Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Court blocks pro-life group from releasing new fetal body part videos
Life Site ^ | July 29, 2015 | John Jalsevac

Posted on 07/29/2015 7:13:18 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

The California Superior Court has issued a narrow temporary restraining order preventing the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), a pro-life group, from releasing further undercover video footage taken of three top-level staff of StemExpress.

CMP is the organization behind the series of three videos released over the past three weeks exposing the alleged harvesting and sale of body parts from aborted babies by Planned Parenthood – body parts that are then purchased by StemExpress.

CMP has alleged that the fees paid by StemExpress to Planned Parenthood violate federal law prohibiting the sale and trafficking of human tissue.

While Planned Parenthood has claimed that the fees paid to them by StemExpress merely cover their costs, and fall within the bounds of the law, the video footage released so far has appeared to show Planned Parenthood employees seeking profit as part of the transaction.

The Associated Press, which broke the news about the court order, reports that the undercover videos of the Stem Express staff were filmed at a restaurant in May.

It is unclear how just significant an impact the court order will have on the release of subsequent videos in the series. David Daleiden, the lead researcher with CMP, has said that at least nine more videos are slated for release.

The restraining order reportedly only pertains to the footage of the Stem Express employees, meaning that any other footage, including that featuring Planned Parenthood employees, can still be released as planned.

CMP did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In a statement released today, StemExpress stated that they sought the restraining order "on the grounds that CMP and Daleiden violated California’s anti-wiretapping law under Penal Code § 632 (Invasion of Privacy Act)."

"We will continue to pursue all available legal remedies against CMP and Daleiden," said the company.

In a statement responding to the court order, CMP accused Stem Express of using “meritless litigation” to "cover-up this illegal baby parts trade, suppress free speech, and silence the citizen press reporting on issues of burning concern to the American public.”

The pro-life group stated that an initial petition by Stem Express was rejected by the court, while their second petition, the one just granted, “was eviscerated to a narrow and contingent order about an alleged recording pending CMP’s opportunity to respond.”

CMP restated that the organization “follows all applicable laws in the course of our investigative journalism work and will contest all attempts from Planned Parenthood and their allies to silence our First Amendment rights and suppress investigative journalism.”

The AP reports that the restraining order will remain in place until a hearing on Aug. 19.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; 201508; 20150819; abortion; babies; california; censorship; cmp; coverup; experiments; fascism; firstamendment; murder; organmarket; organs; organtrade; plannedparenthood; seetopofbreakingnews; stemexpress
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

1 posted on 07/29/2015 7:13:18 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

doesn’t cover other groups or individuals I bet.


2 posted on 07/29/2015 7:14:42 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

We will not recover our Constitution until people start saying: “I don’t care what the courts say.”


3 posted on 07/29/2015 7:15:19 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Henry Bowman where are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

What would the Alinsky Left do with video evidence - that did horrible damage to an important conservative organization - if some judge told them not to release it.


4 posted on 07/29/2015 7:15:30 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Vote GOP: A Slower Handbasket)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I wonder what the going price is for a Superior Court these days.


5 posted on 07/29/2015 7:15:43 PM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

That decision cost PP a lot of money to get it go their way.


6 posted on 07/29/2015 7:15:59 PM PDT by TYVets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
The people that have the videos can ship them outside the jurisdiction of the Court and they can be seen by the receiver....
7 posted on 07/29/2015 7:16:08 PM PDT by HarleyLady27 (Send 'slob boy of the oval office' back to Kenya ASAP, and save America...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Just don’t release them in California.


8 posted on 07/29/2015 7:16:34 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (There's a right to gay marriagein the Constitution but there is no right of an unborn baby to life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Ever heard of prior restraint?

It is an unconstitutional order and can and will be ignored.

They could also simply release them from a server in Nevada or Clinton’s basement and not even violate an order with no teeth outside of California.


9 posted on 07/29/2015 7:17:39 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“Go f**k yourself, Your Honor”

Come on, SOMEONE has to have the cojones to say it! ;)


10 posted on 07/29/2015 7:17:58 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyLady27

I thought I read about a TV station or news organization that already had ALL the videos.
Does this ruling then prevent any group that already received them from posting / showing / publishing them?


11 posted on 07/29/2015 7:18:11 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

First amendment, like the US Constitution,
is TRUMPED by the whores in Black Robes.


12 posted on 07/29/2015 7:18:11 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("When a crime is unpunished, the world is unbalanced.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Farmer Dean
It is a Local Los Angelas court and it is illegal to order prior restraint. It is meaningless and carries no legal weight. It isn't worth the paper it is written on.
13 posted on 07/29/2015 7:19:28 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

California.


14 posted on 07/29/2015 7:20:25 PM PDT by shankbear (The tree of Liberty appears to be perishing because there are few patriots willing to refresh it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Arn’t hidden videos the staple of investigative exposés? Isn’t this the sort of thing used by “60 Minutes” and “To Catch a Predator”?


15 posted on 07/29/2015 7:20:27 PM PDT by Flick Lives (One should not attend even the end of the world without a good breakfast. -- Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
It is not “the,” it is “a” superior court, and this court, wherever it is does not have any jurisdiction over this. As usual AP never lets the truth get in the way of their agenda.
16 posted on 07/29/2015 7:21:37 PM PDT by Fungi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collectives and members of the legislative, executive and judicial have hijacked the republic.

ZERO representation ALERT!


17 posted on 07/29/2015 7:22:01 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

screwum, release it anyway!


18 posted on 07/29/2015 7:23:42 PM PDT by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbw2
From my understand if your within that Court Jurisdiction then they cannot be shown, only a Federal Judge would have the authority to make it so the films couldn't be seen in any state...but I'm not sure...seems like I remember reading about something like this....
19 posted on 07/29/2015 7:24:04 PM PDT by HarleyLady27 (Send 'slob boy of the oval office' back to Kenya ASAP, and save America...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Somehow anonymous put them on internet.....


20 posted on 07/29/2015 7:24:56 PM PDT by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson