the number of murders that happen inside prisons. I can guarantee that after we put McVeigh to death he will never kill another person.

Wait, let me get this straight: you're arguing that the government should kill criminals in order to save the lives of criminals that the government will later be killing? Umm...

The homicide rate in prisons may be high (I don't really know, as you neglected to link to any statistics supporting your claim), but I would presume that inmates (not all of whom are necessarily criminals) who would otherwise have their lives cut short by the government aren't exactly in the low-security wards of the prison, and won't likely be killing anyone else while locked up.

I don't really buy into the idea that since our prisons are so overcrowded and poorly run that "we can't stop the inmates from killing each other even when we've got them behind bars, so we might just as well go ahead and kill them ourselves because who knows what they might do!"
posted by drywall at 11:50 AM on May 13, 2001

Do we really need statistics to believe that prisoners kill guards? Or other inmates?

drywall - you're arguing that the government should kill criminals in order to save the lives of criminals that the government will later be killing? Umm...

Umm, no. I'm saying that the death penalty is an effective way of keeping certain criminals from ever committing another crime - whether that be against someone in the "free" world, or someone in prison. And remember, not everyone in prison is an inmate - the guards are put at risk every day by having to deal with our society's most horrendous criminals.
posted by schlyer at 1:06 PM on May 13, 2001

What about those who are wrongly executed?

Also I'm sort of surprised when the survivors of victims wish to push forward with execution instead of with knowing that each and every lead had been followed. I tend to wonder what percentage of the recently discovered documents has to do with John Doe no.2?
posted by Sqwerty at 4:56 PM on May 13, 2001

owillis asked:

Why would we want to join the EU? Borg mentality isn't for us, and apparently not the Brits either

It isn't? Then tell me the difference between Kansas and Nebraska... I bet it isn't big.
posted by palnatoke at 2:09 AM on May 14, 2001

Who could be against his execution? Apparently some of the families of his victims. [NYTIMES/FREE REG] Am I? Nyes. Yno. Nyaby?
posted by mister scratch at 5:32 AM on May 14, 2001

Difference between Kansas & Nebraska - Kansas sucks but Nebraska blows.
posted by schlyer at 6:28 AM on May 14, 2001

This isn't about rage anymore with many of the victims. Rather, a way to silence him. McVeigh is hoping to be a martyr...and is intelligent enough to get what he wants.

I think capital punishment is many things, (rage, justice, a method of silencing, etc) but is definitely not creative enough. While I don't think he should be put to death violently, I do think that he should be strapped to a chair with his mouth gagged and eyelids taped open to watch all of the post-bomb footage he supposedly feels no remorse over. Then silently put to sleep.

Justice to me? Sure.

Eye for an eye? Proportionally uneven.

If he was remorseful, I'd feel differently.
posted by samsara at 7:24 AM on May 14, 2001

There's something I don't get here: McVeigh admits to murdering 168 people. And he wants to die. He's talked about his execution as "government-assisted suicide."

Why should we give him what he wants? Put him in solitary, in a cell near the Unabomber. He won't kill anyone else that way, and he won't get to be a martyr. No flashy execution, no famous last words: instead, 45 years from now, a short article on page 37, "Timothy McVeigh, convicted murderer, died of a stroke in federal prison."

There's no deterrent in giving people what they want, even if it's something we can't imagine wanting ourselves.
posted by rosvicl at 8:04 AM on May 14, 2001

rosvicl, I really think it's reverse psychology. I doubt he really wants to die. If he continues to live, he will continue being vocal and influencial. While some of us think to ourselves, "He's got a good point about the U.S. being a global bully." I would think that most of us would write a lengthy article about it instead of going through the thought out process of building a bomb and planting it in front of a building to kill over a hundred people. He's actually preaching B.S. At no point during the crime did he stop to go, "Wait a minute! What if someone in this building has the same views as I do?"

Letting him live basically gives him enough time to reinvent and immortalize himself (at the cost of the aggrivation it causes the victims and their families). However, I do agree with those that are opposed with capital punishment as it is. If we only had a method of silencing someone without killing them (at what point to we ask which is more humane?). For the victims, forgiving him is what might win in the end....even without the closure that is almost impossible to attain.
posted by samsara at 10:20 AM on May 14, 2001