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

Skip to comments.

Felony charges for 2 who secretly filmed Planned Parenthood
AP ^ | 3/28/17 | ANDREW DALTON

Posted on 03/28/2017 8:58:08 PM PDT by blueyon

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- California prosecutors on Tuesday charged two anti-abortion activists who made undercover videos of themselves trying to buy fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood with 15 felonies, saying they invaded the privacy of medical providers by filming without consent.

The charges against David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress come eight months after similar charges were dropped in Texas.

State Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a longtime Congressional Democrat who took over the investigation in January, said in a statement that the state "will not tolerate the criminal recording of conversations."

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: abortion; abuseofpower; becerra; bodyparts; chopshop; cmp; corruption; cultureofcorruption; daleiden; democrats; democratscandals; demsdabreaks; donutwatch; fetaltissue; mediabias; plannedparenthood; prolife; secrecy; transparency; xavierbecerra
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: coloradan
It’s quite the double standard when governments claim the power to surveil their subjects, but prosecute any peasants who would dare to do the same.

good point!

41 posted on 03/28/2017 10:01:09 PM PDT by Cubs Fan (Modern day liberals are the most intolerant, hateful, and violent people in America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

It’s true. Dems have NO conscience whatsoever. They have become truly evil.


42 posted on 03/28/2017 10:05:42 PM PDT by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Political persecution.


43 posted on 03/28/2017 10:05:42 PM PDT by Williams (Stop tolerating the intolerant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

You can record in CA if you believe whats being recorded is evidence of a crime.

PP is on tape admitting they broke laws.


44 posted on 03/28/2017 10:09:31 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

CA is a LONG way from TX.


45 posted on 03/28/2017 10:09:31 PM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust cIonservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

They will of course prosecute every reporter and news crew that uses secret camera filming and recording.......yes?


46 posted on 03/28/2017 10:22:09 PM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mastador1

Unless they are filming Republicans.


47 posted on 03/28/2017 10:25:21 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

>>>”will not tolerate the criminal recording of conversations.”<<<

So, he’s going after Obama?


48 posted on 03/28/2017 10:26:57 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (The way Liberals carry on about Deportation, you would think "Mexico" was Spanish for "Auschwitz".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Nifongism. The RINO who pulled this crap in Houston found herself voted out of office in 2016.

http://www.click2houston.com/news/anderson-upbeat-in-final-moments-of-das-race


49 posted on 03/28/2017 10:32:38 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (patriots win, Communists and Socialist Just-Us Warriors lose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Is everyone on a YouTube Video aware that they were being recorded and that it would become part of the Public Domain?

Did the Restaurant where this happened have Video Surveillance? If so, are they being prosecuted as well?

Did any of the other Customers there video anything in that Restaurant while those Criminals were in there?


50 posted on 03/28/2017 10:34:19 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (The way Liberals carry on about Deportation, you would think "Mexico" was Spanish for "Auschwitz".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: immadashell

Meanwhile the FBI or a similar LEO agency leaked the transcripts of Flynn’s bugged conversations (neither party was aware of the recording) to the media and there is no “crime”.

Fire all Democrats. They are corrupt AF.


51 posted on 03/28/2017 10:35:12 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (patriots win, Communists and Socialist Just-Us Warriors lose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

is there a fund raising going on to defend these victims of Californication’s Nazi style government?


52 posted on 03/28/2017 10:37:07 PM PDT by faithhopecharity ("Politicans are not born, they're excreted." -- Marcus Tillius Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

I think they have a good chance to beat this in court, at least for some of the charges. The California law:

“applies to “confidential communications” — i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation.”

If I remember correctly, most of the conversations recorded were meetings in restaurants and public places. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a place like that where waiters and other diners could easily overhear the conversation.


53 posted on 03/28/2017 10:37:56 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

They could mount a defense of “selective prosecution”. All they would need to do is find some examples of undercover news “stings” that happened in California that were not prosecuted, and they can claim they are being targeted unfairly.


54 posted on 03/28/2017 10:40:23 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

isn’t this harassment and prosecution by attrition?

no jury will convict.


55 posted on 03/28/2017 10:43:06 PM PDT by SteveH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

If a place is publicly funded, all or part, then to any degree does that make it a public place also?


56 posted on 03/28/2017 10:45:42 PM PDT by Anima Mundi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

Videos of our activities are being recorded everywhere without our knowledge. I have a camera on my driveway without any notice of surveillance. Highway patrol cars have cameras mounted to record without notice their activities. The NSA is recording our private lives through our TVs without any notice. And a judge gives a felony judgement for the same activity?


57 posted on 03/28/2017 10:52:46 PM PDT by jonrick46 (The Left has a mental illness: A totalitarian psyche.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anima Mundi

No. There is a lot of tricky jurisprudence about what exactly a “public place” is. Even places that are wholly public funded don’t necessary meet that definition.

For example, the courthouse steps are probably 100% a “public place”, the inside of a courtroom is a different category with more restrictions, mostly up to the discretion of the presiding judge, and the inside of the judge’s chambers in that courtroom is entirely NOT a “public place”. Yet all of those are publicly owned and funded property in the same building!


58 posted on 03/28/2017 11:06:43 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

This will be a high profile trial. A legal defense fund will be set up and a number of highly competent conservative legal minds will line up for the defense. The argument might be privacy versus journalistic freedom—a constitutional issue.


59 posted on 03/28/2017 11:07:31 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee (A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

I think most of the restrictive “two party consent” wiretap laws only hold up because they haven’t been challenged to a high enough court yet.

Usually they are used by the state as grounds for arrest (thereby getting their hands on any recorded evidence), but the cases are subsequently dropped by prosecutors before higher courts have a chance to strike down the law. Illinois made the mistake of trying to actually prosecute under it’s similar two party consent law a few years ago and the state Supreme Court struck it down. I don’t think any of these laws have ever even made it to the federal courts or Supreme courts yet.


60 posted on 03/28/2017 11:11:02 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 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