Peter J. Smith

UPDATE: Kline tells ethics panel, ‘You are violating my due process rights!’

Peter J. Smith
Peter J. Smith

TOPEKA, March 1, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Former attorney general Phill Kline, on trial for alleged ethics violations committed during his investigation of Planned Parenthood, told the disciplinary panel hearing his case that they were depriving him of due process by taking away the time he was supposed to have been allotted to defend himself.

Originally Disciplinary Administrator Stan Hazlett was supposed to be given five days to make his case, while Kline’s attorneys was supposed to have three days, and conclude on Wednesday. Hazlett has now taken a seventh day to make his case against Kline on just one count out of two. But instead of granting Kline’s lawyers extra time, the disciplinary panel insists that they will finish by tomorrow, Wednesday.

Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek, who is on-site at the trial in Topeka, spoke with LifeSiteNews.com by telephone to report that the disciplinary panel, presided by Kansas lawyer Jo Ann Butaud, denied a continuance of the trial today. However, they said they would take Kline’s due process concerns “under consideration.”

Kline has objected that Hazlett, who spent five years investigating him and filed 30,000 pages of documents against Kline to make his case, is getting extended time from the panel. He has also pointed out that his legal counsel has been fired and replaced twice by AG Stephen Six, and the members of his new counsel (Reid Holbrook and Mark Stafford) have only had since September to review Hazlett’s documents and prepare a defense, putting him at a further disadvantage.

Stanek also said the attorneys told her they “may” file for a summary dismissal this afternoon.


Kline Ethics investigators participating or ignoring federal crimes/ethics violations?

Stanek told LifeSiteNews.com by telephone that the trial has also exposed Hazlett’s unwillingness to investigate ethics violations committed by Kline’s legal adversaries. She said the testimony also showed that Hazlett’s office has been willing to use evidence obtained unlawfully or illegally in order to prosecute Kline.

Today’s testimony revealed, first: Hazlett has not investigated Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe for intercepting and opening a private package in January 2009 mailed to Phill Kline – a potential felony under US postal laws – because it was sent to the wrong address. Howe passed along a black three-ring binder and Kline’s personal diary to the Disciplinary Administrator’s Office by October 2009. Hazlett continues to retain Kline’s mail as part of the ethics investigation.

Second, Kline testified that he was not the one who originated the CD that Tiller attorney Dan Monnat said he “mysteriously” found on the defense counsel’s table at a Wichita hearing for Tiller in November 2008. The CD was not in an inventory of Kline’s files that he provided to the Kansas Supreme Court, meaning that somebody else copied files from the AG’s computer server and gave the sensitive data to Monnat.

The CD also had copies of individual’s medical records, information about open investigations related to child rape investigations over live-births, and abortion-related data that had nothing to do with the Tiller case. Monnat kept the files 14 months, a potential violation of federal HIPAA laws protecting patient privacy. It was also raised that Monnat may have violated Kansas Ethics Rule 4.4 by retaining the CD and combing through the data once he learned that it was the property of Attorney General Six’s office and was required to be returned.

However, trial testimony showed that Hazlett’s office neither investigated Monnat, nor did they investigate who stole sensitive information from the AG server for Tiller’s attorney.

Third, it was asked in the trial why Hazlett was not pursuing as vigorous an investigation into serious allegations of impropriety by Paul Morrison as they had into the allegations about Kline.

Stanek said that Linda Carter, Morrison’s former paramour, testified by telephone to the panel Tuesday that Morrison tried to pressure her into changing her testimony, and speak against Kline. Carter, who was told by Morrison to stay at the DA office in Johnson County to keep tabs on Kline for him, also said that Morrison had two assistant DAs in Kline’s office spy and report to him about what Kline was doing, and would also call them for updates.

Kline faces charges of ethical misconduct – in part – for allegedly withholding documents related to the Tiller investigation from Morrison.

See also Video: Kline says ‘those in power’ blocked Planned Parenthood, Tiller investigation

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

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

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook