Oregon "Mercy" Killing May Not Have Been "Merciful"

I have seen cases like this before: Husband kills sick wife, claims she wanted to die. Facts later disclose he was getting some nookie on the side or wished to pursue other agendas. Classic example: George Delury who "assisted" the suicide of his wife Myrna Lebov, who was not terminally ill with MS. As I wrote in Forced Exit, when Delury claimed it was a merciful act, the right to die crowd loudly clamored to his side. Then, it turned out that Delury pushed his wife to kill herself. From my book:

Delury became an instant "victim-celebrity." He made numerous television appearances, a speech in front of the American Psychiatric Association, and signed a book deal to write his story. Far and wide, he was acclaimed as a dedicated husband willing to risk jail to help his wife achieve her deeply desired end to suffering. He was allowed to quickly plead guilty to a minor crime and served only 4 months in jail...

Delury [later] admitted that he encouraged his wife to kill herself, or as he put it, "to decide to quit." He researched her antidepressant medication to see if it could kill her, and when she took less than the prescribed amount, which in and of itself could cause depression, he used the surplus to mix the poisonous brew that ended her life. But he went further than that. He helped destroy her will to live by making her feel worthless and a burden on him.

Delury recently killed himself.

Now, the "mercy killing" in Oregon has taken a similar potential turn. From the story:

Prosecutors say a Gresham man who claims he killed his terminally ill wife to end her misery was not the loving, devoted husband he pretended to be. Court documents filed Monday after John Lyle Roberts was indicted on a charge of murder paint a dramatically different portrait of the man who claimed to be a compassionate mercy killer.

For starters, Virginia Roberts wasn't dying of an illness when she was shot in the head as she slept Feb. 2. And she wasn't the only woman in John Roberts' life. Although Roberts, 51, told police and family that his 51-year-old wife was suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a doctor who examined her in January told authorities she did not have the terminal disease. Dr. John Ellison determined she was in overall good health but she may have had carpal tunnel syndrome. That could have explained weakness in her hands that is also a symptom of ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig's disease.

Previously, I worried here that this case would be the kind that would render the Oregon assisted suicide guidelines practically inoperative. But if these facts are true, obviously the mercy defense won't fly. But here is the point: It shouldn't matter whether Virginia had ALS: Killing her was unequivocally wrong and deserving of strong punishment. But I wonder why it has become so fashionable to help kill unwanted spouses and claim it was an act of "mercy."

Apparent Mercy Killing a Test of Oregon Assisted Suicide Limits

John Roberts has been arrested for murdering his wife Virginia in Oregon. Why is this important? His brother claims that John killed Virginia as an act of compassion because she had Lou Gehrig's disease and didn't want to wait to die until she would have qualified for legal assisted suicide. From the story:

Friends and family of John Roberts, the Gresham man arrested in the death of his wife, Virginia, say her death Saturday was not a cold-blooded attack but an act of compassion for a woman living with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's Disease. John Roberts' brother and daughter and a close family friend told The Oregonian that Virginia's ALS had worsened in the weeks leading to her death on Saturday. They say John Roberts hinted to them that Virginia had asked him to help take her life when she no longer wished to carry on...

"There is a story that makes this not just a murder," said Greg Roberts, a former Seattle police detective and John Roberts' brother. "It is my firm belief that this was a pact between the two of them, that she asked him to do this. "And part of the reason why they chose this method rather than going down the assisted suicide route was that she was so proud that she didn't want to let herself get into the condition she would need to be in before they'd be allowed" to participate in Oregon's Death with Dignity program, which requires a person to be within six months of death. (My emphasis.)

This is the kind of case that led to the complete collapse of euthanasia guideline enforcement in the Netherlands. And I predict: If this is the defense, if Mr. Roberts admits killing his wife for purposes of mercy at her request--he may be convicted of something like manslaughter, but will not be meaningfully punished. After all, the only thing he did was provide "aid in dying" a little earlier than would have otherwise been provided under the law. And so what if it wasn't "self administered" or overseen by a doctor: What is it about "choice" that we don't understand?

If Roberts killed his wife and despite a "mercy killing" defense is seriously punished, I will post it as the state taking the assisted suicide guidelines seriously. But I am betting--again assuming the assertions in the story are true--that Mr. Roberts will do little if any jail time for shooting his wife. This is the tide unleashed when we agree in law that killing is an acceptable answer to human suffering.