TYRANNY: California Criminally Charges Undercover Reporters Who Exposed Planned Parenthood's Baby Body Part Sales. Where's The Outrage?
YouTube
MARCH 28, 2017
On Tuesday, the state of California charged David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt
of the Center for Medical Progress on 15 felony counts over their undercover
reporting regarding Planned Parenthood. In 2015, Daleiden and Merritt
released video showing high-ranking Planned Parenthood members joking
about selling baby body parts for market rates and picking through baby body
parts in order to demonstrate which sorts of body parts were available for
sale for medical research, as well as talking about the best methods of abortion
for procuring those baby body parts. The California Department of Justice,
under the auspices of now-Senator Kamala Harris, raided Daleiden’s home
for footage in April 2016; last year, the state of Texas pursued charges against
Daleiden and Merritt, but those charges were thrown out.
of the Center for Medical Progress on 15 felony counts over their undercover
reporting regarding Planned Parenthood. In 2015, Daleiden and Merritt
released video showing high-ranking Planned Parenthood members joking
about selling baby body parts for market rates and picking through baby body
parts in order to demonstrate which sorts of body parts were available for
sale for medical research, as well as talking about the best methods of abortion
for procuring those baby body parts. The California Department of Justice,
under the auspices of now-Senator Kamala Harris, raided Daleiden’s home
for footage in April 2016; last year, the state of Texas pursued charges against
Daleiden and Merritt, but those charges were thrown out.
So, here’s the question: where’s the media, rushing to the defense of these
undercover journalists?
undercover journalists?
They’re silent. Or they’re celebrating, since they think that Daleiden and Merritt
were evil conservatives out to target the saints at Planned Parenthood. They
buy the lie that the tapes were deceptively edited so as to implicate Planned
Parenthood in nefarious activity – but the tapes show precisely what the tapes
show.
were evil conservatives out to target the saints at Planned Parenthood. They
buy the lie that the tapes were deceptively edited so as to implicate Planned
Parenthood in nefarious activity – but the tapes show precisely what the tapes
show.
Here’s what you need to know.
California is a two-party consent state when it comes to taping private
conversations. But those conversations have to be private. Fourteen of the
15 charges filed came under California Penal Code Section 632(a), which
states in relevant part, “Every person who, intentionally and without the
consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the
confidential communication ... shall be punished by a fine not exceeding
two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and
imprisonment.” Note the language: confidential. These were not confidential
communications.
conversations. But those conversations have to be private. Fourteen of the
15 charges filed came under California Penal Code Section 632(a), which
states in relevant part, “Every person who, intentionally and without the
consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the
confidential communication ... shall be punished by a fine not exceeding
two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and
imprisonment.” Note the language: confidential. These were not confidential
communications.
First off, conversations in a public restaurant are clearly not confidential. And
the Ninth Circuit found in 2002 that tapes made in private areas between a
company and undercover journalists who are “strangers” to that company
are not illegal – they ruled that a very similar undercover investigation by
ABC News against Medical Laboratory Management Consultants
for Primetime Live was just fine: “Devaraj's willingness to invite these
strangers into the administrative offices for a meeting and then on a tour
of the premises indicates that Devaraj did not have an objectively reasonable
expectation of solitude or seclusion in the parts of Medical Lab that he
showed the ABC representatives.”
the Ninth Circuit found in 2002 that tapes made in private areas between a
company and undercover journalists who are “strangers” to that company
are not illegal – they ruled that a very similar undercover investigation by
ABC News against Medical Laboratory Management Consultants
for Primetime Live was just fine: “Devaraj's willingness to invite these
strangers into the administrative offices for a meeting and then on a tour
of the premises indicates that Devaraj did not have an objectively reasonable
expectation of solitude or seclusion in the parts of Medical Lab that he
showed the ABC representatives.”
Furthermore, the court found no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding
the conversations between the ABC undercover reporters and medical
technicians: “Devaraj did not reveal any information about his personal life or
affairs, but only generally discussed Medical Lab's business operations, the
pap smear testing industry, and Gordon's supposed plans to open her own
laboratory.” In fact, the Ninth Circuit explicitly distinguished Arizona law from
California law and then said that even under California law, there would be
no reasonable expectation of privacy: “The expectation of limited privacy
in a communication – namely the expectation that a communication shared
with, or possibly overheard by, a limited group of persons will nonetheless
remain relatively private and secluded from the public at large – is reasonable
only to the extent that the communication conveys information private and
personal to the declarant.” This is precisely the same logic that would apply here.
the conversations between the ABC undercover reporters and medical
technicians: “Devaraj did not reveal any information about his personal life or
affairs, but only generally discussed Medical Lab's business operations, the
pap smear testing industry, and Gordon's supposed plans to open her own
laboratory.” In fact, the Ninth Circuit explicitly distinguished Arizona law from
California law and then said that even under California law, there would be
no reasonable expectation of privacy: “The expectation of limited privacy
in a communication – namely the expectation that a communication shared
with, or possibly overheard by, a limited group of persons will nonetheless
remain relatively private and secluded from the public at large – is reasonable
only to the extent that the communication conveys information private and
personal to the declarant.” This is precisely the same logic that would apply here.
So, where’s the media in defense of Daleiden and Merritt? They’re absent,
even as they defend their own undercover journalists. Today, National
Public Radio asked for the reinstatement of a reporter who secretly
recorded high school students and legislators chatting about LGBT issues.
Yet NPR has said nothing about Daleiden and Merritt.
even as they defend their own undercover journalists. Today, National
Public Radio asked for the reinstatement of a reporter who secretly
recorded high school students and legislators chatting about LGBT issues.
Yet NPR has said nothing about Daleiden and Merritt.
This undermines the press’ repeated, vociferous claims that they will challenge
anyone who stands against press freedoms. They pretend to be fighters
against governmental overreach – they’ll fight Trumpian fascism every step
of the way! – but the minute that somebody they don’t like, a conservative,
faces serious government crackdowns, they shut up.
anyone who stands against press freedoms. They pretend to be fighters
against governmental overreach – they’ll fight Trumpian fascism every step
of the way! – but the minute that somebody they don’t like, a conservative,
faces serious government crackdowns, they shut up.
Daleiden and Merritt deserve their defense. Anything less is rank hypocrisy.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.