"For the Court to grant the State's motion to prohibit 'any evidence' in support of the necessity defense would be premature, and contrary to Kansas law," the defense wrote. "In addition, it would be rank speculation on the part of the state (and the Court if it were to grant said Motion) as to the purpose of any and all evidence that the Defendant may seek to introduce."
While the prosecution's motion refers to a decade old case settled by the Kansas Supreme Court that rules out necessity defense for trespassing, the defense says trespassing won't necessarily save lives but murder would. At the time, the Court stated allowing personal beliefs to justify criminal activity would "not only lead to chaos but would be tantamount to sanctioning anarchy." Allowing anti-choice militants to shoot abortion providers would certainly lead to both chaos and anarchy, especially since abortion is 100% legal and a constitutional right in the United States.
"It is inconclusive whether the lives of the unborn were spared as a result of the act of criminal trespass," they wrote. "In the instant case, the result of the alleged murder resulted in the termination of abortions being performed in the City of Wichita by the victim, Dr. George Tiller."
Defense attorneys noted the Supreme Court also said that whether "the necessity defense should be adopted or recognized in Kansas may best be left for another day."
Perhaps performed by Dr. Tiller, but it certainly didn't prevent any abortions, in spite of Roeder's insistence otherwise. The number of abortions in the US have dropped consistently since the 80s and have leveled off since 2000 due to better access to contraceptives, which is true worldwide, and outlawing or restricting access to abortion does not prevent it. The only thing accomplished by assassinating providers is to force women to have unsafe and illegal abortions. Want a necessity defense? How's this: unsafe abortions killed 70,000 women last year. Each year, 2 million babies and 536,000 women die in childbirth, most of which can be easily prevented. The US ranks higher than other industrialized countries in premature births and maternal and infant mortality rates. This rate is linked largely to poverty and being uninsured throughout a woman's life. Why not save those babies and women? Why kill abortion providers?
[Roeder] told The Associated Press on Nov. 9 that he shot Tiller to protect unborn children and he planned to present a necessity defense at his trial. He also said one of his two public defenders, Mark Rudy, had given him the "green light" to talk to the media about it.
But the following day, lead defense attorney Steve Osburn told reporters the necessity defense did not exist in Kansas law and the defense team did not plan to present that strategy.
It's not allowable under Kansas law, but they're still going to argue it. Hopefully, this will all be settled next month when these motions are brought up in hearings.
Posts
Can I assume that the defense wants Dr. Tillers
ReplyDeleteappointment schedule to prove that Scott stopped a late term abortion. Of course, this would violate the HIPAA regulations. But what if one of these appointments from June 1st to the 30th showed that a woman died because she could not carry a child to term without risk to her life. Or a family had to go through the torture of watching a child die within hours or days of its birth horribly deformed without vital organs.
I suppose if a judge would allow this illegal defense, it might be a good idea for Khalid Sheikh Muhammad to ask for a change of venue to that court. He certainly could use the necessity defense in his upcoming trial for the Twin Towers plan crashes. Abd Major Hassan could as well, for the Ft. Hood shootings.
ReplyDelete