David Daleiden Doubles Down

[PapaZoom]

I believe those who were considered 3/5ths of a person in the US constitution would disagree.

You're making his point.

 

[Belk]

THey can cook the books

They could also be innocent of wrong doing.

How exactly have I insulted your intelligence? Do you disagre with what I said? Why?

I was going to say 'By claiming a simplistic "they get money and do wrong things" when the money they get is for completely different services.' but I took some pain killers and am not sure I am thinking straight. I'll revisit this topic tomorrow.

 

[PapaZoom]

They could also be innocent of wrong doing.



I was going to say 'By claiming a simplistic "they get money and do wrong things" when the money they get is for completely different services.' but I took some pain killers and am not sure I am thinking straight. I'll revisit this topic tomorrow.

They are hardly innocent of wrong doing. The make millions killing unborn humans.

 

[DaisyDay]

So Washington times article claiming the veracity of the videos will proven in this trial I believe is inaccurate. Just my opinion though.

To call that piece an "article" seems overly generous, akin to calling Daleiden a "journalist".

 

[Mayzoo]

They could also be innocent of wrong doing.



I was going to say 'By claiming a simplistic "they get money and do wrong things" when the money they get is for completely different services.' but I took some pain killers and am not sure I am thinking straight. I'll revisit this topic tomorrow.

The US government makes a huge amount of money and does a lot of things I do not agree with and I consider wrong. I still pay my taxes. I have not seen an earnest attempt to shut them down.

 

[KCfromNC]

Like he didn't understand what he's doing. CMP is playing a game of chess with the courts.

Breaking the law as a way to dare the courts to do their job and then breaking them again when they start to do their job isn't exactly the most brilliant strategy to stay out of jail. It is consistent with someone who has fallen for their own BS, though. Things rarely tend to end well for people who lose perspective like that.

 

[KCfromNC]

That's good news. If this goes to trial the truth will come out and Planned Parenthood will be further exposed and embarrassed.

The only exposure so far for PP has been to have people who falsely accused them end up facing criminal charges. I imagine that they will continue to get that sort of "exposure". Not sure why that's embarrassing to them - they aren't responsible for the illegal actions of the anti-abortion groups in question.

 

[Belk]

They are hardly innocent of wrong doing. The make millions killing unborn humans.

Which makes them the devil incarnate and everything they do is pure evil?

 

[KCfromNC]

A new video is just released. How can they be vindicated when all the evidence hasn't been seen?

Innocent until proven guilty and all that still matters to some people. Granted a witch-hunt might be more entertaining, especially when you're really positive that the target must be doing something wrong, somehow, some way.

 

[Belk]

You're making his point.

No, not really. The designation of "person" is a philosophical and legal concept. Those who are considered a person (the vast majority of us) are granted legal rights. Those who are not don't have any. Designating someone a person is the very mechanism by which we give rights.

 

[KCfromNC]

THey can cook the books

And groups like the CMP can break the and get caught for it. Guess which one of these "can" actually happened and which one is just a hypothetical that didn't?

 

[DaisyDay]

. After all, we give them 1/2 billion dollars to kill the unborn.

This is a false statement .

And it's true that PP gets nearly 500 million and that they kill the unborn. So there ya go.

Well, I can see why Daleiden's tactics don't bother you.

 

[Belk]

How exactly have I insulted your intelligence?

By giving simplistic arguments. That you find their actions deplorable, even evil, does not imply that they are dishonest in everything they do.

Do you disagre with what I said? Why?

Yes I do disagree. First off simply they receive money for women's health services not abortion. Secondly "ripping the limbs off" is, to my knowledge, not part of a normal abortion procedure and even if it was making sure that you have all the tissue so that it does not turn septic and kill the mother strikes me as a good idea.

 

[rjs330]

I doubt he'll be found guilty of attempting to buy the body parts. The law probably has a purpose clause which means they have to prove that he actually was trying to purchase the parts. We all know he had no actual intention to buy the parts and that it was a ruse to get the videos. The fake ID is a problem for him as there is no way to get around that. Either he had one and used it or he didn't. The video taping is another matter. Each state has its own laws regarding that and investigative journalism freedom of the press may come into play here. It will be interesting to see the arguments in defense of those actions. He may be found guilty in some states while not in others. I have a sneaking suspicion that he'll do some jail time in the end.

What I find interesting is the hypocrisy in prosecuting this case. There are,plenty of similar types of cases out there where people were taped without their consent in the name of investigative journalism and they were not prosecuted. Why this one?

 

[Mayzoo]

Jesus defied man's law. Specifically the way the ruling Jewish elites enforced Sabbath laws.

Sabbath law was not a governmental (Roman) law so far as I am aware. Sabbath law was a church law/rule. I was always taught Jesus changed Sabbath law, not that he broke sabbath law. POV I suppose.

We are discussing Daleiden violating government imposed law. What Roman law did Jesus break? If you want to compare Daleiden to Jesus, please make your comparisons apples to apples (violated government law to violated government law).

 

[rjs330]

One other thing on the video taping that will be important is that federal law only requires consent for one person. So Daleiden cannot be guilty under federal law. He could in trouble for state law depending on what state he is in. However this all so may fall under the right to privacy and did the person being recorded have the expectation of privacy. And that would,depend on Where the videos were recorded. So if the individual states do not prosecute then the feds can't for the taping.

 

[Mayzoo]

One other thing on the video taping that will be important is that federal law only requires consent for one person. So Daleiden cannot be guilty under federal law. He could in trouble for state law depending on what state he is in. However this all so may fall under the right to privacy and did the person being recorded have the expectation of privacy. And that would,depend on Where the videos were recorded. So if the individual states do not prosecute then the feds can't for the taping.

"California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation." http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law

 

[KCfromNC]

I doubt he'll be found guilty of attempting to buy the body parts. The law probably has a purpose clause which means they have to prove that he actually was trying to purchase the parts. We all know he had no actual intention to buy the parts and that it was a ruse to get the videos.

All he has to do is prove it in court that he was lying while dealing with PP. Which should do wonders for his defense against the separate fraud case brought against him.

What I find interesting is the hypocrisy in prosecuting this case. There are,plenty of similar types of cases out there where people were taped without their consent in the name of investigative journalism and they were not prosecuted. Why this one?

And specific examples you have in mind?

 

[lasthero]

I doubt he'll be found guilty of attempting to buy the body parts. The law probably has a purpose clause which means they have to prove that he actually was trying to purchase the parts. We all know he had no actual intention to buy the parts and that it was a ruse to get the videos. The fake ID is a problem for him as there is no way to get around that. Either he had one and used it or he didn't. The video taping is another matter. Each state has its own laws regarding that and investigative journalism freedom of the press may come into play here. It will be interesting to see the arguments in defense of those actions. He may be found guilty in some states while not in others. I have a sneaking suspicion that he'll do some jail time in the end.

What I find interesting is the hypocrisy in prosecuting this case. There are,plenty of similar types of cases out there where people were taped without their consent in the name of investigative journalism and they were not prosecuted. Why this one?

This logic baffles me. Even if true, just because some people have gotten away with breaking the law doesn't mean anyone in particular should. It's like saying that, because the police have been known to let speeders go, you shouldn't be held accountable for speeding.

 

[DaisyDay]

We all know he had no actual intention to buy the parts and that it was a ruse to get the videos.

We don't know that as the offer to buy came after the video had already been taken. We don't know how far he would have gone with his "sting".

The video taping is another matter. Each state has its own laws regarding that and investigative journalism freedom of the press may come into play here. It will be interesting to see the arguments in defense of those actions. He may be found guilty in some states while not in others. I have a sneaking suspicion that he'll do some jail time in the end.

The prosecutor offered him probation with no time, but he turned it down, so who knows? If he is found guilty, he'll probably get some time as well as costs. Plus, it won't help his civil case.

What I find interesting is the hypocrisy in prosecuting this case. There are,plenty of similar types of cases out there where people were taped without their consent in the name of investigative journalism and they were not prosecuted. Why this one?

Name one case in a state where it is illegal to tape without both parties' consent that wasn't prosecuted.