Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire what purpose will a new McVeigh trial; serve?

Tim McVeigh has pled guilty and asked to die. The Federal Burough of Incompetence has given him a new chance to waste millions more of our dollars will there be any winners if a new trial is set? Who will win? Will we learn any thing new that proves our criminal justice system is only justice for criminals while the citizens pay the bills and lawyers go to the bank.Or are the principals of American justice strong enough to live up to it's credo; Justice for All. What is this mans life worth? After all he did admit to the crime, There is no question of guilt. I say if there is a retrial, no one gets paid.<P>Bullwnkl.

I dunno, other than to keep that baby killer alive for a while longer. I jsut thought they were delaying his execution til June 11.

evidently mcveigh's attorneys just recieved evidence from the fbi that was supposed to be turned over to the defense long ago. the attorneys are hoping that this new evidence will at least get mcveigh off the death penalty.<P>w/ mcveigh's attitude towards the gov't i would imagine he would be all for this, knowing that it will cost the gov't a fortune to retry.<P>what good would it do? none for the general public. for mcveigh, it would put him back in the spotlight, and keep him there for awhile. it would also further his cause (whatever his cause truly is) and keep his thorny *** in the side of the gov't, open and refresh wounds that are barely beginning to heal, and give him one more chance to be a smug s.o.b. for the cameras.

The only ones that will bennifit will be the atornies and the media.Give me the needle,I will gouge him......Ss....<P>------------------<BR>Florida by Birth-Georgia by Choice

Here is a theory which probably doesn't hold any water, but some real strange things happen in this crazy world we live in. Is it possible that the Feds do not want to make McVeigh into a martyr? A dead McVeigh might be a rallying cry which could create more problems for the government by those with an axe to grind. Waco was a rallying cry for some and a martyred McVeigh might also be one. When we gun owners see the Feds trying to tamper with our gun rights, we get angry, but handle our grievances through lawful and effective means (for the most part). There are those whose feelings for intrusive government turn into an uncontrolled rage, and many possibilities for getting even then emerge. This theory is supported by no evidence, just general observations.

I dont think he'll get a new trial. Most of the stuff in those files are from the very start of the investigation. <P>Remember right after it happened and they kept talking about looking for John Doe #2, and we now know(or so we're told anyway),that there was no #2?<P>There was a pretty good editorial in a local paper here that talked about stuff like that.<P>They say it aint the kind of evidence most people think it is.<P><P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://TheSouthernOutdoorsman.com" TARGET=_blank>TheSouthernOutdoorsman.com</A>

So no one is upset about the Feds with holding evidence? Is not the most important thing here the principal of justice?? What if one of you guys were arrested and then later found out that evidence has been surpressed?

Pete,<P>You took the words right out of my mouth! <P>Our media is telling us that all these files are meaningless, and it is just a formality. The thing is, with evidence withheld, everything this country was founded on is a sham. Maybe the evidence is meaningless, and maybe alot of it just shows some incompetence and screwups on the part of the agents, who knows? The point is, if this is the America founded over 200 years ago, there is no benefit in the government witholding evidence. <P>I was going to post on the war on drugs thread, but maybe it fits better here. The real losers on this war on drugs, is you and me, and how our precious rights and freedoms have been drastically eroded in the name of efficiency, expediency, and "getting the bad guys". <P>Being free is a double edged swoard, and a sharp one at that. The up side is the decent folks get to enjoy a wonderful life, the downside is that it allows the irresponsible to get away with more. The funny thing is, with all our new laws, and erosions of freedom, crime has not gone down, and irresponsible people are still irresponsible. If anything, all we've done is enabled the ideots by finding excuses for everyone, whether from their environment, or a "medical condition". Remember, he's no longer a worthless drunk, he has a disease, and needs treatment.<P>For all the trumpeting of the second ammendment I hear from shooting and hunting enthusiasts, I seem to see an utter lack of understanding of our constitution and bill of rights. <P>You may feel better by having the bad guy nabbed, and a neat and clean trial and execution, but that doesn't necesarrily mean it is what is best for the country.

Pete. You hit the bullseye. I find it repulsive that the Fibi's just happen to conveniently forget evidence in the Ruby Ridge incident, Waco, and now the McVeigh trial. Whats going on here? You can think what you wish about all of these incidents, but I think that when the govt supresses, lies, or is just plain lazy in producing evidence, we as Americans all suffer and slide further down the slippery slope toward a totalitarian government. <BR> I would just ask this. If the Govenment's case was so solid in these cases, then why does the govt have to supress and lie about evidence? If it is indeed just a case of "forgetting" then President needs to fire Louis Freech and replace him with someone who has some competence and some integrity.<BR>Keeb

i think the point of the post was that mcveigh had already plead guilty, and asked to die.<P>i agree w/ the points made about the fbi not being forthcoming w/ their evidence, and that justice needs to be the same for everybody at all levels. i also agree w/ the point that the media is not to be trusted. however, i don't think that was what was meant by the post.<P>

I agree with you guys 100% about the evidence. I should have made that clear in my previous post.<P>But remember that the FBI we are talking about at that time, was led by Janet Reno and Bill Clinton. That definitely doesnt make it right, but it probably explains some of it.<P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://TheSouthernOutdoorsman.com" TARGET=_blank>TheSouthernOutdoorsman.com</A>

With regards to McVeigh pleading quilty and asking to die lets look it another way.<P>Your sitting in your cell charged with murder, treason and a few other things the Government have come up with. Although you are "anti-The Government" and are a political activist, you are in fact "not guilty".<P>As the investigation goes, you realise your being "set up" and the truth will never come out. This culminates in a visit by some Suits<BR>asking for info about other Patriots in exchange for a deal. Is it not possible that certain people knowning they are doomed anyway will try to beat the system by sticking their chin out and saying "do what you will". History is full of people dying for their beliefs. <P>I'm not saying McVeigh is guity or that he is'nt, but simply that unless he has a fair and open trial we will never know. there should be no place for mob justice stirred up buy the media. <BR><p>[This message has been edited by Pete E (edited May 18, 2001).]

1) Nobody except the prosecution has said that the withheld evidence is meaningless.<P>2) In this case it might be, but in yours or my trila it might not be meaningless.<P>3) McVeigh wanted his lawyers to use a "necessary defense" argument. This was that he was guilty but that the Clinton/Reno gov't was so out of line that his action was necessary to reign in the death squads. <P>The argument questions - How long would the wheels of tyranny turn if every house of dead Jews left behind a dead Nazi Gestapo agent? How long would ethnic cleansing have lasted in Kosavo if Serbian units lost a man every time they turned down a village street? How many Waco's and Ruby ridges would have happened if Tim McVeigh had stayed an obedient un-thinking soldier? <P>His lawyers wouldn't use that defense. A new trial might let him get his argument to a jury. <P>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Arial" size="2">Originally posted by big time:<BR><B>i think the point of the post was that mcveigh had already plead guilty, and asked to die.<P>i agree w/ the points made about the fbi not being forthcoming w/ their evidence, and that justice needs to be the same for everybody at all levels. i also agree w/ the point that the media is not to be trusted. however, i don't think that was what was meant by the post.<P></B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Big Time , the point of my post was to ask the question? Is the government prosecution honest enough to allow all the fact in this case come to light. Some of the responses on this thread are just short of being a conspiracy theory, and that may be so. Lets have all the facts and let the public decide. In the OJ trial we the public got all the arguments, the jury got only what was allowed them by the lawyers. It seems the jury found OJ innocent while the rest of the country went the other way. Facts are important; all the facts, all the evidence. I deplore what McVeigh admitted to doing, but is the with holding of evidence to gain a conviction any less evil. I just want to know who is going to pay the bill?<P>Bullwnkl.<P>

i stand corrected, bullwnkl. sorry. i should've looked at your post closer before replying. i went back and re-read it, i never should've posted that.<P><BR>------------------<BR>Hunting is not a matter of life or death. It is much more important than that.<p>[This message has been edited by big time (edited May 19, 2001).]

Big Time, no need to apologize, often these threads develop a life of their own, we digress on to another tangent that can be more enlightening than the original post. <BR>My original posting was a bit poorly drafted so I apologize to you.<P>Bullwnkl.

Actually, McVeigh didn't plead guilty. He pled not guilty but was found guilty at his trial. He directed his attorneys to file no more appeals so apparently he wanted to be executed, possibly in furtherance of his aims/goals, whatever they may be. Also, he apparently did acknowledge his guilt but, not to any official, only to the writers who interviewed him for the book. In any event, failure of the gov't to provide all required documents to the defense, for whatever reason, is a serious breach of legal procedures. Even if said documents show no helpful evidence for McVeigh's defense, their discovery now provides more "grist" for the mill of anti-gov't extremists who will use their witholding to charge "more gov't corruption'. They may even be right??<P>------------------<BR>Exercising maximum personal freedom means . . . accepting total personal responsibility...!!