Cheryl Sullenger

Gosnell still facing 380 criminal charges, including five murder charges

Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger
Image

Philadelphia, PA, April 24, 2013 (OperationRescue.org) – In a surprise move, the defense in the Kermit Gosnell murder trial has rested without calling a single witness. The news comes on the heals of a clarification by Judge Jeffery P. Minehart about a mix-up in the dismissal of one of the murder charges yesterday.

Closing arguments are set for Monday.

Yesterday’s dismissal of nine criminal charges against accused murderer Kermit Gosnell stunned many who have followed this macabre case involving babies born alive during illegal late-term abortions then intentionally killed amid squalid conditions at Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” abortion clinic.

Today, Judge Jeffery P. Minehart clarified that he did not intend to drop the First Degree Murder charges for Baby C, a baby witnesses said was breathing for 20 minutes before it was stabbed in the neck by Lynda Williams in Gosnell’s presence.

Instead, murder charges should have been dismissed in the death of Baby F for which there was less compelling evidence.

Nevertheless, the dismissals are expected to have little effect on the trial’s outcome. Court records show that Gosnell still faces over 380 criminal counts, including five murder charges. A conviction on any of the First Degree murder counts would mean he could still receive the death penalty or life in prison without parole.

After heated arguments by Defense Attorney Jack McMahon and Assistant District Attorney Ed Cameron, Judge Minehart dismissed the following charges without explanation:

• Three counts of First Degree Murder in the deaths of Babies Boy B, Baby G, and Baby F (after correction by the judge).
• Five counts of Abuse of Corpse related to the discovery of five jars containing the severed feet of large aborted babies.
• One count of Infanticide in the case of Baby Boy B

However, according to court records, Conspiracy and Solicitation to Commit Murder charges for Baby G remain active and were not dismissed with the murder charges.

Also dismissed were were six counts of “Theft by Deception” against former Gosnell employee Eileen O’Neill, sho is standing trail with Gosnell. She is accused of billing for medical services provided as she was masquerading as a license physician. Three remaining counts will go to the jury.

Victims’ Cases Won’t Go to the Jury

Baby Boy B was discovered during the original 2010 law enforcement raid of Gosnell’s abortion clinic frozen in a red biohazard bag along with the remains of 46 other aborted babies. The medical examiner told the grand jury that he estimated gestational age of Baby Boy B to be 28 weeks. This baby was intact and bore the now-familiar neck wound that indicated his spinal cord had been severed. However, there was no testimony presented during the trial that this baby ever moved or breathed. Gosnell had been charged with infanticide related to the death of Baby Boy B.

Baby G was of an unknown gestational age. An unlicensed abortionist who worked with Gosnell testified before the Grand Jury that he helped Gosnell deliver Baby G and observed a “respiratory excursion,” or a breath. He said Gosnell then turned the baby over and severed his spinal cord with scissors.

Baby F was estimated to be 25-27 weeks gestation when Steven Massof, an unlicensed abortionist employed by Gosnell, assisted his boss in the abortion and delivery of the intact baby. Massof testified that he saw a leg “jerk and move” after which he saw Gosnell sever its spine.

Other Charges Also Dropped

The five abuse of corpse charges dismissed by Judge Minehart related to five jars of severed feet seized from Gosnell’s clinic. McMahon argued that they were kept for possible DNA sampling and as proof of gestational age, but medical professionals who testified all said that there was no known medical reason or precedent for such behavior.

While those charges have been dropped, it is estimated that over 380 other criminal charges remain, including four counts of first degree murder for the deaths of Baby Boy A, Baby D, Baby E, Baby F and one count of Third Degree Murder for the death of patient Karnamaya Mongar.

Four Remaining First Degree Murder Counts

Baby Boy A was the biggest baby that Kareema Cross had ever seen delivered at Gosnell’s abortion “House of Horrors” clinic in the four years she worked there. He was delivered to 17-year-old Shaquana Abrams at 29.4 weeks gestation, according to an ultrasound record. Baby Boy A was so large, he did not fit into the plastic shoe box that Gosnell tossed him in. Cross said she saw the baby pull in his arms and legs while Gosnell explained the movements as “reflexes” telling her the baby really didn’t move prior to cutting the baby’s neck. Baby Boy A was so large, Gosnell joked that “this baby is big enough to walk around with me or walk me to the bus stop.” Cross and fellow employees Adrienne Moton and 15-year old Ashley Baldwin were all so “startled” by the size of the baby that they all took photos of the baby with their cell phones.

Baby C was an intact baby of over 25-weeks gestation. Kareema Cross testified that she saw Baby C breathing and described the up and down chest movements she observed for 20 minutes. She told the court she saw Lynda Williams lift the baby’s arm and watched as the newborn drew it back on its own power. Afterwards, Williams inserted surgical scissors into the baby’s neck and “snipped” the spinal cord. Gosnell was said to be in the room at the time. This baby’s murder charges were unintentionally dismissed in the place of Baby F, but were reinstated after Judge Minehart discovered his error.

Baby D was described by witnesses as 12-15 inches long with the head the size of a “big pancake” when he was delivered into a toilet. Kareema Cross testified that she saw the baby struggling, using swimming motions in an attempt to get out of the toilet bowl. Adrienne Moton pulled the baby out and “snipped” the neck, as Gosnell had taught her to do, while the mother watched. Gosnell has also been charged with Criminal Solicitation of Moton to commit murder of Baby D.

Baby E was estimated to be at least 23 weeks gestation and maybe more. After Baby E was delivered, teen Ashley Baldwin heard the baby cry and called Kareema Cross for help. Cross described the baby’s cry as a “whine.” Baldwin said that Gosnell when into the room then came out with the baby — which now had an incision in its neck — and tossed it into the waste bin.

Mongar Murder Count Still Active

Gosnell also still faces one Third Degree Murder charge in the drug overdose death of second-trimester abortion patient Karnamaya Mongar. Witnesses testified that Mongar was not breathing right but Gosnell completed the abortion before attempting to revive Mongar. A defibrillator present in the room at the time was broken and unusable. Gosnell also faces several other charges related to the death of Mongar, including Murder by Drug Delivery Resulting in Death.

Other Active Criminal Charges

Gosnell faces a massive amount of other charges related to his corrupt abortion organization, including several violations of the Controlled Substances act for sloppy or improper drug handling and administration by unqualified employees. He also faces numerous Conspiracy and Solicitation charges related to the murder of newborns and illegal distribution of drugs. Gosnell faces a whopping 310 counts of violating Informed Consent laws, 33 counts of abortion at more than 24 weeks, and 10 counts of Theft by Deception, and three counts of Corruption of a Minor. He is also facing charges of running a Corrupt Organization and Racketeering.

Below is a full listing of his active charges, all of which will go to the jury:

• Murder (Karnamaya Mongar), 3rd degree, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502(c)
• Murder, drug delivery resulting in death (K. Mongar), 18 Pa.C.S. § 2506
• Controlled Substances Act, 35 P.S. 780-§113(f)(30), F-1
• Controlled Substances Act, 35 P.S. 780-§113(f)(14), F-1
• Conspiracy (Controlled Substances Act), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Solicitation (Controlled Substances Act), 18 Pa.C.S. § 902, 2 counts, F-1
• Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5105(a), F-3
• Obstructing Administration of Law, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5101, M-2
• Murder (Baby Boy A), 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502
• Conspiracy (Murder of Baby C), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Solicitation (Murder, Baby C), 18 Pa.C.S. § 902, F-1
• Murder (Baby D), 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502
• Conspiracy (Murder of Baby D), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Solicitation (Murder, Baby D), 18 Pa.C.S. § 902, F-1
• Murder (Baby E) 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502
• Murder (Baby F), 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502
• Conspiracy (Murder of Baby F), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Conspiracy (Murder of Baby G), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Solicitation (Murder of Baby G), 18 Pa.C.S. § 902, F-1
• Conspiracy (murder, generally), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Infanticide (Baby Girl A), 18 Pa.C.S. § 3212, F-3
• Abortion at 24 or more weeks (33 counts), 18 Pa.C.S. § 3211, F-3
• Conspiracy (Abortion, 24 or more weeks), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-3
• Informed consent violations (310 counts), 18 Pa.C.S. § 3205, M-3
• Theft by deception (10 counts), 18 Pa.C.S. § 3922, M-1
• Conspiracy (Theft by deception), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, M-1
• Controlled Substances Act (Massof), 35 P.S. 780-(§113(f)(30), F-1
• Controlled Substances Act (Massof), 35 P.S. 780-(§113(f)(14), F-1
• Conspiracy (Controlled Substances Act), 18 Pa.C.S. § 903, F-1
• Corrupt Organizations, Racketeering, 18 Pa.C.S. § 911(b), F-1
• Corrupt Organization, Conspiracy,18 Pa.C.S. § 911(b)(4), F-1
• Corruption of Minors (3 counts), 18 Pa.C.S. § 6301, M-1
• Obstructing Administration of Law, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5101, M-2
• Tampering with or Fabricating Evidence, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4910, M-2

Gosnell also faces numerous Federal drug charges for the illegal distribution of narcotics that ended up on the streets of Philadelphia. He is expected to be tried in that case sometime later in Federal Court.

“The prospect of Gosnell being completely exonerated seems highly unlikely, but when a jury is involved, anything can happen,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “While the spotlight shines on this horrific case, we remain acutely aware that abortion clinics across America are operating in Gosnell-like conditions committing violations that Gosnell also committed. We continue to pray for justice in the Gosnell case and that all abortionists of his ilk will soon be brought to justice. May the Gosnell case speed the day when abortion is abolished in this country for good.”

Operation Rescue plans to be in the courtroom for closing arguments.

LAST CALL! Can you donate $5?

Today is the last day of our fall fundraising campaign. Can you help us reach our goal?


Share this article

Advertisement
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

Sandra Cano, ‘Mary Doe’ of Doe v. Bolton, RIP

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson
Image

Sandra Cano, the woman whose divorce custody case morphed into a Supreme Court decision extending the “constitutional right” to an abortion throughout all nine months of pregnacy, has passed away of natural causes.

Cano was “Mary Doe” of Doe v. Bolton, the other case settled by the High Court on January 22, 1973. In 1970, at 22, Cano saw an attorney to divorce her husband – who had a troubled legal history – and regain custody of her children. The Georgia resident was nine weeks pregnant with her fourth child at the time.

Cano said once the attorney from Legal Aid, Margie Pitts Hames, deceptively twisted her desire to stay with her children into a legal crusade that has resulted in 56 million children being aborted.

“I was a trusting person and did not read the papers put in front of me by my lawyer,” Cano said in a sworn affidavit in 2003. “I did not even suspect that the papers related to abortion until one afternoon when my mother and my lawyer told me that my suitcase was packed to go to a hospital, and that they had scheduled an abortion for the next day.”

Cano was so disgusted by the prospect that she fled the state.

Yet the legal case went on, winding up before the Supreme Court the same day as Roe v. Wade. The same 7-2 majority agreed to Roe, which struck down state regulations on abortions before viability, and Doe, which allowed abortions until the moment of birth on the grounds of maternal “health” – a definition so broad that any abortion could be justified.

All the justices except Byron White and future Chief Justice William Rehnquist agreed that “physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age” are all “factors [that] may relate to [maternal] health.”

“I was nothing but a symbol in Doe v. Bolton with my experience and circumstances discounted and misrepresented,” Cano said in 2003.

Two years later, she told a Senate subcommittee, “Using my name and life, Doe v. Bolton falsely created the health exception that led to abortion on demand and partial birth abortion... I only sought legal assistance to get a divorce from my husband and to get my children from foster care. I was very vulnerable: poor and pregnant with my fourth child, but abortion never crossed my mind.”

On the 30th anniversary of the case, she asked the Supreme Court justices to revisit the ruling that bears her pseudonym, but they denied her request. “I felt responsible for the experiences to which the mothers and babies were being subjected. In a way, I felt that I was involved in the abortions – that I was somehow responsible for the lives of the children and the horrible experiences of their mothers,” she explained.

By that time, both Cano and Norma McCorvey, Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade, opposed abortion and implored the Supreme Court to overturn the rulings made in their names. Both also said their pro-abortion attorneys had misrepresented or lied about their circumstances to make abortion-on-demand more sympathetic.

"I pledge that as long as I have breath, I will strive to see abortion ended in America,” Cano said in 1997.

Priests for Life announced last week that Cano was in a hospital in the Atlanta area, in critical condition with throat cancer, blood sepsis, and congestive heart failure.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

“My heart is broken that Sandra will never witness an end to abortion,” Janet Morana said. “She never wanted to have an abortion. She never had an abortion, and she certainly never wanted to be a part of the Supreme Court decision, Doe v. Bolton, that opened the gates for legal abortion at any time during pregnancy and for any reason.”

“Sandra’s work to overturn that devastating decision that was based on lies will not end with her death,” Fr. Frank Pavone said. “When life ultimately triumphs over death, Sandra will share in that victory.”

Advertisement
Featured Image
We don’t kill problems anymore. We kill people, and pretend that it is the same thing.
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

First we killed our unborn children. Now we’re killing our own parents.

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

In a culture that elevates transient pleasure as a “value,” while reducing “value” itself to a subjective and utilitarian status, I suppose it should not be surprising that the worth of human beings is now constantly in question.

We once lived in a culture that drafted laws to protect “dependents”: the very young, the very old, and the disabled. This was done in recognition of the fact that a human being’s increased vulnerability correspondingly heightens our moral responsibility to that human being.

Now, however, the exit strategists of the Sexual Revolution are burning the candle at both ends - abortion for children in the womb, euthanasia and “assisted suicide” for the old. Both children and elderly parents, you see, can be costly and time-consuming.

We don’t kill problems anymore. We kill people, and pretend that it is the same thing.

I noted some time ago that the concept of “dying with dignity” is rapidly becoming “killing with impunity,” as our culture finds all sorts of excuses to assist “inconvenient” people in leaving Planet Earth.

There is a similarity to abortion, here, too—our technologically advanced culture is no longer looking for compassionate and ethical solutions to the complex, tragic, and often heartbreaking circumstances. Instead, we offer the solution that Darkness always has: Death. Disability, dependence, difficult life circumstances: a suction aspirator, a lethal injection, a bloody set of forceps. And the “problem,” as it were, is solved.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

We don’t kill problems anymore. We kill people, and pretend that it is the same thing.

There is something chilling about the intimacy of these killings. As Gregg Cunningham noted, “Ours is the first generation that, having demanded the right to kill its children through elective abortion, is now demanding the right to kill its parents through doctor-assisted suicide.” The closest of human relationships are rupturing under the sheer weight of the selfishness and narcissism of the Me Generation.

The great poet Dylan Thomas is famous for urging his dying father to fight on, to keep breathing, to live longer:

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Such sentiment is not present among the advocates of euthanasia. In fact, the tagline “dying with dignity” is starting to very much sound like, “Now don’t make a fuss, off with you now.” Consider this story in The Daily Mail from a few days ago:

An elderly husband and wife have announced their plans to die in the world's first 'couple' euthanasia - despite neither of them being terminally ill.

Instead the pair fear loneliness if the other one dies first from natural causes.

Identified only by their first names, Francis, 89, and Anne, 86, they have the support of their three adult children who say they would be unable to care for either parent if they became widowed.

The children have even gone so far as to find a practitioner willing to carry out the double killings on the grounds that the couple's mental anguish constituted the unbearable suffering needed to legally justify euthanasia.

… The couple's daughter has remarked that her parents are talking about their deaths as eagerly as if they were planning a holiday.

John Paul [their son] said the double euthanasia of his parents was the 'best solution'.

'If one of them should die, who would remain would be so sad and totally dependent on us,' he said. 'It would be impossible for us to come here every day, take care of our father or our mother.'

I wonder why no one considers the fact that the reason some elderly parents may experience “mental anguish” is that they have come to the sickening realization that their grown children would rather find an executioner to dispatch them than take on the responsibility of caring for their parents. Imagine the thoughts of a mother realizing that the child she fed and rocked to sleep, played with and sang to, would rather have her killed than care for her: that their relationship really does have a price.

This is why some scenes in the HBO euthanasia documentary How To Die In Oregon are so chilling. In one scene, an elderly father explains to the interviewer why he has procured death drugs that he plans to take in case of severe health problems. “I don’t want to be a burden,” he explains while his adult daughter nods approvingly, “It’s the decent thing to do. For once in my life I’ll do something decent.”

No argument from the daughter.

If we decide in North America to embrace euthanasia and “assisted suicide,” we will not be able to unring this bell. Just as with abortion and other manifestations of the Culture of Death, the Sexual Revolutionaries work hard to use heart-rending and emotional outlier examples to drive us to, once again, legislate from the exception.

But for once, we have to start asking ourselves if we really want to further enable our medical community to kill rather than heal. We have to ask ourselves if the easy option of dispatching “burdensome” people will not impact our incentive to advance in palliative care. And we have to stop simply asking how someone in severe pain might respond to such a legal “service,” and start asking how greedy children watching “their” inheritance going towards taking proper care of their parents.

And to the pro-life movement, those fighting to hold back the forces of the Culture of Death—the words of Dylan Thomas have a message for us, too.

Do not go gentle into that good night…
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Advertisement
Featured Image
Luka Magnotta http://luka-magnotta.com
Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus

,

Gay porn star admits dismembering ex-lover and molesting his corpse on film

Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus
By Thaddeus Baklinski

Montreal gay porn actor Luka Magnotta admits killing and dismembering his ex-lover and molesting his corpse on film, but pled not guilty on Monday to all five charges filed against him.

Magnotta shocked the world in June 2012 by allegedly killing and cannibalizing a 33-year-old university student from China, Jun Lin, then posting a video of his actions and the results online. He later hid some of the dismembered parts in the garbage, but also mailed parcels containing body parts to political offices in Ottawa and schools in Vancouver.

He was charged with first-degree murder, committing an indignity to a body, publishing obscene material, mailing obscene and indecent material, and criminally harassing Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other MPs.

Magnotta's lawyer Luc Leclair is basing the not guilty plea on the defendant having a history of mental illness, thus making him not criminally responsible.

Crown prosecutor Louis Bouthillier said he intends to prove that Magnotta planned the alleged murder well before it was committed.

"He admits the acts or the conducts underlying the crime for which he is charged. Your task will be to determine whether he committed the five offences with the required state of mind for each offence," Quebec Superior Court Justice Guy Cournoyer instructed the jury, according to media reports.

However, some authorities have pointed out that Magnotta’s behavior follows a newly discernible trend of an out-of-control sexual deviancy fueled by violent pornography.

Click "like" if you  say NO to porn!

Dr. Judith Reisman, an internationally-recognized expert on pornography and sexuality, told LifeSiteNews in 2012 she believes Magnotta’s behavior “reflects years of brain imprinting by pornography.”

“His homosexual cannibalism links sex arousal with shame, hate and sadism,” said Reisman. Although cannibalism is not as common as simple rape, she added, “serial rape, murder, torture of adults and even of children is an inevitable result of our ‘new brains,’ increasingly rewired by our out-of-control sexually exploitive and sadistic mass media and the Internet.”

In their 2010 book “Online Killers,” criminology researchers Christopher Berry-Dee and Steven Morris said research has shown “there are an estimated 10,000 cannibal websites, with millions ... who sit for hours and hours in front of their computer screens, fantasizing about eating someone.” 

This underworld came to light in a shocking case in Germany in 2003, when Armin Meiwes was tried for killing his homosexual lover Bernd Jürgen Brandes, a voluntary fetish victim whom Meiwes picked up through an Internet forum ad seeking “a well-built 18- to 30-year-old to be slaughtered and then consumed.”

After the warrant was issued for his arrest, Magnotta was the target of an international manhunt for several days until he was arrested in Berlin, where police say he was found looking at online pornography alongside news articles about himself at an Internet café.

The trial is expected to continue to mid-November, with several dozen witnesses being called to testify before the jury of six men and eight women.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook