Thursday, September 6, 2001 Volume 67, Issue 11


 
 









 

Staff Editorial



EDITORIAL BOARD

Crystal J. Doucette        Ed De La Garza 
Ken Fountain     Nikie Johnson       Ellen Simonson



 

Justice

What could be the last chapter in the Oklahoma City bombing case has just begun.

That city's new district attorney announced Wednesday night he will pursue the state's case against Terry Nichols.

Nichols was convicted in federal courts of conspiracy and involuntary manslaughter in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City that killed 168 people -- the deadliest act of terrorism ever committed on U.S. soil. He is serving a life sentence for his work in
helping prepare the bomb and the truck that carried it, as well as for the deaths of eight federal agents.

The state trial, however, would be on 160 counts of first-degree murder, and could result in the death penalty.

District Attorney Wes Lane's announcement has sparked much controversy as to what is the right thing to do.

Victims and their families are divided on wanting the trial to go forth. Some think enough is enough, and don't want to be reminded of their pain;
others just want him to fry.

But that's not the point. The American justice system doesn't operate based on what the masses want. We have grand juries to hear the facts of the
case and be unbiased in deciding whether there's enough evidence to go to trial.

If the grand jury decides there is enough evidence, the case goes to trial -- regardless of popular sentiment.

Lane told the Associated Press he made his decision partly because Nichols is appealing his federal conviction, and he didn't want him to go
unpunished if the appeals should work.

Nichols' attorney, Brian Hermanson, has said Nichols is willing to end his federal appeals and accept a life sentence to avoid the state trial with its
chance of a death sentence.

But neither of those are the point, either. The point should be that a jury in Oklahoma must decide whether Nichols' conspiracy with Timothy
McVeigh (who was executed in June for the bombing) makes him responsible for 160 of those deaths.

If the jury decides that what he did is enough to make him guilty of 160 murders and deserving of the death penalty, will executing him serve a
purpose?

Will it tell terrorists -- from the United States and from foreign countries -- that we condemn their actions? Will it say that we won't tolerate terrorism in
other countries? Will it send the message that we think these actions are so horrible they nullify the terrorists' most basic right to life? Will some of
the most staunchly anti-death penalty ideologists agree that in a case this extreme, capital punishment is the right thing to do?

Yes.
 
 

To contact the Opinon Section Editor, send e-mail to dcampus@mail.uh.edu

To contact other members of 
The Daily Cougar Online staff, 


 
 
 
 
 

Advertise in The Daily Cougar

Student Publications
University of Houston
Houston, Texas 77204-4071

©2005, Student Publications. All rights reserved.
Permissions/Web Use Policy
http://www.uh.edu/campus/cougar/Todays/Issue/opinion/staff-eddy.html



 

Last upThursday, September 6, 2001:

Visit The Daily Cougar