Archive for Monday, November 9, 2009
Roeder confesses to shooting abortion doctor
November 9, 2009, 2:24 p.m. Updated November 9, 2009, 4:45 p.m.
Advertisement
Wichita — Defiant and unapologetic, a man accused of shooting a Kansas abortion provider confessed to the slaying Monday, telling The Associated Press that he killed the doctor to protect unborn children.
Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, Mo., spoke to the AP in a telephone call from jail, saying he plans to argue at his trial that he was justified in shooting Dr. George Tiller at the abortion provider’s Wichita church in May.
“Because of the fact preborn children’s lives were in imminent danger this was the action I chose. ... I want to make sure that the focus is, of course, obviously on the preborn children and the necessity to defend them,” Roeder said.
“Defending innocent life — that is what prompted me. It is pretty simple,” he said.
Roeder is charged with one count of first-degree murder in Tiller’s death and two counts of aggravated assault for allegedly threatening two ushers who tried to stop him during the May 31 melee in the foyer of the doctor’s church. Roeder has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to go to trial in January.
In a more than 30-minute interview with the AP, Roeder did not apologize for the slaying.
“No, I don’t have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby,” Roeder said. “So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don’t have any regrets.”
His confession came on the same day several strident abortion opponents released their “Defensive Action Statement 3rd Edition” that proclaims any force that can be used to defend the life of a “born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child.” The statement’s 21 signers demand Roeder’s jurors be allowed to consider the “question of when life begins” in deciding whether lethal force was justified.
Among the signers are Eric Rudolph, James Kopp and Shelley Shannon — all serving prison time for targeting abortion doctors.
Lee Thompson, attorney for the Tiller family and executor of his estate, has said allowing such a defense would “invite chaos and be tantamount to anarchy.” The Kansas Supreme Court rejected such a defense in a 1993 ruling over an abortion clinic trespassing case.
Tiller, 67, had been the target of relentless protests for most of the 36 years that he performed abortions at his Wichita clinic, where he practiced as one of the nation’s few providers of late-term abortions. He was shot in both arms in 1993 and his clinic was bombed in 1986.
More like this
- Attorney for man who says he shot George Tiller won't present 'necessity' defense 92 comments / November 10, 2009
- Tiller suspect has court date Tuesday July 27, 2009
- Prosecutors want to bar 'necessity' defense from Roeder trial 13 comments / November 13, 2009
- Attorneys of man who says he killed George Tiller ask for change of venue 34 comments / November 12, 2009
- Tiller shooting trial Attorney suggests unusual defense 61 comments / August 30, 2009
Top ads RSS
- Coordinator with Teaching Responsibilities University of Kansas Requires professional knowledge ...
- Schwans Home Service now hiring starting at $32,000 a yr. ...
- Financial Manager Research & Graduate Studies (RGS) and the KU ...
- Googols of Learning Child Development Center is now hiring for ...
- RN, LPN and CNA/CMA positions available in family practice setting. ...
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Blog: We Noticed November 19, 2009 · 97 comments
- KU's Chancellor issues statement putting support behind Lew Perkins November 20, 2009 · 29 comments
- Mangino denies validity of former player allegations November 19, 2009 · 154 comments
- Blog: Palin Book Could Be Your Cheapest Source For Winter Fuel November 20, 2009 · 18 comments
- Report: Women can do with fewer Pap tests November 20, 2009 · 26 comments
- Blog: Why Do People Repeat Falsehoods? November 20, 2009 · 32 comments
- Muslim countries seek blasphemy ban November 20, 2009 · 15 comments
- Fatal mindset November 20, 2009 · 45 comments
- Lawrence man charged in hit-and-run accident that killed bicyclist November 19, 2009 · 105 comments
- 75-year-old Topeka area man dies from H1N1; LMH reports flu activity November 20, 2009 · 3 comments
- Baldwin City teen detained for bringing loaded gun and knife to school November 19, 2009
- Mangino denies validity of former player allegations November 19, 2009
- Resident hopes to start rickshaw business in downtown Lawrence, pending city approval November 19, 2009
- Lawrence schools preparing for another round of budget cuts November 18, 2009
- KU's Chancellor issues statement putting support behind Lew Perkins November 20, 2009
- Farmers' Turnpike reopens after four months of construction November 20, 2009
- KU student pushes button that demolishes a portion of the Kansas Turnpike bridge November 19, 2009
- Rise and shine November 20, 2009
- Kansas Board of Regents OKs contract to implement $25.6 million in conservation projects November 19, 2009
- Elder Henry makes debut November 20, 2009
9 November 2009
at 2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
srj (Anonymous) says…
“Almost all common-law and statutory definitions of the necessity defense include the following elements: (1) the defendant acted to avoid a significant risk of harm; (2) no adequate lawful means could have been used to escape the harm; and (3) the harm avoided was greater than that caused by breaking the law.” We are talking about
Abortion protesters (and other protesters) have used necessity defense before and it does not work, so a murder suspect, no way.
9 November 2009
at 2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Sulla (Anonymous) says…
John Brown this redneck Fetus Fixator, ain't
9 November 2009
at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
edjayhawk (Anonymous) says…
I hope he gets the death penalty but I sure they can weasel out of that one. Sounds to me like anti-abortion people don't believe in the 10 commandments.
9 November 2009
at 2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
edjayhawk (Anonymous) says…
But they do believe in eye-for-an-eye.
9 November 2009
at 2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…
This is simply not a viable defense. There is no single person that Roeder can identify as being protected.
Protecting against some undefined, future harm is untenable. It needs to be an individual.
It would be akin to killing gun manufacturers for the future deaths in which those guns might be used.
Ridiculous, in other words.
9 November 2009
at 2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
srj (Anonymous) says…
Another good legal quote…
“Virtually all abortion protesters who have tried to avail themselves of the defense have lost. The courts have reasoned that because the right to an abortion is constitutionally protected, it cannot simultaneously be a legally recognized harm justifying illegal action”
And we are just talking about protesters.
9 November 2009
at 2:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…
neccesity defense a/k/a “dreaming and then you woke up” defense.
truly a whack job if ever there was one.
9 November 2009
at 2:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Wallythewalrus (Anonymous) says…
Why does he not just claim he heard the voice of god? A religious honor killing? The Bible said he would become a Martyr and would go to heaven? Or, maybe he is just another nut case. Surely, no more of his kind will be attacking humans on religious grounds will they?
9 November 2009
at 3:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…
the best thing about articles on this subject is that it ferrets out the loonies.
present company not included, of course. :D
9 November 2009
at 3:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…
you're right, blessed. so by his own definition, he's a murderer and there is no defense.
9 November 2009
at 3:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
preebo (Anonymous) says…
Lock him up!
9 November 2009
at 3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ferrislives (Anonymous) says…
BlessedSap, self-righteous much?
9 November 2009
at 3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
sfjayhawk (Anonymous) says…
Roder has it all wrong, its not the necessity defense he needs to use, its the insanity defense. These wackjobs always forget that one.
9 November 2009
at 3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Sulla (Anonymous) says…
Well that would include too many people, that insanity defense. I mean anyone who claims to take a book called The Bible as the certified word of the Almighty has more than one screw loose.C'mon.
9 November 2009
at 3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ferrislives (Anonymous) says…
Roeder doesn't really care about the unborn BlessedSap. He only cares about the attention he gets. He's an attention-whore; nothing more.
9 November 2009
at 3:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
1029 (Anonymous) says…
This rationale for defense is kind of like when the terminator was sent from the future to kill young John Conner even though he hadn't done anything. But in the future his actions led to the destruction of machines—machines that hadn't even been built yet! So the machines wanted to kill him before he could kill (destroy) them. It's kind of like with the babies—except it was this guy Roeder and not a baby from the future.
9 November 2009
at 3:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
porch_person (Anonymous) says…
1029, Ladies and Gentlemen!!
(clap, clap, clap)
With the “I saw it in a really cool movie” defense.
(laughter)
9 November 2009
at 3:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
kugrad (Anonymous) says…
There is zero doubt that he committed murder. He was seen doing it by multiple people. He has confessed. Murder is never legal. It was in cold blood. So, skip the trial, save the taxpayers the money, go straight to sentencing. A trial is, in this case, absolutely pointless.
9 November 2009
at 4:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
barrypenders (Anonymous) says…
A terrorist kills 13 in Fort Hood and a terrorist kills one in Kansas.
For the progressive mind, does the terrorist that murdered 13 and lived because of expert government healthcare, get to be put to death 13 times over? Oh my. The gut wrenching hatred for the terrorist that killed one in Kansas must be a terribly gut wrenching thrill for the progressive mind, for a call to have the terrorist that killed 13 in Fort Hood, put to death.
Stimulus, evolution and Posercare lives
Darwin bless you all
9 November 2009
at 4:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
RalphReed (Ralph Reed) says…
@kugrad.
The only purpose a trial would serve at this point is to feed his need for attention.
Roeder confessed to the murder. The way I understand it, his confession is the same as standing in court and saying, “Guilty, your honor.” That ends the trial and it should go to the sentencing phase.
9 November 2009
at 4:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
porch_person (Anonymous) says…
One would think….
9 November 2009
at 4:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ebyrdstarr (Anonymous) says…
A confession to a reporter is not in any way, shape, or form the same as a guilty plea in a court of law. Heck, even if he'd signed a sworn statement confessing to the police, he would still be entitled to enter a plea of not guilty and have a trial.
9 November 2009
at 4:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…
Confesses to murder.
Sentencing?
You know how I roll.
9 November 2009
at 4:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
barrypenders (Anonymous) says…
Lava lamp….that explains it!
Stimulus, evolution and Posercare lives
Darwin bless you
9 November 2009
at 4:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…
“barrypenders (Anonymous) rambles…
A terrorist kills 13 in Fort Hood and a terrorist kills one in Kansas.
For the progressive mind, does the terrorist that murdered 13 and lived because of expert government healthcare, get to be put to death 13 times over?”
I wish. But practically speaking, it's one and done.
9 November 2009
at 4:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
RogueThrill (Anonymous) says…
I don't think he should get the death penalty and even if he does he won't be executed. It's Kansas and we haven't executed anyone in forever. All the death penalty does is cost us a ton of money.
And BlessedSap/be3, you're trying too hard. It's fun to see how many people agree with you, but you aren't trolling out many liberals.
9 November 2009
at 4:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
If it was a necessity, why did Roeder run? Why not be a man and take credit for his work on the spot? Actions belie the proclaimed beliefs.
BlessedSap, an interesting analysis of justifiable killing can be found in St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica.
9 November 2009
at 4:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
edjayhawk (Anonymous) says…
Once again Barry Penders displays illogical thinking that has nothing to do with the topic. I'm surprised he didn't blame Obama like he does for everything.
9 November 2009
at 4:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BABBOY (Anonymous) says…
Vanguard3 pretty much has this right.
My take is that this is a confession in the sense that it is evidence for the DA. It may also be a capacity argument (which loses) for the defense. It is not a change of plea or confession that will stop a trial. He could retract saying he was grandstanding for the media or more likely he will try the insanity or hybrid justification arguments. My understanding is that the defense has to prove that he did not understand what he was doing was “legally” wrong. I think it is clear he knew it was legally wrong. I do not think the fact that he thought he was morally right matters much as shown by his running away.
9 November 2009
at 5 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
Roeder's defense will fall flat, as it would open the door for a wave of justifiable homicides. The precedent would be set: if you can convince the jury that you killed 'em because they needed killin', you get a free pass!
Won't happen.
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
9 November 2009
at 5:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Faith is nothing more than belief in things unseen. I believe that man has great capacity for good, but don't see too much of it lately. Does that make me something worthy of ridicule? I'll leave that discussion for another day.
Having faith and believing in a higher power to which we answer is not something to mock. However, if people don't live up to professed beliefs, I'd think it right and prudent to challenge that. I'd also challenge the people who choose to worship man as the end all. If man is all the better this universe is ever going to have, we're all in a world of trouble.
9 November 2009
at 6:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
beobachter (Anonymous) says…
2 questions. When's the execution and will it be open to the public?
9 November 2009
at 6:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Go Saudi on him and do it at the farmers' market with a sword. Hang his body out for public display. Dig up Tiller and post him right next to Roeder.
That's fair.
9 November 2009
at 6:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
If you look back at the articles on this you will find the state has already stated they are not seeking the death penalty in this case.
9 November 2009
at 6:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ebyrdstarr (Anonymous) says…
The state can't seek the death penalty here because this particular murder does not fit within the 7 scenarios specified in Kansas' capital murder statute.
9 November 2009
at 7:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…
What is God's call on this stand-off? I am a faithful “Dexter” watcher and I fall on Dexters' side. Sooooo???
9 November 2009
at 7:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Dude, there is nothing better than equality of man based on judgment of actions, right? Killing is killing.
9 November 2009
at 7:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Where, oh, where are the light of heart on this discussion?
9 November 2009
at 7:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Hey, Vet, not too many in the “civilized world” understand the concept of occupational hazards and the $hit that normally accompanies the choice of jobs. Anyone present who realizes that we don't really live in a civilized world?
9 November 2009
at 9:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
puddleglum (Anonymous) says…
Thanks for electing me to govenoh of calliefornya.
and come see my new movie terminata tree, Riese of duh machine!
9 November 2009
at 11:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
prolifersforwar (Anonymous) says…
Do abortion doctors go to abortion medical school? Are they called ADR's or ADoc's? What's up, ADoc? Or AMD's? “Where are you going—you got an abortion doctor's appointment?” “Yeah, I hate abortion doctor's appointments.” Where are those done? At the abortion doctor's office? If we could just find the Abortion Medical School where are all these Abortion Doctors are getting Abortion Doctor Credentials and Doing Abortion Residencies and close those places! Bam! No more Abortions, liberals! Ha-ha! Why don't the liberal media report on where that Abortion Medical School is that's churning out all these damn Abortion Doctors! Come on! Next time you write a headline, don't get me all excited for no reason.
10 November 2009
at 12:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jhawk11 (Anonymous) says…
“Defending innocent life — that is what prompted me. It is pretty simple,” [Roeder] said.
So he shot a guy in church? Seems ironic.
10 November 2009
at 6:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ivalueamerica (Anonymous) says…
When bigots yell all people who follow Islam are terrorist, where are they when stuff like this happens?
No, I do not think all Christians are terrorists anymore than I think all Muslims are terrorists, I just want to point out that those that do so ONLY to one faith (color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation) are bigots.
10 November 2009
at 8:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LarryNative (Anonymous) says…
Tiller, by the laws of the United States, was not a murderer. Your religious or moral beliefs are not the law. Your personal definition of murder is irrelevant. By calling Tiller a murderer, you are committing slander which is illegal by law. You are the criminal.
Tiller's murder was carried out by a religious fanatic just as any terrorist kill's in the name of their god. There is no difference whatsoever.
10 November 2009
at 8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
oldvet (Anonymous) says…
You only have to convince one juror each time… and jury nullification is always a possibility…
10 November 2009
at 9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Cappy (Anonymous) says…
Doctors learn to perform abortions in medical school just like they do everything else. Sometimes abortions ARE medically necessary.
Roeder says four women have chosen not to have abortions. Probably because they are terrorized. Because he is a terrorist. I wonder if he expects maybe just a few virgins, if not 72.
BlessedSap (Anonymous) says…
The progressive mind is very flexible and constantly changing like a groovy lava lamp.
Cappy says…
The conservative mind is rigid and inflexible like a dead, unfeeling rock.
10 November 2009
at 10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Jimo (Anonymous) says…
I ask again: why is this terrorist not at Guantanamo?
10 November 2009
at 10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
yankeevet (Anonymous) says…
Hangem High……….
…………..clint…………….
10 November 2009
at 11:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
The neoconservative mind is cold and stiff like a corpse.
10 November 2009
at 12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Larrynative, Tiller, by definition, is not a murderer. However, his actions support the definition of baby killer. Isn't that the name that the liberals used to call the Vietnam Vets when they came home? Seems that for the liberals, the occupation of baby killer is in now vogue.
10 November 2009
at 2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
So then, vanguard, by your definition of “liberal” … you're exclusively talking about people that were, say, teenagers during the '60s and early '70s?
Let's see… that'd make those people, in 2009… ballpark it between 55 and 65 years of age.
Whew! That's kinda cool. Anyone under age 50 can't *possibly* be a “liberal,” then.
Thanks for that laugh!
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
P.S. Careful with that red herring you're wearing on your sleeve—those things begin to stink after a couple of days, so mind you don't throw it in the washer with your other laundry. ;)
10 November 2009
at 3:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
I could care less what Roeder is doing with his defense. He fulfilled his mission as a result Tiller is dead and will kill no more babies.
“vanguard3 (Anonymous) says…
Larrynative, Tiller, by definition, is not a murderer. However, his actions support the definition of baby killer. Isn't that the name that the liberals used to call the Vietnam Vets when they came home? Seems that for the liberals, the occupation of baby killer is in now vogue.”
Yep this is a sign you are in America. Note there is a story on the increase in homeless Veterans with only 3 comments.
10 November 2009
at 4:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…
” I could care less what Roeder is doing with his defense. He fulfilled his mission as a result Tiller is dead and will kill no more babies.”
Based on this line of thinking, you condone what the murderer at Ft. Hood did as well on his “mission”. So…….. murder is okay in your book as long as it isn't a zygote. Terrifying.
10 November 2009
at 10:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LarryNative (Anonymous) says…
Kathy,
I agree, it is scary that so many individuals think that murder is good if it agrees with their own way of thinking. Don't these people see this is exactly how terrorists think. I would like to have one of you explain how this murder is any different then the murders that took took place on 9/11. Religious freaks killing for their gods. Amazing.
11 November 2009
at 6:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
If you compare Roeder to 9/11? One person died vs hundreds.
I find it funny that people keep bringing God into this especially since Tiller was killed in church.
11 November 2009
at 7:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LarryNative (Anonymous) says…
Murder is murder arti. It's not a game of numbers.
I mentioned gods as well as moral beliefs in my earlier post. I felt I covered the bases by mentioning both. Is there another reason outside of religion or morals as to why a person would be anit-abortion?
The point I'm making is I find it sickening to see people applauding the cold blooded murder of a man who was doing nothing legally wrong. His actions offended individuals but if that is not a free ticket to justify murder.
11 November 2009
at 8:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LarryNative (Anonymous) says…
Like I stated, it is a moral issue and not religious for some such as yourself.
Any person with any sense of decency would not murder a man in cold blood or cheer on that type of behavior. I am not an abortion advocate. I do believe it is not my choice however to bestow my beliefs on others. I also believe that is beside the point. My issue is with anyone who thinks murdering this doctor was a good thing.
11 November 2009
at 8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
Just because the allows it doesn't make it O.K. The state of Kansas may allow late term abortions but the state lacks in other arenas. Apperently it is okie dokie to kill a person with your car in Kansas so long as you flee the scene. Does this make Kansas greater? I think not. Do you wonder why late term abortions have only been allowed at limited locations? People in Kansas think they are somehow special because of their willingness to go where other states will not. You people keep saying ” murder is murder” but you dismiss the lives taken by late term abortions. Your very hypocrisy in that kind of statement alone makes me wonder if you even understand what the heck you are supporting.
11 November 2009
at 8:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
Sorry that should read ” just because the law allows it.”
11 November 2009
at 9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
You're one to talk about “hypocrisy,” choke.
11 November 2009
at 4:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
LarryNative (Anonymous) says…
Vet,
You would do whatever it took………..so you would murder?
Arti,
It's not legal to hit someone with a car and flee the scene.
I am not a hypocrit because I don't consider an aborted fetus a human life, it is a fetus. It is not murder.
There is really no sense in continuing this discussion because Roeder, you and vet want to take human lives and I do not. You believe in murdering people and I do not. You believe a fetus is a human and I do not. We will never see eye to eye. You believe you and others like you do not have to follow our laws because you believe your beliefs are more important then the greater good.
Like I stated, I am not a pro abortion person. I am a man and will never be put in a situation where I would have to choose if my life and riasing my children are more or less important then a fetus that may kill me due to complications but if I were a women, I would want that right.
11 November 2009
at 5:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
ComradeRedRooster (Anonymous) says…
Agnostick (Anonymous) says…
“The neoconservative mind is cold and stiff like a corpse.”
So speaketh the Neo-marxist