IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
 Criminal Action No. 96-CR-68
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
     Plaintiff,
 vs.
 TIMOTHY JAMES McVEIGH,
     Defendant.
 ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
                      REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT
                 (Trial to Jury - Volume 130)
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
         Proceedings before the HONORABLE RICHARD P. MATSCH,
Judge, United States District Court for the District of
Colorado, commencing at 1:30 p.m., on the 2nd day of June,
1997, in Courtroom C-204, United States Courthouse, Denver,
Colorado.







 Proceeding Recorded by Mechanical Stenography, Transcription
  Produced via Computer by Paul Zuckerman, 1929 Stout Street,
    P.O. Box 3563, Denver, Colorado, 80294, (303) 629-9285
                          APPEARANCES
         PATRICK M. RYAN, United States Attorney for the
Western District of Oklahoma, 210 West Park Avenue, Suite 400,
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73102, appearing for the plaintiff.
         JOSEPH H. HARTZLER, SEAN CONNELLY, LARRY A. MACKEY,
BETH WILKINSON, SCOTT MENDELOFF, JAMIE ORENSTEIN, AITAN
GOELMAN, and VICKI BEHENNA, Special Attorneys to the U.S.
Attorney General, 1961 Stout Street, Suite 1200, Denver,
Colorado, 80294, appearing for the plaintiff.
         STEPHEN JONES, ROBERT NIGH, JR., ROBERT WYATT, RICHARD
BURR, RANDALL COYNE,  STEVEN ENGLAND, and ROBERT WARREN,
Attorneys at Law, Jones, Wyatt & Roberts, 999 18th Street,
Suite 2460, Denver, Colorado, 80202; JERALYN MERRITT, 303 East
17th Avenue, Suite 400, Denver, Colorado, 80203; MANDY WELCH,
Attorney at Law, 412 Main, Suite 1150, Houston, Texas, 77002;
CHERYL A. RAMSEY, Attorney at Law, Szlichta and Ramsey, 8 Main
Place, Post Office Box 1206, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74076, and
CHRISTOPHER L. TRITICO, Attorney at Law, Essmyer, Tritico &
Clary, 4300 Scotland, Houston, Texas, 77007, appearing for
Defendant McVeigh.
                         *  *  *  *  *
                          PROCEEDINGS
    (In open court at 1:30 p.m.)
         THE COURT:  Please be seated.
         The jury has informed that they have arrived at a
verdict.  Before I return the jury to receive the verdict --
and of course, at this moment, the verdict is known only to the
jury -- I want to caution everyone here that there must be no
audible or visible reaction to the verdict when it is read.
When the jury returns, the verdict will be handed to me and I
will read it.
         Now, any person violating this order that there be no
reaction will be removed from the courtroom.
         I will address the jurors after reading the verdict.
There will be some time required for this, and no one will
leave the room until a recess or adjournment of the Court is
announced.
         We'll return the verdict -- the jury.
    (Jury in at 1:32 p.m.)
         THE COURT:  Members of the jury, have you reached a
verdict?
         JURORS:  Yes, we have.
         THE COURT:  Does the foreperson have the verdict form?
         JUROR NO. 11:  Yes, I do.
         THE COURT:  If you'll pass the verdict form to
Mr. Manspeaker, he will pass it to me.
         THE COURT:  Members of the jury, you will listen to
the reading of your verdict.
                            VERDICT
         THE COURT:  In the United States District Court for
the District of Colorado, Criminal Action No. 96-CR-68, United
States of America vs. Timothy James McVeigh.  We, the jury,
upon our oaths unanimously find as follows:
         Count 1, conspiracy to use a weapon of mass
destruction, guilty.
         Count 2, use of a weapon of mass destruction, guilty.
         Count Three, destruction by explosive, guilty.
         Do you find that the Government proved beyond a
reasonable doubt that the crime or crimes committed by the
defendant, Timothy James McVeigh, as found above, resulted in
the death of one or more of the persons named in the
indictment?  Yes.
         Was the death of such person or persons a foreseeable
result of the defendant's criminal conduct?  Yes.
         Count 4, first-degree murder of Mickey Bryant Maroney,
guilty.
         Count 5, first-degree murder of Donald R. Leonard,
guilty.
         Count 6, first-degree murder of Alan Gerald Whicher,
guilty.
         Count 7, first-degree murder of Cynthia Lynn Campbell
Brown, guilty.
         Count 8, first-degree murder of Kenneth Glenn
McCullough, guilty.
         Count 9, first degree murder of Paul Douglas Ice,
guilty.
         Count 10, first-degree murder of Claude Arthur
Medearis, guilty.
         Count 11, first-degree murder of Paul C. Broxterman,
guilty.
         Dated June 2, 1997, signed by the foreperson.
         Sir, was this and is this the jury's verdict?
         JUROR NO. 11:  Yes.
         THE COURT:  So say you all?
         JURORS:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  I will poll the jury on the verdict; and
I'm simply going to refer to you, members of the jury, by the
chairs in which you are seated.
         The juror seated in Chair No. 1:  Was this and is this
your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 1:  Yes.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 2:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 2:  Yes.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 3:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 3:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 4:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 4:  Yes.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 5:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 5:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 6:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 6:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 7:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 7:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 8:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 8:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 9:  Was this
and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 9:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 10:  Was
this and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 10:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 11:  Was
this and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 11:  Yes.
         THE COURT:  The juror seated in Chair No. 12:  Was
this and is this your verdict?
         JUROR NO. 12:  Yes, sir.
         THE COURT:  Members of the jury, you have determined
by your verdict that the evidence established the guilt of
Timothy McVeigh on these charges beyond a reasonable doubt of
crimes for which death is a possible punishment.  Whether
Mr. McVeigh should be put to death for these crimes is a
question to be answered by the jury serving as the conscience
of the community.  Although Congress has given this
responsibility exclusively to the jury, the applicable statute
and the Constitution command that you must exercise your
discretion by following a specific procedure and give careful
and thoughtful consideration to information characterized as
"aggravating and mitigating factors" to be presented now in a
court hearing that is in a sense an extension or continuation
of the trial.
         I'm going to return the alternate jurors into the jury
box with you now, announce your verdict to them, and give you
some additional instructions.
    (Alternate jurors in at 1:37 p.m.)
         THE COURT:  Those of you who have served as alternate
jurors through the trial of this case are now informed that the
jury has just returned a verdict of guilty as to all 11 counts
in this case.  You are now going to rejoin the members of the
jury during the next phase of this trial, and you may be called
upon to participate in evaluating the information to be
presented concerning aggravating and mitigating factors.
         You must accept this verdict without questioning it.
Please remember that this jury of 12 persons has functioned
according to their own group dynamics.  The 12 jurors sitting
here discussed, analyzed, and evaluated this evidence during
their days of deliberation.  They did their work in secret
sessions, as the law requires.
         Now, they have no duty or obligation to defend or
explain their collective decision to anyone in any way.  You
will be rejoined together, the 18 of you, during the penalty
phase hearing.  It would be wholly improper and a violation of
your sworn duty to follow the law for any of you alternate
jurors to in any way question any of the jurors about their
deliberations or in any way to express any thoughts or opinions
you may have about the trial or anything connected with this
case.  Your position is no different from any of the other
trial participants or the public.  You must accept this
verdict.
         I specifically instruct all of you, jurors and
alternate jurors alike, that you must not discuss the verdict
or the deliberations resulting in the verdict at any time
before the penalty questions in this case are addressed and
resolved.
         I'm going to remove the order of sequestration now for
all of you, and we will be returning to the normal practice
that we followed throughout the trial.  And I'm going to have
an interval here between this moment and the time that we begin
with the presentation of the information that is relevant to
the question of penalty.
         So we're going to start that phase of the trial on
Wednesday morning.  Between now and then, there will be a
hearing tomorrow, at which time I will hear some issues that
are appropriately going to be raised by the lawyers so that we
can have some -- they can have some advance information with
respect to the Court's ruling on what will be permitted to be
heard by the jurors in connection with the penalty.
         And there will be a whole new set of instructions that
will given to you as you address the question of the penalty to
be imposed.  You understand, I'm sure, from what I told you in
the course of jury selection, the voir dire process, about the
penalty phase is a very separate phase; and it really has its
own rules and own principles of law that must be followed in
connection with that.
         So we're going to, as I say, release the sequestration
order, permit you to return to your homes and families.
         Now, of course, this is a much different situation
from any other time that I recessed and you went home.  This
verdict, obviously, is going to be a matter of great public
interest.  Great publicity will surround it.  There will
undoubtedly be many commentaries with respect to it.  People
can second-guess you on your decision.
         As I've explained here, however, there is no
obligation on your part to answer anybody's questions; and
indeed, it would be inappropriate for people to ask you
questions about this decision.  So at the same time, you should
not discuss the case now among yourselves or with anyone else,
returning to the instructions that I gave you while we were
addressing the evidence at the trial, to keep open minds with
respect to the question of punishment.  This is, of course, a
solemn question.  It must be addressed seriously and in
accordance with the instructions that will be given to you in
the next phase of the case.
         And I simply want to also assure you that I've
continued to maintain your privacy.  The foreperson has signed
this verdict form, but that part of it will not be made public
now.  And in the event that anyone should attempt to contact
you or trouble you in any way with respect to this verdict, you
let us know about it and we'll take appropriate measures, so
that you can come back to us here.
         And, of course, just as with the question of guilt or
innocence of these charges, the question of what the punishment
should be is a matter on which you should reserve judgment,
even in your own minds, again, knowing that this question is
coming but reserve judgment in your own minds until we have had
the penalty phase completed, the information necessary has been
provided to you, and I have had the opportunity to instruct you
in detail with respect to that law, because those instructions
are quite detailed and require you to address this question in
a very analytical way, just as you have addressed the questions
before you on the guilt or innocence of these charges.
         So you have done your duty in this case.  You've
returned this verdict.  As I've just said to the alternate
jurors, all of us accept that verdict, and we will go forward
with it from here to proceed to the next phase.  And we will
begin that at 9:00 on this next Wednesday -- coming Wednesday
morning.
         Between now and then, you are going to be excused.
And again, do not talk with anybody about it, the verdict, your
deliberations, the trial, and what lies ahead; and permit no
one to talk with you about it.  And if anyone seeks to do that,
you let us know about it.  Again, contact us immediately
through the numbers that you have in the event that that
happens; and then also, of course, when during the penalty
phase that should happen, you give me a note, just as I've told
you with respect to the trial that we've had.
         Also, of course, stay away, now -- and it's going to
be difficult, because there is going to be a lot out there, a
lot of comment.  Stay away from that.  We don't want to have,
and it would be unfair now to have, you influenced by anything
that anybody says about your decision in this case or what you
should do next.  This is a solemn responsibility that is given
to you; and it is, indeed, a most serious obligation that rests
upon you to decide this next question.
         So be true to your oath, as you already have been.
Reserve judgment.  Don't talk about it.  We'll have you back in
here at 9:00 on Wednesday morning and start the penalty phase
hearing.
         You're all excused until then.
    (Jury out at 1:47 p.m.)
         THE COURT:  I'm going to suggest to counsel that we
convene at 9:00 tomorrow morning for the purpose of hearing the
motions and motions which yet may be filed with respect to the
penalty phase.
         Mr. Jones?
                  DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTIONS
         MR. JONES:  Your Honor, on September 29, 1995, your
Honor advised us that upon the receipt of the jury verdict, we
should renew our motions with respect to duplicity and
multiplicity; and we renew them at this time.
         THE COURT:  Yes.  And those motions are denied.
         Now, I'm going to ask the marshals to escort
Mr. McVeigh from the courtroom now.
    (Defendant out at 1:48 p.m.)
         THE COURT:  All right.  We'll recess until 9:00
tomorrow morning.
    (Recess at 1:48 p.m.)
                         *  *  *  *  *
 
                             INDEX
Item                                                      Page
Verdict                                        
Defendant's Renewed Motions                    
                         *  *  *  *  *
                    REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
    I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from
the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter.  Dated
at Denver, Colorado, this 2d day of June, 1997.

                                 _______________________________
                                         Paul Zuckerman