The Lawrence Journal-World reports that the man in police custody in connection with the assassination of Dr. George Tiller had a “brush with the law” in the 1990’s.
Scott P. Roeder, the man who was detained by Johnson County officials as a “person of interest” in the Sunday morning killing of George Tiller, has a brush with the law in his past.
He was convicted in 1996 of criminal use of an explosive after police discovered a blasting cap in his car when his car was pulled over because his car was not registered. Roeder served time in Kansas prisons before an appeal was granted on the basis of the search of his car being unlawful, according to court of appeals records.
The article goes on to quote court documents saying that Roeder’s convictions for driving offenses were sustained, and mentions that they were somehow related to the “Freeman Group.” It’s not completely clear if the reporter means the “Freemen,” the nutjobs who holed up in Montana during the last Democratic administration.
At any rate, the killing of Tiller was a political assassination as vile as any assassination. The American Taliban had hounded Tiller for decades, and Tiller had even suffered right-wing attacks previously, having been shot in both arms and enduring a bombing of his clinic. The former attorney general of Kansas, Phil Kline, had relentlessly harassed Tiller and the women of Kansas with legal maneuvers until even Kansans said “enough” and booted Kline from his state post.
While details are still emerging, the pro-subjugation-of-women movement is trying to scramble for political cover.
“For the movement, it could not come at a worse time,” the Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition, which lobbies against abortion, said of the killing.
“If they make it seem that people who embrace the pro-life movement are kind of this extremist violent group, that could diminish some of the passion and energy on confronting Sotomayor.”
Nice sensitivity there. Don’t let the family grieve or anything.
I don’t know why anyone would think violence is part of the pro-subjugation strategy, other than say, all the violence. Weird how so much of it happened during the last Democratic administration. I’m sure that’s just an unhappy coincidence and has nothing to do with intemperate and inflammatory comments made by political leaders and media personalities.
There’s no discussing things with people who think they have exclusive insight into the supernatural and wish to impose their beliefs on all of society. They either follow the law or they suffer the consequences, and any bastard who thinks he has the right to be judge, jury and executioner needs to feel the full force of a real jury, judge and well, life in prison.
The death penalty is killing after all.
UPDATE 8:45 PM PDT–McClatchy just moved a story with some interviews of people who knew Roeder.
Those who know Roeder said he believed that killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide.
“I know that he believed in justifiable homicide,” said Regina Dinwiddie, a Kansas City anti-abortion activist who made headlines in 1995 when she was ordered by a federal judge to stop using a bullhorn within 500 feet of any abortion clinic. “I know he very strongly believed that abortion was murder and that you ought to defend the little ones, both born and unborn.”
The McClatchy article also discusses Roeder’s association with right wing extremists.
Morris Wilson, commander of the Kansas Unorganized Citizens Militia in the mid-1990s, said he knew Roeder fairly well.
“I’d say he’s a good ol’ boy except he was just so fanatic about abortion,” said Wilson, who now lives in western Nebraska. “He was always talking about how awful abortion was. But there’s a lot of people who think abortion is awful.”
Yep, it sure sounds like an assassination, although those of us who believe in the rule of law and democracy must hasten to add that Roeder is presumed innocent until he has had a trial by a jury of his peers or pleads guilty, something that Tiller was not afforded at church this morning.
And you didn’t speak out against the Tubaman murder because …?
And Troll didn’t speak out against the Miller murder because Troll is a punk, bitch, terrorist-loving, anti-American coward. And as a Publican – what else would you expect from the bitch Troll?
The Tubaman murder was a despicable act by punk kids. It is a local matter, tragic for the family and a loss for the community.
The Tiller murder was a political act, also despicable, encouraged by the right wing noise machine. It is an act with national consequences.
And Troll is an ass.
@3 “And Troll is an ass.”
That ain’t the half of it. He’s a supercilious ass.
@3 “And Troll is an ass.”
That ain’t the half of it. He’s a supercilious ass.
I’m glad to see that this arrest is actually getting some legs in the media.
The Freemen in MT didn’t think they needed drivers licenses, so yeah, that’s probably them.
4&5 Roger, the “Submit Comment” button is a matter of timing and nothing more. EDITOR
I know its pretty simplistic, but I have to comment on the quote: “…he believed that abortion was murder and you have to defend the little ones…”
Ummm, by cold blooded murder? Right wing terrorism seems to be the most consistent and pervasive domestic threat to our free democratic society.
And fuck you, too, troll. What a fucking idiotic comment. You should be better than that.
There’s a good post up at Orcinus.
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2.....hadis.html
As I write this, police have a suspect in custody for Dr. Tiller’s murder. There’s no word yet on who the perpetrator is, or what motivated him; but it’s a pretty sure bet that as the story comes out, he’ll be found to be an anti-abortion True Believer. The fact that this killing happened on the sixth anniversary of Eric Rudolph’s capture bears this out. The date was chosen with a message in mind. It seems very likely that the venue was, too.
Please, do not think that I advocate the full use of Bush/Cheney era national security “law.” However:
Given the current laws that are on the books, and the way that congress allowed the previous administration to use those laws, couldn’t Obama declare the suspect and anyone who had any association with him a “terrorist cell” and therefore “enemy combatants?” I think that Obama could pretty much round up the entire apparatus of Operation Rescue and any associated organizations and have them shipped off to … somewhere.
The unlucky pro-life activists could then be interrogated at leisure. After a few months of interrogation using enhanced techniques, they could then appear in front of the media, admitting everything. Yes, they were a terrorist cell who had been developing multiple plots against government and civilian targets, they would say.
And then they might start implicating executives in Fox News. Or large donors to pro-life causes who coincidentally donate to the RNC.
This is how the laws created during the Bush/Cheney era COULD be used. Which is why they need to be fully eradicated from the books. Please understand that I don’t think the Obama administration would do this. This is just an example of how these laws could theoretically be abused.
Please correct me if I’m wrong on this. I would love to know that this sort of thing would not be possible.
Why are Republicans so hateful they have to kill people?
Tho I fear this will just be another case of the ringleaders getting off, and leaving the underlings to pay any penalty.
Like w/ Abu Ghraib, torture, & the financial disaster we’re in that was started w/ Reagan
Anyone wanna bet he had also loaded up on ammo and weaponry after Obama’s election? But of course… time (and an intrepid reporter) will tell.
These faux-Christians live for but only one mantra: Who would Jesus Kill? WWJK?
For those pro-lifers, nothing spells L-I-F-E like K-I-L-L.
@7 First of all, you’re not the editor, so stop impersonating. Secondly, I didn’t hit the “submit” button twice, I hit it 8 times because that’s how many prompts it took to get my no-good, worthless, piece of shit AOL program to work. OK, so Goldy’s server saw it twice and posted it twice, to which I say, what happened to Goldy’s “duplicate comment” function? Is it not working tonight? Why wasn’t the duplicate post blocked at his end? It appears his software is junk, too. As I didn’t write either of these malfunctioning software programs, how is the double post my fault? Is it my fault simply because I hit “submit” 8 times because nothing happened the first 7 times I hit it? Wouldn’t you? Now, if I told you to go fuck yourself, you probably would respond that’s a technical impossibility. (I’m not sure about that, as I’ve never tried it; maybe you could enlighten me?) Well, this is a technical impossibility, too — Goldy’s software is supposed to block duplicate posts. The fact it didn’t suggests that things we didn’t believe possible are, in fact, feasible. So there’s hope for you after all: Go fuck yourself.
@7 First of all, you’re not an editor, so stop impersonating one. Secondly, I didn’t hit the “submit” button twice, I hit it 8 times because that’s how many prompts it took to get my no-good, worthless, piece of shit AOL program to work. OK, so Goldy’s server saw it twice and posted it twice, to which I say, what happened to Goldy’s “duplicate comment” function? Is it not working tonight? Why wasn’t the duplicate post blocked at his end? It appears his software is junk, too. As I didn’t write either of these malfunctioning software programs, how is the double post my fault? Is it my fault simply because I hit “submit” 8 times because nothing happened the first 7 times I hit it? Wouldn’t you? Now, if I told you to go fuck yourself, you probably would respond that’s a technical impossibility. (I’m not sure about that, as I’ve never tried it; maybe you could enlighten me?) Well, this is a technical impossibility, too — Goldy’s software is supposed to block duplicate posts. The fact it didn’t suggests things we didn’t believe possible are indeed practicable. So there’s hope for you after all: Go fuck yourself.
Just a comment here.
“Roeder is presumed innocent until he has had a trial by a jury of his peers or pleads guilty” is not a true statement.
You’re only presumed innocent in a court of law. When the one doing the presuming is sitting as a judge or as part of a jury.
Otherwise we are all free to presume, infer, believe, and state the guilt of anyone we like.
And we do it all the time.
It might make sense to insert that word allegedly because one doesn’t really know, or to protect against a defamation, but there is no requirement that you or I or anyone presume this guy they caught is innocent.
Unless and until you are put on the jury.
IOW don’t be so sloppy in describing the constitution.
@HA… good coverage and reporting, as always