Search Results

This chapter examines how Timothy McVeigh confronted his public image. It considers the media's portrayal of McVeigh as a malicious, even monstrous, individual and McVeigh's response to this treatment with media interviews and an authorized biography. It also analyzes the increase in McVeigh's public visibility between June 13, 1997, when he was sentenced to death, and June 11, 2001, when he was executed; the two-way, reciprocal relationships that developed between McVeigh and journalists and victims after the bombing; and McVeigh's attempts at reputation management and his feelings toward victims. Finally, it cites the publication of McVeigh's biography, American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing.

This chapter examines how Timothy McVeigh confronted his public image. It considers the media's portrayal of McVeigh as a malicious, even monstrous, individual and McVeigh's response to this treatment with media interviews and an authorized biography. It also analyzes the increase in McVeigh's public visibility between June 13, 1997, when he was sentenced to death, and June 11, 2001, when he was executed; the two-way, reciprocal relationships that developed between McVeigh and journalists and victims after the bombing; and McVeigh's attempts at reputation management and his feelings toward victims. Finally, it cites the publication of McVeigh's biography, American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing.

This chapter examines Timothy McVeigh's execution that put an end to the victim-offender relationship. The day before McVeigh was executed on June 12, 2001, survivors and victims' families who would witness his death live began the long journey from Oklahoma City and elsewhere to Terre Haute, Indiana. Other family members and survivors of the Oklahoma City bombing opted not to attend the execution. This chapter considers how, on the morning of McVeigh's execution, the healing, voluntary relationships that family members and survivors had formed with one another converged with other destructive, involuntary relationships that chained them to the perpetrators. It also describes McVeigh's execution as a modern spectacle and a site of memory work, his gaze prior to his execution which was interpreted by witnesses as confrontational or defiant, and images of his execution.

This chapter examines Timothy McVeigh's execution that put an end to the victim-offender relationship. The day before McVeigh was executed on June 12, 2001, survivors and victims' families who would witness his death live began the long journey from Oklahoma City and elsewhere to Terre Haute, Indiana. Other family members and survivors of the Oklahoma City bombing opted not to attend the execution. This chapter considers how, on the morning of McVeigh's execution, the healing, voluntary relationships that family members and survivors had formed with one another converged with other destructive, involuntary relationships that chained them to the perpetrators. It also describes McVeigh's execution as a modern spectacle and a site of memory work, his gaze prior to his execution which was interpreted by witnesses as confrontational or defiant, and images of his execution.

This chapter examines the place of emotionality in legal proceedings by focusing on the prosecution of Timothy McVeigh and how his trial sparked a conflict between those determined to champion crime victims' participatory rights—prosecutors, legislators, and victims, bolstered by emotive norms prevalent in popular culture and therapeutic discourse—and those who believed that such claims undermined defendants' constitutional rights. In particular, it considers the controversy surrounding U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch's decision to exclude bombing victims who planned to give impact testimony at sentencing from attending the trial. It also explores the emotions of victims, their ardent desire for memory work, and their desire to participate in legal proceedings. Finally, it discusses the views of family members and survivors regarding emotion as an inherent part of holding McVeigh and Terry Nichols accountable for their crime.

This chapter examines the attitudes of survivors and the families of victims of the Oklahoma City bombing toward Timothy McVeigh and his impending execution. It considers the factors that family members and survivors took into account in deciding whether or not they wished to view McVeigh's execution, including their opinions on the death penalty, whether they felt a duty or responsibility to witness McVeigh's execution, and what behaviors they wished to see from McVeigh immediately before he was executed. It also discusses the struggle to broadcast McVeigh's execution via closed-circuit television and concludes with an analysis of participants' reactions to McVeigh's media visibility.

This chapter examines the attitudes of survivors and the families of victims of the Oklahoma City bombing toward Timothy McVeigh and his impending execution. It considers the factors that family members and survivors took into account in deciding whether or not they wished to view McVeigh's execution, including their opinions on the death penalty, whether they felt a duty or responsibility to witness McVeigh's execution, and what behaviors they wished to see from McVeigh immediately before he was executed. It also discusses the struggle to broadcast McVeigh's execution via closed-circuit television and concludes with an analysis of participants' reactions to McVeigh's media visibility.

This chapter examines the place of emotionality in legal proceedings by focusing on the prosecution of Timothy McVeigh and how his trial sparked a conflict between those determined to champion crime victims' participatory rights—prosecutors, legislators, and victims, bolstered by emotive norms prevalent in popular culture and therapeutic discourse—and those who believed that such claims undermined defendants' constitutional rights. In particular, it considers the controversy surrounding U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch's decision to exclude bombing victims who planned to give impact testimony at sentencing from attending the trial. It also explores the emotions of victims, their ardent desire for memory work, and their desire to participate in legal proceedings. Finally, it discusses the views of family members and survivors regarding emotion as an inherent part of holding McVeigh and Terry Nichols accountable for their crime.

This chapter examines how it is to experience the victim–offender relationship, and particularly how Timothy McVeigh entailed feelings of helplessness and passivity. It describes McVeigh, the principal suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing, as an unwelcome, even toxic, intrusion into the lives of survivors and family members. It considers the criminal impact and personal impact of an offender's presence in a victim's life and argues that all participants who were aware of McVeigh's toxic presence, including victims, experienced both a criminal impact and a personal impact. It also discusses participants' personal impressions of McVeigh, the emotional consequences of McVeigh's toxic presence, and the unwelcome presence of Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, the two other suspected offenders in the Oklahoma City bombing. Finally, it suggests that recovering one's identity and restoring one's dignity meant ejecting McVeigh and reasserting self-control.

In this chapter, the author traces the origins of the relationship between victims and offenders within the context of the Oklahoma City bombing. She begins by giving her first impressions of Timothy McVeigh, the suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing whom she saw on April 21, 1995. She then considers how viewers regard (or disregard) perpetrators' pictures, particularly in memorial spaces commemorating victims, and in particular pictures of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building taken shortly after the bombing as well as McVeigh's perp walk footage. She also examines the reactions of family members and survivors to McVeigh, along with the connections that they felt with him and media constructions of McVeigh as a para-social enemy. Finally, the author explores how the victim–offender relationship influenced the attempts of family members and survivors of the Oklahoma City bombing at memory work.

This chapter focuses on media coverage of suspects in the Oklahoma City bombing, their motivations, their families, and their life histories. It suggests that Timothy McVeigh was counting on the media to cement the bombing's place in American memory and considers how media coverage became a source of crucial information to family members and survivors concerning the bombing site's status. It also shows how the media became an avenue for victims to air their opinions and a forum where they could advocate for change, along with media coverage of the other perpetrators, namely, Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier. Finally, it examines the mass media's efficacy as a site of collective memory as well as the criticisms against the media for exaggerating, sensationalizing, or overreporting information.

This chapter examines how it is to experience the victim–offender relationship, and particularly how Timothy McVeigh entailed feelings of helplessness and passivity. It describes McVeigh, the principal suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing, as an unwelcome, even toxic, intrusion into the lives of survivors and family members. It considers the criminal impact and personal impact of an offender's presence in a victim's life and argues that all participants who were aware of McVeigh's toxic presence, including victims, experienced both a criminal impact and a personal impact. It also discusses participants' personal impressions of McVeigh, the emotional consequences of McVeigh's toxic presence, and the unwelcome presence of Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier, the two other suspected offenders in the Oklahoma City bombing. Finally, it suggests that recovering one's identity and restoring one's dignity meant ejecting McVeigh and reasserting self-control.

This chapter focuses on media coverage of suspects in the Oklahoma City bombing, their motivations, their families, and their life histories. It suggests that Timothy McVeigh was counting on the media to cement the bombing's place in American memory and considers how media coverage became a source of crucial information to family members and survivors concerning the bombing site's status. It also shows how the media became an avenue for victims to air their opinions and a forum where they could advocate for change, along with media coverage of the other perpetrators, namely, Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier. Finally, it examines the mass media's efficacy as a site of collective memory as well as the criticisms against the media for exaggerating, sensationalizing, or overreporting information.

This book concludes by focusing on the memorialization of Timothy McVeigh ten years after he was executed. It suggests that the presences of McVeigh and his co-conspirators have not been altogether banished, noting how attention has shifted from the duties of prosecution and execution to incorporation—how best to acknowledge and explain the role played by McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier in the Oklahoma City bombing without giving them further credit or airtime. It also considers the impact of the task of incorporation on the ways survivors, victims' families, and Oklahoma City National Memorial and Museum personnel negotiated the perpetrators' presences. Finally, it discusses the issue of including McVeigh in museum exhibits.

This book concludes by focusing on the memorialization of Timothy McVeigh ten years after he was executed. It suggests that the presences of McVeigh and his co-conspirators have not been altogether banished, noting how attention has shifted from the duties of prosecution and execution to incorporation—how best to acknowledge and explain the role played by McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier in the Oklahoma City bombing without giving them further credit or airtime. It also considers the impact of the task of incorporation on the ways survivors, victims' families, and Oklahoma City National Memorial and Museum personnel negotiated the perpetrators' presences. Finally, it discusses the issue of including McVeigh in museum exhibits.

In this chapter, the author traces the origins of the relationship between victims and offenders within the context of the Oklahoma City bombing. She begins by giving her first impressions of Timothy McVeigh, the suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing whom she saw on April 21, 1995. She then considers how viewers regard (or disregard) perpetrators' pictures, particularly in memorial spaces commemorating victims, and in particular pictures of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building taken shortly after the bombing as well as McVeigh's perp walk footage. She also examines the reactions of family members and survivors to McVeigh, along with the connections that they felt with him and media constructions of McVeigh as a para-social enemy. Finally, the author explores how the victim–offender relationship influenced the attempts of family members and survivors of the Oklahoma City bombing at memory work.

This chapter examines the moral aspects of antisocial behavior. Drawing on the developmental theories of Lawrence Kohlberg and Martin Hoffman, it explores self-centration and other limitations characteristic of young people with antisocial behavior problems, taking into account the background factors of nature and nurture. Three limitations are discussed: developmental delay in moral judgment, self-serving cognitive distortions, and deficiencies in social skills. The chapter presents the case of a notoriously antisocial individual, Timothy McVeigh, with particular emphasis on his erroneous “moral” convictions and pseudo-justifications. It argues that McVeigh illustrates how cognitive distortions can preempt or neutralize social perspective-taking, moral understanding, and veridical empathy.

More than eighty members of the Branch Davidian movement died during the Mt. Carmel fire in the spring of 1993. Not long after the fire, it was evident that the interest of the general public veered away from the incidences at Waco, and some of the surviving Branch Davidian families attempted to file lawsuits through the US courts. One of the most note-worthy reactions to the incident was that exactly two years after the fire, Timothy McVeigh bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. Of course, such tragic events are not easily forgotten especially by the loved ones of those caught in the events. This chapter attempts to provide an account of how the Branch Davidian movement attempted to come to terms with the 1993 events through adopting the views from several different dimensions of Branch Davidianism.

This chapter examines the trials of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols as well as the McVeigh jury's visit to Oklahoma City that illustrated the courtroom's role as an essential but incomplete site for memory work. It first considers Nichols' federal trial, the jury issues surrounding his trial, and his courtroom behavior and goes on to discuss the effect of Michael Fortier's sentencing proceeding on family members and survivors. It then discusses the criticisms against the McVeigh jurors for their visit to Oklahoma City and how culturally traumatic events produced unprecedented trials, which in turn engendered unique relationships. It also assesses the implications of McVeigh's trial for both bombing victims and jurors.