McVeigh-The End

[Niteshift]

Many states still use the electric chair (including mine), although the legislature approved LI in case the chair is abolished by the court. That's the main reason for LI, fear of the lawsuits.

------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[ftrphxcop]

I agree Mac90, I also think it was for the benefit of the people who have to do this job all the time.

Its unfortunate that the victims do not get thier choice of how a criminal must die. It might ease the wave of violence among young people if they see capital punishment first hand.

I personally am neutral on the death penalty. I can't help but think that there must of been alot of people who suffered because they wrong man/woman was sentenced to death. Be it in the justice system or otherwise. But at the same time it must be hell to lose a loved one because some idiot has a bad sense of making the whole world suffer his injustice.

[Niteshift]

I don't know about other states, but here the duty is by choice, so burn-out shouldn't be an issue.

------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[ftrphxcop]

I don't know about burnout but my grandfather worked death row, and he was just a plain jerk to everybody. I think it was way to many years of working around people who had nothing to lose. (He was in New York.)

[katnn]

Alot of interesting replies here. Keeping in mind that I in no way condone his actions, I can see his frustration with the govt. Even by ALOT of the comments here from those of us who have sworn to uphold and enforce the law and the constitution it seems that the fact that the law was side stepped in his case and those who took that oath DON'T CARE.
Oh, just for the record and to set ALOT of you folks straight, there were 169 people killed in the bombing, not 168. You see there is still the unaccounted for left leg of the final victim. The world's leading bomb expert from Ireland, I believe he has investigated over 2,500 IRA bombings, when presented with all the facts of the case says with out a doubt that the leg in fact belongs to the "bomber". Kind of odd don't you think that there has been no mention of mcveigh having lost a leg in this bombing????????????

[Niteshift]

"the law was side stepped in his case and those who took that oath DON'T CARE."

What laws were side-stepped?

"Oh, just for the record and to set ALOT of you folks straight, there were 169 people killed in the bombing, not 168."

Until the unidentified leg is identified as having belonged to a person that was alive and in the building before the explosion, the answer is 168. Can you say for absolute certainty that there was a living person attached to it prior to the explosion?




------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[katnn]

Mr Nightshift, I believe the courts have ruled for years that all evidence that could provide a defense MUST be turned over prior to trial. Out of the 4000+ documents just recently released the govt. claims that "only 9 of them would have helped his defense" Should not make any difference if it was 9 or 900, the govt. failed to follow the procedures that have been in place for years. As for the leg, I guess it is possible that the leg was carried in someones (mcveigh's???) pocket to the scene. And of course the experts could possible be wrong. However if you really want to discuss the unusual events that happened with this incident you may also want to question the 2 explosive devices that DOD dismantled in the building. These same 2 devices that our govt. now claims never existed. While I know that in the heat of the moment comments can be made about what folks thought were additional devices and I would prefer that folks error on the side of caution I have a difficult time believing that they "thought" they were explosive devices in the heat of the moment, deactivated them and removed them to only say later that the were not what they thought they were. Especiall when DOD documents clearly show that EOD personnel deactivated 2 explosive devices. Like I first stated, I don't condone his actions and I don't necessarily disagree with the sentence handed out I still feel that there are ALOT of answered ?? and I can't help but feel that the C.J system slipped on this one.

[Rule.303]

Originally posted by Niteshift:

Until the unidentified leg is identified as having belonged to a person that was alive and in the building before the explosion, the answer is 168. Can you say for absolute certainty that there was a living person attached to it prior to the explosion?

This is true. We had a case in Australia in the 1970's where a severed leg was located washed up on a beach near Sydney. Forensic examination of the leg revealed that it had been severed by way of a knife or similar sharp instrument (not a shark). Tattoos on the leg identified it's owner. Without going into all the evidence surrounding the case, two men were arrested and charged with murder. Both were aquitted as the court stated, "The severed leg alone does not establish that the person from whom it was removed is either alive or dead, and thus no evidence of death has been established."

[Niteshift]

"I believe the courts have ruled for years that all evidence that could provide a defense MUST be turned over prior to trial."

Actually, no. They have to turn over what the defense requests in their discovery motion. It's not just automatic.

"Out of the 4000+ documents just recently released the govt. claims that "only 9 of them would have helped his defense" Should not make any difference if it was 9 or 900, the govt. failed to follow the procedures that have been in place for years."

Making a mistake a a government conspiracy to "side-step" the law are not the same thing.

Evidently, there was some truth to it. Even McVeigh's attorneys couldn't find anything helpful in there, especially considering their client confessed. How do you defend a guy that say, I did it?

"As for the leg, I guess it is possible that the leg was carried in someones (mcveigh's???) pocket to the scene."

Could it have been in one of the govt. offices? As evidence?

"I have a difficult time believing that they "thought" they were explosive devices in the heat of the moment, deactivated them and removed them to only say later that the were not what they thought they were."

Why not? Bomb squads blow up or "deactivate" suspected devices all the time, only to find out they weren't bombs.

"Especiall when DOD documents clearly show that EOD personnel deactivated 2 explosive devices."

Again, how do we know they weren't in the BATF offices or something similar?

Do you believe everything you hear?

"and I can't help but feel that the C.J system slipped on this one."

How? He CONFESSED. There was enough evidence without his confession to convict him. How did it slip? The right guy went to jail and was put to death. The evidence said he was the right guy. McVeigh said he was the right guy.

I think you've been reading the Spotlight too much.




------------------
Niteshift-
Perseverate In Pugna

[RT]

Artie, I don't feel sorry for him, I think it is possible that he could have turned out different if he had a father to pull him back to reality. I work with juveniles and we identify them as targets, when they have had 3 felony arrest as a juvenile they are identified as targets. I took a stack of targets from our office and found that 90% had no father listed. About 6% had a step father. The rest had a father. I think the lack of fathers in families is one of the biggest problems in our society today. As far as McVeigh, he was a crusader against bullies as a child. He believed strongly in the cause and went into his own private world. Later he went deeper and deeper into this private world. He saw the government as the bully and read in the Turner Diaries that taking out a federal building was the way to get back at the government. He was in a fantasy world that he created and he lived in it till the day he died. The really sad thing is he was against big government which a lot of people are but the anti-government movement took a huge hit when he blew up the bomb. I think in real life in a free society we have a lot of ways to affect our government but violence is never one of the options. I do think the people who blow up abortion clinics do much more harm to their cause than good too. Same principle.

[retired]

Niteshift and Artie,

First for Niteshift, I respect your opinions and input into this forum. I myself can only speak about California law, and not about Federal law or your particular state. Although I would think the discovery motions in most states and in federal court would be similar. In California the defense in reality doesn't even have to file discovery motion, (although they always do) because the DA automatically provides them with all documents relevant to the case. However, the defense in their discovery motion always asks for ALL documents, all statements, all witness reports, etc everything that applies to the case. So in my opinion, and I don't believe that the FBI intentionally withheld the documents, they were negligent and as such, even though Mcveigh needed to be executed, I believe his trial as all trials must be conducted with due process. It isn't the responsibility of the FBI or AG to decide what may or may not be beneficial to the defense. It is not up to the FBI or the AG to decide if the documents would or would not prove his innocence, it is the responsibility of the jury to decide his innocence or guilt. Because they withheld evidence in a capital case, unintentionally or not, and as much as I hate to say it, I don't think he had proper due process of law!

For Artie, McVeigh admitted he committed the crime after the trial and after he was found guilty, and I agree, he should have been found guilty and executed. However, there are numerous cases here in the US where the accused has been released because of procedural flaws in the law, which are just as important as substantive laws. We can't pick and choose who gets due process and who doesn't

My point is because McVeigh committed such a heinous and ruthless act, many are willing to overlook what I consider a violation of due process. If it can happen to an ******* like McVeigh, what is to prevent it from happening to an innocent person, or to you or me? In order to maintain strict fairness in our justice system for everyone, even the monsters must be allowed their due process right.

So in closing, let me reiterate, I am not a supporter of McVeigh, nor do I condone his actions in any sense of the word. I am a supporter of our constitution.

I appreciate the comments from both of you.

Retired

[jellybean40]

From what i watched, interviews i had seen, family members/loved ones who lost ppl in the bombing, had gotten to the point where they didnt expect to get closure from McVeigh's death. they know it wont change anything. they believe it's justice carried out, and the "right thing to do" in this case, and i do also. the fact is, their lives where changed the day he murdered their loved ones.

somehow some of them have found a way to forgive him, which i cant imagine, but i CAN imagine that holding on to so much hatred and anger would only make their lives worse. so in order to cope and go on with their lives, they HAD to find a way.


[This message has been edited by jellybean40 (edited 06-12-2001).]

[RT]

I know they will never feel closure but they will be relieved that justice is done and they don't have to think about McVeigh anymore. I don't know if I could forgive him either, but I would not be bitter because being bitter helps no one, so maybe this is their way of not being bitter.

[Artie]

Mac90,
Ok Artie I understand. Nothing works against the government so just take it right?

No, that

[Dukeboy01]

Hey, me and some of my buddies were shooting the breeze between calls and came up with an alternative to the death penalty. You take the condemmned and surgically amputate his/ her arms and legs. Next, you surgically remove their vocal chords, inner ear drums, teeth, and eyes. (The eyes could be used for organ donation!) Then you give 'em a colostomy (Is this the correct term?) so that to remove their wastes, all you have to do is change out the bag. Hook 'em up to a feeding tube, stick 'em on a giant ward, and hire a few nurses to change the bags. No chance of escape and minimal cost to the taxpayer. No chance of them ever being able to hurt another human being, including the caretakers. (Can't even bite them, no teeth.) They get to spend the rest of their natural lives deaf, blind, mute, and crapping into a bag. No need for maximum security measurements and society doesn't have to feel squishy about the state taking a human life.

I bet you could make it an alternative to the condemned and 99.99% of them would decide that they didn't fear the reaper after all.