Watch a killer defend himself - starting LIVE in 5 minutes

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

Link to live coverage of Scott Roeder trial

http://www.kwch.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?vt1=l&d1=0&ClipId1=mms%3A//a822.l2397043490.c23970.n.lm.akamaistream.net/D/822/23970/v0001/reflector%3A43490&LiveURI=mms%3A//a822.l2397043490.c23970.n.lm.akamaistream.net/D/822/23970/v0001/reflector%3A43490&h1=Live

Trial restarts at 2:30 EST. Scott Roeder is testifying in his own defense.

2

This guy seems lucid and not crazy at all. But I guess most psychopaths appear lucid.

3

Cross examination by the district attorney is just beginning…this should get good now.

4

:smack: Always a bad idea.

Seriously, when has this ever worked and not sent out “CRAZY!” waves across the county?

5

The district attorney is not the best orator and her question forming abilities are pretty poor…but this guy is hanging himself for sure.

6

The jury will give him voluntary manslaughter. Mark my words.

7

I was afraid that would happen to - but somewhere I got the legal language for the state of KS for that provision, and it would be pretty hard to get it done. That doesn’t mean that jury nullification isn’t a huge risk, but I will still be hopeful that he gets what’s coming to him. (I think I started a thread about this in GD)

8

And your words will be wrong. I have confidence this jury will convict him of murder.

9

Are you saying it’s okay to get a lesser charge if you murder a person who is commiting a legal act that you don’t like.

I kill a smoker because I don’t like secondhand smoke. It could be killing me. Should I be convicted of anything but cold blooded murder?

10

I don’t think Shirley is saying that at all. I think she’s saying that the jury will think that.

11

I was reading about this in the New York Times. It seems the standard in Kansas law is an “unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force,” mitigates murder down to manslaughter.

If this is in fact the case, and if it is the relevant portion of the law, then I (if on the jury) would have to vote for manslaughter.

Darn dumb law.

12

I agree with Paul - the problem is the way the law is written (if that’s the relevent part).

13

Kansas Statutes:

14

According to this article, the judge has ruled that the jury will only consider murder charges. Voluntary manslaughter is off the table.

To the judge’s credit, he’s said all along that he does not want this trial to turn into a referendum on abortion.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1713378.html

15

From the reader comments of Katriona:

Tommy, if you ever want to subscribe here, I’ll happily cover your tab. That is some quality faux-moron there.
Note, if that is not parody and is acutal moron, then God help anyone with whom he ever has to share a cab.

16

This is correct, except for my gender.

I don’t think you would. I agree that Roeder mistakenly thought that he was saving lives. However, the deadly force has to be reasonable under a separate section of Kansas law cited above, which requires the threat to be imminent. And that’s where Roeder’s defense fails. There were no lives in imminent danger at that church that morning, as the judge pointed out. If Roeder had busted in to Tiller’s clinic just as he was starting a procedure, maybe.

That’s good news. Now all we have to worry about is one die-hard pro-lifer hanging the jury.

17

I was just looking at a couple of Freeper threads about this trial. Teabagtommy is not far off from what they’re really saying. The Freepers are all foursquare behind Roeder.

18

Thought this thread may have been about Tony Blair.

Carry on.

19

Verdict is in: Guilty

20

Premeditated first-degree.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100129/ap_on_re_us/us_abortion_shooting_trial