Necessity Defence: Murder To Protect Potential Life

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Dante, Dec 23, 2009.

  1. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    The trial for Scott Roeder, the christian soldier/murderer, who btw admitted he murdered an unarmed medical doctor in the name of protecting the un-born, is set to begin next month.

    Roeder's defense attorney has been denied the use of a 'necessity defense' because that defense is NOT recognized under Kansas law. This according to the judge selected to hear the case.

    One tidbit of interest is that even under a common law argument, the christian soldier/murderer could not avail himself (legally) of this defense, since the act Roeder was trying to stop someone else from committing, was NOT a crime (abortion). Abortion IS legal.

    so much for the hyperbole and the irresponsibile rhettoric of the hateful and often dangerous, religious right in America.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2009
  2. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    The judge in the case has said he may even limit what the defense can say in it's opening statements, because if the defense uses the 'necessity defense' in opening statements it will be using deceit. The law states an ''imminent threat'' must be present in order to use the necessity defense, which is a claim that a law was broken (murder), in order to prevent a greater harm.
     
  3. JD_2B
    Offline

    JD_2B Little Vixen

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,092
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nunya, Wudjathink
    Ratings:
    +118
    Good grief... a person whose neighbor sits outside on the porch with a baseball bat, could also stupidly use this "necessity defense" for going over there and shooting them, just in case that person actually decided to use the bat.
    How ridiculous.

    Why aren't these psychos throwing Molotov Cocktails at Meth houses??? Or busting a cap in every red light runner that comes along?

    This story is sad, but I still had to laugh at how pathetic that defense was.
     
  4. Anguille
    Offline

    Anguille Bane of the Urbane

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    17,910
    Thanks Received:
    2,122
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,137
    He has no defence. Therefore his lawyers will try to make a martyr of him.
     
  5. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,227
    Thanks Received:
    2,076
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,277
    It does not matter either way. The defense is just attempting to do a job that is not possible. He will burn for the murder; there is no defense for him. I do find it interesting that the judge limited him from using said defense though. It would not have helped his case any so I would think the judge would just let him try and fail.
     

Share This Page