Judge reinstates murder count in Gosnell trial, dismisses another; Update: “Defense rests”?

posted at 1:21 pm on April 24, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

At the beginning of a defense case in a criminal trial, attorneys will routinely move to dismiss some or all of the charges on the basis of a failure by the prosecution to present enough evidence.  The judge in the trial of Kermit Gosnell agreed this week on three of the murder counts, but has since reconsidered on one count.  Judge Jeffrey Minehart reinstated the charge related to “Baby C,” whom staffers testified breathed on his own for 20 minutes after the botched abortion, admitting a mistake in his order:

Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Minehart had ruled Tuesday that prosecutors over the past month failed to make a case on three of the seven first-degree murder counts, involving aborted babies known as Baby B, Baby C and Baby G.

On Wednesday, Minehart clarified that he did not intend to dismiss charges related to Baby C, which former employee Lynda Williams admits killing after it was alive for 20 minutes.

Instead, Minehart has thrown out the charges involving Baby F, which allegedly jerked its leg after it was born. Another staff member says Gosnell then cut the baby’s neck to “ensure fetal demise.”

To be clear, Minehart has still thrown out three of the murder charges, which are now down to five — four children and Karnamaya Monger.  Minehart refused to dismiss those charges, denying the defense motion.  That means Jack McMahon will have to present a defense, starting as early as this afternoon, in a case that could still carry the death penalty for the abortionist.

LifeNews carries an objection from an activist with Operation Rescue:

“I am shocked that these counts have been dismissed. I have heard testimony by very credible witnesses to the effect that these babies were murdered in cold blood by Gosnell as they cried and struggled for life. We pray that justice will be done in the remaining five victims of Gosnell’s horrific slayings,” said Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Policy Advisor for Operation Rescue, who has observed the trial and published first-hand accounts of the proceedings.

Sullenger said testimony from the medical examiner and toxicologist has indicated that there was no evidence the babies were injected with Digoxin to ensure the babies were dead prior to the abortion, as the defense has claimed.

The medical examiner testified that tests were inconclusive as proof that the babies were born alive. However, the tests also did not prove the babies were dead prior to birth. Those inconclusive test results were overshadowed by the weight of testimony from witness after witness, who detailed how the babies were in fact living prior to being murdered through what one witness described as a “virtual beheading.”

“If Gosnell gets off scot-free, that will send a message that murdering live babies and abortion patients is now acceptable behavior in America and that abortionists who engage in such depraved practices are above the law. This would put women and babies in grave danger – more than they already face – at abortion clinics throughout the nation,” said Sullenger.

Without being in the courtroom, it’s difficult to determine just how well the prosecution presented that case in the opening round of the trial.  The burden of proof for the prosecution not only involves presenting clear evidence of intent to murder (or gross neglect amounting to intent), but also that an actual murder took place.  The judge has the responsibility to dismiss charges where the prosecution hasn’t presented enough evidence to allow a jury to consider guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The fact that Minehart allowed more than half of the charges to remain — and corrected the record expeditiously on which specific charges remain — tend to demonstrate that he’s taking that responsibility seriously.  The case will continue, and the jury will have the chance to deliver a verdict on Gosnell’s operation.

Update: And that chance may come a lot sooner than we thought. The intrepid JD Mullane just tweeted:

Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Update: If the judge sent the jury out until Monday, he at least has some time to see if McMahon wants to reconsider.  With all of the very powerful testimony about the neck-snipping and conditions in the clinic, it seems almost incomprehensible to me that an attorney would roll the dice on getting a jury to dispassionately dispense with the charges.

Update: Commenter Resist We Much offers this analysis of McMahon’s strategy:

Three possibilities:

1. He believes that he proved Gosnell’s innocence during the prosecution’s case-in-chief via cross-examination; or

2. He believes the jury is likely to convict and instead of putting on a case that might inflame and lead them to impose the death sentence (even though there is a separate sentencing ‘trial’); or

3. He thinks conviction is likely and is setting up an ineffectiveness of counsel appellate issue for his client.

As I noted above, he is charged with far more than first-degree murder. He is also on trial for infanticide (different charge than FDM), violating PA’s Controlled Substances Act, PA’s Abortion Control Act, fraud and conspiracy relative to narcotic distribution, tampering with evidence, corrupt organisation (PA’s version of the RICO Act), etc. His wife, Pearl, has already pleaded guilty to performing illegal abortions, corrupt organisation, and criminal conspiracy – all felonies.

I think those three strategies cover all the rational possibilities for McMahon’s strategic decision, and #1 is almost certainly not the case.  My first inclination is to lean toward #3, which may be the reason why Judge Minehart has sent the jury out for the rest of the week; he might want to get McMahon on record explaining this decision and minimize the danger of getting a verdict tossed by an appellate court later.  I think, though, that McMahon may be thinking along the lines of #2, and having failed to get the judge to toss out all of the murder counts, is now trying to do his best to salvage whatever leeway exists with the jury for the sentencing.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

WTF- Is he playing muscial chairs?

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Media were quick to report the “droppings” yesterday.

May most all spontaneously combust, from dereliction of duty.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:22 PM

On Wednesday, Minehart clarified that he did not intend to dismiss charges related to Baby C, which former employee Lynda Williams admits killing after it was alive for 20 minutes.

Instead, Minehart has thrown out the charges involving Baby F, which allegedly jerked its leg after it was born. Another staff member says Gosnell then cut the baby’s neck to “ensure fetal demise.”

This is what happens when you dehumanize victims so much so that they don’t have a name..

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:24 PM

“…whom staffers testified breathed on his own for 20 minutes after the botched abortion…”

God help us…

:(

Seven Percent Solution on April 24, 2013 at 1:26 PM

The judge just built-in the appeal.

Good job.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:29 PM

I’m surprised not many people are talking about how pro-life has already won this trial due to the fact they reference the victims as “baby” and not “fetus”.

ButterflyDragon on April 24, 2013 at 1:30 PM

This is what happens when you dehumanize victims so much so that they don’t have a name..

Give ‘em real human names and the jury might be swayed by sympathy to Gosnell’s victims.

Better to have generic letters of the alphabet to identify these blobs of tissue to keep the jury in the right frame of mind.

Besides which, the jury may have trouble distinguishing one letter from another and force a mistrial.

/s

hawkeye54 on April 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM

He doesn’t deserve the death penalty
-tingles

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM

This is what happens when you dehumanize victims so much so that they don’t have a name..
Give ‘em real human names and the jury might be swayed by sympathy to Gosnell’s victims.

Better to have generic letters of the alphabet to identify these blobs of tissue to keep the jury in the right frame of mind.

Besides which, the jury may have trouble distinguishing one letter from another and force a mistrial.

/s

hawkeye54 on April 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM

Hey, at least they’re calling them “Baby” A, B, C, etc. and not “Fetus” A, B, C, etc. Remember, the defense will have to use that word every single time he brings one of them up. That’s a big deal.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:35 PM

“…whom staffers testified breathed on his own for 20 minutes after the botched abortion successful birth…”

 
Fixed.

rogerb on April 24, 2013 at 1:35 PM

What is so horrific about this is the conclusions that thinking people must draw from all of this. Namely that any victim of an abortion must be killed — whether in the womb as stated with a chemical or outside the womb. These are all living beings.

AZfederalist on April 24, 2013 at 1:36 PM

He doesn’t deserve the death penalty
-tingles

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM

No, he deserves far worse. Fortunately for him, the Eighth Amendment applies, and I’m a stickler for upholding the Bill of Rights. Even for satanic spawn like him.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:36 PM

I’m seeing reports that the defense rested with a terse statement from the defense attorney immediately after the jury was seated following lunch. Does that mean the defense is choosing not to present any case???

Shump on April 24, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Update: And that chance may come a lot sooner than we thought:

#Gosnell def atty Jack McMahon tersely announced “Defense rests” as jury was seated after lunch. Jury dismissed by Judge Minehart til Monday

— jdmullane (@jdmullane) April 24, 2013
Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Or that he thinks his best shot now is appeal and/or mistrial.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Rests?

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Shocked that the defense rested. I would have thought McMahon would have called some medical expert witnesses to delay the case to dull the shock of some of the testimony.

blammm on April 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Wow, indeed. This might prove debilitatingly stupid or brilliant. We’ll see.

It, however, deprives the media from salivating at every smear the defense would have brought. They would have covered the defense side by the seconds, proving again how derelic they are.

May he fry, then fry in Hell, in the hottest section.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM

What?

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM

derelict

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Without being in the courtroom, it’s difficult to determine just how well the prosecution presented that case in the opening round of the trial.

No problem, just reference the NY Times, or other major media outlets – they’ve covered this case extensively. /

Hill60 on April 24, 2013 at 1:40 PM

The defense isn’t going to provide a defense? That’s odd, but obviously they’ve got some card/ulterior motive yet to come into play. Or maybe they genuinely think the prosecution didn’t make the case adequately? I have no doubt the dude’s guilty and hopefully the jury agrees but I haven’t been following the actual proceedings at all, so who knows, but wow.

LukeinNE on April 24, 2013 at 1:41 PM

Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

That is not good, and probably will be used as grounds for an appeal.. The only thing I can think is that the defense will say they didn’t prove that the babies were alive, and the woman’s death was medical negligence at best.. I mean the only reason the defense wouldn’t put on a defense is if they thought that the Prosecution made their case, because if they didn’t put on a defense because they thought it wouldn’t “do any good”- that could be used as a case of ineffective counsel.

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:41 PM

that the Prosecution made their case,

didn’t make their case..

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Update: If the judge sent the jury out until Monday

The judge should have sent the jury to the jury room, immediately, after instructions. This is not right.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

He doesn’t deserve the death penalty
-tingles

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM

Even if convicted, he won’t be sentenced to death.

hawkeye54 on April 24, 2013 at 1:43 PM

With all of the very powerful testimony about the neck-snipping and conditions in the clinic, it seems almost incomprehensible to me that an attorney would roll the dice on getting a jury to dispassionately dispense with the charges.

The defense only needs one juror. The state needs all 12 of them.

Whose task is easier? What are the odds (keep in mind this is Philly) that at least one juror is an Obamaite?

Hung jury without a defense case.

Then we’ll hear about the trial and poor Mr. Gosnell for weeks, 24/7.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

I wonder what the racial make up of the jury is. I have a clue.

Poor Prosecutor. What a waste of four or five weeks, when some are in the jury box and might as well have their fingers in their ears and singing “la la la, I can’t hear you…”.

And I bet those jurors are women.

Marcus on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Coming up next: Bullying the jury to get a mistrial. Justice for sale continues unabated.

nobar on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Judge reinstates murder count in Gosnell trial, dismisses another

Judge determined Baby B was Armin, Baby G was keep the change and thought Baby C was Thuja, only to discover Baby F was Thuja.

Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Both?

rukiddingme on April 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Sir Fundrasesalot backs out of PP big speech.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Update: If the judge sent the jury out until Monday

The judge should have sent the jury to the jury room, immediately, after instructions. This is not right.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Not necessarily. Judges will often delay sending the case to the jury if they feel they need to discuss something with one or both of the attorneys first. It may be as simple as the judge is as shocked as we are, and wants to ask the defense what he’s up to, or if he’s lost his frakking mind.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Wonder if the judge will rule on this and not the jury? IF so, would he give gosmell the most allowed he can do?
L

letget on April 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM

The defense only needs one juror. The state needs all 12 of them.

Whose task is easier? What are the odds (keep in mind this is Philly) that at least one juror is an Obamaite?

Hung jury without a defense case.

Then we’ll hear about the trial and poor Mr. Gosnell for weeks, 24/7.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Well if they are an Obamaite shouldn’t they at least care about the woman he killed?//

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

The defense rested? What does Gosnell’s lawyer have up his sleeve?

Paging RWM…Paging RWM…

Liam on April 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

The judge should have sent the jury to the jury room, immediately, after instructions. This is not right.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Hey….only one government-mandated sequester at a time please.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Sir Fundrasesalot backs out of PP big speech.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Wow, he’s not 100% politically tone def. Only 99%.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Defense rests?

Yes…and in a death penalty case, too!

Kermit Gosnell is NOT Randy Weaver.

Jack McMahon is NOT Gerry Spence.

I very much doubt that Kermit Gosnell will walk out of the courtroom a free and cleared man as Randy Weaver did.

He is charged with much more than the murder of a woman and newborns.

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

“def”??? I meant “deaf” of course.

Chris of Rights on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Yes…and in a death penalty case, too!

Kermit Gosnell is NOT Randy Weaver.

Jack McMahon is NOT Gerry Spence.

I very much doubt that Kermit Gosnell will walk out of the courtroom a free and cleared man as Randy Weaver did.

He is charged with much more than the murder of a woman and newborns.

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Think they are trying to get an appeal by “ineffective counsel?”

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:48 PM

“…whom staffers testified breathed on his own for 20 minutes after the botched abortion successful birth…”

Fixed.

rogerb on April 24, 2013 at 1:35 PM

+7%…

Seven Percent Solution on April 24, 2013 at 1:49 PM

The defense only needs one juror. The state needs all 12 of them.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

That’s not how I look at it. Both sides need all 12 to “win.” The only thing that the Left would hate more than a conviction is a hung jury (your 11-1 scenario) and another trial. I’m ok with either outcome as long as the bastard doesn’t walk.

LukeinNE on April 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM

obama backs out of Planned Parenthood keynote address

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/24/obama-backs-out-planned-parenthood-address/

Pork-Chop on April 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Kermit Gosnell is NOT Randy Weaver.

Jack McMahon is NOT Gerry Spence…

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:47 PM

McMahon isn’t Louis Nizer either.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:51 PM

Has anyone noted the reactions of the jury to testimony so far? I just asked JD Mullane on twitter for reactions of the jury too. We haven’t really heard much about the jury amidst all the efforts to shame the media into covering this at all.

I can’t imagine McMahon rested without running that by Gosnell. He has some sort of plan here or he thinks he has the pulse of the jury. Time will tell I guess.

msmveritas on April 24, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Wow. It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

I was a juror on a capital murder trial nearly 10 years ago and the prosecution took close to a week to present their case. Once they were done, we were stuck in the jury room for what seemed like hours. Then when we finally returned to the courtroom and prepared to hear the defense’s case, the lead defense attorney got up when asked to call his first witness and said “the defense rests”. Needless to say, we were all shocked and were immediately sent back to start deliberating.

Now the defense did spend several days calling witnesses during the punishment phase(we found him guilty). We found out from the attorneys after the trial was over that the reason they ended up not calling any witnesses during the guilt or innocence phase was because they couldn’t find any doctors who would testify that the defendant was insane.

So my guess is with the Gosnell attorneys is that they realize they have no defense for what he did. He was obviously in his right mind(as much as that’s possible) when he did what he’s accused of. And the witness testimony and physical evidence is too damning. At this point they’re likely resigning themselves to accepting a guilty verdict, but trying to save him from getting the death penalty.

Doughboy on April 24, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Think they are trying to get an appeal by “ineffective counsel?”

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:48 PM

…or some other chenannigans…

It should not be granted.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:52 PM

It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Just who is he going to put on the stand? Who can bear witness to these events and help the defense? Who could try to do so and withstand cross-examination?

I think he is aiming for a hung jury. He has no hope for an acquittal. He is just hoping the argument that while it might be a little gruesome it is all legal and really just business-as-usual will hang one or two jurors.

If he gets a mistrial he has a shot at negotiating a plea to life in prison as opposed to re-trial.

novaculus on April 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM

It is very wrong to have sent the jury home until Monday.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM

Is this to get a basis for an appeal later because of bad representation?

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM

Sullenger said testimony from the medical examiner and toxicologist has indicated that there was no evidence the babies were injected with Digoxin to ensure the babies were dead prior to the abortion, as the defense has claimed.

So it comes down to killing them in-utero, or ten minutes later after delivery. A distinction without a difference, it’s murder.

iurockhead on April 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM

Pork-Chop on April 24, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Megan Kelly reporting that Obama IS going to speak at PP event.

esr1951 on April 24, 2013 at 1:56 PM

You don’t think so hawkeye?

Dear leader realized what a photo op that would have been….but I can already hear the lsm….he got bullied into backing out by the pro lifers

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 1:57 PM

There’s probably a couple of table-pounding feminists on the jury – so unfeminine that the very thought of having sex and getting pregnant is about as likely as them walking on Jupiter, yet who consider themselves the vanguard of protecting a woman’s right to go to a bar, get plowed, hear “last call!,” pick up some drunk hick who can’t see straight, as he’s stumbling out the door, take him home, have a few more drinks and a couple of lines, and bed him, so that they both can do the same thing, the next night, only with different people.

The defense probably thinks it can get a hung-jury.

OhEssYouCowboys on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

The judge should have sent the jury to the jury room, immediately, after instructions. This is not right.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Not necessarily, it may take some time to write instructions to the jury

AZfederalist on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

The defense rested? What does Gosnell’s lawyer have up his sleeve?

Paging RWM…Paging RWM…

Liam on April 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

Three possibilities:

1. He believes that he proved Gosnell’s innocence during the prosecution’s case-in-chief via cross-examination; or

2. He believes the jury is likely to convict and instead of putting on a case that might inflame and lead them to impose the death sentence (even though there is a separate sentencing ‘trial’); or

3. He thinks conviction is likely and is setting up an ineffectiveness of counsel appellate issue for his client.

As I noted above, he is charged with far more than first-degree murder. He is also on trial for infanticide (different charge than FDM), violating PA’s Controlled Substances Act, PA’s Abortion Control Act, fraud and conspiracy relative to narcotic distribution, tampering with evidence, corrupt organisation (PA’s version of the RICO Act), etc. His wife, Pearl, has already pleaded guilty to performing illegal abortions, corrupt organisation, and criminal conspiracy – all felonies.

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

Then we’ll hear about the trial and railroading of poor Mr. Gosnell for weeks, 24/7.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

FIFY

GWB on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

Defense rests? Sounds more like defense quits in disgust and horror.

starboardhelm on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

I wonder if the judge is hip to the fact that this might be a stunt to appeal based on ineffective counsel and is using today to counsel the defense of that fact..

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 2:02 PM

By the way, Obama just backed out of keynoting a Planned Parenthood meeting. I guess killing babies ain’t as glamourous as it used to be.

WannabeAnglican on April 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM

If the judge sent the jury out until Monday

The judge should have sent the jury to the jury room, immediately, after instructions. This is not right.

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 1:42 PM

The case has not been given to jurors yet – they still have to give closing arguments – which will probably happen on Monday.

Pork-Chop on April 24, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Well if they are an Obamaite shouldn’t they at least care about the woman he killed?//

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM

Speed bump on the way to Utopia. A martyr, if you will.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 2:06 PM

It seems that McMahon either thinks that all of the highly shocking testimony had no impact on the jury, or he doesn’t have a real defense against it.

Or after five weeks of horror stories the defense thinks it will fare better on the capital punishment possibilty without defending 17 years of performing late-term abortions.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:07 PM

By the way, Obama just backed out of keynoting a Planned Parenthood meeting. I guess killing babies ain’t as glamourous as it used to be.

WannabeAnglican on April 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Wow, first he’s shamed into visiting West, Texas, instead of hightailing it back for the PP dinner. Now he’s dumping the dinner?
Wonder if it was the optics or the logistics that caused the cancellation.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:12 PM

Every time I read anything about this trial I think about my 2yo daughter, born to my wife who was told her thyroid cancer treatment would never let her have kids. So many miracles flushed down the toilet, so many opportunities for one of them to have grown up to cure cancer, find a new element, become the next great author.

Maybe McMahon was advised by his client to mount no defense. Hopefully Gosnell is so arrogant to believe he’ll be acquitted outright.

smfic on April 24, 2013 at 2:13 PM

I wonder if the judge is hip to the fact that this might be a stunt to appeal based on ineffective counsel and is using today to counsel the defense of that fact..

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Possibly. Also, appellate courts aren’t as sympathetic to ineffective counsel claims as many think. In this case, I think that Gosnell will have a difficult time making that argument on appeal. It is indisputable that his counsel was engaged and some could say ‘effective’ during the prosecution’s case. He wasn’t passed out drunk, incoherent, etc. Furthermore, Gosnell had to have agreed to not to testify in his own defence or put on a case at all.

Gosnell may be a monster, but he is not an uneducated (he has a MD, after all), poor ($250,000 in cash was found in his home when it was searched), insignificant (he was a community leader, ran a halfway house for which he was honoured, and was a finalist for the Junior Chamber of Commerce’s “Young Philadelphian of the Year” years ago) individual. While ignorance of the law is no defence, educated people are held to a higher standard.

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 2:13 PM

His wife, Pearl, has already pleaded guilty to performing illegal abortions, corrupt organisation, and criminal conspiracy – all felonies.

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 1:58 PM

Just my opinion, but I’m sick of hearing about her convictions….its like the MSM has it on a loop or something.

Wolf Blitzer acts like he’s got a real thing for wives of abortionists who get convicted of abortion crimes. I’d give anything for a good, scandalous Beiber story.

Sarc off.

No sh*t, eh? This is the first I’ve heard about the lovely Mrs. Gosnell.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Thanks, RWM!

If this is a ploy to try winning something on appeal, like reversal of a conviction or to try scoring a new trial, I’m not sure Gosnell will live long enough to see the result. He is quite old, after all. If he gets the death penalty, it’s a sure bet he’ll die of old age or illness before the sentence is carried out.

Long as he’s sitting in prison when he draws his last breath, I won’t complain.

Liam on April 24, 2013 at 2:15 PM

Wonder if it was the optics or the logistics that caused the cancellation.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:12 PM

We know it wasn’t sequester!

Liam on April 24, 2013 at 2:16 PM

Speed Baby bump on the way to Utopia. A martyr, if you will.

BobMbx on April 24, 2013 at 2:06 PM

OhEssYouCowboys on April 24, 2013 at 2:16 PM

So it comes down to killing them in-utero, or ten minutes later after delivery. A distinction without a difference, it’s murder.

iurockhead on April 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM

yeah that is so bizarre. that is their defense!!! “what he did is okay because the baby was located inside a womb instead of outside!!” amazing.

Sachiko on April 24, 2013 at 2:18 PM

Rock on rwm

cmsinaz on April 24, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Pork-Chop on April 24, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Yes, yes… they should have proceeded. Why the delay?

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 2:22 PM

This is what happens when you dehumanize victims so much so that they don’t have a name..

melle1228 on April 24, 2013 at 1:24 PM

I wish I had written this, because it makes for an amusing satire of pro-life sentiments. I guess the usually sensible melle1228 didn’t think this one through.

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Second thought — I wonder if McMahon can see the writing on the wall. Any defense he puts up will just drag the jurors over the same horrifying facts again and again. He’s probably figured that A) killing babies in utero to subsequently perform illegal late term abortions is murder, and people are going to realize that eventually, and B) the longer the trial goes on, the more likely the media is going to have to cover this atrocity.

starboardhelm on April 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM

Long as he’s sitting in prison when he draws his last breath, I won’t complain.

Liam on April 24, 2013 at 2:15 PM

Me? I think somebody should cut his neck to ensure geriatric demise.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Your soul is so dark, it’s smudging mine.

AZfederalist on April 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM

By the way, Obama just backed out of keynoting a Planned Parenthood meeting. I guess killing babies ain’t as glamourous as it used to be.

WannabeAnglican on April 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Dude, Obama is just delaying for one day going to the Planned Parenthood meeting so he can go the funeral for the victims of Texas fertilizer plant explosion. Planned Parenthood is still well loved.

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Yes, yes… they should have proceeded. Why the delay?

Schadenfreude on April 24, 2013 at 2:22 PM

Yeah, seems a bit odd – it is a LONG delay – and I’ll bet that the jury is chomping at the bit to get this trial over with … I’m thinking (hoping) it will only take a couple of hours to reach a (guilty) verdict.

Pork-Chop on April 24, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Me? I think somebody should cut his neck to ensure geriatric demise.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM

but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Looks like this judge is shilling for a Supreme Court appointment from the REB.

slickwillie2001 on April 24, 2013 at 2:34 PM

He thinks conviction is likely and is setting up an ineffectiveness of counsel appellate issue for his client.

Nailed it!

The POS is going to file an appeal stating that the good Doctor received ineffectual counsel.

About 15 years ago, two AH in Kalifornia did the same thing. They didn’t get their client off on a death penalty case. So they filed an appeal that their client did not have effective counsel.

The state executed him anyway. AND those two POS “lawyers” are still ‘practicing law’………despite declaring that they were “incompetent”.

And lawyers wonder why “they don’t get no respect”.

GarandFan on April 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM

but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM

It doesn’t really matter. Kermitt Gosnell and Christ are never going to meet.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Yes, he really said this…

‘As a physician, I am very concerned about the sanctity of life.* But it is for this precise reason that I provide abortions for women who want and need them.’

- Dr Kermit Gosnell, Philadelphia Inquirer, October 1972

October 1972 would be 5 months after Kermit Gosnell’s infamous ‘Mother’s Day Massacre.’

* He said ‘life’…not ‘human being,’ ‘human beings,’ ‘person,’ or ‘people.’

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Dr. Gosnell’s practice was evil.
…because of their attitudes, “God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, …murder…, inventors of evil, that those who practice such things are worthy of death. Rom 1:28+

3dpuzzman on April 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM

but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM

He wouldn’t be performing abortions or ‘snipping’ the spinal columns of newborns to ‘ensure foetal demise.’

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM

And lawyers wonder why “they don’t get no respect”.

GarandFan on April 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM

I resemble that remark.

:-)

Resist We Much on April 24, 2013 at 2:39 PM

but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Jesus was capable of righteous anger. I question the appropriateness of Happy Nomad’s form of righteous anger in this case, but I think a small of righteous anger is permissible in a Christian.

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:40 PM

It doesn’t really matter. Kermitt Gosnell and Christ are never going to meet.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Not exactly. They are going to meet on that great last day. … And in less Gosnell repents and comes to faith, it will not be a happy meeting for Kermit.

AZfederalist on April 24, 2013 at 2:41 PM

… Unless, not “in less”

Dang autocorrect!

AZfederalist on April 24, 2013 at 2:42 PM

It doesn’t really matter. Kermitt Gosnell and Christ are never going to meet.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Oh, yes, they will. And it will not be a happy encounter for Gosnell. But *all* will kneel and proclaim him King.

GWB on April 24, 2013 at 2:46 PM

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:23 PM

eoww…

Your soul is so dark, it’s smudging mine.

AZfederalist
on April 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM

…..apparently a part of the lost generation. Very…lost. Bordering on sociopathic. And, probably most happily so, as most sociopaths are.
.
.

Me? I think somebody should cut his neck to ensure geriatric demise.

Happy Nomad on April 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM

but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Apparently, you are unaware of the Law under which Christ grew up.

(Exodus 21:22,23)
: (22)”If men strive, and hurt a woman
: with child, so that her fruit depart from
: her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall
: be surely punished, according as the
: woman’s husband will lay upon him;
: and he shall pay as the judges determine.”
: (23) “And if any mischief follow, then
: thou shalt give life for life
.”

From this law that God gave Israel, we see that God not only viewed an unborn child as a living person, but that anybody responsible for its death was accountable for murder. Believe stoning until dead was the method in those days for capital punishment.
.

Further,

Yet Thou art He who didst bring me forth from the womb; Thou didst make me trust when upon my mother’s breasts. Upon Thee I was cast from birth; Thou hast been my God from my mother’s womb. (Psalm 22:9-10)

For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from Thee, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Thy book they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. (Psalm 139:13-16)

Thus says the LORD who made you And formed you from the womb, who will help you, `Do not fear, O Jacob My servant; And you Jeshurun whom I have chosen. (Isaiah 44:2)

Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, “I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, And spreading out the earth all alone, (Isaiah 44:24)
.
.

…..you asked.

avagreen on April 24, 2013 at 2:49 PM

I don’t think that a lot of people have read Revelation.

Jesus will be judgment.

OhEssYouCowboys on April 24, 2013 at 2:50 PM

[quote]but would Jesus do that?

nonpartisan on April 24, 2013 at 2:30 PM[/quote]

Jesus prefers to let his minions on earth do that stuff. He keeps his own hands clean. Very clever, that guy.

Armin Tamzarian on April 24, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Jesus was capable of righteous anger. I question the appropriateness of Happy Nomad’s form of righteous anger in this case, but I think a small of righteous anger is permissible in a Christian.

thuja on April 24, 2013 at 2:40 PM

I’m so sick of so-called “Christians” lecturing me on why anger toward sin is so wrong.

nobar on April 24, 2013 at 2:55 PM

I’m so sick of so-called “Christians” lecturing me on why anger toward sin is so wrong.

nobar on April 24, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Everyone else is sick of so-called “Christians” lecturing them, period.

Armin Tamzarian on April 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Armin Tamzarian on April 24, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Into mindreading much?

Christ is part of the Godhead……from scriptures I’ve posted above, I think it’s pretty clear what Christ intended for this earth and it’s behaviors.

avagreen on April 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Armin Tamzarian on April 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Heh! How ironic.

Ditto.

avagreen on April 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Armin Tamzarian on April 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Solution: Leave HA or civilization in general. Religion will always be with you.

nobar on April 24, 2013 at 3:00 PM

Heh! How ironic.

Ditto.

avagreen on April 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Thuja claims to be a christian, I’m calling him an apostate.

nobar on April 24, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3