ap

Skip to content
<B>Scott Roeder</B> can tell the jury he believed killing Tiller was necessary to save the unborn.
Scott Roeder can tell the jury he believed killing Tiller was necessary to save the unborn.
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:
Getting your player ready...

WICHITA — Before the first juror is selected or witness called, a decision allowing a confessed killer to argue that he believes the slaying of one of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers was a justified act aimed at saving unborn children has upended what most expected to be an open-and-shut case.

Abortion opponents are pleasantly stunned and eager to watch Scott Roeder tell a jury his slaying of Wichita Dr. George Tiller was voluntary manslaughter. Tiller’s colleagues and abortion-rights advocates are outraged and fear the court’s actions give a more than tacit approval to further acts of violence.

“This judge has basically announced a death sentence for all of us who help women,” said Dr. Warren Hern of Boulder, a longtime friend of Tiller who also performs late-term abortions. “That is the effect of the ruling.”

Prosecutors charged Roeder with first-degree murder, and the 51-year-old from Kansas City, Mo., later admitted to reporters and in a court filing that he killed Tiller. The prosecution stands ready with more than 250 prospective witnesses to prove it.

But what had been expected to be a simple trial was altered Friday when Sedgwick County Judge Warren Wilbert decided he would allow Roeder to build a defense case calling for a lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter because he sincerely believed the May 31 slaying would save unborn children.

Kansas law defines voluntary manslaughter as “an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.” A conviction on that charge could bring a sentence closer to five years, instead of a life term for first-degree murder.

Prosecutors challenged the ruling Monday, arguing that such a defense should not be considered because there is no evidence Tiller posed an imminent threat at the time of the killing.

Hern said it is irrelevant that Wilbert won’t decide until after the defense presents its evidence whether to allow jurors to actually consider a conviction on the lesser charge.

“The damage is done: The judge has agreed to give him a platform,” Hern said. “It is an act of incomprehensible stupidity on the part of the judge, but he is carrying out the will of the people of Kansas who are trying to get out of the 19th century.”

RevContent Feed

More in News