Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

<b>Man accused of shooting abortion doctor rights SEVERELY infringed upon.</b>
Associated Press ^ | Jan. 27, 2010 | ROXANA HEGEMAN

Posted on 01/29/2010 8:25:08 AM PST by OR Patriot

Scott Roeder will take the witness stand to testify on his own behalf, attorney Steve Osburn told The Associated Press in the wake of a heated hearing about which defense evidence jurors will be allowed to hear.

Roeder will be allowed to testify about his personally held beliefs, the judge said, not about medical procedures of which he has no knowledge or expertise.

"He is not going to be able to get up there and just blurb out what he wants to say," {District Judge Warren}Wilbert said.

(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: abortion; blogpimp; freespeech; scottroeder; testify
I am not condoning what Scott Roeder did. He will likely be found guilty of, at minimum voluntary manslaughter, and deservingly so. However, for him to be barred from testifying about the inhumane and barbaric methods used to conduct late-term / partial-birth abortions is an outrage. Such testimony goes directly to his motive and his state of mind at the time. THERE IS NO MOTIVE FOR THE JUDGE TO SUPRESS SUCH TESTIMONY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF IDEOLOGY!

The judge also barred Roeder from presenting as evidence the indictment against the abortion doctor for not obtaining second opinions about the medical necessity of many abortions.

WE WILL GIVE TERROR SUSPECTS EVERY RIGHT POSSIBLE WHILE BARRING THIS CITIZEN'S BASIC RIGHTS IN AN ATTEMPT TO KEEP THE COURT POLITICALLY CORRECT

I hope Roeder's attorney is already preparing an appeal.

1 posted on 01/29/2010 8:25:09 AM PST by OR Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

The judge withdrew the lesser charges yesterday. The jury can only find Roeder guilty/not guilty on 1st degree murder now.

Anyone know anything about this judge?


2 posted on 01/29/2010 8:32:06 AM PST by KansasGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

Actually, making lemonade out of lemons, Roeder’s best defense is not to appear in any way dogmatic, but to testify from an unexpected tangent, which will throw the prosecution off guard, and give him a better chance with the jury.

Since the judge has opened the door wide for him to talk about his beliefs, then he should run with that, expressing beliefs that will attract the attention and interest of the jurors.

For instance, he could imply that, knowingly or not, the abortion doctor was making human sacrifices to ancient, demonic pagan gods. This is based solely on what he was doing, not any avowed participation in a cult, or expressed beliefs of the abortionist, but solely by his actions. It also cannot be rebutted.

And such sacrifices are intended for some cosmic purpose of evil.

Just a thought. I’m sure others could easily come up with some tangential arguments


3 posted on 01/29/2010 8:39:03 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

The word is “blurt” not “blurb.”

Anyway, hearings to determine what evidence can be presented are common in both civil and criminal cases. Although I personally believe that withholding evidence from a jury can cause a bad decision, it looks like what this defendant will testify about (and what he can’t testify about) is reasonable.


4 posted on 01/29/2010 8:40:17 AM PST by fatnotlazy (I took my wife to the zoo. They thanked me for returning her. Rodney Dangerfield)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

The defendant is NOT permitted to discuss the procedures practiced by this charming “physician.” That is, he’s not allowed to tell the jury WHY he did it. Sounds like a REEEEELY fair trial to me! “Just shut up and plead guilty.” Of course if he were a TERRORIST, nothing would be off limits! Poor guy should have claimed to be a Muslim.


5 posted on 01/29/2010 8:41:37 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot
"Pro-life acitivist Randall Terry, well-known to Wichitans for organizing the 1991 Summer of Mercy protests, held a press conference outside of the Sedgwick County Courthouse on Thursday. Terry argued that abortion is the reason for the trial of Scott Roeder and that the jury in his trial should be allowed to consider voluntary manslaughter during their deliberations" --from The Wichita Eagle. (Click on video to view.)

6 posted on 01/29/2010 8:42:55 AM PST by mlizzy ("Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person" --Mother Teresa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax

I don’t pity the abortionist, but the defendent has admitted to the crime and it sounded calculated, not spur of the moment while an abortion was being performed. He is likely going to prison where he should be. This is not how we do things in this country.


7 posted on 01/29/2010 8:43:28 AM PST by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax
"The defendant is NOT permitted to discuss the procedures practiced by this charming “physician.” That is, he’s not allowed to tell the jury WHY he did it."

The Defense should call an expert witness to discuss the procedures...perhaps Dr. Bernard Nathanson.

8 posted on 01/29/2010 8:44:29 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

The guy goes into a church and murders a doctor in cold blood.

Guilty of murder in the first.


9 posted on 01/29/2010 8:44:42 AM PST by Leo Farnsworth (I'm really not Leo Farnsworth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl
I really think Roeder is not getting a fair trial.

link to court profile

You can email him via the link, your concerns.

More from blog info link

The most interesting thing about Wilbert is that he was reprimanded in 2006 for a sexual harassment complaint filed by a court employee. This is an oddball case. The judge was not only reprimanded, the cease-and-desist order was made public.

10 posted on 01/29/2010 8:49:24 AM PST by OR Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leo Farnsworth

It’s a stretch to call George Tiller a doctor. Doctors save lives which is not what Tiller did. George Tiller was a provider of illegal late-term abortions.


11 posted on 01/29/2010 8:52:16 AM PST by KansasGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot; All
Jury has reached a verdict but has not anounced a time when it will be read...

Just heard on the radio.

12 posted on 01/29/2010 9:02:30 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron ("Because without America, there is no free world" - Canada Free Press - MSM where are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

FOX had a scroll that said the jury found him guilty of first degree murder.


13 posted on 01/29/2010 9:08:00 AM PST by kaylar (It's MARTIAL law. Not marshal(l) or marital-MARTIAL! This has been a spelling PSA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kaylar

Yep.

Guilty - First Degree Murder.


14 posted on 01/29/2010 9:09:26 AM PST by CT-Freeper (Said the frequently disappointed but ever optimistic Mets fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

It is the judge’s job to keep irrelevant testimony out of the trial. Abortion is not on trial here, he is — so the specifics of the procedure are not relevant to this trial.

Think of it from a different perpsective ...

The terrorists that Barack is stupidly dragging into American courts ... should they be allowed to take the stand in their defense and spout anti-American propaganda that is fundamentally irrelevant to the question as to whether they were involved in terrorist activity?

The only question before the Court is whether Roeder murdered someone. The victim (scumbag) is not on trial here ... and has likely endured a much more harrowing trial at the foot of the Almighty.

Roeder knew what he was doing when he pulled the trigger ... he should be convicted and imprisoned for life (or executed). He’s no hero.

SnakeDoc


15 posted on 01/29/2010 9:18:18 AM PST by SnakeDoctor (Life is tough; it's tougher if you're stupid. -- John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leo Farnsworth

“...murders a doctor in cold blood.”

Tiller was NOT a doctor; he was an abortionist. Ask any medical doctor if you don’t believe me!


16 posted on 01/29/2010 10:02:42 AM PST by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY (It's the spending, Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper

The guy is definitely guilty based on the current law of the state. However, I think that he sees it as an acceptable price to pay. He’s made himself a martyr for his cause. However, I doubt that he has succeeded in saving many, if any, babies.


17 posted on 01/29/2010 10:09:04 AM PST by Sopater (...where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. - 2 COR 3:17b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

There is no doubt Roeder committed a crime, it is up to the jury to decide which one.

Hence the reason he should be afforded a fair trial to include testifying about the abortion procedures that helped motivate him to believe his victim’s behavior was so horrible the only way he could be stopped was to kill him. Such testimony is not irrelevant. Add to that the fact that the judicial system failed when this “doctor” was indicted (other testimony barred by the judge), Roeder had a “rational justification” (in his mind) which may lead to a less severe penalty.

It’s a reasonable defense although it won’t likely be successful. Case law has ruled that simply because a defense will not likely be successful the court cannot deny someone the opportunity to attempt it.

The point is, the guy is guilty of a crime, no doubt, however, under no circumstances should his rights to present a defense be abridged simply because he is a critic of abortion and the court wishes to remain PC.


18 posted on 01/29/2010 10:51:00 AM PST by OR Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot

100% agree.


19 posted on 01/29/2010 11:08:06 AM PST by Sopater (...where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. - 2 COR 3:17b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot
Me, I'm still (just as) outraged at the treatment of Mumia Abu-Jamal who had his rights taken away by a racist judge, who denied him the right to represent himself in his case!

I reckons if you shoots somebody, that gives you the right to speak the truth to power on the stand.

20 posted on 01/29/2010 2:43:22 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Don't panic, the lunatics are in charge and have everything in hand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OR Patriot
Man accused of shooting abortion doctor rights SEVERELY infringed upon.

Not as much as he infringed upon the rights of the doctor.

21 posted on 01/29/2010 2:55:24 PM PST by Doomonyou (Let them eat Lead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY
Abortion is LEGAL! I understand why you do not like it. Ok.

Murder is NOT legal.

If you do not like the law, CHANGE IT! If you take the law into your own hands like this fool, expect to suffer the consequences.

Please, GET A GRIP ON REALITY - shooting someone multiple times (in a church!) until they are dead is murder.

Pity it appears that he will only receive a life sentence.

22 posted on 01/29/2010 3:03:00 PM PST by Leo Farnsworth (I'm really not Leo Farnsworth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Leo Farnsworth
“Abortion is LEGAL!”

So was the extermination of Jews by the nazis.

However, there is a higher law that we all must obey; we may avoid prosecution for a time, but justice is certain.

I agree that shooting the monster in a church was plain wrong, and it left him no defense. If he had shot him on the way into his clinic, a manslaughter to prevent murder defense might well have held.

23 posted on 01/30/2010 2:04:06 PM PST by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY (It's the spending, Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY
Hey, zealot, get a clue:

“...I agree that shooting the monster in a church was plain wrong, and it left him no defense. If he had shot him on the way into his clinic, a manslaughter to prevent murder defense might well have held.”

We do NOT agree. Not in the LEAST!. He should not have been shot - anywhere.

The shooters crime is premeditated murder.

I state again - IF YOU DO NOT LIKE THE LAW - CHANGE IT!

Pity this ‘man’ will not be executed. He deserves it.

24 posted on 01/30/2010 2:24:28 PM PST by Leo Farnsworth (I'm really not Leo Farnsworth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Leo Farnsworth

“Hey, zealot..”

Why, thank you!

You failed to acknowledge something from my previous post, do you believe the extermination of the Jews was lawful?

Change the law— millions of your fellow countrymen are working to do just that!


25 posted on 01/30/2010 2:41:26 PM PST by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY (It's the spending, Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY
Zealotry is a bad thing. Try not to be too proud...
26 posted on 01/30/2010 2:54:49 PM PST by Leo Farnsworth (I'm really not Leo Farnsworth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Leo Farnsworth

“Zealotry is a bad thing.”

I guess you don’t understand the meaning of the word.

It’s much better than being lukewarm.


27 posted on 01/30/2010 5:08:53 PM PST by ROLF of the HILL COUNTRY (It's the spending, Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson