Cheryl Sullenger

Prosecution reconstructs abortion room in court for Gosnell murder trial

Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger
Image
Image
Image

PHILADELPHIA, March 21, 2013 (Operation Rescue)  – A macabre drama is unfolding in a Philadelphia courtroom as testimony is now underway in one of the most horrific serial killer cases in U.S. history. On trial for eight counts of murder and a host of other criminal charges is late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell, who is accused of birthing viable late-term babies alive, then snipping their spinal cords with scissors amidst appallingly squalid conditions.

Since Judge Jeffrey P. Minehart ruled that prosecutors could not take the jury to see the squalor that has been preserved at Gosnell’s West Philadelphia abortion clinic, prosecutors have set up a replica of one of Gosnell’s procedure rooms complete with rusty, aging obstetrical equipment.

It was in the midst of that abortion room mock-up that the first employee to testify tearfully explained to the jury how she cut the backs of the necks of at least ten live newborn babies then murdered them by snipping their spinal cords.

Adrienne Moton, 35, was a medical assistant who has been charged with the reduced crime of third degree murder in exchange for her testimony against Gosnell. She told the court that she moved in with Gosnell and his third wife, Pearl, while still in high school due to “family problems” and eventually ended up working at his clinic, earning ten dollars an hour under the table. At the clinic, without proper training, she would administer drugs, perform ultrasounds, assist with abortion procedures, and dispose of the aborted baby remains.

Baby A

Moton also testified that she took photos of one particularly large baby, referred to by prosecutors as “Baby A,” with her cell phone that was estimated to be about 30-weeks gestation. Gosnell later joked that the baby was so large he could have walked to the bus stop.

News reports indicated that one female juror covered her mouth in horror as the photo of Baby A was displayed on the screen in the courtroom.

Baby’s mother testifies

After Moton’s emotional testimony, the mother of that baby, Shayquana Abrams, 21, of Chester, took the stand. She said that Gosnell began her abortion in Delaware then had her report to his Pennsylvania clinic to finish what he told her was a 24-week abortion, even though she was closer to 30 weeks into her pregnancy. Her aunt paid Gosnell $2,750 in cash for the abortion. Abrams said she was so drugged that she has no memory of the actual abortion, which took place when she was only 17. Afterwards, her health began to deteriorate.

She suffered severe pain, heavy bleeding, nausea, vomiting, and the inability to walk, and was hospitalized for two weeks with a blood clot to the heart and a grapefruit-sized abscess on her right side. She still suffers ill effects of the abortion today, including fatigue, stress, headaches, and other health issues.

“Ms. Abram’s story is indicative of experiences of women seeking abortions all over the country. They are given shoddy abortions with the help of unqualified workers and are not always told the truth about the gestational age of their pre-born babies,” said Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue. “Then when they suffer complications, these women are on their own. Unfortunately, we have heard this story all too many times. Such substandard practices are epidemic at abortion clinics across America. We shudder to think of the abuses that continue at abortion clinics that just have not yet been caught.”

Defense plays race card

The defense is disputing that that any of the abortions took place beyond the 24 week limit in Pennsylvania or that any of the babies were born alive. Gosnell’s attorney, Jack McMahon, attempted to convince jurors that the babies were injected with digoxin, a drug that causes the pre-born baby to go into cardiac arrest.

However, the Grand Jury report indicated that the medical examiner found no indication that the fetuses had been injected with Digoxin and the drug did not show up in the toxicology screens.

“Gosnell was not skillful enough to successfully administer digoxin, late-term babies continued to be born alive, and he continued to kill them by slitting their necks,” stated the report.

Click "like" if you want to end abortion!

Also deeply disturbing is the defense’s primary arguments that the prosecution is “elitist and racist” and amounts to “a prosecutorial lynching” because Gosnell is Black and operated an urban abortion clinic that served poor women. This desperate attempt to manufacture racial motives for the prosecution rings hollow in light of the fact that the District Attorney, Seth Williams, who brought the charges against Gosnell, is also Black.

A squalid defense

McMahon showed a particular insensitivity to women who were subjected to substandard abortions on rusty, bloodstained tables at Gosnell’s nasty mill where venereal diseases were spread through the reuse of dirty surgical instruments and the stench of cat urine and decomposing baby remains permeated the air.

“If you want Mayo Clinic standards, then you go to the Mayo Clinic,” he told the jury during opening arguments.

“Apparently Mr. McMahon doesn’t think that poor urban women are deserving of anything better than the dangerous practices and filthy conditions supplied by Gosnell,” said Newman. “His statement about clinic standards is grossly offensive. Even veterinarian clinics have to comply with basic health standards. It is appalling to think that anyone could make the argument that the dogs are deserving of better safety standards than women seeking abortions, no matter how misguided those actions might be.”

Operation Rescue will provide regular updates on the Gosnell murder trial from its unique perspective and has plans to attend the trial the week of April 1st, during which we will publish first-hand accounts of the proceedings. Additional grisly testimony is expected from nearly all Gosnell’s eight employees who were arrested and charged with him over the course of the six to eight week trial.

“This is an historic moment where the inner workings of an abortion clinic are being laid bare before the world. While every abortion clinic may not duplicate the full scope of Gosnell’s ‘house of horrors,’ nearly every one shares at least some of the characteristics of this revolting abortion operation,” said Newman. “This is a rare opportunity to expose the public to the dirty practices that typify abortion in America today.”

Read the full Grand Jury Report
View photos of Gosnell’s victims
View the Gosnell gang’s mug shots and description of charges

This article originally appeared on Operation Rescue and is reprinted with permission.

FREE pro-life news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

Two Congressmen confirm: National 20-week ban on abortion will come up for a vote shortly

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 17, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A bill to end abortion in the United States after 20 weeks will move forward, and it will have the strong support of two leading pro-life Congressmen, the two Republicans told LifeSiteNews.com at the eighth annual Susan B. Anthony List Campaign for Life Summit on Thursday.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-NJ, told LifeSiteNews and the National Catholic Register that ongoing House discussions on H.R. 36, the "Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," will result in a pro-life bill moving forward.

"Very good language" is being put together, Smith told The Register. He told LifeSiteNews that he fully anticipated being able to support the final bill, because the House Republican caucus "wouldn't have something that would be unsupportable. Our leadership is genuinely pro-life."

In 2013, the "Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" easily passed through the House of Representatives, only to be stalled by a Democratic-controlled Senate. This year, an identical bill was halted by Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-NC, and other Republicans -- surprising and angering pro-life leaders who thought its passage was assured. That bill, H.R. 36, is now being rewritten so it can be voted on by the full House, though its final wording remains uncertain.

Some fear that the House leadership will modify the bill to mollify Ellmers. She and others objected that the bill allows women to abort a child after 20 weeks in the case of rape – but only if they report that rape to the authorities.

Pro-life activists say removing the reporting requirement would take abortionists at their word that the women whose children they abort claimed to be raped. Congresswoman Ellmers has publicly stated the House leadership is considering such a proposal.

Jill Stanek, who was recently arrested on Capitol Hill as part of a protest to encourage Republicans to pass H.R. 36, said that would be "a loophole big enough for a Mack truck."

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Congressman Smith said the bill will come to the floor shortly. "The commitment to this bill is ironclad; we just have to work out some details," Smith said.

He also noted that, while a vote on the 20-week ban has been delayed for nearly three months, "we did get the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act passed, and that would have been in the queue now, so we just reversed" the order of the two bills.

Congressman Smith spoke to both outlets shortly after participating in a panel at the Summit.

Another speaker was Rep. Steve King, R-IA, who also supports the 20-week ban.

"I can't think of what” language that is actively under consideration could make him rethink his support for the bill, King said. He also told attendees that the nation was moving in a direction of supporting life.

The outspoken Congressman declined to answer further, noting "that's asking me to anticipate an unknown hypothetical."

The annual Campaign for Life Summit and its related gala drew other high-profile speakers, including presidential candidate Senator Rand Paul, potential presidential hopeful Senator Lindsay Graham, and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus.  

Advertisement
Featured Image
"Someone who doesn’t flinch at the dismemberment of babies is not going to flinch at the dismemberment of some evangelical baker’s conscience."
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Pro-lifers are winning. So now they’re coming for our cupcakes?

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

As I travel across Canada (and at times the United States) speaking on abortion and various facets of the Culture of Death, one of the things I hear often is a hopelessness, a despair that the West is being flattened by the juggernaut of the Sexual Revolution. There is a feeling among many people that the restriction of religious liberty, the continued legality of abortion, and the redefinition of marriage are inevitable.

This is, of course, one of the most prominent and successful strategies of the Sexual Revolutionaries—create an aura of inevitability while concurrently demonizing all those who oppose their new and mangled “progress” as Neanderthals on the cusp of being left behind by History. That inevitability becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, because many people don’t realize that the various battles in the Sexual Revolution actually all correlate to one another—that what we are seeing now is the end game of an incredibly vast and well-planned cultural project.

It is because we miss many of these connections that we often cannot see, with clarity, how the culture wars are actually unfolding. I read with great interest a recent column by Rev. Douglas Wilson, eloquently titled “With stirrups raised to Molech.”

“We are now much occupied with the issues swirling around same sex mirage,” he writes, “but we need to take great care not to get distracted. Why have the homosexual activists gone all in on this issue? Why is their prosecutorial zeal so adamant? We went, in just a matter of months, from ‘let’s let individual states’ decide on this, to federal judges striking down state statutes, followed up hard by official harassment of florists, bakers, and photographers. Why the anger, and why the savage over-reach? And do they really think we couldn’t remember all the things they were assuring us of this time last year?”

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

It’s a compelling question, and one that I’ve heard many Christians puzzling over recently. Why do the advocates of the Sexual Revolution despise those who disagree with them so viciously? It is partly because their cultural project does not, as they claim, consist of “living and let live.” It is about compulsory acceptance of any and all sexual behaviors, with tax-payer funding for the rubbers and pills they need to ensure all such behaviors remain sterile, and extermination crews to suction, poison, and dismember any inconvenient fetuses that may come into being as the result of casual coitus.

The ancient mantra “the State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation” has long been abandoned—the emboldened Sexual Revolutionaries now demand that politicians show up at their exhibitionist parades of public indecency, force schools to impose their so-called “morally neutral” view of sexuality on children, and force into silence those who still hold to traditional values.

Rev. Wilson, however, thinks that this loud and vicious war on conscience may be about even more than that. The pro-life cause, he notes, has been very successful in the Unites States. The abortion rate is the lowest it has been since 1973. Hundreds of pro-life laws are passing on the state level. The abortion industry has been successfully stigmatized. True, the successes are, for pro-lifers, often too feeble and not nearly adequate enough in the face of such unrestrained bloodshed. Nevertheless, the momentum has turned against the Sexual Revolutionaries who have championed abortion for decades—their shock and anger at the strength of the pro-life movement evident in pro-abortion signs at rallies that read, “I can’t believe I still have to protest this s**t.”

It is because of the pro-life movement’s success, Wilson muses, that the Sexual Revolutionaries may be coming at us with such fury. “If a nation has slaughtered 50 million infants,” he writes, “they are not going to suddenly get a sense of decency over you and your cupcakes. Now this explains their lack of proportion, and their refusal to acknowledge the rights of florists. Someone who doesn’t flinch at the dismemberment of babies is not going to flinch at the dismemberment of some evangelical baker’s conscience. This reveals their distorted priorities, of course, but it also might be revealing a strategy. Is the homosexual lobby doing this because they are freaking out over their losses on the pro-life front? And are they doing so in a way intended to distract us away from an issue where we are slowly, gradually, inexorably, winning?”

It’s a fascinating perspective. It’s true—and has always been true historically—that when one group of human beings is classified as nonhuman by a society as nonhuman and subsequently butchered, the whole of society is degraded. No nation and no culture can collectively and systematically kill so many human beings without a correlating hardening of the conscience. But on the pro-life front, there has been decades of fierce resistance, hundreds of incremental victories, and a renewed energy among the upcoming generation of activists. For the Sexual Revolutionaries who thought the battle was over when Roe v. Wade was announced in 1973, this must be a bitter pill to swallow indeed.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

, ,

‘Prominent’ Catholics attacking Archbishop Cordileone are big donors to Pelosi and pro-abort Democrats

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne

Note: To sign a petition supporting Archbishop Cordileone, click here

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, April 17, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Big donors to the Democrat Party and pro-abortion Nancy Pelosi are among those publicly harassing San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone for protecting Catholic identity in the area’s Catholic high schools.

A big-ticket full-page ad ran April 16 in the San Francisco Chronicle attacking the archbishop and calling Pope Francis to oust him for his efforts to reinforce Catholic principles in the schools.

A number of prominent San Francisco-area residents identifying as Catholic are signatories of the ad, and several are wealthy donors to Democrat entities and pro-abortion politicians, Catholic Vote reports.

Federal Election Commission records indicate Charles Geschke, Adobe Systems chairman and previous head of the Board of Trustees at the University of San Francisco, gave more than $240,000 to Democrat groups, as well as $2,300 to Nancy Pelosi and $4,000 to John Kerry, both politicians who claim to be Catholic but support abortion and homosexual “marriage.”

Also on the list is political consultant and businessman Clint Reilly, who gave nearly $60,000 to Democrat organizations, along with $5,000 to Barack Obama, whose administration vehemently promotes abortion and homosexual “marriage” and has continually opposed religious liberty. Reilly gave $4,600 to Pelosi as well.

Another individual in the ad attacking the archbishop who also gave big campaign donations to California pro-abort Democrats was Lou Giraudo, a former city commissioner and business executive who contributed more than $24,000 to Nancy Pelosi, $6,000 to Dianne Feinstein and $4,300 to Barbara Boxer.

Nancy Pelosi herself challenged the archbishop for his stance on Catholic teaching last year when she tried to pressure him out of speaking at the March for Marriage in Washington D.C., claiming the event was “venom masquerading as virtue.”

The archbishop responded in a letter that he was obliged “as a bishop, to proclaim the truth—the whole truth—about the human person and God’s will for our flourishing ... especially the truth about marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.”

The April 16 ad attacking Archbishop Cordileone was the latest in an ongoing assault since the archbishop took steps in February to strengthen Catholic identity in the schools and clarify for faculty and staff in handbooks and contract language the long-standing expectation that they uphold Church principles. 

It said Archbishop Cordileone has “fostered an atmosphere of division and intolerance” and called on Pope Francis to remove him.

“Holy Father, Please Provide Us With a Leader True to Our Values and Your Namesake,” the ad said. “Please Replace Archbishop Cordileone.”

The Confraternity of Catholic Clergy (CCC), a national association for priests and deacons, condemned Archbishop Cordileone’s harassers in a statement, saying the archbishop “teaches in conformity to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

“The character assassination and uncharitable venom being cast upon a bishop merely defending the doctrines of his religion is appalling and repugnant,” the CCC said. 

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

“It is totally inappropriate, improper and unjust for the media and others to vilify and brutally attack him when he is doing precisely what an ordained minister and pastor of souls is obligated to do,” the group stated, “namely, speak the truth in season and out of season.”

Those behind the attack ad said the proposed handbook language was mean-spirited, and that they were “committed Catholics inspired by Vatican II,” who “believe in the traditions of conscience, respect and inclusion upon which our Catholic faith was founded.”

The Archdiocese of San Francisco denounced the ad upon its release, saying it was a misrepresentation of Catholic teaching and the nature of the teacher contract, and a misrepresentation of the spirit of the Archbishop.

“The greatest misrepresentation of all is that the signers presume to speak for “the Catholic Community of San Francisco,” the archdiocese responded. “They do not.”

The CCC pointed out that just as physicians are expected to be faithful to the Hippocratic Oath, bishops, priests, and deacons are expected to be faithful to the Church, its teachings and its authority, “since their objective is the salvation of souls, not a popularity contest.” 

In openly declaring their support for Archbishop Cordileone, the group urged the media and others to show “prudence, civility, and fair-mindedness” toward those with whom they disagree.

“He took an oath to be faithful to the Gospel,” the Confraternity stated of Archbishop Cordileone, “and in the words of the disciples in the New Testament, ‘better to obey God than men.’”

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook