Dear, dear U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer - which is worse: BIG Pharma or BIG Abortion???

Conversation opened. 1 read message. Skip to content Using Gmail with screen readers 4 of 1,579 Unjust Conviction of DC Nine: Life Legal Proceeds to Appeals Court Inbox Life Legal Defense Foundation 1:06 PM (2 hours ago) to me Unjust Conviction of DC Nine: Life Legal Proceeds to Appeals Court Most Life Legal supporters already know about the federal prosecution – or persecution – of the DC Nine. Pro-life activists, including our client, Herb Geraghty, challenged the notorious Washington Surgi-Center, where abortion ghoul Cesare Santangelo reportedly pursued a program of illegal late-term partial-birth abortions. Our client did not block access, did not violate the federal FACE Act, and did not engage in anything but non-violent protest. Participants faced local charges of trespass – which were ultimately resolved. Nevertheless, years later, as part of its campaign of lawfare against the pro-life movement, the Department of Justice run by Joe Biden and Merrick Garland dug up the case and filed new charges – under FACE and a Reconstruction Era statute that criminalized “conspiracy against rights.” Defendants were tried under Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who made it clear time and again that reasonable arguments in their defense would not be entertained. They were convicted, sent immediately to jail on the specious grounds that any violation of FACE constituted a violent crime, and after nine months cruelly sentenced. Our client received 27 months in federal prison and three years supervised release. Add to that a three-year stay-away order applying to any “reproductive health care” facility, including not only abortion mills but hospitals and other medical establishments. Throughout the trial, Judge Kollar-Kotelly insisted that the case was not about abortion but instead “reproductive health care” – which at the Washington Surgi-Center meant, of course, abortion, abortion, and more abortion. As promised, we at Life Legal submitted a motion to dismiss. As expected, the judge has denied this motion out of hand. No, attorney John Kiyonaga was not making a quixotic gesture. Instead, he was preparing to bring the case before the DC Appeals Court and then, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court. The motion to dismiss presented substantial grounds for overturning the conviction: The defense was not allowed reasonable participation in jury selection – and thus our client was not tried by a jury of peers. Incredibly, the Court cut off defense counsel during this process and arbitrarily rephrased his questioning to be more to its liking. “She has answered your question, sir.” “Your Honor, it was your question, not mine.” The Court even told counsel: “I’m not interested in what you want to establish.” The Court indicated bias against the defense by mistreating a supporter in the gallery. At the mere complaint of the prosecution, the judge sharply rebuked a Catholic nun who made a visible Sign of the Cross while praying the rosary. From the judge’s reaction, you’d think someone in the courtroom feared bursting into flames from the proximity of holy objects. The Court interrupted Defendant’s testimony and then bluntly instructed the jury to ignore it. Responding under cross examination, Herb correctly testified that there were federal laws that made some abortions illegal in DC. The judge incorrectly told the jury that all abortions were legal there, derided Defendant’s legal understanding, and instructed the jury to ignore Defendant’s accurate and highly relevant testimony. The Court repeatedly disparaged counsel for the defense and, by extension, Defendant. The word “repeatedly” hardly does justice to the injustice perpetrated in this manner, and the list of examples is too lengthy to bear… well… repeating. The Court allowed the prosecution to confuse jury members by suggesting that they could convict Defendant even if Defendant had not committed a crime. The Court went beyond the prosecution’s closing arguments to disparage Defendant’s testimony once again before the jury. A court is supposed to be impartial. A jury is supposed to weigh testimony and come to its own conclusions. Here, instead, the Court specifically told the jury to discount Herb’s testimony. When a court denies anyone accused of a crime a properly constituted jury, the right to testify on his own behalf, and an accurate presentation of relevant evidence and law, that defendant has not received a fair trial. It’s that simple. Despite these glaring anomalies, the DC Court of Appeals is unlikely to overturn Herb’s conviction. But the U.S. Supreme Court is another matter. And, if our supporters continue to enable us, we intend to take this case as far as it will go. Also, please consider a financial contribution at this crucial time! Without team members like you, we can’t carry on any aspect of our pro-life mission. Yours for the threatened child in the womb, Alexandra Snyder Chief Executive Officer “Small things done with great love will change the world.” ~ Mother Teresa "Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter." Proverbs 24:11 PLEASE DONATE TODAY! Share on Facebook Please pray for Life Legal cases and clients. Click here or on the image above to view and print our most current prayer requests. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him. (1 John 5:15) PLEASE DONATE TODAY! Connect with us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe Life Legal Defense Foundation https://lifelegaldefensefoundation.org