Comments

You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front: Culture Wars

Planned Parenthood wins $2.2 million verdict against anti-abortion activists

2019-11-18

[San Francisco Chronicle] A federal jury in San Francisco awarded Planned Parenthood more than $2.2 million in damages Friday against antiabortion activists who posed as fetal researchers to enter abortion-rights meetings and secretly record participants, rejecting the activists’ claims that they were acting as undercover journalists to expose wrongdoing.

After a monthlong trial, the jurors found that David Daleiden, his employee Sandra Merritt and their collaborators had violated state and federal laws against trespassing, fraud, clandestine recording and racketeering, as well as the nondisclosure agreements the two signed before entering the meetings.

NDAs matter.

Jurors awarded Planned Parenthood more than $500,000 as compensation for the intrusions and $870,000 in punitive damages. Under federal racketeering law, most of the compensation will be tripled.

Jurors also concluded that both Daleiden and Merritt had violated a California criminal law against secretly recording conversations without consent. They both face criminal charges under that law in a separate proceeding in San Francisco Superior Court. Friday’s verdict has no direct impact on the criminal prosecution, which has a higher standard of proof, but it suggested that the defendants have a formidable task in justifying their actions to a jury.

Daleiden, who heads an organization called the Center for Medical Progress, and Merritt entered the abortion conferences by posing as researchers for a nonexistent company called BioMax Procurement Services. The conferences included the annual meetings of the National Abortion Federation in San Francisco in 2014 and in Baltimore in 2015, as well as Planned Parenthood gatherings.

Posted by:Besoeker

#5 The judge's conflict of interest makes this one very ripe for appeal

Well that and the stacked jury.

Posted by: Mullah Richard 2019-11-18 08:25

#4 Exactly. I can see this being reduced/overturned on appeal.

Posted by: DarthVader 2019-11-18 08:04

#3 The judge's conflict of interest makes this one very ripe for appeal.

Posted by: M. Murcek 2019-11-18 07:53

#2 Can't have any exposure of a dem party taxpayer money laundering front.

Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2019-11-18 07:33

#1 Remember its OK for ABC, NBC, CBS et al do it. One set of rules for thee, another set of rules for me.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-11-18 07:14

00:00