Facebook Pixel

The Frightening Rulings of the Tiller Murder Trial- Editorial

Rate This

On January 13, 2010, Judge Warren Wilbert ruled that Scott Roeder can pursue a voluntary manslaughter defense. Roeder,explained that it was necessary to save the lives of fetuses that would be aborted. But the life of George Tiller, a doctor who performed late term abortions, didn’t matter to him.

The judge’s ruling has created shock waves.

Katherine Spillar,the Executive Vice President of the Feminist Majority Foundation, said, “Let there be no mistake, the rulings of Kansas Judge Warren Wilbert are being seen by extremists as a green light for those who would murder abortion providers.”

Don Spitz, manager of the Army of God website, actually advocates the murder of abortion providers as “justifiable homicide.”

A person who openly advocates the murder of any specific group of people is a danger to society.

Continuing….Spitz has been in touch with the confessed murderer, Scott Roeder. The Associated Press said Spitz believes that Wilbert’s ruling may influence some people to murder abortion providers because they may receive the lower sentence of voluntary sentence. Spitz said the Wilbert’s ruling “may increase the number of people who may be willing to take that risk.”So if Spitz said that, then the judge’s ruling takes on an even greater cause for alarm.

Roeder was charged with one count of premeditated murder and two counts of aggravated assault for allegedly threatening church ushers right after the murder. Dr.Tiller was killed while attending a church service. Given Wilbert's ruling, it is now possible for Roeder’s defense lawyers to argue for the lesser sentence of voluntary manslaughter, which Kansas defines as “an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.” That is not Roeder’s case.

If Roeder is found guilty of first degree murder, he could receive life in prison. Lesser charges would result in a shorter sentence.

Taking into consideration that Dr. Tiller was murdered by Roeder in cold blood, I don’t see what would stop a jury of convicting him of first degree murder, in spite of Judge Wilbert.

Add a Comment11 Comments

EmpowHER Guest

The Judge was following Kansas LAW not his personal belief. For a FAIR trial he has to let him argue manslaughter, it does not mean he personally believes this. Why is that so hard for people to grasp?

February 8, 2010 - 9:15am

You wrote "A person who openly advocates the murder of any specific group of people is a danger to society.' You are so right.
Of the 48 million aborted babies about half or 24 million were women. Where are their rights?
Wholesale abortions are the largest genocide ever committed.
The definition of Genocide: The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
Unborn babies are a Cultural Group. They are the group of INNOCENCE.

January 25, 2010 - 6:25am
(reply to mattvanB)

It is interesting that you have decided that "unborn babies are a cultural group." I wonder what culture you are referring to...the American culture, or Mexican culture, or any of a number of them. As a man, you cannot get pregnant, and so in my book you do not have the right to pass harsh judgments on what women choose to do with their pregnancies.

February 8, 2010 - 11:22am

Hi Susan,
Please read the comments I made to Sunnie. I only wish that there were more sane, level headed people like you and Sunnie out there.

January 22, 2010 - 1:22pm
HERWriter Guide (reply to Anna Portela)

Thanks Anna :-)

You see? Sane and compassionate pro-lifers and pro-choicers can have a lot of common ground. We all want to give women the education and options (I think free birth control should be given out to anyone who wants it) so that we reduce numbers. Abortion isn't just a medical procedure for a lot of women : it causes grief, guilt and regret for many. If they had more education, more protection against the men in their lives that impregnate them without their consent via marital rape (that happened to a friend of mine) and free birth control, the abortion numbers would be so much lower.

And if we "insist" that women have these babies, then we have to offer long term aftercare. It's too easy to say "have the baby, you'll be glad you did" when that woman and child then live a life of poverty and despair.

I'm going to stop now before this firm capitalist sounds like a firm socialist!!

Have a great weekend!

January 22, 2010 - 1:51pm

Hi Sunnie,
The comment I made about the contradictions was intended for Susan. Got the names confused. But yes, Roeder should be charged with murder, plain and simple.

January 22, 2010 - 1:18pm

Hi Sunnie,
I agree with you. The extremist anti-abortionists exhibit many contradictions in their beliefs and actions.
You can't have a rational discussion with them.

January 22, 2010 - 1:15pm
HERWriter Guide

I wish these people would look at the complete and utter contradictions in their beliefs and actions. If all life is sacred, then murdering abortion doctors and nurses is just that - murder. And the bombing of abortion clinics is insane - aren't there unborn babies in there, too??

These radicals give compassionate, never-violent pro-lifers a very bad name. Many pro-lifers do not agree with abortion, certainly not for themselves. And while they don't like abortion in general, they pass no judgment on others and are are not screaming "sinner!!" and "murderer!!" outside clinics.

People like that (meaning me, and I'm not afraid to say it!) want to work (like most of us, I think) in making the number of abortions far fewer and giving women the education and options so that they don't get into this predicament over and over again.

Then we have nuts who claim to be 'speaking on our behalf' who believe that murdering abortion doctors is entirely justifiable. It never is. And they certainly are not 'speaking on my behalf'.

January 22, 2010 - 12:43pm

So, it's all right to kill people as long as they're not very small (like a fetus)? This is NOT voluntary manslaughter, this is MURDER, plain and simple. Unless there wasn't enough evidence to convict on murder, I can't imagine why anyone would allow this man to plead manslaughter.

January 22, 2010 - 12:33pm

Hi Rosa,
I am curious as to where this judge is coming from, his background etc. That could help explain his ruling. I do appreciate your comments.

January 22, 2010 - 9:00am
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy
Add a Comment

We value and respect our HERWriters' experiences, but everyone is different. Many of our writers are speaking from personal experience, and what's worked for them may not work for you. Their articles are not a substitute for medical advice, although we hope you can gain knowledge from their insight.



Get Email Updates

Parenting Guide

HERWriter Guide

Have a question? We're here to help. Ask the Community.


Health Newsletter

Receive the latest and greatest in women's health and wellness from EmpowHER - for free!