## Facts

- A federal grand jury in the Western District of Oklahoma indicted Timothy James McVeigh and Terry Lynn Nichols for offenses arising from the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
- The indictment alleged a conspiracy beginning in September 1994 to use a truck bomb to damage the building and kill or injure persons inside; other charges included use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction of government property by explosive, and first-degree murder of federal law enforcement officers.
- The government filed notices of intent to seek the death penalty as to both defendants on all counts.
- The bombing caused 168 deaths, hundreds of injuries, destruction of the Murrah Building, and extensive collateral damage, including damage to the federal courthouse; total incident costs were estimated at more than $651 million.
- The court initially set the place of trial within the district at Lawton, Oklahoma.
- Defendants moved for a change of venue out of the Western District of Oklahoma under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 21(a), asserting pervasive pretrial publicity and community prejudice made a fair trial impossible in Oklahoma.
- After an evidentiary hearing (including review of media coverage, community sentiment, surveys, and expert testimony), the court found extraordinarily emotional and sustained publicity, highly visible public memorialization, and broad dissemination of arrest footage portraying McVeigh in restraints amid an angry crowd.
- Survey evidence and testimony indicated high case familiarity among potential jurors in Oklahoma, strong emotional reactions, substantial prejudgment of guilt, and significant support for the death penalty.

## Issues

1. Whether pretrial publicity and community impact created “so great a prejudice” in the Western District of Oklahoma that defendants could not obtain a fair and impartial trial there under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 21(a).
2. Whether moving the trial to another location within Oklahoma could adequately mitigate prejudice, or whether transfer to another federal district was required.

## Decision

- The court granted the defendants’ Rule 21(a) motions for change of venue.
- The court found defendants could not receive a fair and impartial trial in the Western District of Oklahoma due to significant, statewide prejudice.
- The court rejected the view that a trial within Oklahoma (including in Lawton) would cure the problem because prejudice was not limited to Oklahoma City.
- The court ordered the case transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, sitting in Denver.

## Legal Principles

- Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 21(a), a court must transfer a prosecution to another district if it is satisfied that prejudice in the current district is so great that the defendant cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial there.
- In exceptional cases, the combination of catastrophic local impact and saturation, emotionally charged media coverage can support a finding that impartial jurors cannot realistically be seated in the district, even with careful voir dire and instructions.
- Venue transfer may be warranted where prejudice is shown to be statewide (or otherwise not geographically containable) such that relocating within the same state would not materially reduce the risk of juror bias.
- Victim and community interests in a local trial cannot override the defendants’ constitutional right to trial by an impartial jury when impartiality is not reasonably attainable in the forum.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that the bombing’s profound statewide impact and sustained, prejudicial publicity created such pervasive bias in Oklahoma that an impartial jury could not be reliably selected through voir dire, requiring transfer under Rule 21(a) to the District of Colorado for trial.


United States v. McVeigh, 918 F. Supp. 1467 (W.D. Okla. 1996)