Given that the government botched the handling of documents in the Timothy McVeigh case, a defense request to postpone his execution should be granted.

There is nothing special about June 11, and there is no good reason beyond posturing that Attorney General John Ashcroft should be demanding that the execution of Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh go forward on that date.

McVeigh and his lawyers are seeking a delay because the government did such a slipshod job of handling its responsibility to turn over relevant documents to the defense. If the defense team believes an additional postponement is necessary to give it time to review and react to the new material as well as determine whether there are more documents to be uncovered, then Ashcroft should be flexible and accommodating. Due process demands nothing less.

Originally McVeigh's execution for the 1995 bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City in which 168 people died, was scheduled for May 16. But that date was moved when the Justice Department announced that thousands of documents had not been properly turned over to the defense. At the time, Ashcroft acknowledged the mistake was on the government's part, claiming archivists gave inexact instructions to FBI field offices, and postponed the execution himself. It was a measured, sensible reaction to a significant oversight on the government's part. However, since Ashcroft's initial concession, hundreds of additional documents as well as audio records have been discovered. Despite this, Ashcroft is refusing to provide the defense with additional time.

"Because these documents cast no doubt on the surety of his guilt, the Justice Department will vigorously oppose any attempt to further delay the imposition of the sentence," Ashcroft said in a written statement.

Is this a responsible officer of the court talking or a restless politician? The Justice Department botched the job and Ashcroft should be professional enough to accept the delays that result. Had McVeigh decided after his trial to appeal rather than move directly to have his sentence carried out, the court process would probably be going on for years to come. What's the rush now?

Yes, McVeigh has admitted his guilt, so it's unlikely the documents will exonerate him. But that is not the end of the inquiry, especially in a death penalty case. It is vital that the trial and sentencing process be scrupulously fair. Maybe the evidence contained in these documents would have significantly impacted the defense's case, maybe not. But that's a judgment for the defense and for a court to make, not for Ashcroft. The court should approve the request for a postponement of McVeigh's sentence and should give McVeigh's lawyers substantial time to carefully review what has been presented to them at this late hour. The execution can wait until the process has been duly corrected.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page