[Alberta's Child]

On what grounds can anyone say that Hill "rendered judgement" in this case?

He could very well have approached this whole situation without rendering judgement any more than a soldier does so when he shoots an Iraqi in Tikrit.

[dmz]

I would say the obvious premeditation in this case alone is enough to safely say that judgement was, in fact, rendered.

Attempting to compare a US soldier involved in a firefight in Tikrit to the actions of cowardly Paul Hill really demeans the US soldier.

Perhaps you would use the same argument to defend Tim McVeigh's actions. Collateral damage is a fact of war, y'know.

[Dead Corpse]

How would Hill know what the doctor was doing was wrong, unless he had thought about it, compared it to his own beliefs, and then acted on it? This process is rendering a judgement.

A soldier in time of war, is in direct harms way. Their decision to shoot the enemy is a matter of SELF preservation. The only way Hills actions could have been justified on those lines is if his own life was in danger. It wasn't. Period. End of story.