Zimmerman and Gosnell

     

The acquittal of George Zimmerman by a Florida jury of all charges relating to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin has led to the predictable response on the part of some leaders of the so-called black community. It did not take the jury long to realize that the prosecution had no case against Zimmerman. The jury’s verdict only confirmed the initial findings of the local police that there was no reason under Florida law to hold Zimmerman for anything.

Nevertheless, political and media pressure forced state politicians to cave in and appoint a special team of prosecutors to get Zimmerman. It was obvious from the beginning that there would be no presumption of innocence for Zimmerman in the media. Even during the trial I heard one reporter say that he was looking for inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s story. Obviously, he was not looking for evidence to confirm Zimmerman’s innocence or for inconsistencies in the prosecution’s charges.

It is interesting to contrast the media attention to the Zimmerman/Martin case with the appalling lack of attention to the recently concluded trail of Dr. Kermit Gosnell. On May 13 this year Gosnell was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder of infants born alive, and one count of involuntary manslaughter of a woman, Karnamaya Mongar, who died of an overdose of anesthesia given by an unqualified Gosnell assistant.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell

The following is drawn from an editorial by Barry MacDonald, the editor of the St. Croix Review.* MacDonald quotes the grand jury case against Gosnell:

This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy—and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels-–and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths.

The grand jury indictment went on to describe the terrible conditions in the so-called medical facility that functioned as a prescription mill during the day and an abortuary at night. Gosnell specialized in the abortion of late term babies who were too big or advance for other doctors. A large baby was a difficult “procedure” and would cost a lot to “terminate.” Gosnell’s procedure was to administer labor inducing drugs during the day to the poor, mostly black, women who came to him; let them deliver the baby and then come back in the evening to kill the newborn by severing its spinal cord with a scissor.

Even if you are in favor of abortion, you would have to admit that this procedure was infanticide. The babies had been born, they were outside the womb, and they were killed.

Incredibly, owing to political correctness Gosnell’s facility in Pennsylvania had gone unsupervised, uninspected, and uncontrolled by Pennsylvania agencies for years. MacDonald again quoted the grand jury:

…the Pennsylvania Department of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all. The Politics in question were not anti-abortion, but pro. With the change of administration from Governor Casey [ a pro-life Democrat] to Governor Ridge, [ a pro-choice Republican], officials concluded that inspections would be “putting a barrier up to women” seeking abortions. Better to leave clinics to do as they pleased, even though, as Gosnell proved, that meant both women and babies would pay.

Despite repeated complaints Gosnell’s “clinic” was only shut down by the Pennsylvania Department of Health after the arrest and trial of Dr. Gosnell. Other state agencies refused to take action, much less investigate. Two nearby hospitals who had to treat some of the women injured never reported the dangerous clinic to the proper authorities.

The grand jury noted that the reason no one acted was because the “women in question were poor and of color. Dr. Gosnell is a black man and most of his victims were poor black women who were forced to pay his exorbitant fees up front.

Today, people will be demonstrating in the streets because of the verdict in the Zimmerman trial. Already, prominent black spokesmen are branding the trial a gross injustice and a sign of racism in America. Liberal politicians are quickly falling into line and calling for a new Federal trial. But where was their outrage over the Gosnell trial?

Actually, both cases would appear to have been evidence for the fairness and justice of the American legal system especially when matters can be left to an ordinary jury to decide. Zimmerman was innocent until proven guilty and the prosecution could not produce evidence of his guilt. Despite political correctness and ideology, the jury in Pennsylvania responded to an incredible amount of evidence and put away Dr. Gosnell for life.

###

*The St. Croix Review, a small Mid-Western journal of opinion bills itself as a "A Thoughtful Journal for Thoughtful People." It is a personal favorite.