Trial of "Serial Killer" abortion "doctor"

[The_Falcon]

Some one linked to this on my wall (article is quite lengthy) http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/  How in the sam hell is this not making international headlines??  This guy is one twisted bastard if found guilty.  And yet I have only seen a handful of mainstream media pick up on the story. 

 

[Jed]

I can't understand why this has not made the news. I would be interested in Technoviking's take on this.

 

[George Wallace]

This is absolutely sickening.

 

[medicineman]

I do find it weird that this hasn't hit the front pages pretty much everywhere...and I agree George, though sickening is too polite a word to be honest. 

MM

 

[a_majoor]

It isn't the front age because "we" are not supposed to talk about abortion. If this story got even a fraction of the attention that it deserves, lots of people might start thinking and talking about the subject again, and no politician wants to deal with that.

 

[medicineman]

It isn't the front age because "we" are not supposed to talk about abortion. If this story got even a fraction of the attention that it deserves, lots of people might start thinking and talking about the subject again, and no politician wants to deal with that.

I hear you there, however there are other issues at stake as well - medical malpractice to the upteenth degree, criminal negligence causing death, an argument for, at best, manslaughter due to the fact that many of these terminations were in fact of pre-term babies vice embryos...the other political mess involved as well is the apparent lack of even vague indirect oversight by the many agencies supposedly in place for medical regulation - the potential number of rolling heads as a result of this trial could be huge, especially if brought out into the full public limelight.  However, when have the press, anywhere in North America, ever been accused of pulling punches when it comes to news coverage of politically sensitive stuff like this?

MM

 

[Spanky]

Well, when you have Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood and the big networks in the States leaning left, I don't think this is the kind of news they want out and discussed.  I've been following the trial of this evil creature for a while, since Fox News has been covering it, and it is disgusting.

 

[TheHead]

Well, when you have Obama speaking to Planned Parenthood and the big networks in the States leaning left, I don't think this is the kind of news they want out and discussed.  I've been following the trial of this evil creature for a while, since Fox News has been covering it, and it is disgusting.

  It's been covered on CNN and MSNBC with stories dating back since 2011. 

 

[The_Falcon]

  It's been covered on CNN and MSNBC with stories dating back since 2011.

Links?  Cause I would be curious to know if those stories were in any way indepth or just blurbs in between the latest celebrity gossip.

 

[a_majoor]

I hear you there, however there are other issues at stake as well - medical malpractice to the upteenth degree, criminal negligence causing death, an argument for, at best, manslaughter due to the fact that many of these terminations were in fact of pre-term babies vice embryos...the other political mess involved as well is the apparent lack of even vague indirect oversight by the many agencies supposedly in place for medical regulation - the potential number of rolling heads as a result of this trial could be huge, especially if brought out into the full public limelight.  However, when have the press, anywhere in North America, ever been accused of pulling punches when it comes to news coverage of politically sensitive stuff like this?

MM

Exactly. This would open many cans of worms, and politicians of all stripes are pretty squeemish about dealing with even one of these topics, much less angry constituents going on about all at once.

 

[medicineman]

Like I said though, I just find it at best odd, that the MSM would worry that much about what politicians felt, unless there was something financial involved for them to minimize the reporting -  that freedom of the press and all.  A murder trial of a no name jilted girlfriend is almost as much a national sport as the OJ Simpson trial, yet this barely makes it?  You think there is some behind the scenes Tom Foolery going on?

MM

 

[The_Falcon]

Like I said though, I just find it at best odd, that the MSM would worry that much about what politicians felt, unless there was something financial involved for them to minimize the reporting -  that freedom of the press and all.  A murder trial of a no name jilted girlfriend is almost as much a national sport as the OJ Simpson trial, yet this barely makes it?  You think there is some behind the scenes Tom Foolery going on?

MM

I think there is so back room happenings in regards to this.  If you do a google news search the over whelming majority of stories are from local news sites and independent bloggers.  CNN does have a few stories, but the coverage is certainly very slim compared to say Sandyhook, or the Colorado shooting.

 

[the 48th regulator]

This article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from The New York Times Company


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/us/doctor-avoids-death-penalty-in-murders-at-clinic.html?_r=0

Doctor Avoids Death Penalty in Murders at His Clinic


By TRIP GABRIEL
Published: May 14, 2013

Kermit Gosnell, the doctor convicted of murdering babies after failed abortions in his Philadelphia clinic, avoided the death penalty on Tuesday by agreeing to a sentence of life in prison without parole.

Dr. Gosnell, 72, waived his right to appeal three first-degree murder convictions handed down Monday, and he was immediately sentenced in two of the cases, known as Baby C and Baby D, the Philadelphia district attorney, R. Seth Williams, announced.

Dr. Gosnell, who did not testify during his five-week trial, will be sentenced Wednesday on the remaining convictions, including a third murder case, that of Baby A, and manslaughter in the death of a 41-year-old patient who received a fatal dose of anesthesia.

Prosecutors had said from the start of the trial that they would seek the death penalty because of the “aggravated” circumstances of the crimes Dr. Gosnell was charged with: murder of more than one person and the young age of the victims.

But the district attorney’s willingness to compromise on a life-without-parole sentence seemed a calculation about the difficulty of persuading the same 12 jurors to agree on capital punishment after they spent 10 days sifting evidence and acquitted Dr. Gosnell on one first-degree murder charge. Before deliberations began, the judge dismissed charges in three other pregnancy terminations.

The trial included graphic testimony that galvanized debate over abortion far beyond the downtown Philadelphia courthouse.

Dr. Gosnell’s lawyer, Jack McMahon, argued that in each case, the fetus was dead before delivery. But jurors heard testimony from clinic workers who described babies moving after botched abortions and told how Dr. Gosnell and, in some cases, the workers themselves, cut the babies’ necks with scissors.

The case drew wide attention from anti-abortion activists, for whom it illustrated the need for much tighter regulation of clinics and, more important, what they consider the immorality of all abortion.

Abortion rights groups were equally adamant in condemning Dr. Gosnell. But they drew an opposite conclusion: abortion must be safe and available, they said, or desperate women will be driven to other “back-alley” practitioners like Dr. Gosnell.


© 2013 The New York Times Company

Yong Kim/Philadelphia Daily News/AP Photo
Dr. Kermit Gosnell is seen during an interview with the Philadelphia Daily News at his attorney's office in Philadelphia, March 8, 2010.