SHOCK: California Attorney General argues that killing abortion survivors is not infanticide
By Nancy Flanders | October 13, 2019 , 10:53am
Closing arguments have been filed in the preliminary hearing of the criminal trial against The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) investigators Sandra Merritt and David Daleiden, who are facing 14 felony charges brought by former attorney general Kamala Harris and current attorney general Xavier Becerra for recording conversations. In his closing arguments submitted last week, the attorney general's office implied that killing abortion survivors is not infanticide.
According to LifeSiteNews, deputy attorney general Johnette Jauron wrote, "Defendant Daleiden opined in his testimony that infanticide, or homicide, whether one performs it personally or instructs another to do so, is a crime of violence which fits within the exception of Penal Code section 633.5. As a matter of statutory definition, however, a fetus is not a 'person' and does not come with the exception found within Penal Code section 633.5."
The attorney general's office is now attempting to claim that born, living infants are not persons.
Penal Code section 633.5 states that one of the parties in a confidential communication can record that communication "for the purpose of obtaining evidence reasonably believed to relate to the commission by another party to the communication of the crime of extortion, kidnapping, bribery, any felony involving violence against the person, including, but not limited to, human trafficking." Evidence obtained in the records will be admissible in court.
READ: Planned Parenthood medical director admits in court there were 'demands for certain organs' of aborted babies
If Planned Parenthood did allow abortion survivors to be killed for their body parts, then CMP's undercover investigation and recording of conversations is legal because that would fit under violence against a person. In order to get around that and secure the trial and win the case, the attorney general's office is claiming that children who survive abortions are not persons worthy of protection. Therefore, based on the attorney general's argument, the communications with Daleiden's fake BioMax were illegally obtained.
The attorney general's office is attempting to claim that born babies are still fetuses because they were targeted for abortion. Therefore, harvesting their organs while they are still alive is acceptable to the state of California.
"Apparently that's the way these people feel, once the woman wants the child aborted, the child is not a child," Tom Brejcha of the Thomas More Society told LifeSiteNews.
Brejcha also noted that "The abortion paradigm is changing" with abortion advocates moving "the defining landmark" of birth in order to justify the abortion industry's tactics and motives.
"One moment the fetus is zero, the next moment it's a person in the eyes of the law, entitled to due process and consitutional protection. Yet they blur that line there," he said.
Judge Christopher C. Hite will rule October 22 as to whether or not the case will go to trial.