There has been a historic capital murder trial ongoing in Philadelphia over the past five weeks – it involves the intentional killing of multiple helpless new-born infants by a medical doctor who used surgical scissors to sever the spinal cord of each infant to terminate their short lives. When the grand jury report and indictment was announced, I wrote about the case in this column, but you probably would never even have known that the case was being tried unless you knew where to look for the news. The story itself is so horrendous that it is difficult to understand why more coverage has not been devoted to the story – and the lack of coverage stands as a stark indictment of the 24-hour mainstream media itself.
Given that Kermit Gosnell (I have omitted the “Dr.” in front of his name as I cannot bring myself to call this monster a doctor) was an abortion provider, there are many critics contending that the media is ignoring the trial as it does not fit into the media-driven agenda that seeks to shape public policy. The evidence in the case is so gruesome and horrific that some theorize that the media has no desire for the general public to hear those facts as it would provide a crippling blow to the “pro-choice” movement. Several prominent commentators began to openly criticize the major media outlets for a lack of coverage – and forced the media into some limited coverage. But make no mistake about it the media coverage has been terribly limited.
The case involved a late-term abortion provider in Philadelphia – a man who violated Pennsylvania law that generally prohibits abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy unless the life of the mother is jeopardized. How would he do this act? Well, Gosnell would inject a drug into the baby in the womb that was designed to stop the baby’s heart. Gosnell would then “deliver” the drugged babies – most of which would be dead prior to the end of delivery – but the prosecution contends that some of those babies were not dead upon delivery – and this position is confirmed by Gosnell’s former employees who testified to the use of the surgical scissors to finish off the small infant that was struggling to survive the attempt on its life.
The crux of the homicide case has boiled down to a simple question – whether the victims were alive when they were forced out their mothers’ wombs? Gosnell’s defense rested upon a simple theory – Gosnell killed the babies while they were still in the womb – not after he had induced their delivery. The defense argued that all of the movements that the employees observed were simply involuntary spasms occurring after the infant’s heart had stopped. The defense attorney used terms like “fetal demise” and “stillbirth” to describe those babies. The defense was successful in having several of the homicide counts dismissed by the judge in the middle of the trial as the court concluded there was no sufficient evidence as to some of the babies that they had made it out of their mother’s womb alive.
The prosecution countered with witnesses who described moving children, beating hearts, gasps for breath and Gosnell’s deadly surgical scissors used to sever the spinal column of the babies that were struggling for life. A former janitor provided testimony that he quit his job because he could not handle having to plunge toilets that had become clogged with little hands and feet that had been severed from the aborted babies. At the end, the prosecution presented enough evidence for the jury to consider homicide counts for 4 babies – those babies where the court found there was enough evidence for the jury to conclude that they were living outside the womb prior to Gosnell terminating their life. There is also a homicide count relating to the death of a 41-year old woman who died as a result of Gosnell’s “medical care.”
As one commentator noted, the case boils down to a distinction based upon “maybe a 15-minute or half hour time frame and 10 inches of physical space,” i.e., the amount of time and distance it takes to kill that baby and remove the dead baby from the womb. The difference between a “lawful” medical procedure and homicide are so close that it is difficult to find a real distinction that makes logical sense.
As I write this column, the jury is still deliberating on the 250 counts that were filed against Gosnell – and the only certain thing is that the verdict will be historical. No one knows how long it will take them to come to a verdict, but the Gosnell trial has served to make people stop and think about this issue in a real-life way. The reality and brutality of this procedure has been exposed – and the misleading and sanitized language used in the debate has been debunked. The timing of the case is also powerful with Mother’s Day being so close. For those of you reading this column, if you are able, please take the opportunity to thank your mother for choosing life.
Please submit any questions, concerns, or comments to Susquehanna County District Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 218, Montrose, Pennsylvania 18801 or at our website www.SusquehannaCounty-DA.org or discuss this and all articles at http://dadesk.blogspot.com/.