NewsAbortionWed Apr 24, 2013 - 3:16 pm EST
Gosnell still facing 380 criminal charges, including five murder charges
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.
OpinionAbortion, Catholic Church Fri Jan 8, 2016 - 1:17 pm EST
Fr. Pavone: Church can’t be afraid to denounce a political party that supports killing unborn babies
January 8, 2016 (NewsBusters) -- Churches must not be afraid to speak out against abortion in the 2016 election, according to one prominent pro-life group.
On Wednesday, Priests for Life hosted a press conference on abortion in light of the upcoming 2016 elections at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The event centered on the question “How political can the Catholic Church be?” under its tax-exempt status and highlighted that “restrictions on political activity by churches are misunderstood” -- even by the media.
Priests for Life National Director Fr. Frank Pavone opened the press conference by stressing Church obligation during the election season.
“This is not about the Church becoming a political machine,” he said. “This is about the Church becoming more the Church.”
But instead, many churches have been undergoing a “massive self-censorship” to avoid losing their tax exemptions.
During elections, Catholic institutions and Christian entities send out instructions and memos, he said, "somehow telling us that we cannot really participate in the election process by doing, for example, clear teaching and preaching that the people of God have to elect public servants who know the difference between serving the public and killing the public.”
According to Fr. Pavone, churches too frequently veer away from teaching Catholic doctrine due to the Johnson amendment, which forbids tax-exempt organizations from intervening “directly or indirectly” in political campaigns.
He deemed the amendment a “law on the books which is being vastly misunderstood, misrepresented.”
“Whether it’s by the fact that we simply do not understand this particular law or whether it’s by the fact that we are using the taxman as an excuse for our own fears and hesitations,” he said, “we have not gotten in our institutional churches a proper understanding of what we really are allowed to do and what we aren’t allowed to do.”
But the vague rules directly influence diocese memos, said Fr. Pavone, like one, which read, “Do not even appear to endorse or oppose particular candidates for public office or political parties.”
Fr. Pavone deemed that mandate impossible.
“I ask you, brothers and sisters, how can anyone carry out that particular piece of advice?” he pressed. “How can you not even appear to favor or oppose a candidate who is in favor of child-killing throughout pregnancy when you represent a church that says no abortion is never morally permitted and that the law has to protect children from the beginning of their lives?”
Fr. Pavone stressed that the Church really is non-partisan in messaging.
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
“Whatever my message today seems to favor or oppose when it comes to political parties or candidates, what if tomorrow those parties and candidates swapped their positions on abortion?” he challenged.
“Nothing changes,” he confirmed.
MRC Culture Exclusive Interview
Following the event, MRC Culture asked Fr. Pavone if he saw a pro-life president in the near future.
“I am very confident that a lot of pro-life candidates are going to be elected in 2016,” he said, “and the reason for that confidence is that the American people are learning much more about what abortion is.”
He also expressed confidence that the Priests for Life’s new initiative to encourage churches to speak out was “very much in line with the spirit of Pope Francis.”
“The pope has made statements about the fact that we shouldn’t be afraid to ‘mess things up,’” Fr. Pavone said. “In other words, don’t feel constrained by the limitations that are imposed just by an institution.”
While the pope takes a staunch pro-life stance in line with Church doctrine, he called the Church “obsessed” with certain doctrines, such as abortion, in 2013.
“This is what the pope means when he expresses concern,” Fr. Pavone told MRC Culture. “The Church is not defined by one or another particular issue.”
The Church, he continued, is defined by Jesus. And it’s in Jesus that “we find the reason why we’re pro-life and the reason why we take the stance on every other issue that we stand on.”
Fr. Pavone also addressed the media’s part in church restrictions.
“The media’s role in all of this, I believe, plays into the confusion as well, because I don’t believe that our friends in the media,” he said, “necessarily understand these limitations any better than the pastors do.”
Fr. Pavone encouraged his audience to visit www.politicalresponsibility.com and www.abolishingabortion.com and read his new book Abolishing Abortion for more information.
Attorney James Bopp, Jr., a law expert on church freedom in elections, Alliance Defending Freedom’s legal counsel Christiana Holcomb and Priests for Life executive director Janet Morana also spoke at the event.
Reprinted with permission from Newsbusters.
NewsCatholic Church, Specialty pages, Vatican Synod on the Family Fri Jan 8, 2016 - 9:52 am EST
Belgian archbishop: ‘Time has come’ for Pope Francis to defend Church’s Tradition
In a sweeping interview, the archbishop emeritus of Brussels warns that the ambiguity in the Synod’s final text was ‘very risky,’ but says he trusts the Pope will hold to his word and defend Catholic Tradition.
BRUSSELS, January 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Shortly after leaving the see of Mechelen-Brussels at the age of 75 – the official retirement age for prelates of the Roman Catholic Church – Archbishop André Léonard, former primate of Belgium, gave a wide-ranging interview to the French weekly Famille chrétienne. Bishop Léonard made unusually direct remarks about the crisis of vocations, the dangerous “ambiguities” of the recent Synod on the Family and other controversial topics. In liberal Belgium he had the reputation of being conservative and even narrow-minded – contrary to his successor, Jozef De Kesel, former auxiliary bishop to Cardinal Danneels of the infamous “Sankt-Gallen group.” Léonard was even attacked by a group of topless “Femen” activists in April 2013: they drenched him with water during a conference, accusing him of “homophobia” for his statements on the “abnormality” of homosexuality.
But he has never wavered. Responding to Famille chrétienne’s journalist, he said: “I am convinced that the Church’s Magisterium is valid, even on the most sensitive and controversial issues.”
Under his leadership, the number of seminarians progressed tenfold in his diocese, growing from four when he arrived to 55 on his departure. Archbishop Léonard is also known for his openness to traditional Catholic institutions such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) and the Institute of Christ the King, both of whom he welcomed in Brussels. Just before leaving Belgium to retire in the French Marian sanctuary of Notre Dame du Laus, he celebrated Mass in the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite in the church of the Minims where he had named a priest of the FSSP as vicar several years before.
Of special interest to the readers of LifeSiteNews are Leonard’s interview responses regarding the Synod on the Family. Antoine Pasquier of Famille chrétienne asked him: “The second Synod on the Family took place in October. The final text is open to interpretation. How do you read it, having taken part in the first session?”
What is most fundamentally at stake in the Synod is the alliance – in all the joys and suffering of families and couples – of love and truth.
Archbishop Leonard answered bluntly: “I didn’t get the impression of real progress from one synod to the other, rather there was a repetition of what had already been said. It left me a bit unsatisfied. There are good things in the final text, but I was a bit disappointed by the fact that they cultivated ambiguity around the most sensitive issues. Some bishops told me the texts were deliberately formulated in an ambiguous way, in order to leave them open to interpretation in different directions. Such ambiguity on key issues is very risky, as it could give way to practices that would be very difficult to reverse once they have been instituted and developed.”
“I therefore hope”, he said, “that we will have a nuanced and benevolent approach, but that it will remain clear on doctrinal and disciplinary teachings of the Catholic Church regarding marriage and the family. The ball is now in the Pope’s court. The time has come for him to fulfill his Petrine ministry of unity and continuity of Tradition, as he declared he would in his final declaration at the end of the first Synod on the Family. What is most fundamentally at stake in the Synod is the alliance – in all the joys and suffering of families and couples – of love and truth. So says Psalm 84: ‘Love and truth will meet; justice and peace will kiss.’ The Church must be all at once merciful, welcoming all with openness of heart, and faithful to her teachings on marriage and the family.”
Bishop Leonard was equally clear about the idea of delegating more power to bishops’ conferences in matters of discipline.
STORY: Archbishop prays while topless gay activists shout curses and douse him with water
“That is not a good idea”, he said. “I find it hard to see how discipline could be modulated from one country to another or from one continent to another. I would find it extremely risky for Western countries to be allowed a more flexible discipline. What sort of image would that give of the Church? Would Christians from richer countries, besides the greater comforts that most of them enjoy, also benefit from a more comfortable discipline? It would be a great scandal! On the other hand, there is a point where the diversity of locations should be taken into account: in implementing pastoral care with regard to the different problems that appear in different continents, so as to offer adequate solutions.”
Archbishop Léonard’s plain speaking earned him no little opposition during his five years as Primate of Belgium: an overwhelmingly Catholic nation which gave innumerable missionaries to the Church in the first half of the 20th century but where relativism has become a way of life and religious practice has plummeted. Seventy percent of under-thirties now declare they have no link whatsoever with the Catholic Church and only 25 percent of marriages involve a religious ceremony. The decline accelerated under Cardinal Danneels, who was Primate of Belgium between 1979 and 2010: he was of the vein of the majority of Belgian bishops who openly defied the teaching of Paul VI on contraception in Humanæ vitæ in 1968. How did Archbishop Léonard cope with this opposition both within and without the Church?
“Partly with strong convictions, partly by temperament,” he answered. “During my years of priesthood the Church’s conviction as it regards different aspects of human existence my own. And I am convinced that the Church’s Magisterium is valid, even on the most sensitive and controversial issues. I always judged my mission was to be an echo to the teachings of Christ and the Church on human destiny. So it never disturbed me to paddle upstream, sometimes, against the current of society and the spirit of the times. Wouldn’t you say that is a bit normal? A significant proportion of the Gospel goes against the grain. St Paul, speaking to the Romans, said: ‘Do not conform yourselves to this age.’”
If a man wants to give his life to Christ, the bishop should meet with him! When a young man feels he is important in the eyes of the bishop of his diocese: that will help him to make his decision.
Léonard went on to say: “My convictions prompted varied reactions: there were those who were happy to hear clear language that was truly encouraging them to live according to their Catholic identity, and there were others who protested, sometimes even among Christians themselves because they didn’t really like – even in a world where freedom is considered to be a supreme value – that a bishop should be thinking differently from the dominant mindset. This type of opposition or disagreement is, in a way, inevitable. It is its absence that would have troubled me. Jesus does not promise us success, but rather contradiction. But these small miseries are only a small part of my ministry, and they are nothing compared with what the bishops suffered during the first centuries of the Church, or what bishops suffer today in the Middle-East or in Asia!”
Despite his reputation of “rigidity” and “intolerance” hawked by the Belgian media, Léonard’s steadfast Catholic stances and clear condemnation of the manifestations of the culture of death in a country that has been a fore-runner in social engineering did not deter young men in Belgium from answering their call to the priesthood; quite the contrary.
When asked to explain the sudden in rise in vocations under his leadership in Mechelen-Brussels, Léonard made it plain that what counted in his eyes was the attitude of the bishop to young men who think they have a vocation: it requires welcoming and proximity, he said. “I never sent away a young man who came to see me, I never told him to first go and see the vocations office of the diocese, I always welcomed him. If a man wants to give his life to Christ, the bishop should meet with him! When a young man feels he is important in the eyes of the bishop of his diocese: that will help him to make his decision. I have no miracle recipe. I simply always remained open to the realities to which the Holy Spirit gives rise in the Church. (…) All those who present themselves will not necessarily become priests, discernment is necessary, but first of all there must be a welcoming attitude. What a joy for a bishop to meet a man who wants to consecrate himself to the Church! What a wonderful present!”
NewsCatholic Church Fri Jan 8, 2016 - 9:42 am EST
LifeSiteNews releases new Catholic magazine Faithful Insight
January 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Want to have a monthly collection of the most important Catholic news from LifeSite in a beautiful full color magazine? While some may not know about it yet, Faithful Insight, a publication of LifeSiteNews, has just published its fourth issue. Dedicated to the service of Christ through Our Lady, this magazine, unlike LifeSiteNews, is specifically intended for Catholics, but like LifeSiteNews, hopes to strengthen faith, life, the natural family, and freedom, by arming readers with truthful news and views and many inspiring stories from a faithfully Catholic perspective.
The name Faithful Insight is one rendering of the Latin phrase ‘sensus fidelium’ better known in English as ‘sense of the faithful’ which the Catechism calls, a “supernatural sense of the faith,” where “all the faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth.” That sensus fidelium or faithful insight is bolstered as we see the truths of God confirmed in science and human experience. Conversion testimonies, the words of true fathers of the faith and the witness of countless martyrs “manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.”
Subscribe to Faithful Insight here.
Faithful Insight magazine is intended for an international audience but is currently only available in the United States and Canada. Faithful Insight launched in September as the last authentically Catholic news magazine in Canada, Catholic Insight, ceased its paper publication after more than 20 years of service. The first issue was dedicated to Fr. Alphonse de Valk whose courageous work in founding and running Catholic Insight has served the Church by helping countless Canadian Catholics to maintain and strengthen their faith in perilous times.
The guiding principle of LifeSiteNews will also permeate Faithful Insight – Caritas in Veritate – Love in Truth. It is not a love that is sentimental or afraid to risk loss of worldly respect, but the love a parent would show – a willingness to speak the hard truth out of love for the ultimate well being of their child.
It is rather painfully obvious we are living in times St. Paul warned about in 2 Timothy 4 when he said “they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” But the apostle to the Gentiles strictly directed Timothy preach the truth nonetheless. “I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: Preach the word: be instant in season and out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.”
Finally, this magazine is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. True Devotion to Mary is as St. Pope John Paul II said, “indispensable to anyone who means to give himself without reserve to Christ and to the work of redemption.”
Hopefully you will find Faithful Insight to be edifying for your spiritual lives. Please pray for us, for the success of Faithful Insight, and especially for the situations you will read about in the pages of this magazine. Prayer is our most powerful weapon in the culture war.
Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.
LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.
Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).
LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.
Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.