[coloradan]

If McVeigh was guilty, why should the FBI have to lie about factual evidence?

And even if he is guilty, I would easily support the death penalty for anyone who perjurers himself at a death-penalty trial. Otherwise, what's to keep the FBI from FIBbing at future trials? Justice is serious business, and lying under oath is a crime - especially when someone's life is at stake.

[Blood of Tyrants]

lying under oath is a crime

Not according to the Rats that supported clintoon. And if it is, it is no worse than being accused of impure thoughts on a steamboat landing.

[drjimmy]

If McVeigh was guilty, why should the FBI have to lie about factual evidence?
For the same reason some of the cops lied in the OJ Simpson case--to make the case stronger. One doesn't have to think OJ was innocent to also think that the cops fudged around with the evidence. The problem in that case was that they were no match for the defense team.

[aristeides]

If McVeigh was guilty, why should the FBI have to lie about factual evidence?

Arguably to conceal the participation of others in the plot. And the participation of those others might have led the jury to decide against the death penalty for McVeigh. It was for the jury to consider that, and they may have been denied evidence on the matter.

[templar]

If McVeigh was guilty, why should the FBI have to lie about factual evidence?

Because that's what they do. It's their nature and they can't help it.