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 ...
That’s right—and when the legal process failed, the bloodiest war in our history was a result. You think the law is something to be ignored at a whim or when it’s no longer convenient to do so?
With a gun.
He still managed to kill a lot of unborn infants.
Tiller’s murder will only harden other abortionists to kill even more babies. The only way abortion will end is if people are convinced it is evil. Because of this, people will think pro-lifers are on the side of evil.
[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.]
The judge threw out consideration of the lesser charge. The only charge he could be convicted on was 1st degree murder.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584194,00.html
You mean on a partial jury? The answer is no.
I say the “good” abortionist was in the Heydrich league. He will not be missed. Justice has been served. I look forward to the day when the other abortionist monsters are tried by judge and jury.
<><><>><<><><><
I think you are being disingenuous with your last statement. It does not appear that you care whether or not the abortion docs are tried in a court of law or shot down in their churches.
Something stinks in Kansas. Specifically the juries.
A really fair, impartial jury on the subject of abortion is hard to find these days.
What would you call someone who champions murder?
The only possible way his defense could have worked is if Roeder shot Tiller in the clinic right before he was going to kill a baby. That's it. There was no chance it can work without jury nullification since Roeder shot him in a church where nobody was in imminent danger. Imminent is the key word.
I'm not shedding any tears for Tiller's death, but Roeder shouldn't have made a martyr out of him.
“Something stinks in Kansas.”
You are exactly right, something does stink in Kansas.
Specifically, that stink will be emanating from Scott Roeder who will be rotting in a Kansas prison.
The bloodiest time in our history has been since after a certain SCOTUS decision in 1973, and it makes the Civil War casualties look like a Sunday afternoon picnic. I’d rather be in Roeder’s shoes on Judgment Day than Tiller’s.
I served on a jury years ago in Florida. This was a murder trial.I voted the defendant “not guilty” because in my opinion the Government did not prove its case. I was the only “not guilty,” so the case was retried with the result the defendant was found “not guilty” and released from custody after serving 18 months for a crime he didn’t commit.
Oh! And the real murderer was later captured, convicted and executed.
Something stinks in Kansas. Specifically the juries.
<><><><><<><
How do you figure that? The only charge the jury could consider, by judge’s order, was 1st degree murder. Given that Roeder admitted murder and premeditation, how could the jury have found differently?
When juries decide based on who they like or trust/dislike or distrust, we get folks like OJ Simpson running free. Juries need to base their decisions on the facts, and the facts in this case are quite clear, 1st degree murder.
What isn't pretty is that anyone would not celebrate the death of a monster -- no matter how it occurred -- that killed tens of thousands of fully-formed, perfectly health infants for reasons not related to the health of the mother.
And, no, that isn't an endorsement of Roeder's actions.
His death should be just as much a reason to rejoice as the death Osama Bin Laden or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Only those with no respect for human life would not feel that way.
A really fair, impartial jury on the subject of abortion is hard to find these days.
<><><><><><
I agree with the judge on this point, this trial was not about abortion, it was about Roeder committing murder.
“...in real life it has no practical impact.”
Hmmm. Also the question is difficult to answer, I think. In any case it has not been answered.
But even if this question has no practical impact on “real life”, what about after-life? Isn’t that the real test of the biggest moral questions?
No. Tiller still, slim of chance as he had, could have changed his ways before his next legal murder.
If Roeder did this, at the clinic, right before Tiller was killing a baby in immediate danger, then I could see a possible defense, legally or morally.
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.