The title of his editorial, Judge being commendably cautious in Roeder trial, says exactly what we're thinking.
Hendricks said it best:
And guess what? Despite the continuing hysterical fears from abortion-rights groups, Wilbert is doing exactly what you’d expect from a judge in such a sensitive case.
He’s being careful.
“Every defendant has the right to have his theory of defense presented,” says Carl Cornwell, an Olathe defense attorney who has handled his share of murder cases.
For instance, some mistakenly think Wilbert has already decided to instruct jurors to consider a lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter when it’s time for deliberations. He hasn’t.
Nor is he promising that he’ll allow Roeder’s attorneys to present evidence in support of their client’s contention that he thought he had to kill Tiller to protect others.
All Wilbert has done is left open those options so Roeder can’t later assert in an appeal that he was denied a fair trial.
None of us want to see Scott Roeder walk free. But we especially don't want it to happen the way it did the last time he was arrested, because his constitutional rights were violated - something that can be prevented.
Give Judge Wilbert a break. He's following the law and that is what we want in a Judge. If you don't like the law as it is (and there is reason to dislike it for sure) then the appropriate response is to work in the legislature to change the law. Judge Wilbert can't write the law, all he can do is follow it.