Judge in murder trial must not abet mockery

The trial of the man charged with killing Dr. George Tiller, one of the nation’s few late-term abortion providers, is under way Wichita, Kansas. However, an issue that could raise the abortion battle to an even higher level of violence looms large.

Lawyers for confessed killer Scott Roeder in- tend to try for a conviction on the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter — by arguing that their client believed the doctor’s killing would save un- born children. He has pleaded not guilty to the murder charge.

In Kansas, voluntary manslaughter is defined as “an unreasonable but honest belief that cir- cumstances existed that justified force.”

Judge Warren Wilbert, who has said he will not permit the trial to be turned into clash over abor- tion, will rule on the defense’s plan when it be- gins presenting evidence.

The judge said he will decide how much jurors will be allowed to hear. But he also said that he will limit the evidence to Roeder’s beliefs at the time of the killing.

It is a stretch to suggest that the voluntary manslaughter provision in the statute was meant to cover anything other than an individual’s be- lief that he, or members of his family, were in harm’s way and hence the use of deadly force was the only option.

To argue that Roeder’s opposition to abortion was justification for his committing murder in cold blood is to make a mockery of the system of justice.

Floodgates to violence

If he is permitted to dodge the first-degree mur- der charge — he faces a life sentence if convicted, as opposed to a five-year jail term if found guilty of voluntary manslaughter — it would open the floodgates for violence not only against doctors who perform abortion, but women’s centers.

The facts in the murder of Dr. Tiller, who was shot in the fellowship hall of his church, are supported by Roeder’s public confession to shooting him

In building its case, the prosecution is intro- ducing DNA evidence linking the doctor to the ac- cused shooter; forensic analyses of bullet casings; and video of Roeder at local hotels.

District Attorney Nola Foulston’s opening statement methodically outlined the events of the fatal shooting that the government hopes will convince jurors to return a premeditated first- degree verdict.

But if Judge Wilbert permits the defense to argue voluntary manslaughter, it could be a game changer.

The history of the debate over abortion in the United States is filled with incidents of violence against doctors and women’s centers. Through it all, leaders of the anti-abortion movement have been less than strident in their condemnation of the murders, bombings and other violent attacks, even though they contend that their goal is the preservation of life.

Such hypocrisy has hurt the credibility of the movement with Americans who choose to look at the abortion issue objectively.

Several years ago, in commenting on unrepen- tant terrorist killer Eric Rudolph, who pleaded guilty to the bombing of a Birmingham abor- tion clinic, Atlanta’s Olympic Park in 1996, a gay nightclub and a women’s center, we said, “We find it ironic and hypocritical that individuals who rail against abortion, which they view as murder, aren’t as vocal when it comes to taking of all life. This double standard has emboldened the likes of Rudolph.”

Scott Roeder is the latest dramatic case in point.