Posted on 01/29/2010 9:49:10 AM PST by FutureRocketMan
WICHITA, Kan. — A man who said he killed prominent Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller in order to save the lives of unborn children was convicted Friday of murder.
The jury deliberated for just 37 minutes before finding Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, Mo., guilty of premeditated, first-degree murder in the May 31 shooting death.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
And if you ask me, he should fry for premeditated murder.
He was ‘pro-life’ ??
There a some nuts here that see this guy as a hero.
First: Don’t change the title of the article. The proper title is “Jury Finds Man Guilty of Murder in Kansas Abortion Provider’s Death”. Use it - those are the rules.
Second: Roeder admitted he did it. He claimed that he did it to save more babies from being slaughtered, but he admitted he did it.
Roeder did the crime, he’ll do the time.
My opinion: A killer killed a killer. If we were to have people kill in disregard for the law - as bad as the law is - we’d have anarchy that would dwarf even the horror of abortion.
Of course. I can’t wait to see some of the idiot replies on this thread.
Good call, murder is murder.
The only disgusting breach of justice I see here is Kansas’s failure to apply the death penalty.
Give him the needle.
I don’t understand what you mean...the prosecution had the biggest part of the case and proved it overwhelmingly.
Roeder confessed, but that isn’t enough for a conviction....there was eyewitness, DNA, blood evidence etc.
Yes, he had to prove himself innocent. That’s what happens when you put on an affirmative defense - the burden is on the defense not the prosecutor, which is as it should be in such cases.
By the way, the man is guilty as sin of murder in the first degree. You cannot use murder to justify the stopping of murder unless your life or the lives of other people is in imminent danger (a person according to the definition in the law is someone who has been born and taken a breath, and, in many jurisdictions, are no longer attached to the mother by the umbilical cord). Unfortunately a fetus is currently afforded no such protection. Until the laws are changed (and fat chance of that happening), fetuses will not be recognized as living persons.
I agree with you. See #3.
Doesn't qualify. Absent one of the aggravating circumstances outlined in the law, killing a single person doesn't warrant the death penalty in Kansas. The minimum he can get is life, eligible for parole in 2035.
This was the correct verdict.
*ping*
The only question here is how much time he should get.
I would go for the very minimum amount allowed under the law if on the jury, but there is no question he was guilty.
I posted this a few minutes ago on a thread that was removed by the Moderator as duplicate, which linked to CNN instead of Fox.
Unintentional, I’m sure, but I find it ironic that this linked website has a large red title: CNN JUSTICE.
Yes, this is CNN-style justice all right. I think perhaps his lawyer failed in the jury selection process.
One quotation from Roeder that I think sums up his position: “There was nothing being done, and the legal process had been exhausted, and these babies were dying every day,” Roeder said. “I felt that if someone did not do something, he was going to continue.”
One can provide two justifications for what he did: 1) The right of self defense also may be expanded to include defense of your “neighbor.” In this case, the defense of the innocent babies who would have been slaughtered by Tiller in the future.
2) Failure of the law to act. Tiller’s operation would have been closed down for numerous violations of Kansas law if he had not bribed the politicians, including Kathleen Sebelius, and if he had not used his dirty money to oust an honest prosecutor and elect a Democrat (who subsequently resigned in disgrace).
Voluntary manslaughter would have been an alternate finding that the jury could have settled on. But evidently they didn’t even bother to really deliberate the case. I’d say that the prosecutor did a good job picking this jury, perhaps with the judge’s help.
This was entirely pre-meditated and therefore first degree murder.
The legal what if is what if he was killed in during the act of performing a late stage abortion? Would that protection or intense at the moment rage that wasn’t pre-meditated be 2nd degree murder?
I’m not defending him or saying he should have done it a different way than he did but wondering under what conditions this wouldn’t have been first degree murder.
I’ll likely be banned for saying this, but....
If I had been on that jury, I’d voted Roeder “not guilty” because he stopped an arrogant mass murderer dead in his tracks.
In my humble opinion, Roeder’s was tantamount to the actions of those heroic Czech freedom fighters in 1942 who gunned down the monster Reinhard Heyrich, the head of the dread RHSA, the driving force behind the Holocaust and “The Hangman of Prague.”
The wrong man was on trial here. I can think of a long list of Leftist pro-abortion activists, judges and politicians who should be facing capital punishment for their role in the American Holocaust that has claimed over 30 million innocent lives since 1971.
What kills me(pardon the pun)is that the murder took place in a church.I’m anti-abortion but what he did was wrong,in every sense of the word.Tiller was scum,however,for performing late-term abortions,which is outright murder. I think a doctor would have to be sick and cold-hearted to perform such an abortion.In my mind the mother is no better,since she’s allowing her infant to be murdered.It’s not even up for debate;a partial-birth abortion is murder, plain and simple.
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.