Jury was right about murder of abortion doctor By Angelica Watkins

Jury was right about murder of abortion doctor
By Angelica Watkins

Published: Wednesday, February 24, 2010


Protesting abortion is legal, but murdering doctors is not.

On May 31, 2009, Scott Roeder took the law into his own hands and made a decision that would create a major landmark in the history of the national abortion controversy.

Roeder, age 51, planned, enacted, and even attempted his crime multiple times before he actually succeeded in murdering George R. Tiller, one of the handful doctors left in the United States that legally performed third-trimester abortions.

That Sunday morning, Roeder entered Reformation Lutheran Church, where Dr. Tiller was serving as an usher, and shot him once in the forehead, killing him instantly in front of his wife, children and the other members of the church. Before fleeing, Roeder also aimed the gun at other ushers who had tried to subdue him.

This was not an isolated incident, however, nor was it the first attempt on Dr. Tiller’s life. He had been shot multiple times before by other anti-abortion fanatics. He wasn’t the first abortion doctor to be killed either, as his murder was preceded by three of his contemporaries. Yet in spite of the constant death threats and multiple murder attempts by many misguided souls, Dr. Tiller continued on in his services.

During the three week long trial, Roeder’s defense spent their time trying to convince the jury that Roeder’s crime was justified, because under Kansas law, “an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force,” constitutes a lesser conviction. This conviction would have allowed Roeder to be released after serving a five-year prison sentence. However, after the judge ruled this option out for not meeting the proper requirements, he gave the jury two choices: either convict Roeder of first-degree murder or acquit him completely.

After a quick 37 minutes of deliberation, the jury convicted Roeder of first-degree murder; He now faces life in prison. Now some anti-abortion activists are questioning whether or not his trial and sentencing were fair. Many claim that his actions were justified because he killed to save the lives of children. Others are appalled by Roeder’s action and fear it will taint the image of their cause. But to analyze this case critically, we must look past whatever Roeder’s motive was, and get straight to the facts. The bottom line is that Roeder openly admitted to committing pre-mediated murder, which constitutes as first-degree manslaughter. In my opinion, that alone equals a closed case.

If Roeder had been acquitted, and I don’t see why this was ever an option, this case would have very possibly been a green light for all the conspirators to set loose on any and every doctor, nurse and secretary assisting in performing abortions.

In the end, the issue is not about whether or not Roeder believed that committing the murder was his moral obligation, but simply that he committed it. There have been many before him, and there will be many to come, who attempt to justify their wrong doing in the name of a greater good or higher power. One example is Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, and I’m sure the majority would agree that a simple slap on the wrist would not be feasible punishment. So what makes this different? Murder is murder.

Furthermore, what Roeder failed to acknowledge, or probably even to realize, was the reason Dr. Tiller was so diligent and determined in his work. Obviously he wasn’t easily scared off and felt that his job was one that needed to be done. The reason being is that the women he was treating weren’t simply selfish women who wanted to rid themselves of a burden, but women who truly wanted their children, yet realized that their child would be born with serious defects or worse, they were carrying an already dead child. There was and there is still no woman who can legally get a late-term abortion without a valid medical reason such as anencephaly, meaning to be born without a brain.

That being said, Roeder’s conviction was the correct one in the eyes of the law. Dr. Tiller was well within his legal boundaries in his practice, therefore the murder cannot be justified. I cannot make a moral judgment, because I am not God, and I do not know that God really didn’t call Roeder to do what he did, as he says. I do know, however, that God tells his children to be merciful, forgive and to love all.

Roeder stated in his defense that abortion is equal to murder and that murder is a sin, yet he himself is now a murderer. His whole defense is laced with hypocrisy. He also said that if he hadn’t killed Tiller, God would have. Well, why didn’t he let God do it then? I’m sure that if God wanted Dr. Tiller dead, then He could have found His own ways to accomplish this task. After all, He is God, right?

Getting back to the facts, under Kansas law, murder in the first degree is accompanied by a death sentence if two or more people are killed in the same act. Therefore, if Scott Roeder had even accidentally pulled the trigger on either one of the other two ushers he aimed at when fleeing, he would be facing death by lethal injection. Thankfully for him, this was not the case. The truth is, however, that he did commit a premeditated murder, which undeniably justifies a life sentence without possibility of parole for at least 20 years.

Hopefully this will be a lesson to others planning to follow in Roeder’s footsteps: just like babies are humans, abortion doctors are humans too. Let the universe carry out its own justice. We are not here to judge one another, but simply to live our own lives as best we can.