Sedgwick County District Judge Tony Powell’s high-profile past as an anti-abortion lawmaker makes him the wrong person to sit in judgment of the George Tiller abortion case. He should recuse himself, we argue in today’s editorial.
The issue isn’t just that Powell helped write the legislation he must now rule on; it’s not unusual for former lawmakers to become judges. But this legislation specifically targeted Tiller and his Wichita clinic. And Powell made negative statements at the time directed at Tiller, who is now the defendant in his court.
Presumably these are among the reasons why Tiller’s attorneys formally asked Monday for a new presiding judge.
Powell is capable of putting aside his personal and political views and ruling on the merits of the case. But why, in such a high-profile, emotional case, would the court system invite public doubt about judicial objectivity?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- sursum on Let immigrants run
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- littlejohn on Health care reform would save state money
- ANTI on Let immigrants run
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- gster on Open thread 11/23
- LonnythePlumber on Health care reform would save state money
- aldenrw on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Too many exemptions
104 Comments
Read this in the paper today, Randy. Admire your courage. It takes courage to speak sense to the anti-choice crowd.
Is it true that Tiller’s attorney said initially that he trusted this judge to rule fairly? I thought, what crack is he smoking.
I think I’m pretty fair, but if I were the judge in this case, I would have to recuse myself. I just feel too strongly about the issue.
The anti-choice crowd will be up in arms about this, but this judge CANNOT rule on this case. He’s too close to it, has too much history with Tiller, and I would think it would be an automatic appeal for Tiller if he was found guilty of any of the charges.
Yeah let’s give Tiller a pro-abortion judge who believes full term abortion. /sarcasm>
No Kansas, but I would think it would be fair to have a judge who did not WRITE the law that Tiller is being charged!
I think the judge should recuse himself, if for no other reason than appearances.
I agree that Judge Powell should recuse himself. He undoubtedly would do a good and unbiased job in presiding over the jury trial. But if the case is good against Tiller, it will stand on it’s own merits.
And we don’t the pro-abortion crowd whining if their favorite late term abortionist is convicted.
Now we’ll see the judicial ethics of the religious right. Wasn’t Powell one of those that was critical of Judge Clark when he dismissed the Kline charges?
Is this Let’s Make A deal?
Do we get to pick and choose our judge on every case?
If you are up for murder, pick a judge who is against the death penalty?
If you were raped, you get a female judge who has been victimized?
Tom DeLay would seem to think that a Democrat Judge should recuse himself when a Repub. Politician defendent comes before him. Bet alot of the Righties were as one with DeLay.
Tony Powell is an activist judge. George Bush is right in believing that activist judges should be retired by the voters. Tony Powell is a perfect example of what our good President warned us about – a judge who seeks to radically reform our society based upon his value system and not the laws of our land…opps in this case Tony wrote the law according to his value system.
I encourage all the God fearing Republicans and a few of the Democrats to do the right thing and vote this activist judge out of office at the next opportunity.
I always wondered where the term Kangaroo Court came from – I still don’t know but we now have a relevant example in Wichita Kansas.
Judge, juror (crafting of legislation) and now what’s next Tony, executioner?
Judge Powell: Tear down this Wall — Recuse Yourself!!
If Powell wants to be the next martyr of the Phil Kline Genre; let him hear the case.
Powell will surprise all of you.
He is a very fair and level headed guy.
As a previous thread noted, the charges Morrision brought against Tiller are primarily “financial” charges, most of the evidence will be documents linking the relationship between Tiller and his “2nd Opinion” rubber stamp, I mean, Doctor.
Anyway, you praised Morrison for being able to charge Tiller, even though Tiller supporters supported Morrison.
I think, if you give Powell a chance, you will find that he is fair and honest, regardless of his personal views.
By the way, a “prochoice” judge might “hang” Tiller, and say he had “no choice” under the law. Politically, if a prochoicer gets the bench, instead of Powell, it might be worse for Tiller.
Powell will bend over backwards to be fair, because he knows he is being watched!
By the way, is there a single person in Wichita that has not said SOMETHING about abortion?
Is there a single lawyer in Wichita that does not have an opinion about abortion?
Is there a single Jugde in Wichita or Sedgwick County that has never stated an opinion about abortion or received an endorsement from one side or the other in this debate?
The last “Kangaroo Court” in this town, on this issue, was run by Federal Judge Patrick Kelly.
EVERY SINGLE RULING of Judge Kelly’s, relating to Operation Rescue, was overturned by a higher court.
Powell will NOT let that happen to him. He will follow the law, no matter what!
Econ,
Powell is the judge who was overturned this year on a payroll case involving illegal aliens. He ruled against them, saying they had no right to back pay for work done, because they were in this country illegally.
I don’t trust him to judge _anyone_ fairly, on anything.
Why should illegal immigrants get back pay?
If I entered Germany illegally and some employer kept the pay, I wouldn’t expect there would be much I could do about it.
Illegal is Illegal? What is so hard to understand about someone who is the country illegal to understand?
It’s illegal!
You know, against the laws of the U.S.
I agree that Judge Powell would be scrupulous in the application of the law, Econ. However, there is the appearance of a conflict, and this should be avoided if at all possible. In this case, the appearance goes much deeper than acceptance of contributions, given the relationship of the judge to the drafting of the legislation.
Again, I want to make it clear that I believe Judge Powell can make a fair, based upon the law, decision; a recusal, it seems to me, is needed to remove the appearance of a conflict.
Oh, give me a break, Paul. OF COURSE Powell should recuse himself.
He could Solomon and Jesus combined, and the ethical issue would remain. For cryin’ out loud, he WROTE the law!
Duh.
Judges ROUTINELY recuse themselves for far less.
Troll,
Civilized people call making someone work without pay “slavery.”
TomI am thinking that Powell might be upheld at the Supreme Court level.It is illegal for illegals to work in this country.Usually, when you pay someone for something that is illegal, you are also guilty of a crime.Will we now protect employers who pay illegals?Or will we force employers to pay illegals, even if they did not know they were illegal when hired?And then, will we prosecute the employer for higher illegals but let the illegals off the hook?
Again, Powell’s ruling in the case you mention is not out of line with many other rulings, in this state and elsewhere.
It appears to me Vaughn, this is more about Tiller “Judge” shopping than fairness or conflict. That is the weakness of recusal.
If you say that Judge Powell can be scrupulous in the law and be fair, then what is the problem?
Appearance? Is appearance appealable ?
Or if there is Judicial Review, won’t the reviewing Judge or Judges decide the merits on the case rather than the Judge?
Where does this appearance of conflict stop?
I can see if it was a financial situation where the Judge owned stock in a company. Or even if the Judge was related to anyone in the trial.
Just because a Judge, who is a lawyer made decisions, passed laws or made rulings on cases involving abortion is part of the business of doing things under our legal system.
Eventually, we will run out of Judges if every Judge is removed for the sake of appearance.
If Powell thinks he can be fair, Powell can be fair.
However, I will laugh very hard if Powell does recuse himself, and Tiller is, subsequently, convicted, by a different Judge.
Econ – while I have no beef with Powell I do think he should recuse. As noted, they should avoid even an appearence of conflict.
Consider: you and I have an issue that goes to Court. Should Eric Yost sit on the case? I think not. You and I both know eric; that would create a conflict situation for him.
I am not in any way implying that Eric is not ethical; in fact I think he would run like hell away from both of us just because he is, in fact, ethical and would want to avoid anything that might LOOK otherwise.
Address me by my printed nic Tom.
That would be Kansas, not Troll. Thank you.
Back to the not paying someone.
If an employer is required to hire people without knowing their citizenship (which they are,) then they are put into a Catch-22 situation.
So an employer finds out that the workers he hired are illegal and he could get into trouble keeping them employed.
He does not want to further the unwritten contract of employment of someone in illegal status, so he terminates it and cannot justify paying illegal works because under the law any Employer hiring illegal workers can be prosecuted.
So what we have here, is the goverment forcing an Employer to break the law by paying illegal aliens in which of itself is illegal.
Something only a Democrat could approve – pure madness.
Econ,
The KS Supreme Court has already ruled in favor of the unfairly treated employee.
http://www.kscourts.org/kscases/supct/2007/20070323/95537.htm
Troll,
If you don’t like being called a troll, don’t act like one (I’m not holding my breath).
KMA
Actually, this is what the “choicers” want:
A system that will not allow ANY enforcement of abortion laws!
Therefore, Kline HAD to go!
Therefore, only Pro-Choice Judges can rule in abortion cases!
In pretending to want “fairness” for Tiller, they really want a system that makes it impossible for the citizens of Kansas to have ANY restrictive legislation.
This is one reason why Kansas law is MORE liberal than New York law, on this issue!
(Of course, I admit, one of the reasons we have less restrictions than New York is that our radicals in the pro-life movement won’t allow Parental Consent or Late Term restrictions, since they want “no exceptions, no compromise” — all or nothing gets us nothing!
I dont want this case to hurt Tony.
However, I would invite all of you to study these events a little further.
Tony brought this up, himself, without being prompted by counsel from either side.
What would be the alternative?
Name a “neutral” judge, on this issue?
Whether you LIKE the law or not is a political question, outside the scope of this case.
Whether Tiller BROKE the law, or not, is hardly a political question.
TomI imagine that the illegal alien case could be appealed to the Federal courts.
However, thanks for the info.
Tom,
I am posting like everyone else on this blog.
I apologized to you and you still throw stuff in my face.
You are exactly like cosmos in digging up old grievance and re-using them like a hammer if you happen to disagree with what someone posts.
I don’t think you would like it if I called you “Fag” on every post.
I would never do it, because it is a disparaging, cruel remark.
I am just posting my opinion and every opportunity, you and cosmos use some past post to beat me over the head with and its getting very tiresome.
Are you saying to me I’m not entitled to an opinion without being called names Tom?
Is that your position?
That is called harassment and can be reported.
“neutral” judge – you are correct econ, that would be difficult. However, at least from what I have read Tony has made some specific comments about Tiller. As a result recusal would seem prudent.
It might be that this case should have a venue change.
Back to my analogy above – we could have a real tough time getting a judge since we have both been involved in politics. Again, I am not casting aseprsions; simply noting the difficulty. Especially in a small town.
Thank you, Tom, for posting the link to the Kansas Supreme Court decision. You beat me to it.
I would note that Judge Powell correctly determined that the provisions of the Kansas Wage Payment Act by its own specific language applies to an undocumented worker; he was reversed on his determination that the employee was entitled to only minimum wage under FLSA, not the higher per hour compensation to which the former employee testified at the administrative hearing, which testimony was not contradicted.
I would not be surprised to see a legislative reversal of this decision in the next session by amendment to the said Act.
VT – care to comment on the conflict issue counselor?
Econ, you correctly point out the actions taken by Judge Powell pre-hearing, which I believe he was required to do under the Code of Judicial Ethics. Again, this is as much an ethical matter as a legal one, and I freely admit my unfamiliarity with the Code as applicable to judges.
That is called harassment and can be reported.Posted by: Kansas | August 14, 2007 at 05:30 PM
Report me. Go cry to the editors.
Would you like a tissue?
Vaughn,
IMO, Powell made a political interpretation of the law. However, I’m not a lawyer (obviously!), and am probably reading my own bias into this.
But anyway. Powell’s statements specifically against Tiller, specifically on the statute he’s been charged with violating, are clear to me at least that he’s pre-judged this defendant, and pre-judged him on this specific statute. He should recuse himself.
Tom, I understand your position. I would, in defense of Judge Powell in the wage claim case, note that there was at least a bit of authority from another jurisdiction or two which gave a bit of support to his decision on the value of the wages found unpaid.
Ben, I think I’ve said all I may be competent to say on the appearance of conflict issue at this point. Again, due to the appearance of a conflict, I believe the right course of action to be recusal.
Vaughn,
I have a hypothetical question.
In a generic way, if you had to litigate on someone’s behalf, and that person was being judged by someone who had made prior public statements about your client, and the issue your client is in court over, what would you do?
Wow Tom, way to act like a grownup
I apologize to you several times and this is how you behave.
I guess we know who is the mature one here and it ain’t you.
I’d research the issue and, if the outcome of the research is as I think it is, move for recusal of the judge.
The problem arises here in Sedgwick County due, in part, to the way cases are assigned. Judge Waller has publicly stated that he was not aware of Judge Powell’s involvement while in the legislature with the statute in question. As the chief judge of the Criminal Department of the District Court, one of Judge Waller’s duties is assignment of cases to a judge available to hear it. By “cases”, I include pretrial motions, etc. in the term. Accepting Judge Waller’s explanation as given, as I have no reason to not do so, I suspect the motion had been filed, and was assigned to Judge Powell for hearing based upon Judge Powell’s availability to hear it. I suspect had Judge Waller had knowledge of what has become the issue here, there would have been assignment to another judge for hearing.
To clarify my 5:55 post a bit, as a general rule, when a motion (civil or criminal) is filed, or a case is set for bench trial and it’s the day for trial, the attorneys do not know which judge will hear it until the time it is “assigned out” by the Presiding Judge (not Chief Judge, my error above) for hearing or trial.
Why would the anti-abortion group want a different judge? They want Tiller convicted and executed – nothing less will be acceptable. And this group does not care if the judge just happens to be in ‘their pocket’ because the anti-abortion group does not care about a little thing like ethics. No one ever accused the anti-abortion wingnuts of being fair and above suspicion.
Vaughn,
Thanks for the explanation!
It comes down to perception.In my profession, accounting, a CPA can get into real trouble if they certify something as an independent auditor if there is a perception that they are not independent.
I hope there is some similar requirement in the legal profession. Even if there is not, the Judge should recuse himself from the trial due to the appearance of him not being independent. I have no reason to believe he is anything other than competent and capable to rule impartially, however, due to the perception he has on the issue, any ruling he could deliver would be viewed with question.
Kansas, if Tom wants to name call, consider the following. Tom advocates for elected Democrats, and elections between Dem’s and Rep’s on a regular basis.
Tom, was very specific of the Who what and where in the State House regarding the legislative process for the gambling legistation. I understand individuals that post comments, do so with political Party, and idealogical leanings. However, Tom appears more than most posters to promote a Democrat Party (line) agenda.
In another post exchange, because of his knowledge regarding all of the above, Tom was asked if he is a lobbyist or a Dem. Legislator. He was honored to be asked if he was a Dem. Legislator, he is not; and confessed that he used to be a LOBBYIST, is no longer, but he does employ a lobbyist. I think lobbyists are “whores”! Since Tom employs a lobbyist, and Tom posts on behalf of the Democrat Party Agenda; couldn’t he be named, “Big Tom Democrat Pimp”?
“Not impressed,”
You give me too much credit, I’m afraid. But if that’s what you want to call me, there’s certainly nothing I can do to stop you.
Well, I guess I could go cry to the Eagle editors, but I’m afraid I’ve given all my tissues to the troll.
Oh, and for those unwilling to type it all out, you could just use “BTDP,” right?
brian – good observation. The irony here is that Tiller is accused of much the same thing – the second DR was not independent. In other words there was allegedly a conflict of interest in Tiller’s relationship with the other DR.
Tom:
We’ve shared some mutual respect here, even though we probably have some fundamental disagreements.
But – I think Kansas has a point. I’ve condemned his past behavior too. But people get fresh starts. He’s apologized for his past, several times.
Here, he posted a legitimate position; one you disagreed with, of course, but a legitimate position nonetheless. You can of course ignore him, but you chose instead to personally attack.
It seems to me that here you are using the term “troll” itself as a troll; i.e. to disrupt and attack, rather than engage and discuss.
You’re better than that, Tom, and I say that with real sincerity. Several on this blog have engaged on a concerted and organized attempt to marginalize Kansas in an attempt to, it appears, shut him up. At times, given some things said in the past, the hostility is understandable (even if not entirely justifiable). But there’s been no such attack by Kansas here.
If you choose to ignore Kansas, of course, that’s your privilege. But you need not lower yourself to trolling.
Many of those so adamantly against “Kansas” have written, repeatedly, that they want a higher level of discourse, and are offended when other posters use what they consider trolling tactics. In fact, labeling a poster as a “troll” was/is often used as a tactic itelf, to dismiss and marginialize rather than engage in substance.
Well, here you go. Behavior has changed. Are you (and you know who you are) going to do as you say, or not?
Or should I just duck for the inevitable flaming to follow?
;-)
Tom, Republank refers to me as WS Troll, so feel free to use any name you want for him – he wants respect but fails to extend it to anyone else.
You can sure tell Karl Rove is gone from Bush’s side. He would not have fallen for Hillary’s ploy.
The Republicans are falling apart and their low IQ President will soon be seen for the dufus he is.
It’s just too bad that good American soldiers have to die for tin soldiers like Kansas and Outlander.
“You are exactly like cosmos in digging up old grievance …
you and cosmos use some past post to beat me over the head with…”
Posted by: Kansas, aka troll | August 14, 2007 at 05:30 PM
Kansas seems to believe his 2:08 PM YESTERDAY post, with multiple LIES is “old”, and should be completely forgotten.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/08/evangelicals-ca.html#comment-79365626
Posters are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.
“Appearance? Is appearance appealable ?”
I don’t know if Lawrence Kohlberg is still alive, but I have wondered what he would say about the moral development of some folks around here. If we don’t have photographic evidence of wrong-doing, it’s okay, right?
“Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. Kohlberg’s stage 1 is similar to Piaget’s first stage of moral thought. The child assumes that powerful authorities hand down a fixed set of rules which he or she must unquestioningly obey. To the Heinz dilemma, the child typically says that Heinz was wrong to steal the drug because ‘It’s against the law,’ or ‘It’s bad to steal,’ as if this were all there were to it. When asked to elaborate, the child usually responds in terms of the consequences involved, explaining that stealing is bad ‘because you’ll get punished’ (Kohlberg, 1958b).
http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm
Steven Davis-
I think the question about is appearance appealable was in answer to this post:
“He’s too close to it, has too much history with Tiller, and I would think it would be an automatic appeal for Tiller if he was found guilty of any of the charges.”
I could be wrong. For some posters above, the judge is automatically biased, and cannot rule objectively. That calls into account his integrity. Fine, but bsed on pure speculation, not a good moral stance, I wouldn; think.
In any case, I think he should indeed recuse himself, if for no other reason than appearances, and the possibility of the Tiller defenders crying foul. That is wht the canons of judicial conduct are for: to protect the integrity of the court
“You can sure tell Karl Rove is gone from Bush’s side. He would not have fallen for Hillary’s ploy…..
….It’s just too bad that good American soldiers have to die for tin soldiers like Kansas and Outlander.”
Posted by: happy | August 14, 2007 at 08:05 PM -
Wrong thread Dopey.
Too bad I’m too much a coward to fight my party’s war.
The anti-abortion group does not care about the ethics of the court judges. They want Tiller’s blood and nothing less will satisfy them.
And this is the group that expects the rest of us to actually believe they care about the sanctity of life?
Hang the bastard…
“And this is the group that expects the rest of us to actually believe they care about the sanctity of life?”
As if YOU do?
From the Kansas Supreme Court Website:
CANON 1A Judge Shall Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary will be preserved. The provisions of this Code are to be construed and applied to further that objective.
CANON 2A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge’s Activities
A. A judge shall respect and comply with the law* and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
B. A judge shall not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment. A judge shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others; nor shall a judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge shall not testify voluntarily as a character witness.
CANON 3A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently(1) A judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge except those in which disqualification is required.
(2) A judge shall be faithful to the law* and maintain professional competence in it. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism.
E. Disqualification. (1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where:(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge* of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
You get the idea – http://www.kscourts.org/ctruls/judruls.htm
GMC,
You know the person I refer to as the “troll” posted my full name here, the general location of my office and a threat to “rifle” it, right?
Since then, he’s given me one apology that didn’t come with some sort of backhanded insult attached, and that was only when pressed to do so. There haven’t been “several” apologies, at least not that I’ve seen.
To be honest, I have pretty thick skin; his constant insults, before and since his “apology,” don’t really mean much.
You know I can have a reasonable exchange of views with people with whom I have serious disagreement. It’s not his views that I have disagreement with – it’s him as a person I find completely disagreeable.
He needs to either A) ignore me or B) be a little more respectful of the views of others. Respect is not a free gift. It’s earned. And right now, he’s running a serious deficit.
I hope you didn’t find this too “flaming.” The only thing flaming around here should be me. :>
“And this is the group that expects the rest of us to actually believe they care about the sanctity of life?”
As if YOU do?
Posted by: Mary Caruso
I’m not the one out in front of Tiller’s clinic telling my kid to lay down in the street to block traffic. How about that for sanctity of life?
I’m not out there either…and as far as the pro-choice people risking their kids lives to stop traffic, that’s a myth perpetrated by those who think the way you do.How is killing a millon pre born babies each year showing respect for the santity of life?
It wasn’t the pro-choice people, that was the anti-choice people…and I think there was a discussion about this with Paul (Econ) where this did happen.
I always put the sanctity of the already living above the potentially living.
Mary I’ve asked you in the past to explain how you can be FOR the women’s right to choose, yet work FOR the anti-choice establishment. I DO get that you want to make women able to carry the babies …I do too. So you don’t have to explain that. I DO get that you want to reduce the need for abortion. I do too.
What I don’t get is how you can hate Dr. Tiller SO much, when he is the only person that provides the service that you yourself know needs to be available. Your policy of putting him out of business is just the same as banning abortion. Who will the women in need go to if you put him out of business?
If he was really a horrible doctor praying on women, since I’m a women’s advocate, I’d be standing right along side you. But he’s not. He’s a good man. He does a service that helps women that very very few are willing to do.
I do understand, Tom. And I wrote what I did out of respect.
Just remember (and I forget at times, too); we are still responsible for what we do, no matter what others may deserve. We are responsible for our own acts.
As a defense attorney friend puts it, ” ‘he had it coming’ is not a defense.”
You know that, of course. Rarely have I known you to fly off the handle and write something you’ll have to back away from later.
I’ve been known to do that . . . but we’ll let that go for now.
;-)
Have a good evening.
Doug Ittner of the “Maggot Punks” (this is a group of pro-aborts that have a web-site by the name Maggot Punks here in Wichita) was all over this in Randy’s article on Tuesday. Where are you Doug?
One thing that got lost in the discussion yesterday, and I’m as wrong here as anyone, is that the current issue in front of the Court is a motion by the defense to dismiss the charges based upon the unconstitutionality of the statute in question. In other words, this isn’t the trial on the charges.
While this doesn’t affect the ultimate question of whether Judge Powell should recuse himself, I thought in the interests of clarity it should be stated so we can hopefully move forward with the discussion (should it be determined that further discussion is needed) on the question raised.
Good point Vaughn Tolle. And one that really brings to the fore whether or not judge Powell shold recuse himself. In my opinion, the answer is still yes
Does anyone have the KSA number Tiller is challenging?
Tom, I THINK the provisions of KSA 65-7303 (a) dealing with what is meant by the term “unrelated” as set out therein.
P Mom. I won’t condon abortion, I don’t see it as a “right”, but a tragic, sometimes necessary procedure that prevents the life of another human being. I don’t believe it should (or could) be outlawed because that would force women to obtain illegal ones and risk their life in the process…abortion is a sad reality of our society, not something to celebrate, because of what it illustrates about who we really are and what we really value. But on the other hand, I also have a problem with people being forced to become parents when they have no business doing so.I have no respect for Tiller, because to me, anyone who would do that for a living and be able to sleep at night is not someone I could admire. Abortion is WRONG, but it’s here to stay, and I have to accept that. I will always do what I can to help any woman find an alternative to ending her pregnancy, because it’s the RIGHT thing to do.I owned the property next to Tiller’s clinic (where “Choices” now sits) and my mom lived right across the street from his clinic for years. I happen to know based on my own personal experience that he’s not a “nice man”. He’s a sick man who enjoys his notoriety and making lots of money killing pre born babies..there is nothing heroic, noble, loving, or “nice” about that.Go spend a day in the abortion clinic, P Mom. Work in the back and see how it’s done, then come tell me that it’s something we should be proud of and grateful for.
I am pro life and believe abortion in even the earliest terms is murder. However, this is not a question of my views. So if I was to put myself in a pro-murder persons place I guess I would be thinking, bummer we got Powell. I would be upset. This reminds me of how I actually feel about dictator Kelly oops I mean Judge Kelly. How many cases should he have recused himself of?The thing is if I was presiding over this case Tiller’s fate would be sealed, And If I had the power he would get the death penalty. I do believe in murder when it comes to certain people that deserve it, however none of them are innocent babies. But that is why I am not a judge because I would be partial to my beliefs.
Judge Powell will have to be more partial than he wants to be. He knows that anything less will be scrutinized. He may (because of his strong moral stand) hurt this case for pro-life by staying. So for that reason, I do not have an opinion on whether or not he should recuse himself. Even though I would like to see Tiller the killer hung in town square.
Tiller gets to have the Attorney General, the District Attorney, the Governor, Judge Clark, and Judge Waller in his pocket. (Judges Clark and Waller actually had Tiller’s blood-stained “contributions” in their pockets when they got involved in Tiller’s criminal proceedings.)Pro-lifers are therefore entitled to have at least one judge in their pocket.No judge who shows Baby Killer Tiller any mercy should be kept on the judicial bench.
“Pro-lifers are therefore entitled to have at least one judge in their pocket”
Are you really pro-life, or do you just want to prolife people to look bad?
Vaughn,
Could you please double-check that statute number? 65-7303 has to do with licensing radiology techs. Perhaps you transposed a number…
Littlejohn,
If Parkay is the individual I think it is, he makes the anti-choice activists look _very_ bad.
Tom, sorry about that; KSA 65-6703 is the correct cite, I don’t know how I mangled it before.
“No person shall perform or induce an abortion when the fetus is viable unless such person is a physician and has a documented referral from another physician not legally or financially affiliated with the physician performing or inducing the abortion and both physicians determine that: (1) The abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant woman; or (2) a continuation of the pregnancy will cause a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman”
Okay GMC & Vaughn,
How does one define “legally or financially affiliated” ?
Tom, that’s the issue before the court. It’s my understanding that the motion is based upon the “void for vagueness” argument based upon the cited language.
“I owned the property next to Tiller’s clinic (where ‘Choices’ now sits) and my mom lived right across the street from his clinic for years. I happen to know based on my own personal experience that he’s not a ‘nice man’. ”
Okay. Keep going, Mary. This is interesting.
Parkay mostly just makes them look funny!
And pathetic!
Vaughn,
Are there other professions (accounting was mentioned earlier) where there’s a clearly defined standard of “legally or financially affiliated” ?
Tom – I wonder about two accounting firms doing the attest and the consulting work. It is my understanding that under Sarbanes-Oxley they are to be separate; what if the two companies are ‘related’?
Ben,
I know so little about the subject matter that I had to Google Sarbanes-Oxley just to know what the hell you were talking about…heh.
Anyway, it looks like it’s a law that says the same CPA firm can’t simultaneously handle a companies books, and certify an audit.
“SOX” was passed in 2002, well _after_ the 1998 law Judge, then Representative, Powell wrote. So he certainly couldn’t have had the standards outlined in SOX in mind, simply because they didn’t exist yet. Wiki says the law was passed because of Enron’s collapse.
Tom, I’m not sure about such a standard clearly stated; I’d need to poke around, and right now don’t have the time to do an adequate job on this.
Ben, without hazarding any guesses about subject legislation, I suspect but do not know that there’s likely some definitional provisions which cover your question.
To me, the language as stated in the statute can mean a number of things, trying to read it fairly. Example: “legally related” could mean partners/members/stockholders in a common professional practice; or, employer/employee relationship; or, a continuing agency or contractual relationship. There’s likely more that would come to mind if I was to apply myself. The existence of the options set forth above does raise a question, in a penal statute, of just what relationships are prohibited thereby, IMHO.
Mary,
It sounds like you and your family have a personal beef with Dr. Tiller. Like Rage, I’d like to know if there’s more to this story that may color your views here?
The story is WAY too long…just suffice it to say that I had no intention of selling my property to Tiller…he was expanding his clinic at the time..in order to give women “a first class experience”..and yes, those WERE his words. I had the idea to put a place next door to his that offered abortion alternatives and so I sold the property to Life Inc. with that intention. After they bought the property they ended up in a court battle for years because he and his cronies battled the zoning in order to not let it happen.Life, Inc. became the subject of a huge propaganda war they put on..but in the end Tiller’s camp lost and so now the clinic is there, helping women with free prenatal care, adoption services, etc.I consider it one of my best efforts, but I can’t take credit for the clinic itself..I only got the ball rolling. There were many dedicated people who fought hard to put it all together so that women with unwanted pregnancies could have another “choice” offered to them.Tiller isn’t interested in “choice”, he’s only interested in abortion, otherwise he wouldn’t have been so threated by the Choices Clinic.
Wow.
Well, Mary, given your often-stated antipathy toward religious fanaticism, is this what you really wanted?:
http://maggotpunks.com/headlines/2003-02-05.htm
This is an interesting blog about Powell. The whole topic is a moot point since it assumes there is ONE judge in Wichita who gives a hoot about justice in the entire Sedgwick County judicial system. The only benefit this adjudication has is that career corrupt judicial officials like Pilshaw & her ilk are not involved. You cannot draw fresh water from a fouled well,and you will never have justice among the criminal element SG county employs & allows to ride the bench. The only way it could be worse is if attorneys without ethics like Christine Ladner of the DA’s office were involved!
I don’t care for the religious aspect of the clinic..but they do offer a lot help to women in trouble and offer alternatives. They’re not the religious fanatics they’re made out to be by the pro choice side…there is WAY to much propaganda on that side of the issue, I’ve lived it and observed it for years..the Maggot Punks are the worst, if you’re looking for any ojective info, you won’t find it on their web site. I’ve been in the clinic more than once, and everytime what I find is non judgemental people who truly want to help.Why would anyone be opposed to an organization who offers other choices than abortion? How can you be “pro choice” if you’re really only pro abortion?
Mary, having seen the fetus fanatics up close and personal, and knowing full well how the clinic operate not to offer alternatives, but to push and guilt women into something different…I can’t agree with you. YOU made it so that these clinics look like abortion clinics, that’s why they put them right next to them. We know this trick we’ve seen it all over the nation. Hoping that women will walk into them instead, and them pummel them with guilt once inside.
I hope that the one thing Choices really does, is not offer false hope for a girl who really is torn. In other words, don’t make promises to her that you can’t keep. Solutions aren’t easy. I don’t blame him for fighting you tooth and nail over the placement of this clinic. I’d have fought you too.
Note, Joe mentions nothing about the women in trouble who might need to be there in the first place. Murder at the earliest cell, and death penalty for Tiller.
“I had the idea to put a place next door to his that offered abortion alternatives and so I sold the property to Life Inc.”
Well Mary, I am glad you did what you thought was the right thing to do.
I had the mistaken impression that your views on this issue were independent of your activism. Labeling the maggotpunks as being the worst on the propaganda front seems kind of hollow given your unstated interests in this debate. Not saying that I am necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is a reason British Medical journals ask that one state one’s conflicts of interest.
Do appreciate knowing where you’re coming from, though. Better late than never.
I could do it Mary, because I believe those women there are in desperate situation…and just like working an auto accident, I deal with the nasty to help the person in trouble.
Go there PMom and see what they have to offer, don’t take the words of the Maggot Punks as gospel, because they will do anything to make Choices look bad. Like I said before, they don’t twist anyone’s arm, they just offer facts and help…the last thing a woman needs is her blinders on before she makes a such a life altering decision and she has the right to know the correct information and what alternatives are available. No one is trying to lay a guilt trip on anyone. If you’re truly pro choice, then you wouldn’t be so threatened by anyone offering alternatives. I have known plenty of women who regretted the choice to have an abortion, and if I can help them not to make that mistake, I will.Steven, I have always believed in putting my money where my mouth is..I was pro life a long time before the clinic was there and I’m very proud of the work they do…I had an opportunity to make a differnce and help women and I took it.
I AM truly pro-choice, which is why I struggled greatly with the whole Alexa’s law. Women should be able to choose they want to carry a baby and not be punished for it….but when I found out how much the fetus fanatics were for this kind of law, and how other states had used the law to turn on the pregnant women for prosecuting their behavior more than someone else, I could no longer support it.So I basically flip flopped, because I was informed.
I have NO trouble with you wanting to help someone facing a difficult decision.
But at the same time, you cannot claim to be pro-choice when you align yourself with anti-choice groups who will do any and everything in their power to stop abortion at all costs…and claim to hate Tiller for merely providing the services that you say yourself that are needed. There is nothing, no complaints from his patients, that he was ever anything but honest and professional and caring to them. You still haven’t explained where these women would go- the ones you know are in need. Perhaps a real monster who preys on women or back alleys? And then you can’t understand why Tiller is so against these groups who wish to do nothing but harm HIM and the people who support him?
He could do so much more if he wasn’t in this business. I appreciate his activism for the sake of women who he knows need him.
And still, you said it yourself right here “I have known plenty of women who regretted the choice to have an abortion, and if I can help them not to make that mistake, I will.”
You automatically assume that all of these women would be fine today if they hadn’t had the abortion. Regret and guilt come from ANY choice related to this. Have you read the stories of women who say they wouldn’t change a thing? An entire MS article was printed “I had an abortion”, on women who are sure they made the right decision, regardless of how hard it was to do. I have little doubt that there are women out there who are torn up about having an abortion. But guilting them further and agreeing that they made the wrong choice, is not right. You should tell them they made the decision they felt was best at the time for their circumstances, and nobody else was walking in their shoes at the time, and they may have felt differently and their lives turned out differently if they had chosen another path.
I have a very good friend who had an abortion, and she regrets it. I told her those same words. She battled really bad depression her entire lifetime, and I said to her ‘how do you know that the stress of having the baby at that time wouldn’t have put you over the top and made things worse’. She said she never thought of it before like that. But she’s still anti-choice. I told her about the guilt I had and the depression I had at not being able to provide, the fear of having my child in someplace unsafe so I could work. I made my decision. I wish I would have never gotten pregnant IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Per the home page of kansas.com, Judge Powell has recused himself citing the appearance of lack of objectivity (my paraphrase).
Maybe someone can explain the Nazi roots of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, and how PP still goes by what she wrote (racial eugenics, killing unwanted people, getting rid of excess population to save resources, working hand in hand with Nazi doctors, etc.
Time to pull out the waterboard for Catherine!
Kersplash!!!!!
Now then Catherine, were you ever involved with Bill Clinton? Speak up!
Kersplash!!!!
Go away Catherine we don’t need your kind on this board!
My choice is to support alternatives for women who might make another decision other than to abort their baby. That’s where I will always put my focus, PMom. I hate abortion like I hate war, genocide, and anything else that has the sole purpose of denying life to others. If you don’t understand that, I’m sorry, but many of us don’t think in black and white.I accept that fact that abortion will always be legal..therefore I want women to be educated about it and have other options available. I don’t believe there are monsters on either side, but my contempt for Tiller is the same as my contempt for Hitler, George Bush, Bin Laden, or Sadamn Hussein. All of them have destroyed innocent life and are unrepentant of that fact, something I find repulsive. Abortion isn’t some happy wonderful thing that we should celebrate, it’s a sad and tragic event.Would you be out in the streets celebrating that young people are dying for our coutry? Why not? Isn’t patriotism something to be proud of? Why aren’t you happy when young people are dying to preserve freedom for the rest of us?Then why would you celebrate the destruction of unwanted human life? Like war, maybe it’s necessary sometimes, but why would ANYONE feel good about it?As far as I’m concerned, I’ll always speak out against the deliberate taking of innocent life and focus on alternatives and options, whether it’s abortion or war. Like is precious to some of us, and that means everyone’s life, not just our own.Sorry you regret being a mom, you’re probably the only woman I’ve ever seen admit that. My few friends who have children with various disablities love and cherish them. Life isn’t perfect, and if you can’t handle that fact that it isn’t, well then you’re right, you probably shouldn’t have become a mom.
Mary
Would you prefer that Tiller not be there to perform abortions?
Would you prefer to have women go to ‘a friend’ or resort to a homemade concoction?
A soldier who fights in war does what many others do not want to do or will do. Do you condemn the soldier while you condemn war?
Tiller does what many others will not do. He does it as a medical professional.
To compare him to Hitler is quite a stretch.