Doctor murderer to use "justifiable homicide" defense

[Ravi]

Roeder said he planned to use a so-called necessity defense at his trial, arguing that he killed Tiller to prevent a greater harm. Other antiabortion activists charged with violent acts have tried to use such a defense, with little success. Roeder's trial is set for Jan. 11.

Murder suspect confesses to killing abortion provider -- latimes.com

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

 

[strollingbones]

merit? legal merit? no.

moral merit? perhaps. if he truly believes that abortion is murder and that killing an abortion doctor would result in saving lives...i can see it...however he has let pure emotions make this decision...

if either party was truly concerned with doing away with abortion it would have been done by now...abortion is a huge business in the us...no one is gonna stand in the way of profits...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Roeder said he planned to use a so-called necessity defense at his trial, arguing that he killed Tiller to prevent a greater harm. Other antiabortion activists charged with violent acts have tried to use such a defense, with little success. Roeder's trial is set for Jan. 11.

Murder suspect confesses to killing abortion provider -- latimes.com

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

No and it just ensures he will get the highest possible sentence. If that State has the Death Penalty one can hope he gets that for cruel and depraved actions.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

No more than labeling him a terrorist for the action.
He is a murderer whose motive was to illegally stop abortions.
- Did someone live as a result? Perhaps.
No different than a murderer whose motive was to illegally silence a witness.
- if the lack of a witness derailed a trial with potential capital punishment then perhaps that too would 'save a life'

Both cases are murder, only the motive is different.
For extra fun, stipulate that in the witness case presume the witness was a known gangster and the killer knew the defendant was innocent of the charges against them.

 

[Ravi]

Roeder said he planned to use a so-called necessity defense at his trial, arguing that he killed Tiller to prevent a greater harm. Other antiabortion activists charged with violent acts have tried to use such a defense, with little success. Roeder's trial is set for Jan. 11.

Murder suspect confesses to killing abortion provider -- latimes.com

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

No and it just ensures he will get the highest possible sentence. If that State has the Death Penalty one can hope he gets that for cruel and depraved actions.

How so?

 

[Immanuel]

Murder suspect confesses to killing abortion provider -- latimes.com

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

No and it just ensures he will get the highest possible sentence. If that State has the Death Penalty one can hope he gets that for cruel and depraved actions.

How so?

Abortion is legal while killing a human being is not. In simple terms, I do not see how anyone can justify performing an illegal act against a legal one. Regardless of the fact that I am opposed to abortion, I cannot fathom that he has a snowball's chance in hell of pulling this off... nor do I believe that he should get away with it.

I take that back. I suppose that if he could pull off getting one person who is very much Pro-Life he could hang the jury, but chances are anyone that Pro-Life is going to be removed from the jury before the trial even begins.

Immie

 

[Si modo]

Roeder said he planned to use a so-called necessity defense at his trial, arguing that he killed Tiller to prevent a greater harm. Other antiabortion activists charged with violent acts have tried to use such a defense, with little success. Roeder's trial is set for Jan. 11.

Murder suspect confesses to killing abortion provider -- latimes.com

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

Hell no and I hope the judge doesn't even allow that line of defense.

 

[Diuretic]

I doubt if that argument is going to work, it seems there's not much precedent for it being successful so it sounds as if the defence is desperate.

The idea of "preborn children" is novel, it makes absolutely no sense in reality though.

Still, I suppose this means that the defence is going to the jury rather than looking for a plea bargain. Any jury that buys that argument though has to be more than a bit logically challenged.

But it put me in mind of an old English case which claimed "necessity." Didn't work then either.

R v Dudley and Stephens [1884] 14 QBD 273 DC is a leading English criminal case that established a precedent, throughout the common law world, that necessity is no defence against a charge of murder. It concerned survival cannibalism following a shipwreck and its purported justification on the basis of a Custom of the Sea.[citation needed] It marked the culmination of a long history of attempts by the law, in the face of public opinion sympathetic to castaways, to outlaw the Custom and it became something of a cause célèbre in Victorian Britain.

R v Dudley and Stephens - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[garyd]

Everyone of those idiots have tried it they ahve all been convicted anyway. It doesn't work and it shouldn't.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Does anyone think his claim has any merit?

No more than labeling him a terrorist for the action.
He is a murderer whose motive was to illegally stop abortions.
- Did someone live as a result? Perhaps.
No different than a murderer whose motive was to illegally silence a witness.
- if the lack of a witness derailed a trial with potential capital punishment then perhaps that too would 'save a life'

Both cases are murder, only the motive is different.
For extra fun, stipulate that in the witness case presume the witness was a known gangster and the killer knew the defendant was innocent of the charges against them.

He's not a terrorist? ...please...

 

[Missourian]

Abolitionist broke the law to do what they believed was morally right.

Tiller was an extreme case...he was a late term abortionist.

Roeder is going to put Tiller on trial...if he can prove that even one of those late term abortions were not medically necessary (which is the threshold set by Kansas statute) it is possible for a jury to find Tillers murder justifiable, as Tiller himself would be a murderer.

It's a win/win for Roeder, if he can PROVE Tiller's late term abortions were murder, even if Roeder himself is found guilty, the result will be ALL late term abortionist will be investigated.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Abolitionist broke the law to do what they believed was morally right.

Tiller was an extreme case...he was a late term abortionist.

Roeder is going to put Tiller on trial...if he can prove that even one of those late term abortions were not medical necessary (which is the threshold set by Kansas statute) it is possible for a jury to find Tillers murder justifiable, as Tiller himself would be a murderer.

It's a win/win for Roeder, if he can PROVE Tiller's late term abortions were murder, even if Roeder himself is found guilty, the result will be ALL late term abortionist will be investigated.

Won't work and it is going to cost the defendant. When it is over the Judge will have no remorse to take into consideration for the despicable act of murdering an unarmed man while in church.

 

[Shogun]

Abolitionist broke the law to do what they believed was morally right.

Tiller was an extreme case...he was a late term abortionist.

Roeder is going to put Tiller on trial...if he can prove that even one of those late term abortions were not medically necessary (which is the threshold set by Kansas statute) it is possible for a jury to find Tillers murder justifiable, as Tiller himself would be a murderer.

It's a win/win for Roeder, if he can PROVE Tiller's late term abortions were murder, even if Roeder himself is found guilty, the result will be ALL late term abortionist will be investigated.

THAT is a stretch. The criminal trial for Tiller's killer is not some episode of Law & Order. He may not get the death penalty but he sure as hell won't become the launching pad for the investigation of every abortion in Kansas. Hell, it's still legal in Kansas and the killer admitted his guilt. He'll be put away and life, AND ABORTIONS, will still go on just like what happened after that piece of shit eric rudolph became a posterboy for pro life radicalism.