Personally, I am somewhat disappointed that Scott Roeder was not charged with terrorism.

[howard112211]

Because I think that legally a strong case could be made that what he did was an act of terrorism.

Normally terrorism is defined commiting an act of violence (or some general illegal act)
against primarily civilian or
exclusively civilian targets, with the intent of furthering an ideology by instilling fear
or terror (hence the word) in the public.

There can be other indicators of terrorism, such as belonging to some larger organized effort,
but they are not necessary conditions.

What Roeder did definately installed fear in providers and receivers of abortion services, and
may in fact make it harder for some to obtain a late-term abortion. Whether that was his intent
can only be speculated, but the effect is inarguable. That he was ideology driven is also beyond
any reasonable doubt.

I know that an additional charge of terrorism would probably not have lead to any additional penalties
to the ones that he got. However, I think it would have been a good thing to send a signal, both
to Roeder's supporters and to providers of abortion services, that this issue is taken very seriously.

I am content with the outcome of the murder trial. Justice was served. But I think it is somewhat
of a lapse of the legal system that there were no terrorism charges on top of that.

[Maru Kitteh]

1. Agreed. K&R.

[Sebastian Doyle]

2. Right wing lunatics are no longer called "terrorists" in this country.

In fact the latest manufactured Osama Bin Emanuel Goldstein tape is an attempt to remake him as an environmental activist, a movement which the corporatists have long tried to equate with "terrorism".

I'm sure it's only a matter of time before the CIA puts out a long form "Osama" video and calls it "An Inconvenient Jihad". Wouldn't put it past them to digitally add Al Gore into the movie either.

[sam sarrha]

3. right after that my grand niece's fetus died at 7 months, she had to carry the dead fetus for nearly

a month.. until a life threatening crisis was produced.. every Dr she went to suddenly went on vacation.. she was 18 and now cant have children because of what happened

[philly_bob]

12. An awful story. Sympathy for your niece and anger at RW bullies.

And yes, on OP, I agree that the murder of Tiller should be considered terrorism.

[sam sarrha]

19. the "Abortion Dr" he killed only helped women like my niece in life threatening crisis, he didnt

murder babies...

[me b zola]

4. I agree, plus...

I am also disappointed that they put no effort into investigating the possibility co-conspirators working with/funding Roeder's actions. He had no job or money, who paid for his hotel rooms? How did he know Dr Tiller's schedule?

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Operation Rescue had tried a couple times to put their people in Tiller's clinic

as employees.

I wouldn't put anything past these domestic terrorists.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Lots of unanswered questions

Where is the gun? He claims he buried it at a well traveled exit off of the interstate. The #1 ranked truck stop in the country is there. I was just there 2 weeks ago. It is impossible to imagine anyone burying a gun there and not being seen. So why did he lie about where he put the gun? And where is the gun?

He was caught vandalizing a clinic here in KC the day before he killed Dr Tiller. Why didn't the cops at least talk to him? Where was the FBI? Why have they ignored laws protecting clinics?

The usual suspects are still here in KS, still harrassing women at clinics. Why are they still being allowed to do this and why are there never any cops around to keep an eye on these terrorists?

Too many unanswered questions, that's for sure.

[TorchTheWitch]

7. sorry, but I don't see this as terrorism

He killed a specific person for the specific reason that the specific person was doing something he didn't like. His intent was not to instill fear in the public at large in order to affect a political purpose, it was to stop the specific person from doing something specific that he didn't like. If it instills fear in other doctors who do abortions is a side effect and not his intent. Essentially, any specific murder could be called terrorism by your definition as long as there is a side effect of fear in others who do the same job or have the same attributes the murderer disliked. He murdered a specific person for the specific reason that he didn't like what that specific person was doing... that's not terrorism.

[JoeyT]

10. Fear in others isn't a side effect.

It was the intent.
"Stop doing something we don't like or die." was the message. It got through loud and clear.
If preventing abortions isn't a political purpose, exactly what do you consider to be one?
By your definition absolutely nothing is terrorism.
9/11 wasn't terrorism. It was a religious purpose, not a political one. <--See how that works?

[TorchTheWitch]

13. not true at all

Suppose he killed a specific stripper because he was convinced it was the only way to stop the specific stripper from continuing to dance naked for a for money because he believes that stripping is wrong. This action instills fear in some other strippers that some nut will kill them for the same reason. Is that terrorism? No.

Suppose he killed a specific cop because he was convinced it was the only way to stop the specific cop from continuing to do their job because he believes that cops interfere with his freedom. This action instills fear in some other cops that some nut will kill them for the same reason. Is that terrorism? No.

Suppose he killed a specific dog breeder because he was convinced it was the only way to stop the specific dog breeder from continuing to breed dogs because he believes that there are already too many dogs without homes. This action instills fear in some other dog breeders that some nut will kill them for the same reason. Is that terrorism? No.

Suppose he killed a specific gay man because he was convinced it was the only way to stop the specific gay man from continuing to be gay because he believes that being gay is wrong. This action instills fear in some other gay men that some nut will kill them for the same reason. Is that terrorism? No.

Roeder specifically targeted Tiller ONLY because Tiller specifically was doing something he didn't approve of and believed it was the only way to make Tiller specifically to stop doing it. His intent was to stop Tiller and only Tiller from continuing to provide abortions.

[JoeyT]

14. That would be a valid point

if there were only three strippers, police, dog breeders, or gay men in the entire country.
When there are only three of something and you gun one down at his church in front of his family, you're doing it to send a very specific message. Had he simply wanted Tiller to stop performing abortions, he would've at least made an attempt at killing him in an unobtrusive place instead of doing it in full view of the public. This was a message. The message being "Do something we don't like and no amount of security can save you."

Edited to add: Or do you think that if he'd gotten away with it he wouldn't have moved on to kill anyone else that performed abortions given half a chance? He'd have just settled down and lived out the remainder of his days now that the threat of that one single man was removed?

[liberal_at_heart]

22. I have to agree

The intent of many of these fundamentalist pro-lifers who are willing to murder doctors is to to shut down ALL clinics that provide abortions not just one. I also agree with your assertion that he would probably do it again especially given that he has said that he holds fast to his belief even after being arrested. In a parole hearing you are suppose to prove that you have changed and won't reoffend. If he believes what he did was right will he ever be willing to tell a parole board that what he did was wrong? If he sticks to this belief that he did nothing wrong then he should never be let out of prison.

[sam sarrha]

20. he murdered to threaten and intimate other Dr's from doing their jobs.. F'n Terrorist.. ignorant Rat

Bastard incited to mayhem by Fascist Theocrats who threatened a long list of doctors on a "Wanted Dead" Posters.

you are very misinformed at best..

http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-09-07/news/17392670_1_punitive-damage-award-appeals-court

[gratuitous]

8. No, in order for a white person to be a terrorist . . .

They have to set an SUV on fire, or picket a fur store. See, those are "terrorist" acts for white people. Blow up a federal building and kill 168 people? Bad, but not terroristic. Walk up to someone and blow him away at point-blank range in front of his congregation? Again, bad, but nobody in the popular media will call you a terrorist. But if you torch a road grader used for cutting swaths through old growth forest? Oh, then you're a terrorist! An eco-terrorist, and that's practically the worst kind.

[Shrek]

9. The murder didn't really fit the Kansas terrorism statute

The effect of his actions wasn't relevant -- the prosecution would have to prove an intent to coerce the civilian population (or the government). As you pointed out the intent can only be speculated, which isn't a basis for conviction.

http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatuteFile.do?number=/21-3449.html

[sam sarrha]

21. link>> wrong, he is a terrorest

http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-09-07/news/17392670_1_punitive-damage-award-appeals-court

[fascisthunter]

11. he should have been

but this is America.

[hatesthegop]

15. I agree

That and RICO that's only way we'll make these fuckers thinks twice before carrying out their twisted warped sense of justice!!!

[WeDidIt]

16. The DOJ still considers this an open case n/t

[defendandprotect]

17. Should have been "domestic terrorism" and full investigation of all his contacts . . !!

[flvegan]

18. He didn't cost any business that mattered any money. Erego, no charges.

Steal some rats from big pharma, and it's your ass, terrorist.