Citations:

Hill v. State, 656 So.2d 1271 (Fla.,1995) (Motion for pro se appeal).

Hill v. State, 656 So.2d 1271 (Fla.,1995) (Direct Appeal).

Final Meal:
Steak, baked potato, broccoli, salad, orange sherbert and sweetened ice tea.

Final Words:
"The last thing I want to say: If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it. May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected."

Internet Sources:

Florida Department of Corrections

ProDeathPenalty.Com

September 3, 2003 Florida John B. Britton James H. Barrett Paul Hill executed Florida Governor Jeb Bush signed a death warrant for an anti-abortion activist who fatally shot a doctor and volunteer escort outside a Pensacola women's clinic in 1994. Corrections officials set Paul Hill's execution by lethal injection for September 3rd at Florida State Prison in Starke in northeastern Florida. The former minister said two weeks after being sentenced in December 1994 that he did not want his case appealed and would welcome his execution. He said he believed it would prevent abortions by inciting more violence against abortion providers. The 49-year-old Hill used a shotgun to kill Doctor John B. Britton and retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel James H. Barrett on July 29th, 1994 outside what then was known as The Ladies Center. They were killed after pulling into the parking lot in Barrett's pickup truck. Barrett's wife, June, was wounded. The deaths added to Pensacola's reputation as a focal point of anti-abortion violence, which included a similar shooting outside another abortion clinic the previous year. Hill's convictions were upheld by the Florida and US supreme courts in 1997.

Miami Herald

"Hill Defiant to the End, Urges on Activists," by Phil Long and Lesley Clark. (September 4, 2003)

STARKE — Paul Hill, the defiant former minister who called himself pro-life yet gunned down a Pensacola abortion doctor, was put to death peacefully by injection Wednesday night.

To the end, the man who became the first killer of an abortion doctor to be executed in the United States showed no remorse and, in his final words, spurred antiabortion activists to follow his lead. ''If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it,'' he said, strapped to the gurney at Florida State Prison, his face without expression. ``May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected.''

Hill, 49, went to his death arguing that the 1994 shotgun slaying of Dr. John Britton was justified because Britton was ''killing children.'' The execution reignited fears that the militant wing of the extreme antiabortion movement will use his death as a catalyst for renewed violence. Two weeks ago, death threat letters containing rifle bullets were sent to top state officials involved with the execution, but a resolute Gov. Jeb Bush, who signed Hill's death warrant, said he wouldn't be ''bullied'' and refused to halt the execution.

Still, fears that Hill's death would inspire an attempt to disrupt the execution led to the tightest security since serial killer Ted Bundy was electrocuted in 1989 in the same death chamber. Prison officials wouldn't release the names of the two dozen people who witnessed the execution, citing the ongoing criminal investigation into the death threats. But there were few incidents, despite the collision of two of the nation's most controversial issues -- abortion and the death penalty.

Across the road from the prison, about 60 antiabortion activists held a quiet prayer vigil in a muddy field under threatening clouds and drizzle, outnumbered by the nearly 100 police officers. The protesters, some carrying Bibles and rosary beads, held up signs decrying Bush as a ''baby killer's helper'' and depicting graphic pictures of aborted fetuses.

`HEAVENS DARKENED'

A massive thunderclap rattled the sky just as Hill was scheduled to die at 6 p.m., and a howl went up from the crowd, hailing the weather as a sign from above. ''When they crucified Jesus, the heavens darkened,'' said Neal Horsley, a Carrolton, Ga., activist whose newsletter, The Abortion Abolitionist, treats Hill as a hero. ``Speak to this nation, O Lord, speak your wrath.'' Inside the death chamber, thunder cracked and the lights flickered moments before Hill made his last statement.

The day before his execution, Hill told reporters that he was sure he would be rewarded in heaven for his actions. He said he was following God's instructions when he shot Britton in the driveway of the Ladies Center, a Pensacola abortion clinic, on July 29, 1994. He also killed Britton's escort, James Barrett, 69, and wounded Barrett's wife, June. Across the nation, clinic owners braced for retaliation by antiabortion extremists who may see Hill as a martyr.

At the vigil outside the prison, Joshua Graff, 29, who served three years in prison for a 1993 Texas clinic abortion bombing, declared Hill's death ``probably the single most monumental event in the history of the movement.'' Antiabortion websites had provided maps to the prison, and protesters came from across the country, including one couple who made a two-day trek from Iowa at the wheel of a van plastered with antiabortion slogans. ''Never before have they killed one of us,'' Graff said. ``Paul Hill is dying a martyr. He's dying a righteous death for upholding the truth and preserving innocent lives.''

Abortion providers in South Florida increased vigilance Wednesday, with several noting that they have been on high alert almost since Bush signed Hill's death warrant in July. ''The reality is that people have been murdered before, and these zealots rabble-rouse and incite, and are not held accountable to the point that they need to be,'' said Mona Reis, director of the Presidential Women's Center in West Palm Beach.

Moderate antiabortion activists say Hill's violence has set back the movement, and a group of Catholic priests who attended an anti-death-penalty vigil across from the prison decried his actions. ''All life is sacred and all killing is wrong,'' said pastor Phil Egitto of Our Lady of Lourdes in Daytona Beach. ``The state killing Paul Hill is wrong, Paul Hill killing is wrong and the abortion doctor killing, it's all wrong. To say any of it is right in the name of the Lord is to not recognize the sanctity of human life.''

MADE THE CHOICE

Though Hill, who grew up in Coral Gables, said he didn't know he would be executed for killing an abortion doctor, he said he was sure that committing what he called ''justifiable homicide'' would cause him to suffer one of the greatest punishments for a pro-family Christian: the absence of his wife and children.

In writings from prison, the one-time Presbyterian minister said he weighed the options and decided that killing an abortion doctor was more important. But he didn't act instantly. He settled on the idea a week before, when a fellow protester told him that Britton often arrived earlier at the abortion clinic than his police guard.

''This information was like a bright, green light, signaling me on,'' Hill wrote in a Web-based treatise, Defending the Defenseless, while in prison. Activists on Wednesday distributed copies of the work, along with Horsley's newsletter, imploring reporters ``to tell the truth about the horror of abortion.''

In it, Hill wrote that he hid his intentions from his wife, taking his family on a last day at the beach, where he choked back tears at the ''happy and serene'' scene of his children playing in the surf.

He spent Wednesday morning visiting with his wife, Karen, his 18-year-old son Justin, his parents and two sisters. He spent his final hours with his spiritual advisor, Donald Spitz, a Pentecostal minister who witnessed the execution and said later that Hill died with ``joy in his heart.'' ''He knew what he did was right, he willingly gave his life for the unborn,'' Spitz said.

(Herald staff writers Marc Caputo, Sara Olkon and Casey Woods contributed to this report.)

The Death House

"Killer of Abortion Doc Executed by Lethal Injection in Florida," by Robert Anthony Phillips. (September 4, 2003)

STARKE, Fla. - Paul Hill, the fanatical former Presbyterian minister and anti-abortionist who killed a doctor and his bodyguard at a Pensacola abortion clinic in 1994, was executed by lethal injection at the state prison Wednesday night. Hill, who had told reporters that his death would make him a "martyr" in the anti-abortion movement and that he expected a "reward" in Heaven, was pronounced dead from the lethal injection at 6:08 p.m. Hill became the first killer of an abortion clinic doctor to be executed.

Hill also used his last words from the exeuction gurney to urge anti-abortion activists to continue their fight and to thank God for his "loving parents" and "loving sisters." "The last thing I want to say: If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it," Hill said. "May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected."

Sterling Ivey, spokesman for the Florida Department of Corrections, said prison officials put on extra security outside the gates of Florida State Prison, but, to his knowledge, there there were no incidents. Threats had been made against state officials in the weeks before Hill's execuiton. Ivey said there were about 75 anti-abortion and anti-death penalty protestors outside the prison. Ivey said Hill spent his last five hours talking with a spritual advisor outside a holding cell and, earlier Wednesday, had visits from his wife, children, mother, father and sisters. Hill ate a last meal of steak, baked potato, broccoli, salad, orange sherbert and sweetened ice tea at about 10 a.m. Ivey said.

Hill: Used Same Means As God Would Have

Hill was sentenced to death for the 1994 murders of a doctor and a bodyguard who was escorting the physician into the Pensacola Ladies' Clinic. Hill, a former Presbyterian minister with three children, was part of a fringe movement believing it it to be justifiable homicide to kill those who performed abortions. Hill, 49, killed Dr. John Britton, 69, and a man who was escorting him into The Ladies' Center clinic, retired Air Force. Lt. Col James Barrett, 74. The murders occurred on July 29, 1994. Hill had been at the clinic laying white crosses before he killed the victims. Hill first shot Barrett as he exited the vehicle after parking at the clinic. He then reloaded and fired into the vehicle, killing Britton and wounding the doctor's wife. She survived.

"I was determined to do everything in my power to prevent John Britton from killing any children that day-or ever again," Hill wrote on the anti-abortion Army of God website in August. "I had made up my mind that the clinic door would not close and lock behind the abortionist-protecting him (as he had in the past) as he dismembered over thirty unborn children. "I realized that using force to stop abortion is the same means that God has used to stop similar atrocities throughout history." The unrepentant Hill once said in a prison interview he would kill abortion providers again. "I wouldn't advise them to give me my shotgun back and let me go unless they wanted a similar outcome," he once was quoted as saying by a reporter. Anti-death penalty groups argued that executing Hill would, indeed, make him a martyr for extremists and "incite more violence rather than protect women, their doctors, and clinic staff."

Waiting With Shotgun

The murders occurred July 29, 1994. When Britton and James and June Barrett arrived at the center that morning, Hill was outside protesting, but stepped out of the way to let the vehicle pass. When Barrett got out the truck, Hill had a shotgun and fired four times at him. He then reloaded and shot Britton. June Barrett was slightly wounded. Hill represented himself at his 1994 trial. His defense was that the slayings were justifiable to prevent abortions. Later on appeal, Hill won permission to dismiss his lawyers and had not filed any appeals.

Murder, In Hill's Own Words On the "official" Paul Hill Website, armyofgod.com, Hill described the shooting.

"As I stood awaiting the abortionist's arrival, I was struggling in fervent prayer to maintain my resolution of heart," Hill wrote. " At the end, as the moment of his expected arrival approached, I was praying fervently that the police security would not arrive first. I could still find the heart to shoot the abortionist, but, while I knew it would be justified to kill a policeman in order to stop the murderer he was protecting, I did not want to have to do it. I made an earnest and personal request to the Lord to spare me, and the policeman, if possible.

"God answered my prayers, and the abortionist arrived two or three minutes prior to the police guard. When I lifted the shotgun, two men were sitting in the front seats of the parked truck; Jim Barret, the escort, was directly between me and the abortionist. "When I finished shooting, I laid the shotgun at my feet and walked away with my hands held out at my sides, awaiting arrest. (I did not want to appear to be threatening anyone when the police arrived."

Hill would also later write that by killing the doctor, he was putting "the pro-life rhetoric" about defending born and unborn children equally into practice. He also wrote that the killings opened people's eyes to the consequences of abortion; forced people to decide whether to fight against the abortionists or join them; and also upheld "the truth of the Gospel at the precise point of Satan's current attack (the abortionist's knife)."

In the weeks prior to the execution, threatening letters and even bullets were sent to Florida' Attorney General Charlie Christ, prison officials and even a judge involved in the case. Gov. Jeb Bush, who had refused to stop the execution, was even threatened in one of the letters.

AP Wire

"Abortion Clinics Fear Execution Reprisals," by David Royse. (AP September 4, 2003)

STARKE, Fla. (AP) -- The execution of Paul Hill for the murders of an abortion doctor and his bodyguard left abortion providers holding their breath, wary that the former minister may become a martyr to the anti-abortion cause and spur others to act violently. While the mainstream anti-abortion community largely dismissed Hill as a fringe character, his supporters - including a small but vocal group that stood outside the prison as Hill was put to death Wednesday - believe he was rewarded with glory in heaven for his actions.

Florida abortion clinics and police were on heightened alert for reprisals. Several officials connected to the case received threatening letters last week, accompanied by rifle bullets. "We're very concerned," said Vicki Saporta, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation in Washington. "We know that certain events can and do trigger increased violence."

Hill, 49, was executed by injection at Florida State Prison for the 1994 shotgun murders of Dr. John Bayard Britton and Britton's unarmed bodyguard, James Barrett, outside a Pensacola abortion clinic. When officers arrested Hill minutes later, he told them, "I know one thing, no innocent babies are going to be killed in that clinic today."

Hill, whose own murderous rampage was inspired by a 1993 shooting death of another abortion doctor, was remorseless to the end, even using his last statement to urge others to take up his cause. "If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it," Hill said. "May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected."

Most leaders in the anti-abortion community have condemned Hill's actions and have spoken out against clinic violence, saying murder does not advance their cause. "We think that unborn children should be protected and it should be through law," said Sheila Hopkins, a spokeswoman for the Florida Catholic Conference. "We definitely reject his statement that it was justifiable homicide."

Still, police officers in Jacksonville were posted outside several clinics. In Gainesville, where there was false bomb threat at one clinic Wednesday, officers were present at all area facilities. "The bottom line is when you work in the industry, you're aware those people are out there every single day," said Marti McKenzie, a spokeswoman for Dr. James S. Pendergraft, who runs several clinics around the state.

State law enforcement agents and the FBI were investigating threats made before Hill's execution, in the form of letters warning that if he were put to death some state officials might face danger. Bullets were mailed in letters to the judge who sentenced Hill, to state Attorney General Charlie Crist and to two state prison officials. The letters also implicitly threatened Gov. Jeb Bush, who signed Hill's death warrant. The governor said he would not be "bullied" into stopping the execution.

The killings of Britton and Barrett happened during a time of increased violence at clinics nationwide. Another abortion doctor had been killed in Pensacola in 1993 by Michael Griffin, who is serving a life sentence. Two receptionists were killed at Boston-area abortion clinics in 1994 by John Salvi, who committed suicide in prison two years later. Since losing his automatic appeals, Hill did not fight his execution and insisted up to the day before his death that he would be forgiven by God for killing to save the unborn.

A handful of anti-abortion protesters gathered across the road from the prison Wednesday and expressed their support for what Hill did, saying any others who feel called upon to do so would be justified in attacking abortion providers. "I think it's legitimate to consider," said Drew Heiss, an abortion protester from Milwaukee, Wis. "I wouldn't condemn someone if they were called to do it." Heiss held a sign outside the prison saying, "Paul Hill can be killed, but his message will never die."

(Associated Press writers Ron Word in Starke and Rachel La Corte in Miami contributed to this report.)

Washington Post

"Turning From 'Weapon of the Spirit' to the Shotgun," by Kathy Sawyer. (August 7, 1994)

PENSACOLA, FLA. -- Paul Hill spent his life crossing lines, veering abruptly from one view of the world to another. On July 29, the minister turned auto pin-striper crossed a new line and ended up in the purgatory of Escambia County jail. Police have charged Hill, 40, with first-degree murder in the shotgun killing of an abortion clinic physician and his escort.

Were there foreshadowings? That is always the question. In his middle-class youth, for a time, Hill let his blond hair grow long, used drugs and raised hell. Then, in a muddy swimming pool baptism, he found Jesus. He dated enthusiastically, watched what he ate, went through a body-builder phase. Later, he had his wife put him through seminary, but then he failed as a minister. Still, neither longtime acquaintances nor, more recently, wary law enforcement officials sensed the turn from what Hill called the "weapon of the spirit" to the black pump-action shotgun. Even when he abruptly began to advocate the murder of abortion doctors, about 15 months ago, Hill vowed he would not commit such an act himself. Both friends and adversaries generally believed him.

"He has a frightening ... grin plastered on his face all the time," said Dallas Blanchard of the University of West Florida, author of a book on the Christian antiabortion movement. "The combination of the grin and this little gleam in his eye seemed to say, 'Here's a dangerous person'... . But I thought he was a ... coward." "Until about a month ago, he never crossed the line," said special agent William Charles "Charlie" Griffith of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, who had been assigned to keep an eye on Hill (along with other extremists) since March 1993.

And yet, here are the stark facts of that morning nine days ago, as described by witnesses, Pensacola Police Department officials and Incident Report No. 94-04266: By 7 a.m., Hill had taken up his usual protest station on the front lines of the abortion wars -- outside the weathered wood fence around the small, two-story clinic. He had been coming to The Ladies Center almost every Friday for a year. The street is heavily traveled, with a supermarket, drugstore and numerous fast food outlets nearby. Officer Bruce Martin, on patrol duty, found Hill that morning laying white crosses along the right-of-way at the clinic entrance. Martin asked Hill to move the crosses and he did so.

Shortly before 7:30 a.m., abortion doctor John Britton, 69, arrived for regular duty at the clinic, wearing a bulletproof vest. Driving the blue pickup truck was his unarmed volunteer escort, retired Air Force Col. James H. Barrett, 74, and Barrett's wife, June, 68, a retired nurse who also volunteers as a protective escort.

As they passed Hill, Barrett muttered, "Get out of the way, Paul Hill. You know us. You know this truck." They drove through the entrance and into the parking area behind the wood fence. June Barrett noticed that Hill "had something up to his face," she told interviewers last week. "I did not realize it was a gun. Then I saw the recoil ... and heard the boom." She hit the floor as a spray of glass shards exploded through the truck's cabin. "Oh, my God, he's shooting," she cried. The doctor still sat upright in the passenger seat. But she saw a pool of blood forming near his head, and dripping between the seats. The shotgun blasts had caught both men in the head.

June Barrett had been wounded in the forearm and breast, and she also felt blood running down her legs from glass splinter wounds. She saw her husband lying on the ground beside the vehicle. The police would not let her near him to say goodbye.

Still on patrol nearby, Officer Martin responded to the report of the shooting. He saw Hill walking south toward him as he approached the clinic with his lights and siren on. Following Hill were three or four men who "began to wave frantically to draw my attention ... pointing towards {Hill}." Martin stopped his patrol car in front of Hill, drew his gun, ordered Hill to the ground. Just as he responded when Martin had directed him to move his crosses about a half hour earlier, Hill complied and was handcuffed. Martin found three spent shotgun shells at the entrance to the clinic property. Another officer soon found a black pump-action shotgun behind the trunk of a spreading oak that shades the property.

It takes only 10 minutes to drive from the manicured lawns of Confederate Drive, where Hill lived a seemingly comfortable existence with his wife and three children, to The Ladies Center, the focus of his personal jihad. This glimpse of his bizarre pilgrimage comes from dozens of friends, fellow parishioners, activists on both sides of the abortion fight, law enforcement officials and others who knew him.

Paul Jennings Hill was born in Miami on Feb. 6, 1954, the son of Oscar Jennings Hill, an airline pilot, and his wife, Louise. Paul was raised in nearby Coral Gables.

Jeff Sloman, now an assistant U.S. attorney in Brevard County, grew up two doors away from the Hill family. "Paul was a serious type of guy, but I always felt that he was unconcerned with the consequences of things that he did," such as scaling the roof of a school. While others would worry, "he was kind of emotionless, and quite content with himself." One occasion stuck vividly in Sloman's memory. Paul had a dog named Randy. "Once, when Paul was about 13, he called the dog and was getting him to roll over and he had him on his back and he pried his mouth open like a lion tamer. He spit in the dog's throat... . It wasn't a mean thing to do; it was just strange." Sloman said Paul's father seemed very proud of him. "When Paul made the football team {at Coral Gables Senior High}, his dad came over to my house and ... was just busting out with pride. Not long after that, Paul quit the team."

Bob Travis went to junior high and high school with Hill, and both families attended Granada Presbyterian Church. In junior high, Paul was not yet interested in religion. "He was interested in girls," Travis said. "He was very popular, he had long blond hair, he was carefree and rebellious back then. He was, however, a strong-willed person. He had a very fast-paced walk, a deliberate walk." Once, Travis said, "he saved me from getting beat up by some bullies. Paul walked up and because he was big he got them to stop."

By high school, Paul Hill had become a member of the '60s counterculture. According to a Coral Gables police report (first disclosed in the Pensacola News Journal and confirmed by police): In April 1971, when Hill was 17, his father signed a warrant charging him with assault. The police report said Hill's parents took the action to get their son treatment for a drug problem. When police searched Hill, a small bag of marijuana fell from his clothing, and his father turned over 11 more such bags, the report said. "Paul Hill's attitude has been getting worse and violent since he has returned home from the last incident," the report said. The earlier incident was not described. Hill's parents, now living in Atlanta, have declined to comment. At least one of Paul's friends said he has not been in touch with them for years.

John Leonard was a student in Paul Hill's class at Coral Gables High School and attended Granada Church. Now a Presbyterian missionary, based in France but teaching in Orlando for a year, he recalled last week Hill's description of his conversion in 1973. "He said he had been working construction and they were cleaning out the mud and filth from a swimming pool and some guy was telling him to accept the Lord. He didn't think much about it. "But when he got home, while he was washing the filth off of himself, he prayed to receive Christ and he was converted just like that. There was no warming up to it ... no gradual withdrawal from his drug lifestyle. It was immediate and complete." As he told Leonard about his conversion, Hill also confided that he had earlier used marijuana and LSD. "He told me that he had had a couple of bad trips on LSD."

Hill did not drop his old friends. "He got along well with non-Christians, he mixed well." Leonard and Hill roomed together for almost four years beginning in 1973, when they enrolled in Bellhaven College, a Christian liberal arts college in Jackson, Miss. "Paul got up every morning at 4 a.m. for devotions and Bible study alone for two or three hours. "He was hypoglycemic and if he ate the wrong thing it would throw him off." (Hypoglycemia is a low blood sugar condition that can be mild, with symptoms such as sweating or headaches, or it can lead to aggressive or uncooperative behavior.)

Hill had a very structured lifestyle, and "no tolerence for gray," Leonard said. "Everybody liked him, but ... he went to the extreme on everything. He was a body builder and he was extreme about that. When he got into health food, he became a fanatic. No one could ever change his mind about anything." Hill tried to be the model Christian. "Once, we had an argument because I had gone over the speed limit, because if I disobeyed authority, it was un-Christian," Leonard said. "Paul didn't come up with his opinions casually. He always thought about everything." The two friends hunted and fished together. "He wasn't sadistic or violent, he enjoyed guns for sport."

In his senior year of college, Hill met his future wife, Karen Denise Demuth. He had just broken up with another steady girlfriend who suggested he go out with Karen, a certified public accountant (CPA). The two were married in May 1978 in West Memphis, Ark.

Hill went from college to the Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Miss. He arrived in the midst of a controversy about Theonomy, the belief that God's law supersedes the laws of government, and he joined St. Paul Presbyterian Church, which espoused Theonomy. The pastor was his friend Michael Schneider, who had preached at the Hills' wedding. Equipped with a Master of Divinity degree from the seminary, Hill in March 1984 was ordained as a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America.

Between 1984 and 1989, the Hills lived in Kingstree, S.C., where Paul was pastor of two Presbyterian churches before switching his allegiance to the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and being assigned to a church in Lake Worth, Fla., where he served as pastor through 1990. But he was restless, impatient and confrontational as a pastor. In the end, he concluded that was not his true calling. He had also developed a strong belief that young children should be able to take communion, a belief not widely held in Christian churches. Once again, he was drawn to a church where the pastor was his friend Michael Schneider, Trinity Presbyterian in Valparaiso. At Trinity, little children take the bread and wine, or grape juice, of communion as young as they are physically able. There was no work for Hill close to the church, Schneider said, so the Hills moved to Pensacola, just over an hour away.

In early October 1992, Paul and Karen Hill purchased the white brick ranch house on Confederate Drive, a well-tended neighborhood shaded by tall oaks and pines. County records indicate they paid $76,500 cash. Hill also bought an auto paint franchise. Like a number of such independent suppliers in the area, he operated out of the back of his truck, mixing the paints there. His services might include painting delicate lines called pin stripes, washing and cleaning, fitting chrome moldings and repairing vinyl.

Special agent Griffith said he had tried to talk to Hill once while he was on a job at a dealership. But Hill "flat told me he never talked to law enforcement. Anyway, most of the major dealers used Hill, but once they found out who he was, they decided it wasn't worth it." Independent artisans such as Hill typically make $30,000 to $35,000 a year, according to one dealer. Another said a real hustler might make $80,000. This question arises because no one is sure how the Hills managed to afford their house, the auto paint franchise and Paul's protest activities, which included some travel. Karen had a good income as a CPA, friends said, but in recent years she had given up her outside career to provide home schooling for the older children, 8 and 6. The youngest is 4. During his years as a minister, Hill probably made no more than $30,000 a year, according to fellow ministers, although some churches provide a place to live.

In any case, such concerns no longer seemed to matter to Paul Hill after March 10, 1993. That's the day the first Pensacola abortion clinic doctor, David Gunn, was shot to death. The act galvanized Hill. Once again his life turned sharply. Within days, he contacted the Phil Donahue show and declared himself the new national spokesman for abortionist killers, whoever they might be. He appeared on ABC's "Nightline" and CNN's "Sonya Live." Abortion activists -- on both sides -- had never heard of him.

On March 15, 1993, Hill told Donahue on nationwide TV that if someone were killing children on a playground, "if you were to come up behind that man and shoot him in the back three times, you would have protected and saved innocent life from undue harm." He said, "I'm advocating the consistent theology of the Bible, and that is that we must protect innocent life." He equated killing an abortionist with killing Hitler and said that a woman who has an abortion is "an accessory to murder." His fellow antiabortion parishioners at Trinity were troubled. They went to their pastor and said they were having trouble refuting the theological logic of Hill's arguments. After wrestling with the issue for several weeks, the church elders excommunicated Hill.

In March, he was a constant presence at the trial where a chemical plant worker was convicted of killing Gunn. There is no evidence that Hill knew him. After the trial, some acquaintances have suggested that Hill was disappointed as the spotlight moved away and public attention wandered elsewhere. Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, said that, in the midst of confrontations over abortion, he had engaged Hill in several stimulating discussions of their opposing views. "He was disarming, civil, articulate." But Hill "had a thing about cameras," he added. "He knew where every camera was. He really got into the media thing. I'm sure he's thrilled today his picture's on the front page."

In June, Hill turned up the volume. He took to screaming "Mommy, mommy don't kill me," over the fence at patients at The Ladies Center. Pensacola police charged him with disorderly conduct and violation of the noise ordinance, but he did not go to jail. Two weeks ago, two days before the killings, the Pensacola News Journal published a letter to the editor from Karen Hill, complaining about city police officers moonlighting as clinic guards. "These officers have abortion money in their pockets as they arrest pro-lifers," she said. Police responded that they are trained to be neutral.

Neighbors have told reporters that Karen and the children were in North Carolina when the shootings occurred. At the end of the Hills' shaded driveway, a basketball goal hangs limp. In a small shed, a blue powerboat on a trailer, a small red wagon and a child's bicycle sit idle. There are a few -- a priest in Mobile, an activist in Jackson -- who openly echo Hill's grisly dogma. But their crusade may not have the desired effect.

On Tuesday, outside the clinic where Gunn was shot, there was an interlude in the war. A volunteer escort who supports abortion rights and an antiabortion protester chatted briefly as they passed each other. As they talked, they found common ground in their determination to watch for the next terrorist in their midst -- on either side. The two old adversaries hugged.

Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

The Martyrdom of Paul Hill

The State of Florida is going to grant "Martyrdom" via State-Assisted Suicide to Paul Hill at 6pm on September 3, 2003 in revenge for his murder of Dr. John B. Britton, 79, of Fernandina Beach, and retired Air Force Lt. Col. James H. Barrett, 74, of Pensacola. Hill used a shotgun to kill the two men on July 29, 1994 outside what then was known as the Ladies Center. They were killed after pulling into the parking lot in Barrett's pickup. Barrett's wife, June, was wounded.

Paul Hill, an anti-abortion extremist, murdered Dr. Britton because he worked at a facility that provides abortions. Hill readily admits that he committed this act of terror with the full knowledge that he could receive the death penalty. Hill wanted to put the abortion issue on trial by using the "necessity" defence (which is like being justified in breaking into a locked house that is on fire in order to save the people in the house from burning). However, Hill was not allowed to use that defence, nor was he allowed to use the attorney that he wanted, and thus he reportedly remained mostly silent during his trial. From the time he was sentenced to death, Hill has sought to drop his appeals and be executed.

Paul Hill wants to die for his cause and has repeatedly said that he is willing to sacrifice his life to save unborn babies. According to his spiritual advisor, Hill believes Jesus told him to kill the abortion doctor. According to others who champion Hill's action, "20 or 30 babies were saved that day." Extremist anti-abortion activists have several web pages in which they discuss their perspective about Paul Hill, suggesting that what he did was "justifiable homicide." One such page includes a list of the types of people for whom similar treatment ("justifiable homicide") is warranted. Just about anyone who does not agree with these extremists would fit into one of the categories on that list, which is a thinly veiled invitation to any person for whom "Jesus speaks to me" to go out and take similar actions.

WARNING - the following link takes you to one such extremist web page. If you click on this link, you will be immediately subjected to gruesome photographs of dead people and chopped up fetuses. Once on that site, you can hear an interview with Paul Hill's spiritual advisor which provides a window into the thinking of this crowd. (http://www.christiangallery.com/)

TAKE ACTION

Florida's "Pro-Life" governor Jeb Bush is acting in a particularly irresponsible way by once again allowing "the tail to wag the dog" when he signs a death warrant for a prisoner who wants to be executed. By helping Paul Hill martyr himself, Jeb Bush is giving Hill and his followers a platform to encourage others to copy the crime. Rather than the deterrent that death penalty advocates suggest is provided by executions, the martyrdom of Paul Hill is a prime example of how the death penalty can actually encourage more murder and violence. No person other than the Governor himself can stop the martyrdom of Paul Hill. Please write to Governor Bush and ask him to commute Paul Hill's death sentence to life in prison with no possibility of parole, because killing Hill will actually encourage more murders.

Dr. Britton's step-daughter wrote to Governor Bush. It took more than a week for the Governor, who says "executions are for the victim's families" to have an assistant call Ms. Fairbanks to acknowledge her letter. See below....

Dear Governor Bush:

As the stepdaughter of John B. Britton, M.D. who was murdered by Paul Jennings Hill on July 29, 1994, I am asking that you commute Hill's death sentence to life without the possibility of parole. Killing people is against the law in any circumstance, and by the execution of Paul Hill, you are enabling the killing to keep perpetuating in the circle of violence. I do not want to witness murder, killing by gun, lethal injection, electric chair, or any other mode of violence. The violence must stop. Killing must stop. Even though Paul Hill claims he wants to be killed, that will do nothing except allow him to be a martyr - it will not stop the right of women to have abortions, nor solve any other problem in this world. It will cause more pain in the name of the spirit of life. Please stop the killing.

Catherine Britton Fairbanks

******************************

Catherine Fairbanks reports on 8/29/03

"Jeb Bush's office just called - someone by the name of Wendy. She stated that the Governor wanted to let me know that he received my email, but was firm in his stand of "upholding the law." By that, he feels obliged to go ahead with the murder. I told her that the murder would not accomplish anything, and that I felt this was a pre-planned murder, the same as Paul Hill had done. She said that was my opinion. She seemed very cold and very firm in her support of Jeb Bush...."

Is the martyrdom of Paul Hill an irresponsible invitation to unstable extremists to commit similar actions? RADICAL REACTIONS TO FLORIDA MURDER (source: compiled from Reuters reports, August, 1994)

Catholic Priest Rev. David Trosch has led the way encouraging anti-choice activists to kill abortion providers. Since Paul Hill murdered Dr. John Britton and James Barrett last month, Trosch has become a media celebrity. His many television appearances have included the Today Show, CNBC and dozens of local news broadcasts. Among his many quotes excusing these gruesome murders were these gems: "God smiles on those who take a life to save the lives of the 'unborn.'" and "Defending innocent human life is not murder."

Advocates for Life released a statement saying that "While Paul Hill may have been genuinely concerned to protect children and justified in shooting abortionist John Britton, he may have been wrong in the shooting death of the bodyguard." Donald Spitz [Paul Hill's spiritual advisor], spokesman for Operation Rescue Chesapeake, reacted to the murders with this statement, "If there was a sniper in the school yard sniping off children one by one and the only way you could stop him was by stopping that sniper ... you would stop that sniper."

Michael Bray, a Bowie, Md., pastor who served four years in prison for bombing clinics in the Washington area and has just written a book called "A Time to Kill," said, "There is no prohibition in the Bible against killing." The ancient Hebrew word translated as "kill" in the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" does not refer to self-defense, Bray argues. All of these activists say they would not themselves kill a doctor. They say they are either too important to the cause, too committed to their families or too smart to publicly proclaim their intentions. Before the recent murders in Pensacola, Paul Hill assured several friends that he would not himself resort to violence.

Visit www.christiangallery.com/hill.html to see a letter from the above-mentioned Michael Bray, in which he suggests to the Florida clemency board that one of the benefits of commuting Paul Hill's sentence would be: "You prevent reactionary violence from radicals."

Visit www.christiangallery.com/biblicaljustice.htm to read "Biblical Justice for Baby Murderer's"

Visit www.christiangallery.com/InvitationtoMurder.htm to see if YOU fit into one of the categories making your murder a "justifiable homicide."

Here is information recently compiled for FADP regarding the sentences received by other anti-abortion terrorists

- Paul Hill is the first anti-abortion protester sentenced to death.

- Michael Griffin was the first anti-abortion protester to kill a doctor (inspiring Paul Hill), but he was sentenced to life for the first Pensacola murder (of Dr. David Gunn).

- John Salvi killed receptionists at two clinics in Massachusetts, but was found to be insane. He committed suicide in jail.

- James Kopp used a sniper rifle to kill Dr. Slepian in upstate New York, but was extradited from France only on the condition that he not face the death penalty. Kopp recently was sentenced to 25 years to life for that murder.

- Eric Rudolph will eventually go to trial on a death-penalty charge for killing an off-duty police officer who was guarding a clinic that was bombed in Alabama. (He is also charged with the Atlanta Olympics bombing.)

- There have been other clinic/provider shootings and bombings, but not that resulted in death.

According to the Associated Press:

"After Hill was condemned in December 1994, he said he welcomed execution because he believed it would prevent abortions by inciting more violence against abortion providers. "He also said he had been inspired to kill Britton and Barrett by the actions of Michael Griffin, an anti-abortionist who fatally shot another doctor in Pensacola in 1993."

Pensacola News-Journal

"Hill Supporters, Death Penalty Opponents Converge on Prison; Media outnumbers all demonstrators," by Troy Moon. (September 4, 2003)

STARKE - Just four minutes before convicted killer Paul Hill was executed, thunder shook the sky and lightning flashed near the Florida State Prison. To some, it was a sign.

"We're about to execute an innocent man, and this is God's wrath," said Joshua Davis, 45, of Montgomery, Ala., one of about 50 Hill supporters who traveled here to protest Wednesday's execution - the first of a person convicted of killing an abortion doctor in the United States. "This is God's judgment to a corrupt nation." Then Davis joined other Hill supporters on bended knee - all facing the sprawling, lime-colored prison complex across the street - and they prayed.

Law enforcement officers and media reporters handily outnumbered demonstrators who converged upon the prison two hours before the execution at 6 p.m. Eastern time to voice their views on Hill and the death penalty. Hill was convicted and executed for murdering Dr. John Britton, 69, and his escort - retired Air Force Lt. Col. James Barrett, 74 - outside The Ladies Center in Pensacola on July 29, 1994.

Prison officials erected three holding areas, each marked with police tape, across the street from the prison to contain three groups of protesters: Hill supporters in one area, people who supported the execution in another, and anti-death penalty demonstrators in the middle. Despite a few shouting matches between Hill supporters and those who felt he deserved to be executed, prison officials said there were no arrests and no real problems.

Hill's supporters far outnumbered the other two camps. About 20 anti-death penalty demonstrators - many of them affiliated with Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty - held signs condemning what they called "state-sanctioned murder." Only four men stood in the holding area urging the state to get on with the execution. "Paul Hill is not above the law," said Ruben Israel, 42, of Los Angeles. "And soon he will know what it means to face the wrath of God." Nearby, the death penalty opponents joined hands and bowed their heads in the moments before the execution. "I don't care if he's guilty or innocent," said Janice French, 24, of Gainesville. "The government shouldn't be able to murder its citizens."

In the area holding Hill's supporters, many rested their signs and knelt in the rain-dampened grass to pray. Some recited the Lord's Prayer, while others prayed a stream of "Hail Marys" as the seconds counted down. At 6 p.m., Hill supporters released 50 gold balloons into the gray skies to signify his passing. Some cried. Some broke into hymns. A loud voice shouted from the center: "Father, help us, Lord. We are undone. We are undone."

Moments later, Drew Heiss, 41, from Milwaukee, played taps on a trumpet. "Paul Hill gave his life for the unborn babies," Heiss said. "We have lost a great man, but he's with God now." Michael Bray, a Maryland pastor and longtime Hill supporter, felt little joy, even though he had "no doubt Hill was in a better place." "It's a surreal situation," Bray said, "because a friend has just been killed."

Behind Bray, leaning against the yellow police tape that roped off each of the holding areas, a sign showed a smiling Paul Hill crucified on the cross. Heiss looked at the picture and smiled as well. "That's what they did to him all right," Heiss said. "He was a rare man. I think if someone did that (killed an abortion provider) again, he would be justified. But I don't think - well, let's just say I think it's a rare calling. It's not for everyone. We don't see as many courageous people as Paul Hill."

Many death penalty foes fear Hill's execution will prompt more killings. "We just made a martyr out of Paul Hill," said George Barrow, 36, of Ocala. "I think the anti- abortion fanatics - not just the regular people who oppose abortion, but the fanatics - will see him as a hero and try to emulate him." People from all three sides stayed in the holding areas for about 15 minutes after the execution before mingling back to their cars.

But David Miller, 43, of Beverly Hills, Fla., who supported the execution, ventured into the area of Hill supporters, calling them "hypocrites who support murder." A few Hill supporters debated with him momentarily before marching off. But not all walked away. John Brockhoeft, 52, a Kentucky abortion opponent, stood face to face with Miller, calling him a "blasphemer who was perverting the word of God."

Brockhoeft was convicted in 1988 after driving to Pensacola with a carload of bomb parts that he intended to use to blow up The Ladies Center. After also being convicted of the 1985 firebombing of an abortion clinic in Cincinnati, he served two separate prison terms totaling more than six years. He was released from prison in 1995. "I love these babies just like Paul Hill did," Brockhoeft said after walking away from Miller. "They're worthy of being defended, and I'll do everything I can to defend them." A girl, whom he identified as his daughter, tugged at his arm as he tried to engage Miller in debate once more. "Let's go home," the girl said. "Let's just go." They walked back toward their cars under the watchful eye of the dozens of law enforcement officials standing near the demonstration areas.

Uniformed officers checked the identification of everyone allowed into the site, and some were subjected to random vehicle searches with bomb-sniffing dogs. Hours earlier, the driver of a red pickup - with a canopy in back covered with a variety of anti- abortion signs, flags and slogans - tried to enter the prison grounds before being turned away. The driver did not enter the protest area but spent most of the afternoon driving back and forth on Raiford Road, which separated the prison from the protest and media areas. "I saw all those people opposing the execution, and I went into that area," said Hannah Floyd of Starke, an anti-death penalty activist, as she watched the truck drive by once more. "But then I saw all the signs with the aborted babies, and it was just disgusting. I knew I was in the wrong place."

Floyd said she is one of the few Starke residents who regularly ventures out to observe the activity surrounding executions. She said most of the people in the town, just nine miles from the prison, try not to get involved with the politics of the death penalty, because so many Starke residents work there. She was surprised that no one in either camp identified themselves as being from Northwest Florida. "You'd think there would be a couple," she said, "since that's where this whole thing began."

Crosswalk.Com

"The Execution of Justice: The Real Meaning of Paul Hill"

By Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

The state of Florida executed Paul Hill last night, thus putting an end to his life, but not to the controversy he came to represent. He went to the execution chamber without regret or remorse, and stated that he would kill more abortionists if given the opportunity. "If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it," Hill insisted, even as he was strapped to the gurney awaiting the lethal injection that would put him to death.

The facts of the case were never in doubt. Paul Hill premeditated the 1994 murders of Dr. John Britton and his bodyguard, James Barrett, outside a Pensacola, Florida abortion clinic. He awoke that morning determined to act, drove to the women's clinic, and waited for the doctor to arrive. As he later recounted, "God answered my prayers, and the abortionist arrived two or three minutes prior to the police guard. When I lifted the shotgun, two men were sitting in the front seat of the parked truck .... When I finished shooting, I laid the shotgun at my feet and walked away with my hands held out at my sides, awaiting arrest."

At his trial, Hill attempted to present a defense claiming that his actions had been justifiable homicide, since he had killed the two men in order to prevent the murder of unborn children. The judge refused to allow this argument in court, and Hill refused to present any other defense. He was sentenced to death and rejected any effort to appeal the verdict.

During the nine years he spent on Death Row, Hill offered a public defense of his actions by means of an internet website sponsored by a group called the "Army of God." He said that his hope had been that "using the force necessary to defend the unborn gives credibility, urgency, and direction to the pro-life movement which it has lacked and which it needs in order to prevail."

He accused the mainstream pro-life movement of failing to defend unborn life. "They are steady everywhere on the battlefield except where the battle currently rages," he asserted. The pro-life movement has gone soft and weak, he accused, and the killing of an abortion doctor would invigorate the movement, call it to consistency, and lead to a great public movement against abortion. As he explained, "This would convict millions of people of their past neglect and spur many to future obedience." Put simply, this did not happen.

What about his defense argument of justifiable homicide? Paul Hill was certainly correct to call abortion the murder of an innocent unborn human life. Those who argue otherwise must claim that the unborn baby is less than fully human. Of course, this is the logic of the pro-abortion movement and of the U. S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. But the Christian conscience must not negotiate on the moral status and protection of all human life from conception until natural death.

Paul Hill's monumental moral error came when he assumed the roles of judge, jury, and executioner in killing Dr. Britton and his escort. The Bible instructs Christians to "be subject to the governing authorities." [Romans 13:1] Christians are not to take the law into their own hands. The killing of unborn human infants is murder--but so was Paul Hill's killing of John Britton and James Barrett.

We are engaged in one of history's great battles for human life and human dignity. America has given itself over to a logic of sexual libertarianism and the Culture of Death. Abortion is a national scandal for which this nation will one day be judged. But America is not beyond hope and our political system offers an opportunity for correction by means of legal and political action. Christians have the responsibility to contend for life, to defend the unborn, and to work for the end of legal abortion, but we have no right to take up arms against the laws of our nation and its rightful authorities.

Paul Hill did not see it this way. "Any nation that legalizes abortion throws a blanket of fear and intimidation over all its citizens who rightly understand the issues involved," he claimed. "By legalizing abortion, the government has aimed its intimidating weaponry at any who dare to interfere with the slaughter."

Those who defend Hill's killing of the two men have compared him to Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran pastor who was executed for his part in a conspiracy against Adolf Hitler. Bonhoeffer did join the conspiracy to kill Hitler, but only after it was clear that no legal or political process could lead to the recovery of the nation and the end of Hitler's death machine. Even then, Bonhoeffer was not certain that his actions were fully right. He called for Christians to act humbly, acknowledging that moral questions on what he called "the borderland" could not be settled with absolute certainty. In the end, he believed that joining the conspiracy against Hitler was more right than wrong. When it failed, he paid for his complicity with his life.

Paul Hill is no Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He could not be described as humble. "I expect a great reward in heaven," Hill said. "I am looking forward to glory. I don't feel remorse." And America, for all of its many faults and failures, is not Nazi Germany. We do have a means of legal and political correction. It will take much hard work and require the difficult process of moral rearmament--but we have no right to declare the United States government beyond rescue and repair.

If Paul Hill's murder of an abortion doctor is justifiable homicide, what about the killing of a stem cell researcher who destroys a human embryo? The destruction of that embryo is also a form of murder, but it does not justify murder in response. Once Paul Hill's argument is accepted, moral anarchy will inevitably result.

Was Paul Hill really surprised when his murder failed to arouse the American conscience? Instead of giving the pro-life movement a great push forward, as he claimed to have hoped, he gravely injured the pro-life cause by making a abortionist on that day the victim of murder rather then a perpetrator.

The pro-life movement rightly condemned Paul Hill's vigilante justice. His execution should remind us that there is a right way and a wrong way to fight any battle--even the battle for human life.

The Authorized Paul Hill Website: Army of God

"You have a responsibility to protect your neighbor's life, and to use force if necessary to do so. In an effort to suppress this truth, you may mix my blood with the blood of the unborn, and those who have fought to defend the oppressed. However, truth and righteousness will prevail. May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected." - Paul J. Hill

WHO IS PAUL HILL?

If you were to pass by the Ladies Center abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida on a Saturday morning in the early 1990's, you would see a tall, slender, blonde man carrying a sign and calling out to women who entered the building. His cry of "Mommy, Mommy, don't kill me," could be heard inside the walls of the facility, by staff and customer alike. The cry resounded even within the killing chamber, and at times, may have had it's desired effect - the saving of an innocent pre-born child only moments before that baby was scheduled to be ripped apart by a suction machine.

THE FIRST DEFENSIVE ACTION STATEMENT

On March 10, 1993 A.D., Michael Griffin shot and killed abortionist David Gunn outside an abortion mill in Pensacola, Florida. Five days later, Paul Hill appeared on the Donahue television program, and justified the shooting. With the support of many anti-abortion activists, Mr. Hill subsequently justified the shooting on numerous other shows - including ABC's Nightline.

As a result of the shooting, the first "Defensive Action Statement" which codified the position was drafted and signed.

July 29, 1994 A.D. - In July of the following year, Paul Hill shot and killed John Britton, (the abortionist who took David Gunn's place at the killing center in Pensacola) and his usually armed escort James Barrett.

During his trial, the judge would not allow Mr. Hill to explain to the jury the reasons why he took this action. Paul Hill is now on death watch, and having waived all of his appeals, awaits execution on September 3rd at 6 PM at Florida State Prison.

Paul Hill has served as a Presbyterian minister in both the Presbyterian Church of America (P.C.A.) and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (O.P.C.) He is a well known advocate of the duty to defend both born and unborn children with whatever force is necessary.

Why Shoot An Abortionist? by Paul Hill

When I first appeared on Donahue, I asked the audience to suspend judgment as to whether the action had been wise, but I took the position that Griffin's killing of Dr. Gunn was justified. I later realized, however, that using the force necessary to defend the unborn gives credibility, urgency, and direction to the pro-life movement which it has lacked and which it needs in order to prevail. I realized that using force to stop abortion is the same means that God has used to stop similar atrocities throughout history. In the book of Esther, for instance, Ahasuerus, king of Persia, passed a law in 473 B.C. allowing the Persians to kill their Jewish neighbors. But the Jews did not passively submit; their uses of defensive force prevented a calamity of immense proportions. In much the same way, when abortion was first legalized in our nation, if the people had resisted this atrocity with the means necessary it would have saved millions of children from a bloody death. It is not unwise or unspiritual, thus, to use the means that God has appointed for keeping His commandments; rather it is presumptuous to neglect these means and expect Him to work apart from them.

I realized that a large number of very important things would be accomplished by my shooting another abortionist in Pensacola. * This would put the pro-life rhetoric about defending born and unborn children equally into practice. * It would bear witness to the full humanity of the unborn as nothing else could. * It would also open the people's eyes to the enormous consequences of abortion - not only for the unborn, but also for the government that had sanctioned it and for those who are required to resist it. * This would convict millions of people of their past neglect and spur many to future obedience. * I also realized that this would help to force people to decide whether they would join the battle in defense of abortionists or side with their intended victims. * But most importantly, I realized that this would uphold the truth of the Gospel at the precise point of Satan's current attack (the abortionist's knife).

While most Christians firmly profess the duty to defend born children with force (which is not being disputed by the government) most of these professors have neglected the duty to similarly defend the unborn. They are steady everywhere on the battlefield except where the battle currently rages. I was certain that if I took my stand at this point, others would join with me, and the Lord would eventually bring about a great victory.

Defending The Defenseless (August 2003 by Paul J. Hill)

(This is a revised version of a paper published in an anthology in the Current Controversies Series: The Abortion Controversy, Greenhaven Press, 2001.)

I didn't normally stand in the middle of the driveway leading to the abortion clinic. But this day was different. I was determined to do everything in my power to prevent John Britton from killing any children that day—or ever again. I had made up my mind that the clinic door would not close and lock behind the abortionist—protecting him (as he had in the past) as he dismembered over thirty unborn children.

Taking this "defensive action" first occurred to me eight days earlier, on July 21, 1994. I had a business touching up cars at dealerships and used car lots. I was working at a car lot in the afternoon, wondering who would act next, when the idea of taking action myself struck; it hit hard. During the next two or three hours, as I continued to work in a distracted manner, I began to consider what would happen if I were to shoot an abortionist.

The man who had previously shot an abortionist in Pensacola on March 10, 1993, Michael Griffin, had been dismissed because what he said about shooting abortionists contradicted his actions. But I wanted to put my beliefs about defending the unborn into consistent action.

God graciously converted my proud and rebellious heart when I was seventeen. Though I am a slow learner, I managed to graduate from seminary in 1984. The Lord then opened the door for me to serve as a minister in both the Presbyterian Church in America, and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. After seven years of rather unfruitful ministry, I turned from both these denominations because I became convinced that they were inconsistently providing baptism to infants while denying them communion. (Taking this stand was made much easier by my diminishing desire to continue my unsuccessful preaching career.) I then started my own business, and moved my family to Pensacola to join a reformed Presbyterian church that practiced both infant baptism and infant communion.

In God's amazing providence, I began to engage in pro-life activism at the Ladies Center in Pensacola a couple of months before Michael Griffin shot and killed the abortionist, Dr. David Gunn. (I knew of Dr. Gunn before his death, and had seen him entering the clinic.) Two days after Michael Griffin killed Dr. Gunn, I called the Phil Donahue Show and told them I supported the shooting. Three days later, I appeared on the show with the abortionist's son, and compared killing Dr. Gunn to killing a Nazi concentration camp "doctor."

The Lord then led me to contact Advocates for Life Ministries (Portland, Oregon). They graciously published an article I wrote for their magazine, Life Advocate, and provided the contacts necessary for numerous activists to sign a "DEFENSIVE ACTION" statement justifying Griffin's actions. After this, through another set of amazing providential occurrences, I appeared on ABC's Nightline, and justified Shelley Shannon's shooting of an abortionist in Wichita, Kansas in August, 1993.

Fighting for Life

During the Nightline broadcast, I defended the shooting on the basis of the Sixth Commandment (which not only forbids murder, but also requires the means necessary to prevent murder). It is not enough to refrain from committing murder; innocent people must also be protected.

Most people don't realize that legal abortion requires a sin of omission by forbidding people to intervene as mass murder is taking place. By legalizing abortion the government has robbed you of your right to defend your own relatives, and neighbors, from a bloody death. It's as though a machine gunner is taking aim on bound peasants, huddled before a mass grave, and you are forbidden to stop him. In much the same way, the abortionist's knife is pressed to the throat of the unborn, and you are forbidden to stop him. It's as though the police are holding a gun on you, and forcing you to submit to murder— possibly the murder of your own child or grandchild.

The scriptures teach that when the government requires sin of its people that they "... must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29b). No human government can remove the individual's duty to keep each of the Ten Commandments: these duties are inalienable. When the government, thus, will not defend the people's children—as required by the Sixth Commandment—this duty necessarily reverts to the people. You don't need the government's permission before defending your own or your neighbor's child. If the people's children will not be defended by the government, they must be defended by the people, or they will not be defended at all.

And if you want your fellow citizens, and the government, to recognize this duty, you must assert it. The outrage is not that some people use the means necessary to defend the unborn, but that since most people deny that this duty exists the government will not perform it on the people's behalf.

Could it be that those who point the finger, and accuse Michael Griffin of murder—even though he obviously prevented murder—are themselves guilty of complying with murder? Instead of faulting Griffin for going too far, is it possible that people should be accusing themselves of not going far enough? As distasteful as it is to kill a murderer, isn't it infinitely more repulsive to allow him to murder, not just one or two, but hundreds and thousands of unborn children?

Striking Results

When I first appeared on Donahue, I took the position that Griffin's killing of Dr. Gunn was justified, but I asked the audience to suspend judgment as to whether it had been wise. I realized later, however, that using the force necessary to defend the unborn gives credibility, urgency, and direction to the pro-life movement which it has lacked, and which it needs in order to prevail.

I realized that using force to stop abortion is the same means that God has used to stop similar atrocities throughout history. In the book of Esther, for instance, Ahasuerus, the king of Persia, passed a law in 473 B.C. allowing the Persians to kill their Jewish neighbors. But the Jews didn't passively submit; their use of defensive force prevented a calamity of immense proportions. (In this case, the government also permitted the Jews to defend themselves, but the morality of their defense was not dependent on men's approval.) In much the same way, when abortion was first legalized in our nation, if the people had resisted this atrocity with the means necessary, it would have saved millions of children from a bloody death. It is not unwise or unspiritual, thus, to use the means that God has appointed for keeping His commandments; rather, it is presumptuous to neglect these means and expect Him to work apart from them.

I realized that many important things would be accomplished by my shooting another abortionist in Pensacola. This would put the pro-life rhetoric about defending born and unborn children equally into practice. It would bear witness to the full humanity of the unborn as few other things could. It would also open people's eyes to the enormous consequences of abortion—not only for the unborn, but also for the government that had sanctioned it, and those required to resist it. This would convict millions of their past neglect, and also spur many to future obedience. It would also help people to decide whether to join the battle on the side of those defending abortionists, or the side of those defending the unborn.

But, most importantly, I knew that this would uphold the truths of the gospel at the precise point of Satan's current attack (the abortionist's knife). While most Christians firmly profess the duty to defend born children with force (which is not yet being disputed by the government) most of these professors have neglected the duty to similarly defend the unborn. They are steady all along the battleline except at the point where the enemy has broken through. I was certain that if I took my stand at this point, others would join with me, and the Lord would eventually bring about a great victory.

With thoughts like these racing through my mind, I finished my work that Thursday afternoon and drove home. Although at the time my thinking on these things had not crystallized, no matter how I approached the subject, everything seemed to fall together in an amazing manner. I continued to secretly consider shooting an abortionist, half hoping it would not appear as plausible after I had given it more thought.

A Window of Opportunity

The next morning, Friday, as was my practice, I went to the abortion clinic (the Ladies Center). I arrived at about eight o'clock, the time that many of the mothers began arriving. I was usually the first protester there, but that day another activist had arrived first. What was even more unusual was, after discrete questioning, I learned that he had been there when the abortionist arrived: about 7:30. More importantly, I discovered that the abortionist had arrived a few minutes prior to the police security guard. This information was like a bright green light, signaling me on.

For months my wife had planned to take our children on a trip to visit my parents, and to take my son to summer camp. She planned to leave that coming Wednesday morning and return the following week. I would have the remainder of the day that she left, and all of Thursday, to prepare to act on Friday, just eight days after the idea first struck me. All I had to do was hide my intentions from my wife for a few days until she left. If I did not act during her planned trip (since I could not have kept my feelings from her for long) she would almost certainly develop suspicions later, and my plans would be spoiled for fear of implicating her. I could not hope for a better opportunity than the one immediately before me. God had opened a window of opportunity, and it appeared that I had been appointed to step through it.

Remembering God's Promise

Saturday, the second day after I began to consider taking action, we went as a family to the beach. My wife, Karen, and I enjoyed the beach in the afternoon, when it isn't so hot. Our three children were delighted with the outing. My son was nine, and my two daughters were six and three. We dug in the sand, splashed in the water, and walked along the beach on the wet sand. All the while I weighed my plans in my mind, being careful not to arouse suspicion.

This became a heart-rending experience that almost overwhelmed me. I doubted I would ever take my family to the beach like this again. I would be in prison—separated from my beautiful wife and children. The sight of them walking along the beach, so happy and serene, and the contrasting thought of being removed from them was startling, almost breathtaking. Waves of emotion swept over me—threatening to bring up tears in my eyes. I could not allow my emotions to show. To retain control, I lifted my heart to the Lord in praise and faith. As long as I responded to the swelling pain in my chest with praise, I could rise above it, and still see things clearly—and what a strikingly beautiful sight it was. Somehow, responding to the pain with intense praise turned it into joy—joy as clean and clear as the sand and sky. As I lifted my heart and eyes upward, I was reminded of God's promise to bless Abraham, and grant him descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky. I claimed that promise as my own, and rejoiced with all my might, lest my eyes become clouded with tears and they betray me.

All my paternal instincts were stirred as I played with my children. They enjoyed their father's attention. I took them one by one, each in turn, into water over their heads as they clung to my neck. As I carried and supported each child in the water, it was as though I was offering them to God as Abraham offered his son. I also admired the beauty and grace of my wife. I knew that, by God's grace, she would be able to cope with my being incarcerated, but it was soul wrenching to think of being separated from her—though I knew our relationship would continue.

Though I would almost surely be removed from my precious family, I knew that God would somehow work everything out. I would not lose them but only be separated from them. The separation would be painful, but the reward would be great, too great to fathom; it was simply accepted in faith.

An Agonizing Decision

By the time the sun had set, the emotions that I had experienced on the beach had ebbed. We brushed the sand from our things and walked back to the car. Neither Karen nor the children seemed alerted to anything. Like a man savoring his last supper, I enjoyed watching them through eyes unknown to them. But I decided to suspend final judgment as to whether I would act until the upcoming Monday. After making my decision, I would then have four days to prepare myself to act on Friday, the day abortions were performed.

The decision was agonizing. I would be leaving my home, children, and wife, but I felt that God had given me all I had so that I could return it to Him. Nor was I unmindful of the impact this gift would have, or of the reward. I was also assured, from God's Word, that He would be a Father to my children and sustain my wife.

I had not moved to Pensacola for this purpose, nor had I gotten myself on Donahue or Nightline, and carried myself through them in my own strength. I certainly had nothing to do with Michael Griffin shooting Dr. Gunn, or the highly publicized Pensacola abortion clinic bombings on Christmas of 1984. I was not standing for my own ideas, but God's truths—the same truths that have stopped blood baths and similar atrocities throughout history. Who was I to stand in God's way? He now held the door open and promised great blessing for obedience. Was I not to step through it?

When Monday arrived, I knew I had to decide. When I went from mentally debating whether to act, in general, to planning a particular act, I felt some relief. Romans 14:23b says"... and whatever is not from faith is sin." If I had not acted when I did, it would have been a direct and unconscionable sin of disobedience. One of the first things I told my wife, after the shooting was, "I didn't have any choice!" That cry came from the depths of my soul. I was certain, and still am, that God called me to obey His revealed will at that particular time.

My plan was to carry my shotgun from my parked truck to the front of the abortion clinic in a rolled-up poster board protest sign. I would leave the concealed shotgun lying on the ground until the abortionist drove past me into the clinic parking lot.

Preparing to Kill

In spite of my careful plans, the morning of the shooting was not easy. Although I had gone to bed late, I forced myself to rise about 4 A.M. to spend time in prayer and Bible reading, and to prepare myself for the day I was fully determined to act, but my usual zest, and the zeal I expected to feel were missing. The lower half of my body was gripped with a gnawing emptiness. This was not an easy task.

While driving to the clinic, I decided to drive past it first, to see if everything looked normal (I was concerned that someone may have become suspicious and called the police). Just as I approached the clinic, a police cruiser drove by me in the opposite direction. I forced my fears under control as I continued down the road. After driving about a quarter of a mile, it was time to head back, but the truck did not want to turn around; it had to be forced. I could hear the undercarriage groan as I did a tight turn around in an open parking lot. As hard as it was to turn around, I knew I could not continue down the road. Obedience was the only option.

Waiting for the Abortionist

Several months prior to the day of the shooting, GQ magazine had interviewed both the pro-life protesters and the pro-choice people (including the abortionist) who frequented the Ladies Center. This piece (published in February 1994) discussed the threat I posed to the abortionist, and the possibility of someone, like me, shooting him as he entered the clinic.

I knew from having read this article that the abortionist and his escort were on guard when entering the clinic. Jim Barret, an escort who took his turn driving the abortionist to the clinic, was described as being well armed. He was quoted as saying that, if threatened, he would "...shoot first" and "...not miss." As it happened, in God's providence, he was the driver killed that day.

Two thoughts sustained and impelled me as I went through this ordeal. The first was that if I ddid not intervene and prevent the abortionist from entering the clinic, he would kill two or three dozen children that day. The second, and more prominent thought, was that if I did not succeed in killing the abortionist, but merely wounded him, he would, in all probability, return to killing the unborn as soon as he was able. In the coming months and years, he would likely kill thousands of unborn children, under the security of the best police protection available. I was determined to prevent this.

As I stood awaiting the abortionist's arrival, I was struggling in fervent prayer to maintain my resolution of heart. At the end, as the moment of his expected arrival approached, I was praying fervently that the police security would not arrive first. I could still find the heart to shoot the abortionist, but, while I knew it would be justified to kill a policeman in order to stop the murderer he was protecting, I did not want to have to do it. I made an earnest and personal request to the Lord to spare me, and the policeman, if possible.

God answered my prayers, and the abortionist arrived two or three minutes prior to the police guard. When I lifted the shotgun, two men were sitting in the front seats of the parked truck; Jim Barret, the escort, was directly between me and the abortionist.

When I finished shooting, I laid the shotgun at my feet and walked away with my hands held out at my sides, awaiting arrest. (I did not want to appear to be threatening anyone when the police arrived.)

Arrested but Successful

Within a couple of minutes the police arrived. I gave a hopeful and non-resisting look to the policeman who ordered me under arrest with his drawn handgun. I was relieved when they cuffed me. I did not want to be shot, and was glad to be safely in police custody.

When they later led me to the police car, a handful of people had assembled. I spontaneously raised my voice: “One thing's for sure, no innocent people will be killed in that clinic today." Not only had the abortionist been prevented from killing about thirty people that day, he had also been prevented from continuing to kill—unlike other abortionists who have merely been wounded and have returned to “work.” The remarkable thing about that day was that, unlike the children that survived to possibly work some other day, the one that had intended to kill them did not.

At the police station, a specially summoned plain clothed officer sat talking with me for two or three hours. He had sat similarly with Michael Griffin. But I did not discuss what had just happened. I did not want to aid those who had sinned by swearing to uphold mass murder (as have virtually all those who have sworn to uphold the law of the land).

The arresting officer then led me out of the police station, and escorted me twenty yards to his squad car in front of a teeming mass of reporters and photographers. As I came out of the door of the station, I seized the initiative, and raised my voice in a carefully planned declaration: “Now is the time to defend the unborn in the same way you'd defend slaves about to be murdered!”

Soon I was alone in a large one-man cell, and could direct all my praise and thanks to the Lord. I repeatedly sang a song commonly used at rescues. The first stanza is, “Our God is an awesome God”; He most certainly is. The only way to handle the pain of being separated from my family was to continually rejoice in the Lord for all that He had done.

Breaking the Shackles of Submission

Although I did not understand the meaning of all the emotions I experienced immediately after my incarceration, I understand them better now. Prior to the shooting, I experienced the oppressive realization that I was not free to defend my neighbors as I would defend myself. Wrath was ready to be poured out on me if I cast off the shackles of passive submission to the state. The fear of being persecuted for disobeying our tyrannical government made submitting to its yoke seem attractive. My mind and will recoiled from the high cost of acting responsibly. It required an act of the will to even consider obeying the Lord.

Any nation that legalizes abortion throws a blanket of fear and intimidation over all its citizens who rightly understand the issues involved. By legalizing abortion, the government has aimed its intimidating weaponry at any who dare to interfere with the slaughter. The resulting fear of the government has a paralyzing effect on both the individual and the collective mindset that is incalculable. Anyone who underestimates the power that fear of the police has over men's minds fails to appreciate what may be the government's most powerful tool. If you wonder why so few speak, or practice, the whole truth about defending the unborn, you need look no further for an explanation: it's illegal to save those being led away to slaughter.

The inner joy and peace that have flooded my soul since I have cast off the state's tyranny makes my 6 x 9 cell a triumphant and newly liberated kingdom. I shudder at the thought of ever returning to the bondage currently enforced by the state.

What is the appropriate response to news of an abortion provider being slain by someone defending the unborn? Under such circumstances, the focus should not be on the slain murderer, but on the deliverance of his intended victims. For instance, in the book of Esther, when the Lord delivered the Jews from the Persians who intended to harm them, the people didn't mourn the death of their enemies. Rather, they established a holiday of feasting and rejoicing that continues to be celebrated to this day.

Family Neglect and Excessive Force?

Some object that by acting as I did I have neglected my family. But in spite of the emphasis the Bible places on performing familial duties, it is abundantly clear that you must respond to the call of Christ—even if it requires you to leave your children, wife, house, and also forfeit your life. To perform a higher calling, it's often necessary to leave lesser duties behind.

Others object that killing Dr. Britton was excessive. But many who hold this position would not object if they learned that, during the Jewish holocaust, someone had shot and killed a Nazi concentration camp “doctor”.

The appropriate degree of defensive force is determined by the circumstances. Force that is excessive under one set of circumstances may be totally inadequate under conditions that are more demanding. Extreme circumstances normally call for extreme measures. Would you think you had done your duty if you merely wounded someone who was trying to kill your family, if, afterwards, you had to sit in jail as the murderer returned, week after week, until he had killed everyone in your family?

Under circumstances where it's likely that merely wounding someone, rather than killing him, will result in that person later returning to murder numerous people, lethal force is justified. Genesis 14 records an incident in which Abraham, and his men, attacked and killed a group of men who had taken Abraham's nephew, Lot, captive. God later blessed this slaughter through Melchizedek (a type of Christ), who declared that God had delivered Abraham's enemies into his hand. Under these circumstances, lethal force was necessary. It certainly prevented those killed from later regrouping and returning to threaten Abraham or Lot.

Limited to Legal Remedies?

Many people mistakenly think that when the government sanctions mass murder that their responses should be limited to legal and educational remedies. But the appropriate response to an immediate threat to a child's life is not to merely pursue possible educational and legislative remedies, but to do what is necessary for the child's immediate and effective defense.

Those who believe that we should remain within the law, under these circumstances, have some difficult questions to answer. Would it also be wrong to intervene if the government was to sanction the murder of any other minority, and thousands were being slain in the streets every day? If individuals are wrong to bomb abortion clinics, would it have also been wrong for individuals to have bombed the tracks that led to Auschwitz? If this is excessive, may Christians overturn the tables in abortion clinics, and chase everyone from the premises – much as Christ cleansed the temple? If not, why not? If mass rape or enslavement should be resisted with the immediate means necessary, should not mass murder be resisted with similar means?

The Burden of Proof

It's easy to see why someone who supports abortion would accuse me of murder: those who took sides with the men Abraham killed when he rescued Lot would have responded similarly to Abraham. Suppose that, in the process of delivering Lot, Abraham had been captured and put on trial by his enemies. In order for his trial to have been just, regardless of their prejudice against him, they would have been required to consider him innocent until proven guilty. Although his accusers could have raised objections to his actions (for instance, they might have claimed that Abraham used excessive force), they could not have proven that he was wrong. It's so obviously virtuous for someone to risk his life in defense of the innocent that it cannot be proven to be wrong. And while Abraham could not have removed all doubt that he was justified, he could have raised plenty of doubt about his guilt. The many people Abraham saved could have borne convincing testimony to the virtue of his actions. The lethal force Abraham used would have appeared reasonable and necessary to them. They almost certainly joined with God in blessing him for his decisive action. In much the same way, the many unborn children whose lives are being threatened today bear self-evident witness to the morality of intervening with the immediate means necessary. As in Abraham's case, if we don't overcome all objections, and respond in faith, the innocent will continue to suffer irreparable loss.

The Priority of Saving a Threatened Child

What practical priority should be given to stopping abortion? While many people realize that abortion is a serious problem, they still categorize it as one among many other “social issues” that should be given a lower priority than family or church concerns. But it is important to understand that a life threatening crisis in any area of life normally suspends all other duties. If, for instance, you are sharing the gospel on a street corner, and see a young child run into the street, if you don't postpone your other duties until the child is safe you are guilty of gross and shameful neglect, and bring reproach on the gospel you claim to represent.

And if you would put an immediate threat to your own child before all other concerns, why is it that a similar threat to your neighbor's child is given such a low priority? Isn't this disparity in priorities the very thing that the second great commandment, and the golden rule, were designed to overcome? Did the Good Samaritan have misplaced priorities, or was the problem with those who passed by the needy man?

When Abraham learned that Lot, his nephew, had been taken captive (as described in Genesis 14), he rightly dropped everything else until Lot was safe. If he had decided that tending his flocks, making converts—or virtually any other duty—was more important than delivering Lot, he would have been guilty of a sin of omission. In much the same way, though not everyone is called to take up a weapon as Abraham did, since abortion poses an immediate threat, we must be willing to postpone our ordinary duties, and make the personal sacrifices necessary to save the innocent. God's word requires it.

Soon after my arrest, the prosecution announced they were seeking the death penalty. This forced me to decide whether I should try to resist their efforts to kill me. After some thought, I decided that it was my duty to do whatever I could to save the most people from being killed, and thereby bring the most glory to God. I didn't know for certain that my allowing them to kill me would result in fewer children being killed, but it seemed probable that this would be the result. I proceeded in the strength of this judgment.

Mock Trial

My trial was a classic example of judicial tyranny. It bore many similarities to the trials of those who protected the Jews from being murdered in Nazi Germany—prior to the end of the war. It should be remembered, however, that soon after the war many roles were reversed, and many who had condemned the defenders of the Jews were themselves condemned.

With this in mind, Michael Hirsh, a pro-life lawyer formerly involved with Operation Rescue, presented a brief to the judge in my name. With the help of Vince Heiser (another pro-life lawyer who came to my aid) we argued that we should be allowed to show that my actions were necessary to prevent mass murder. We applied the principle of justifiable homicide to defending the unborn. We also reminded the judge that he might, one day, stand trial for upholding the abortion holocaust if he would not allow us to present the truth.

Even though 47% of the population believed that the abortionist was committing murder, the judge ruled against me, and would not allow me to voice this belief. He silenced me with a gag order. The freedom to speak the truth—which every American should enjoy—was denied me during my trial. Even though my life hung in the balance, the court strictly excluded my pro-life views.

If I had been allowed to tell the truth, it would have inevitably resulted in my putting the abortionist, and the government that protected him, on trial for participating in mass murder. The government had a vested interest in suppressing my defense. I could have shown that not only the abortionist, but also the government could have justifiably had force used against it. Governments that sanction mass murder should be resisted, and their innocent victims should be defended with the means necessary.

Since I was denied a truthful defense, I had none. What was I to say? Since I could not tell the truth, I had almost nothing to say. There was no use in offering lame and ineffectual arguments—doing so would only make it appear that I had been given a fair trial.

During the penalty phase, I addressed the jury for the first time, and made a short statement as my “closing argument”: You have a responsibility to protect your neighbor's life, and to use force if necessary to do so. In an effort to suppress this truth, you may mix my blood with the blood of the unborn, and those who have fought to defend the oppressed. However, truth and righteousness will prevail. May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected. Soon afterwards, I was escorted to Florida State Prison's death row.

I could not avoid an automatic appeal to the Florida State Supreme Court. As soon as they upheld my death sentence, I waived all future appeals.

World Transforming Truths

The most powerful weapon for overcoming the world's apathetic response to legal abortion is to advocate the means necessary for resisting this atrocity (as required by God's law). Neither the world nor the worldly Christian want the searchlight of God's word focused on their neglect of the unborn, but these are the means God uses to produce genuine repentance. Without a lofty ethic there can be no hearty repentance; without a sight of sin there is no need of a Savior. How can you expect to convict people of neglecting the unborn, and point them to Christ for pardon, unless the requirements of God's law are being applied to the abortion holocaust?

God's arm is not short. If only a few show the commitment required, He can turn the tide on legalized abortion and begin a worldwide transformation. Victor Hugo has written, “One can resist an invasion of armies, but not an idea whose time has come.” Defending the unborn with force is considerably more than an idea whose time has come, it is a biblical duty whose time has come. God is able to bless the application of this duty far beyond all we could ask or think. If Christians will repent and take a bold stand on this duty, regardless of the cost, the Lord will fight for us, and triumph through us for His own glory and honor. Therefore, if you believe that abortion is lethal force you should uphold the force needed to stop it.

DEFENSIVE ACTION STATEMENT

We, the undersigned, declare the justice of taking all godly action necessary to defend innocent human life including the use of force. We proclaim that whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child. We assert that if Michael Griffin did in fact kill David Gunn, his use of lethal force was justifiable provided it was carried out for the purpose of defending the lives of unborn children. Therefore, he ought to be acquitted of the charges against him.

THE SECOND DEFENSIVE ACTION STATEMENT

The Second Defensive Action Statement was released by the Defenders of the Defenders of Life after Paul Hill shot the abortionist, John Bayard Britton, and his accomplices, Lt. Col. James Barrett, and Mrs. Barrett. It is modeled on the original Defensive Action Statement which was originally issued by Paul Hill

We the undersigned, declare the justice of taking all godly action necessary, including the use of force, to defend innocent human life (born and unborn). We proclaim that whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child.

We declare and affirm that if in fact Paul Hill did kill or wound abortionist John Britton, and accomplices James Barrett and Mrs. Barrett, his actions are morally justified if they were necessary for the purpose of defending innocent human life. Under these conditions, Paul Hill should be acquitted of all charges against him.

Hill v. State, 656 So.2d 1271 (Fla.,1995) (Direct Appeal).

Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder for killing abortion clinic physician and volunteers, and sentenced to death by the Circuit Court, Escambia County,Frank Bell, J. Defendant appealed, challenging validity of waiver of right to counsel, rejection of necessity defense, and death sentence. The Supreme Court held that: (1) waiver of right to counsel was valid despite failure to advise defendant of difficulty in presenting necessity defense; (2) legal abortions were not "harm" required to invoke necessity defense; and (3) preventing legal abortions was not "moral justification" for purposes of preventing application of aggravating circumstance that murders were cold, calculated, and premeditated. Affirmed. Anstead, J., concurred in part, dissented in part, and filed opinion.

Early on the morning of July 29, 1994, Hill went to the Ladies Center in Pensacola, Florida, where he had been protesting against abortion for six months, and waited outside. About one hour later, a pick-up truck driven by James Herman Barrett, also containing his wife June Griffith Barrett and Dr. John Bayard Britton, arrived at the Center. The Barretts volunteered at the Center on the last Friday of every month. On those days, they met Dr. Britton at the airport and escorted him to the Ladies Center, which he visited every Friday to perform legal abortions. As the truck entered the parking lot, Hill was standing in the middle of the driveway. He moved to the side, allowing the truck to pass him. As the truck drove by, it came within several feet of Hill, so that he was able to see the truck's occupants.

James Barrett parked the truck near the steps of the Center. As Barrett got out of the truck, Hill shot and killed him. Hill also shot and wounded June Barrett. He then moved closer to the truck before shooting and killing Dr. Britton. Hill was arrested shortly thereafter while walking away from the Center.

Hill was charged with two counts of first-degree premeditated murder, one count of attempted first-degree murder, and one count of shooting into an occupied vehicle. He pled not guilty to all counts. The Public Defender's Office was appointed as counsel. After Hill indicated that he wished to represent himself, the trial court conducted a hearing pursuant to Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975) The trial court determined that Hill had knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and granted the Public Defender's motion to withdraw. However, the trial court also appointed the Public Defender's Office as "standby counsel" to aid Hill if he requested help and to be available to represent him in the event representation became necessary.

The State filed a motion in limine to prevent Hill from presenting a defense of necessity/justification. The trial court denied Hill's request to have an out-of-state attorney argue at the hearing on the State's motion, but renewed the offer of counsel, whereupon Hill reaffirmed his desire to represent himself. At trial, Hill repeated his desire to present the defense of justification or necessity, but the trial court did not permit it. Hill's participation otherwise throughout the trial was minimal. He was subsequently convicted on all four counts.

The jury recommended a sentence of death on both counts of murder by a vote of 12-0.

The trial court's sentencing order found that the following two aggravators had been established beyond a reasonable doubt for both murders: (1) the defendant was previously convicted of another capital felony or of a felony involving the use or threat of violence to the person, as evidenced by the contemporaneous convictions; and (2) the murder had been committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification. This second aggravator was proven with evidence establishing that Hill had stated previously that abortionists should be executed, had purchased a shotgun and ammunition two days before the murders and practiced at a firing range on two separate occasions during those two days, had modified the shotgun, had arrived at the Center one hour before the victims, and had proudly stood looking over the bodies after he shot them. With respect to Dr. Britton's murder, the trial court found a third aggravator of especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel, established by the agony Dr. Britton had to endure in having time to anticipate and contemplate his own imminent death while he watched Hill reload his gun and approach the Barretts' vehicle.

In statutory mitigation, the trial court found that Hill had no significant history of prior criminal activity. Finding that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances presented, the trial court sentenced Hill to death on each of the two murder convictions.

* * *

Regardless of what name is attached to the defense (and for the sake of simplicity we will refer to it as the necessity defense) one thing is clear: The harm or evil which a defendant, who asserts the necessity defense, seeks to prevent must be a legal harm or evil as opposed to a moral or ethical belief of the individual defendant.

* * *

The courts have invoked several different rationales in rejecting application of the defense. The majority of courts reason that because abortion is a lawful, constitutionally protected act, it is not a legally recognized harm which can justify illegal conduct.

* * *

To accept appellant's argument would be tantamount to judicially sanctioning vigilantism. If every person were to act upon his or her personal beliefs in this manner, and we were to sanction the act, the result would be utter chaos. In a society of laws and not of individuals, we cannot allow each individual to determine, based upon his or her personal beliefs, whether another person may exercise her constitutional rights and then allow that individual to assert the defense of justification to escape criminal liability. We recognize that, despite our proscription, some individuals, because of firmly held and honestly believed convictions, will feel compelled to break the law. If they choose to do so, however, they must be prepared to face the consequences. Thus, such private attempts to circumvent the law with the aim to deprive a pregnant woman of her right to obtain an abortion will not be tolerated by this Court.

Hill v. State, 656 So.2d 1271 (Fla.,1995) (Motion for pro se appeal).

Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death by the Circuit Court, Escambia County, Elzie S. Sanders, C.J. Defendant appealed, and moved for leave to represent himself on appeal and to discharge public defender's office as appellate counsel. The Supreme Court held that defendant was not entitled to discharge public defender's office, and represent himself on appeal, but would be allowed to file pro se supplemental brief. Ordered accordingly.

PER CURIAM.
Appellant Paul Jennings Hill was charged with first-degree murder in Escambia County. Upon his motion, Hill was permitted to represent himself at the trial, together with standby counsel. Hill was convicted and sentenced to death. His appeal is now pending in this Court, and he is represented by the public defender. Hill has now moved for leave to represent himself on appeal and to discharge the public defender's office as appellate counsel. We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution.

Pursuant to our directive, the Honorable Elzie S. Sanders, Circuit Judge of the Eighth Judicial Circuit of Florida, conducted a hearing on Hill's motion. Judge Sanders found that Hill comprehends his constitutional right to assistance of counsel in the appeal process and has knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to assistance of counsel in the appeal. Judge Sanders recommended that Hill be permitted to represent himself but that the public defender continue in the case as "next friend of the court."

The principle of Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975) concerning self-representation is not applicable to appeals. Indeed, the Faretta court cited with approval Price v. Johnston, 334 U.S. 266, 68 S.Ct. 1049, 92 L.Ed. 1356 (1948) . Faretta, 422 U.S. at 816, 95 S.Ct. at 2531-32. In Price, the United States Supreme Court stated: The discretionary nature of the power in question grows out of the fact that a prisoner has no absolute right to argue his own appeal or even to be present at the proceedings in an appellate court. The absence of that right is in sharp contrast to his constitutional prerogative of being present in person at each significant stage of a felony prosecution and to his recognized privilege of conducting his own defense at the trial. 334 U.S. at 285, 68 S.Ct. at 1060 (citations and footnote omitted).

The transcript of the hearing clearly supports Judge Sanders' findings with respect to Hill's competency and knowing and voluntary waiver of assistance of counsel. However, this is the direct appeal of a capital case. The Court is concerned that it cannot properly carry out its statutory responsibility to review Hill's conviction and sentence of death without the skilled adversarial assistance of a lawyer acting on Hill's behalf, particularly as it concerns the sufficiency of the evidence to convict and the proportionality of the death sentence. As this Court stated in Klokoc v. State, 589 So.2d 219 (Fla.1991) when the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal from his death sentence:

[C]ounsel for the appellant is hereby advised that in order for the appellant to receive a meaningful appeal, the Court must have the benefit of an adversary proceeding with diligent appellate advocacy addressed to both the judgment and the sentence. Accordingly, counsel for appellant is directed to proceed to prosecute the appeal in a genuinely adversary manner, providing diligent advocacy of appellant's interests. The foregoing rulings are made without prejudice to the right of appellant to request leave to file a pro se supplemental brief setting forth his personal positions and interests with regard to the subject matter of this appeal. Id. at 221-22 (quoting order on motion to dismiss appeal). Thus, we deny Hill's motion. Because this is a capital case, we will permit Hill to file a pro se supplemental brief on or before the time within which his attorney's brief shall be filed. It is so ordered.

Hill v. State (Application for Stay of Execution)

NOTICE TO SUPREME COURT AND APPLICATION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION OF DEATH WARRANT SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 3, 2003

PAUL JENNINGS HILL, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

The judgment of the Honorable Court in and for Escambia County, Florida in case styled State of Florida, Plaintiff v. Paul Jennings Hill, Defendant, Case No. 94-3510CFA, affirmed by this Honorable Court in Case No. 84,838, is that the Defendant was sentenced in Count One to death, and in Count Two to death consecutively to Count One, to 160.75 months in Count Three, and to 160.75 months on Count Four; Counts Three and Four are to run concurrent, and, “all four of these sentences running consecutive to the Federal Sentence that was imposed under the Federal Law.

***

3. The Petitioner was arrested by the State of Florida on July 29, 1994 and charged with murder. 4. The Petitioner was indicted in Federal Court and charged with violations of 18 U.S.C. 248(a)(1), two counts [intentionally injuring and interfering with individuals providing reproductive health services resulted in their death], 18 U.S.C. 248(a)(2) [intentionally injuring and interfering with an individual providing reproductive health services] and, 18 U.S.C. 324(c), possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. 5. Petitioner was indicted in State Court and charged with two counts of first degree murder [§782.04 and 775.087], attempted first degree murder [§777.04, 782.04 and 775.087] and shooting into occupied vehicle [§790.19]. 6. Petitioner first was tried and convicted in Federal Court on December 2, 1994, where the sentence of the Federal Court, the Honorable Roger Vincent, imposed a life sentence on Counts I and II, to be served concurrently, 120 months on Count III to be served concurrently with the terms imposed Counts I and II, and for a term of 60 months on Count IV, with the term imposed to be served consecutively to the terms of Counts I, II and III, as set forth on Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

7. Petitioner was tried and convicted in the Circuit Court in and for Escambia County, State of Florida, and on December 6, 1994 and The Honorable Frank L. Bell, Circuit Judge, sentenced the petitioner to death on the Count I, first degree murder, §775.087; sentenced the petitioner to death on Count II, §775.087, said sentence consecutive to Count I; sentenced on Count III, [attempted first degree murder] to 160.75 months in State Prison; and on Count IV, §790.12 [shooting into an occupied vehicle] to 160.75 months; Counts III and IV to run concurrent with Counts I and II, and all Counts to run consecutive to the federal sentence (Ex. B).