Image 01 Image 03

Judge tosses several counts against #Gosnell, many others remain

Judge tosses several counts against #Gosnell, many others remain

The prosecution needs to prove its case against Kermit Gosnell beyond a reasonable doubt on each and every count. 

Apparently it did not do that on some counts, particularly 1st Degree Murder as to three of the babies, so the Judge tossed the charges at the close of the prosecution’s case.  The key issue seems to have been whether the prosecution proved the babies were born alive, as opposed to having been killed in the womb.

Several murder and other counts remain, so while this obviously is disheartening given the testimony we have heard about what went on in the clinic, the search for justice is not over.

Judge tosses three murder counts against Kermit Gosnell:

After hearing impassioned arguments from attorneys on both sides of the Kermit Gosnell capital-murder trial Tuesday, a Philadelphia judge threw out three of the seven first-degree murder charges Gosnell faced for allegedly killing fetuses born alive at his abortion clinic.

Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Minehart also tossed out all five counts against Gosnell accusing him of corpse abuse for storing the feet of aborted fetuses in plastic containers in his now closed Women’s Medical Society clinic.

Also dismissed by Minehart was one count of infanticide – the intentional killing of an infant. All other counts against Gosnell, 72, will be decided by the jury, the judge ruled.

In addition to counts of first-degree murder for killing four babies allegedly born alive, those charges include the third-degree murder of a patient who died of a drug overdose following a botched 2009 abortion and multiple counts of preforming illegal, late-term abortions….

Gosnell’s attorney, Jack McMahon, argued that all seven counts regarding the fetuses should be dismissed. None were born alive, he said, all having been injected with death-causing drugs during the abortion process. Assistant District Attorney Edward Cameron argued that there had been enough testimony from former clinic employees that the seven babies were born alive to let the jury decide.

Dropped Gosnell Charge Includes 28-Week Old “Baby Boy B” Found in Freezer:

The judge in the Kermit Gosnell murder trial dropped three charges against the abortion practitioner for killing babies in a gruesome abortion method that involved snipping their necks in infanticides.

One of the three charges the judge dropped includes a 28-week unborn baby who was killed in an abortion-infanticide and eventually discovered in a freezer at Gosnell’s clinic.

Last week, LifeNews featured a report on this aborted baby, who was the subject of testimony during the trial. Because the medical examiner could not confirm the baby was born alive and subsequently killed, the judge dropped the charge.

Here is a photo from the trial of Baby Boy B, for whom there will be no justice (via link above):


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Unfortunately the difference between legal and illegal murder in this area is grey. What Gosnell did is not significantly different then what other abortionists are doing legally across the country.

In some senses Gosnell and the pro-abortion left are write in arguing that this trial is nonsensical. Yes, Gosnell probably violated the letter of the law, but everything he did was well within the spirit of what the pro-abortion left wants the law to be.

Can someone explain to me why, if the babies were NOT alive, they needed to snip their spinal cords? Is this not presentable to assert viability? Do they snip the spinal cord of every aborted child?

Obviously, I am not an attorney!

    paulejb in reply to chelieintx. | April 23, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    Only a judge with legal training would not grasp the point that there is no need to snip the spinal cords of dead babies.

“None were born alive, he said, all having been injected with death-causing drugs during the abortion process.” Plainly, the law is that a child in the womb, whether viable outside the womb or not, whether 24 weeks along or not, can be killed without legal penalty. The law is, indeed, an ass.

Notice, by the way, that Illinois and Iowa (Indiana??) are having their state regulatory folks resume inspections because of this case. Resume inspections? What were they doing ever stopping inspections? Women who are manicurists are inspected yearly in every state; women who kill babies are not. Really? Really? The inmates are truly in charge of the asylum here in the U.S.

Perfectly legal and acceptable if killed in the womb . . . murder if killed outside the womb. Same baby different location.

That’s why the pro-abortionists can’t let this case get the coverage it deserves.

Can Gosnell show that he purchased or dispensed potassium chloride or digoxin? These seem to be the agents used to kill a fetus prior to an abortion.

Now if the babies had only had enough time to get on the Dem voting rolls they might have been considered born alive. Doesn’t matter if you stay alive once you get registered.

JackRussellTerrierist | April 23, 2013 at 3:56 pm

Someone should ask the judge if he’ll need his spinal cord cut after he’s dead, just for drill.

A human life evolves from conception to grave. The court’s comprehension of biology and human life in particular is grossly distorted by the legalization and rationalization of premeditated murder when a human being has no voice to protest nor arms to challenge the artificial termination of their life.

Would it be easier for the court to rule if the aborted human life was named Barack Obama?

The prosecution should bring charges against both Gosnell and the mothers who solicited his “services.” Unfortunately, the degenerate dreams of a majority of Americans are too myopic, and selfish, to appreciate the consequences for the individual, society, and humanity of their unforced choice. The judgment of the court and the pro-abortion people is remarkably ignorant of the short and long-term repercussions of their choice.

Liberty is only suitable for women, and men, capable of self-moderating behavior. Women, and men, have an unalienable right to fuck, but should they give up their right to responsible liberty, then it is they who should suffer the consequences of their actions, not an innocent human life. Either they accept responsibility for their actions, or women can choose to be spayed, and men can choose to be neutered.

The Chinese were right to address overpopulation (i.e. density), but they were wrong to force an innocent human life to suffer the consequences of irresponsible women and men. Actually, they were wrong to first presume the guilt of women and men.

never seen a dead body bleed from a place where gravity would not cause it.

BannedbytheGuardian | April 23, 2013 at 8:14 pm

I thought the fact that none of these ‘medical assistants ” had any medical training would go against veracity .

They were obviously ethically challenged people to ever work there for so long & why would they be believed now?

Quite likely that is why they were employed.

Kind of makes you proud to be a lawyer, eh prof?

BannedbytheGuardian | April 23, 2013 at 11:10 pm

A comment on Daily Mail Suggested this was too co incidental to it being announced that very day that Obama would be attending The Planned Parenthood Gala.