Kline ethics trial recap: Day 1, regurgitation
UPDATE, 1:10p: Operation Rescue’s Cheryl Sullenger, one of 16 members of the public allowed into the courtroom yesterday, has written a great synopsis of Day 1.
8:56a: I have an op ed up at The Daily Caller about the corrupt politics behind the the ethics trial to disbar Phill Kline.
LifeSiteNews.com’s (@LifeSite on Twitter) reporter Peter Smith was in the courtroom yesterday and filed a good report.
Here were yesterday’s highlights:
- Hazlett tried to get pro-life attorney Tom Brejcha of the Thomas More Society kicked out of the courtroom, but the panel allowed him to stay “as an observer.” (Brejcha previously successfully defended the Pro-Life Action League before the US Supreme Court.)
- Disciplinary Administrator Stanton Hazlett dropped the unconstitutional charge that Kline’s pro-life beliefs got in the way of his judgment in pursuing George Tiller and Planned Parenthood of Kansas-Mid-Missouri for illegal late-term abortions.
- Hazlett initially protested when Kline’s attorney showed the comparison between his complaint and Tiller’s 2008 motion to dismiss his case, “showing a ‘clear pattern’ of Hazlett plagiarizing,” according to LSN. (See the fascinating powerpoint slides they entered into evidence.) But Hazlett backed away.
- Kline’s attorney “reminded the panel of 3 judges that they will also be fact-finders in the case and that they will have an opportunity to see the evidence for themselves….” We hope to as well.
Kline was called to the stand in the afternoon for over 3 hours of grilling. The headline in the press was:
… with this opening paragraph…
… Kline testified Monday in an ethics hearing that he and his subordinates had the right to deceive other state agencies and didn’t have a duty to immediately correct flawed information provided to a trial judge as they started investigating abortion providers.
This relates to Hazlett’s claim that Kline was obligated to tell the Sebelius administration the full nature of his investigation.
Kline’s office decided not to tell Sebelius’s Social and Rehabilitation Services out of concern she would leak the investigation as well as concern rumors would spread, causing unnecessary concern and potential threat to victims. Informing too many people about a child rape investigation and failure to report child rape investigation is risky to the investigation and the children.
This is one of the very same attacks Tiller used in his effort to dismiss charges against him. Judge Owens dispatched Tiller’s charge in one paragraph (page 15). Click to enlarge…
Owens handed his decision clearing Kline in 2009, yet Mr. Hazlett is using the same allegation, which reads almost word for word with the Tiller motion to dismiss.
Owens properly stated law enforcement can even deceive witnesses in order to forward an investigation. Of course, this is common sense: Hhow else do you do undercover investigations?
Furthermore, Owens finds Kline didn’t even deceive. Also this “deception” lasted 16 days.
Sebelius’s SRS refused to cooperate unless Kline’s office told them all of the “specific facts” in their investigation. Kline refused and got a subpoena.
Today we may learn what that subpoena revealed.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
This is all about common sense investigation, no matter the topic or subject. It makes complete sense that Kline would not be stupid enough to have his cover blown by blabbing everything to those who would use it to derail the process. Thei is a knagaroo court and that’s the truth plain and simple!
when a group of his peers decide that this man warrants investigation there is usually good cause. mr. kline does not have the right to break the law in pursuing his own agenda.
Kline has already been cleared of any charge of breaking the law. That is not in question. This is an ethics case.
I wonder how any in the police force whom happen to be undercover in any drug cartel would manege themselves to to no break the law!! Lester is that what you don want to understand?
@lester: The kind of attitude you just espoused is exactly the reason our legal system assumes innocence until proof of guilt is available. Cops make mistakes. So do lawyers. And just because the people in power are in power, it doesn’t mean they don’t have agendas of their own.