Posted on 01/22/2007 12:55:53 PM PST by SmithL
Buffalo -- An anti-abortion extremist defending himself in a federal trial sat on the witness stand Monday to explain why he killed a doctor.
"I don't like killing. I don't like the thought of it," James Kopp said as he asked and answered a series of questions from his seat next to the judge. "The plan was to keep everyone alive at the end of the day."
Kopp, charged with violating the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act by killing Dr. Barnett Slepian in 1998, is serving a 25-year-to-life for a state conviction on second-degree murder in the doctor's death.
He has acknowledged firing the shot that killed Slepian inside his Amherst home but said his goal was to incapacitate - not kill - the doctor to prevent him from performing abortions.
Kopp, who estimated he had participated in more than 100 anti-abortion demonstrations outside clinics, said he had become convinced the best way to prevent abortion would be to gravely injure an abortion provider.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
All he has to do is claim he was performing a delayed post-partum procedure in offing the Doc, and he's home free.
Another terrorist loser. And he's a coward too - won't even admit the obvious fact that he was trying to kill Slepian.
Engaging in terrorism, pure and simple.
This guy is a killer but Slepian is more like a serial killer.
By your reasoning, Slepian was a terrorist also ... he was slaughtering alive unborn children.
"... An anti-abortion extremist ..."
New tagline anyone?
We are in some kind of Alice in Wonderland world if a sniper taking out somebody is more of an infringement upon the 'free speech' of an abortionist than it is a violation of the victims right to remain ALIVE.
I've no sympathy or empathy for this killer any more than I do for Slepian who has killed hundreds or thousands. Neither deserves it. But the PC nonsense of charging this admitted murderer with a violation of a nonsensical law about 'free speech' is like prosecuting Charles Manson for 'breaking and entering' instead of or in addition to multiple homicides. Its politics being practiced in a criminal courthouse and its vile.
I'm not pro abortion, but I'm not buying that.
Nor should anyone. - Thats how this country got right here to begin with.
but I know where you are coming from..
I wonder why he has not adobted the greater good argument? That he in essence felt compelled to act in order to save lives.
While it would not change the outcome of the trial one bit (something he simply has to know), it would seem more consistent with his stated purposes of shooting the fellow. It would also better serve his attempt to ethically justify his actions to a larger audiance today.
He's already serving a jail term for the crime of killing the guy. That was a state crime.
This is an additional trial in federal court, for violation of federal statutes.
He should use good liberal defenses. He could claim he has Aspurger's syndrome.
"That's terrorism"
No it's not. Terrorism is a trademark of Islam... You have to come up with your own word.
Good Kopp, bad Kopp.
It would also better serve his attempt to ethically justify his actions to a larger audiance today.
___________
There's ethical justification for cold blooded murder? Who knew?
Terrorism: the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
LOL - reply of the day!
Slepian was not a terrorist ... mass murderer, committer of genocide ... but his crimes were "private".
"He was using public violence as a means to achieve a political goal"
How is stopping the slaughter of babies a political goal?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.