Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jury selection delayed in Roeder trial

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-11-10 01:16 PM
Original message
Jury selection delayed in Roeder trial
Jury selection in the trial of the man charged with killing Wichita abortion doctor George Tiller has been delayed until Wednesday.

A statement issued by the court this morning said the delay was “due to additional legal issues that have surfaced over the weekend.”

Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, is charged with first-degree murder in the May 31 shooting death of Tiller inside his church. Roeder also faces two counts of aggravated assault for allegedly threatening two ushers.

Jury selection was scheduled to begin today, with 61 jurors reporting. The process was expected to take from two days to a week.

In a surprise move on Friday, Sedgwick County District Judge Warren Wilbert said he would allow the defense to present testimony that Roeder acted “upon an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.” That means jurors could have the option of finding Roeder guilty of voluntary manslaughter, which carries a much lighter sentence than first-degree murder.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1676602.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-11-10 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. A new defense for murderers
“upon an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.”

I can see this being used as precedent the next time someone like Roeder commits the same crime!

After reading the article, I think we can safely assume that either someone "got" to the judge, or he's already in the anti-choice corner?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-11-10 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Your thinking is understandable. My guess, however, is that the judge
found enough case law to back the "justifiable" claim and that he is entertaining only to soothe some twitchy nerves.

Just because he allows it doesn't mean he will hold with it. I certainly hope not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC