Featured Post

ALERT! PLEASE TAKE ACTION!

The July 12, 2019 issue of The Flinn Report revealed that The Department of Healthcare and Family Services has proposed an amendment (“propo...

October 8, 2019

Attorney for Undercover Journalists Says Court is Handicapping Defendants' Case

A defense attorney for one of the undercover journalists facing charges of illegal recording when they found evidence of Planned Parenthood selling baby body parts to researchers stated that the defense's case is severely handicapped by the court's imposed rules. The defense will not be allowed to show the videos containing evidence that Planned Parenthood was conducting violent actions, while simultaneously being told to present why the defense had reasonable belief that Planned Parenthood was conducting violent acts. The recording law in California states that if a person has a reasonable belief that violent acts were occurring, then they are not committing a crime by recording people involved. The defense then hinges on whether it can convince the jury that the journalists' reasoning before recording any conversations was "reasonable".

Defense counsel Horation (Harry) Mihet made several statements on Facebook, including the following excerpts:

“...Thus, the Court is NOT allowing us to play ANY portion of the videos that show how Planned Parenthood broke the law by profiting from the sale of baby parts. To show that the videos were recorded, Planned Parenthood is playing only very carefully edited snippets, of only the most innocuous things (people saying ‘hello’). And we can’t play the rest of the videos that show Planned Parenthood’s abhorrent crimes and inhuman conduct...”

“...The result, unless things change during this trial, is that the jury will never see the evidence of Planned Parenthood crimes,” wrote Mihet. “They are being asked to determine whether, BEFORE recording the videos, Sandra had a reasonable belief that Planned Parenthood was committing violent crimes, without being allowed to see that the videos themselves CONFIRMED Sandra’s belief that those crimes were being committed. How could her belief that crimes were being committed be ‘unreasonable,’ when the videos she recorded demonstrated that crimes WERE in fact being committed?”

Click here to read more.