Thoughts on The Oklahoma City Bombing

The 168 murders committed by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols are among the most repugnant crimes committed in recent history. Although I oppose the death penalty in almost all circumstances, I believe the execution of McVeigh was justifed. But the McVeigh and Nichols cases demonstrate why the need for the government-funded defense of indigent persons accused of crimes is necessary for the continued existence of a free country. We should never get to the place where the government doesn't have the highest possible burden in proving criminal guilt in a truly adversarial proceeding. The fact that McVeigh and Nichols recieved the best possible legal representation, at significant public expense, is the only means of ensuring that the constitutional protections afforded criminal defendants have real meaning. Unfortunately in many cases, indigent persons accused of crimes (including capital crimes) do not receive anything approaching the level of representation the terrorists and mass murderers received in Oklahoma City Bombing cases. And the convictions of such persons are far less trustworthy because of it.

McVeigh and Nichols were hate-filled bigots who imagined themselves as warriors opposing a tyrannical federal government. They got far better treatment from that government than they deserved. But not affording them -- and everyone else -- such constitutional protections permits the government to punish and harm the innocent as well as the guilty.