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.

Only 6 days remain!

Support pro-life news. Help us reach our critical spring fundraising goal by April 1!


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signs the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Indiana faces backlash as it becomes 20th state to protect religious liberty

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

INDIANAPOLIS, IN, March 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – On Thursday, Indiana became the 20th state to prevent the government from forcing people of faith to violate their religious beliefs in business or the public square.

Gov. Mike Pence signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (SB 101) into law, saying the freedom of religion is a preeminent American value.

“The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion, but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action,” Pence said.

Gov. Pence, a possible dark horse candidate for president in 2016, cited court cases brought by religious organizations and employers, including Catholic universities, against the HHS mandate. “One need look no further than the recent litigation concerning the Affordable Care Act. A private business and our own University of Notre Dame had to file lawsuits challenging provisions that required them to offer insurance coverage in violation of their religious views.”

The new law could also prevent Christian business owners from being compelled to bake a cake or take photographs of a same-sex "marriage" ceremony, if doing so violates their faith. In recent years, business owners have seen an increased level of prosecution for denying such services, despite their religious and moral beliefs.

The state's pro-life organization applauded Pence for his stance. "Indiana's pro-life community is grateful to Gov. Mike Pence for signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law,” said Indiana Right to Life's president and CEO Mike Fichter. “This bill will give pro-lifers a necessary legal recourse if they are pressured to support abortion against their deeply-held religious beliefs.”

“RFRA is an important bill to protect the religious freedom of Hoosiers who believe the right to life comes from God, not government,” he said.

The state RFRA is based on the federal bill introduced by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. The Supreme Court cited the federal law when it ruled that Hobby Lobby had the right to refuse to fund abortion-inducing drugs, if doing so violated its owners' sincerely held religious beliefs.

In signing the measure – similar to the one Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed – Pence and the state of Indiana have faced a torrent of venom from opponents of the bill, who claim it grants a “right to discriminate” and raises the spectre of segregation.

"They've basically said, as long as your religion tells you to, it's OK to discriminate against people," said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, a national homosexual pressure group.

The Disciples of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination based in the state capital, has said it will move its 2017 annual convention if the RFRA became state law. The NCAA warned the bill's adoption “might affect future events” in the Hoosier state.

Pence denied such concerns, saying, "This bill is not about discrimination, and if I thought it legalized discrimination in any way I would've vetoed it."

The bill's supporters say that, under the Obama administration, it is Christians who are most likely to suffer discrimination.

"Originally RFRA laws were intended to protect small religious groups from undue burdens on practicing their faith in public life,” said Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy. “It was not imagined there would come a day when laws might seek to jail or financially destroy nuns, rabbis or Christian camp counselors who prefer to abstain from the next wave of sexual and gender experimentation. And there's always a next wave.”

The bill's supporters note that it does not end the government's right to coerce people of faith into violating their conscience in every situation. However, it requires that doing so has to serve a compelling government interest and the government must use the least restrictive means possible. “There will be times when a state or federal government can show it has a compelling reason for burdening religious expression – to ensure public safety, for instance,” said Sarah Torre, an expert at the Heritage Foundation. “But Religious Freedom Restoration Acts set a high bar for the government to meet in order to restrict religious freedom.”

Restricting the ability of government to interfere in people's private decisions, especially their religious decisions, is the very purpose of the Constitution, its supporters say.

"Religious freedom is the cornerstone of all liberty for all people,” Tooley said. “Deny or reduce it, and there are no ultimate limits on the state's power to coerce."

Advertisement
Featured Image
Fight pornography. Beat pornography. And join the ranks of those who support their fellow men and women still fighting.
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Porn is transforming our men from protectors into predators. Fight back.

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

Since I’ve gotten involved in anti-pornography work, I’ve met countless men who struggle, fight, or have beaten pornography. Each person seems to deal with the guilt and shame that accompanies porn use in a different way—some deny that it’s “all that bad,” others pretend that they could “stop whenever they want,” many insist that “everyone is doing it,” and most, when pressed, admit to a deep sense of self-loathing.

One worry surfaces often in conversation: What do my past or current struggles with pornography say about me as a man? Can I ever move past this and have a meaningful and fulfilling relationship?

I want to address this question just briefly, since I’ve encountered it so many times.

First, however, I’ve written before how I at times dislike the language of “struggling” with pornography or pornography “addiction,” not because they aren’t accurate but because too often they are used as an excuse rather than an explanation. It is true, many do in fact “struggle” with what can legitimately be considered an addiction, but when this language is used to describe an interminable battle with no end (and I’ve met dozens of men for whom this is the case), then I prefer we use terminology like “fighting my porn habit.” A semantic debate, certainly, but one I think is important. We need to stop struggling with porn and start fighting it.

Secondly, pornography does do devastating things to one’s sense of masculinity. We know this. Pornography enslaves men by the millions, perverting their role as protector and defender of the more vulnerable and turning them into sexual cannibals, consuming those they see on-screen to satisfy their sexual appetites.

What often starts as mere curiosity or an accidental encounter can turn into something that invades the mind and twists even the most basic attractions. I’ve met porn users who can’t believe the types of things they want to watch. They haven’t simply been using porn. Porn has actively reshaped them into something they don’t recognize and don’t like. 

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Porn is this generation’s great assault on masculinity and the role of men in society. It is essential that we win this battle for the sake of society’s survival. Contrary to what the gender-bending and family-morphing progressive elites claim, good husbands and good fathers and good church leaders are necessary for a healthy society. But pornography is destroying marriages, creating distant and disconnected fathers, and, metaphoricaclly castrating men, hindering their ability and desire to make a positive difference in the society around us.

So, with this sobering set of facts in mind let’s return to the question: what do pornography struggles, past and present, say about a man?

The proper way to respond is with everything that is good about masculinity. We have to fight pornography as men have fought countless evils throughout the ages. We need to fight pornography to protect women, and wives, and children, and our society at large. This is how pornography threatens society, by castrating men, and turning them from protectors into predators. Rooting out the evil in our own lives allows us to better fulfill the role we are called to perform in the lives of others. Battling our own demons enables us to battle the wider cultural demons. Every day without porn is another bit of virtue built. Virtue is not something you’re born with. Virtues are habits that you build. And one day without porn is the first step towards the virtue of being porn-free.

Many men ask me if men who have had past porn addictions are cut out for being in a relationship or working in the pro-life movement or in other areas where we are called to protect and defend the weak and vulnerable. And the answer to that is an unequivocal yes. Our society needs men who know what it means to fight battles and win. Our society needs men who can say that they fought porn and they beat porn, because their families and their friends were too important to risk. Our society needs men who rose to the challenge that the evils of their generation threw at them, and became better men as the result. And our society needs men who can help their friends and their sons and those around them fight the plague of pornography and free themselves from it, too—and who can understand better and offer encouragement more relevant than someone who has fought and been freed themselves?

So the answer to men is yes. Fight pornography. Beat pornography. And join the ranks of those who support their fellow men and women still fighting. Lend them support and encouragement. We cannot change the fact that porn has left an enormous path of destruction in its wake. But we can change the fact that too many people aren’t fighting it. We can change our own involvement. And we can rise to the challenge and face this threat to masculinity with all that is good about masculinity.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry

Red Alert!

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

I don’t like having to do this, but we have always found it best to be totally upfront with our readers: our Spring fundraising campaign is now worrying us! 

You see, with just 6 days remaining, we have only raised 30% of our goal, with $125,000 still left to raise. That is a long ways to go yet.

We have no choice but to reach our minimum goal of $175,000 if we are going to be able to continue serving the 5+ million readers who rely on us every month for investigative and groundbreaking news reports on life, faith and family issues.

Every year, LifeSite readership continues to grow by leaps and bounds. This year, we are again experiencing record-breaking interest, with over 6 million people visiting our website last month alone!

This unprecedented growth in turn creates its own demand for increased staff and resources, as we struggle to serve these millions of new readers.

And especially keep this in mind. As many more people read LifeSite, our mission of bringing about cultural change gets boosted. Our ultimate goal has always been to educate and activate the public to take well-informed, needed actions.

Another upside to our huge growth in readers is that it should be that much easier to reach our goal. To put it simply: if each person who read this one email donated whatever they could (even just $10) we would easily surpass our goal! 

Today, I hope you will join the many heroes who keep this ship afloat, and enable us to proclaim the truth through our reporting to tens of millions of people every year!

Your donations to LifeSite cause major things to happen! We see that every day and it is very exciting. Please join with us in making a cultural impact with a donation of ANY AMOUNT right now. 

You can also donate by phone or mail. We would love to hear from you!

Thank you so much for your support. 

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook