Re: Another leftist kangaroo court
> David Daleiden committed trespass as a matter of law. Whether he was morally justified is something that can be debated.
As have many leftist sources.
> He is clearly strongly opposed to abortion, and some would support his law breaking as equivalent, say, to those breaking laws in Nazi Germany to protect Jews. Whatever your views on this, the judge has a duty to decide cases on the basis of the law, not whether she is sympathetic to the accused's motives. The jury can certainly take the motives, in addition to other factors, into account in deciding damages.
I think Planned Parenthood was breaking the law, and lying about it, and wanted their crimes to go unnoticed and unpunished. This is not about abortion. Planned Parenthood was illegally selling body parts.
But the main issue here, I think, is whether this leftist court gave Daleiden a fair trial. Even the guilty deserve a fair trial.
In a statement released by the Center for Medical Progress, Daleiden said the decision is a threat to citizen journalism and First Amendment rights.
“While top Planned Parenthood witnesses spent six weeks testifying under oath that the undercover videos are true and Planned Parenthood sold fetal organs on a quid pro quo basis, a biased judge with close Planned Parenthood ties spent six weeks influencing the jury with pre-determined rulings and by suppressing video evidence, all in order to rubber-stamp Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit attack on the First Amendment,” he said. “This is a dangerous precedent for citizen journalism and First Amendment civil rights across the country, sending a message that speaking truth and facts criticizing the powerful is no longer protected by our institutions.”
I think the jury, not the judge, should decide guilt. That is what a jury is for.