Skip to main content

Lord, we pray for Sandra Merritt and David Daleiden--sustain them as only you can, Father. We pray that those who expose wickedness would not be punished.

 

“A San Francisco district judge ruled Wednesday that the undercover journalists who exposed the aborted baby body parts practices of Planned Parenthood must pay the abortion giant over $1.5 million plus all of its attorney fees.

Judge William Orrick III of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, an Obama appointee, also prohibited Center for Medical Progress (CMP) project lead David Daleiden and his associates from ever entering Planned Parenthood conferences in the future. (This permanent injunction is based on racketeering laws–RICO.)”

Editor’s note: 

IFA had the opportunity to attend a conference in January about the law and pro-life issues. We learned about this case from David Daleiden’s attorneys. Because of what we learned there, this result is deeply, deeply distressing. It is imperative to pray for reversal on appeal. Here is a summary of what the attorneys explained:

  • If this judgment stands, it will be devastating to prolife demonstrators of all kinds. It essentially places “a protective cloak” over abortion clinics.
  • In the trial, it was established as FACT that babies were being born alive to harvest their tissue–they cut beating hearts out of the babies, and there was no effective consent signed for this. These things were demonstrated in Daleiden’s videos, which Planned Parenthood stipulated were accurate. Where is the outrage about this?
  • Although Daleiden’s work is essentially undercover journalism, no news media supported him. If the result of this trial stands, it will be the end of undercover journalism.
  • The trial team emphasized that they felt the prayers of people. Let’s keep praying that this unjust result be reversed on appeal and that Daleiden and his attorneys (Thomas More Society) will have the resources they need to keep fighting.
  • “The order follows a jury’s verdict in November that sided with Planned Parenthood.

    The jury found the undercover journalists violated the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), causing significant harm to the abortion chain with its sting video series. It awarded punitive damages to Planned Parenthood of over $2.2 million.

    Regarding CMP’s claim of its First Amendment right as journalists to uncover corruption, Orrick responded:

    Defendants’ arguments go too far. Simply claiming the mantel of a journalist does not give someone a license to trespass, illegally record, or otherwise commit violations of generally applicable laws. The “evidence” defendants actually gathered and then published as a result of the conduct the jury found was illegal did not itself show any illegal conduct by Planned Parenthood or plaintiff affiliates.

    Planned Parenthood and its media and political allies have continued the narrative that CMP’s videos of its staff engaged in haggling over the price of aborted baby body parts were “deceptively edited.”

    However, in January 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the videos produced by CMP were not deceptively edited.

    Judge Edith H. Jones, a Ronald Reagan nominee who wrote for a three-judge panel, rebuked the lower district court, asserting, “The district court stated, inaccurately, that the CMP video had not been authenticated and suggested that it may have been edited.”

    The judge continued that the district court, which had ruled against the Texas Health and Human Services Commission’s Office of Inspector General (OIG):

    … felt free to credit all of the trial testimony from [Planned Parenthood] — none of which had been offered during the state administrative procedures — [but] the court bound the IG solely to the administrative record and expressly refused to consider any support for termination “not included in the Final Notice and not part of the Inspector General’s termination decision.”

    “Having thus narrowed the evidence, the court concluded that OIG ‘did not have prima facie … evidence, or even a scintilla of evidence, to conclude the bases of termination set forth in the Final Notice merited finding the Plaintiff Providers were not qualified,’” Jones wrote.”

    (Excerpt from Breitbart.)

  • https://ifapray.org/blog/injus...aby-body-parts-case/
Original Post

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×