June 2001 Call to Action News

Mc Veigh case opens a window for soul-searching about the death penalty

by Robert McClory

At first it appeared that capital punishment, long supported by upwards of 75 percent of Americans, was about to get another boost. Timothy McVeigh was, after all, the ideal poster boy for the death penalty. He was admittedly guilty and totally without remorse, referring to the 19 children killed in the Oklahoma City bombing as “collateral damage.” Yet something strange has been happening along the way. The more the media have fixated on the case and the details of the execution, it seems the less appetite for McVeigh’s death they have encountered. It is almost as if the intense light concentrated on the man and his actions has forced Americans as never before to reflect on what the death penalty really is — and how it is employed in this country.

For several years there was only one voice, among the survivors and relatives of the terrible incident in April 1995, insisting that killing McVeigh was not the answer to anything. Bud Welch, whose 23-year-old daughter Julie was killed in the blast, literally toured the country talking about the futility of revenge, about the sacredness of human life, about forgiveness. He has become a tireless spokesman for Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation, and he makes it clear that his views on these subjects spring in large part from his Roman Catholic faith. More outspoken, of course, were the voices of the bereaved and the victims calling for harsh, swift justice against this worst mass murderer in the history of the United States.

Two months before the original May execution date, reporters converged on Terre Haute, Ind., where McVeigh awaited his lethal injection. They discussed the “media driven frenzy,” especially the elaborate television coverage planned for the event. But it was already evident that everyone was not getting caught up in the frenzy. A long Gannett News Service story in March reveled in the details but quoted only three people. The first, a CBS executive, said, “It’s a huge story. We have to tell it.” The other two were far less euphoric. “It reminds me of the early days of Rome,” said Sister Rita Clare Gerardot, who ministers to inmates at the Terre Haute prison. “As we get closer to the date, the spectacle becomes sadistic. It blows my mind.” The manager of a local restaurant was quoted in the same vein. “It doesn’t seem quite right,” said Melody Richards. “What do we do? Run an Execution Special?”

As the days passed, views became sharper. The New York Times published a front-page article in April headlined “Victims Not of One Voice on Execution of McVeigh.” Though it quoted several who wanted McVeigh killed, the bulk of the story was aboutpeople who didn’t. Leading off was Bud Welch, who was continuing his one-man crusade around the nation and who had been calling Timothy McVeigh’s father several times a week helping the man cope with the looming loss of his only son. Then came Tim McCarthy, 30, whose father died in the blast. As a Catholic, McCarthy said, he believes it is wrong to kill McVeigh or anyone else. Next the Times story quoted Patti Hall, 64, crushed under six floors of concrete in the bombing and left permanently disabled. “It isn’t right to take a life,” Hall said. “God says, ‘Vengeance is mine,’” Hall, a Southern Baptist, added. “But he also says, ‘Pray for those who persecute you.’ I’m praying for his soul.” One man who lost 35 co-workers in the bombing said he wavered for a while about the death penalty, then decided it was wrong. “I have certain core beliefs, core values,” said Rob Roddy. “If I lose that, I become something of a victim, more than I had been.”

In May, the New York Times Sunday Magazine had a major feature about Patrick Reeder, 40, a wiry Marine veteran whose wife and mother-in-law perished in the attack. He spoke of wanting to do away with McVeigh personally, slowly crushing his larynx with his bare hands. But Reeder read what Bud Welch was saying and he began to change. “Here was a man who had suffered at least as much as I had,” he said. “And yet he was still able in his heart to ask for mercy for McVeigh. Why couldn’t I?” Eventually, he was able to do just that. He said he knows a lot of people want McVeigh just eliminated from their lives. “I understand that because I felt that way myself,” he said. “I wanted him silenced. But I also wanted my own conscience silenced.”

FBI mistakes delay execution

Doubts about the death penalty reached another level with the revelation of FBI oversights in the prosecution just a few days before the scheduled execution. Death penalty opponents saw here a golden opportunity to turn attention from McVeigh’s obvious guilt and toward the capital punishment system itself. In a major Associated Press story, Abe Benowitz, head of a national anti-death penalty group, said, “If with the scrutiny they had in this case, they can have a bungle, then what’s happening in the cases that nobody’s watching? That’s something that everybody should be worried about.”

And worry they have in the op ed pages, on the call-in radio shows and the nightly news. Chicago Tribune columnist Salim Muwakkil said McVeigh’s death “will continue the barbaric practice this country resumed in 1976 when it re-instituted the death penalty. The state has killed 712 people since that time. McVeigh will be the 30th inmate executed this year.” In a long letter also printed in the Tribune, Steve Pruitt, a blast survivor, wrote, “When we execute McVeigh, we will become a nation of revenge-seeking Tim McVeighs. Is [this] consistent with our beliefs that life is sacred and vengeance belongs to God? Or are we taking the easy way out, striking back because it gives us immediate satisfaction?”

Have these surprising developments changed public opinion overall? Several national polls reported in May in the Washington Post indicate a decline in support for the death penalty. A Post-ABC poll claimed the rate of approval, 77 percent five years ago, is down to 63 percent. Even more intriguing is the revelation that only 46 percent favor capital punishment if the alternative is life in prison without parole. Lower crime rates and the release of many wrongly convicted death row inmates played a role in this shift, said the Post. But it is clear the McVeigh affair is also a factor.

To be sure, the position of the Catholic Church has been consistent all along. Two years ago the U.S bishops said, “We see the death penalty as perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of vengeance in our culture.” And only five months ago Pope John Paul II reiterated his view: “The dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. I renew the appeal…for a consensus to end the death penalty which is both cruel and unnecessary.”

The church can therefore claim a role in recent developments, yet it’s tempting to think the message began to hit home only when it was incarnated in the anguished voices of the Bud Welches, the Patrick Reeders and the others crushed in spirit, yet still crying out in the wilderness.