What's with the lack of prosecution? I guess it would force Americans to take a good look at the obvious. Abortion is murder!

Sorry. I meant pro choice Americans. This should be an outrage to us all!

yllas, please tell us the story about Neva again.

Meanwhile, the baby's mother has retained the services of the Thomas More Society to pursue a wrongful death claim against Basile.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Huh?
She wanted the fetus gone.
She paid good money to a medical professional to get rid of it.
Now she's suing because she got exactly what she wanted?
This woman is clearly too stupid to own and operate a uterus.

I also don't feel that this woman should get 1 red cent! No way! If she wins, she should only receive enough for a tubal ligation.

Boy, just when you thought you heard it all!
WOW!

Basile and Gonzales should both be charged in a wrongful death suit. I agree, Heather, that the "mother" shouldn't get a penny!

Jill,
Are there any charges filed against Basile and Gonzales for hiding the baby on the roof while police were trying to find it?

Also, having the child's decomposing body on a roof for 9 days should spark some type of interest with the State's Health Department, No?

Uhh... I agree with Laura. I mean, the whole situation is obviously messy, but the lawsuit is ridiculous.

People sue for the DUMBEST things!

AB Laura, I have a real problem with people who do the wrong thing, and then they want money. It's just frustrating. If any money is awarded, it should go to a charity of her lawyer's choice.

Heather,
Amen to that! And some should also go to giving that dear child a proper funeral!

I hadn't heard about the bleach. It makes me want to throw my guts up!!

Jill:

Not sure who your "sources" are, but they shouldn't be telling you details of an ongoing investigation.

Actually, under pro-choice thinking, her lawsuit makes perfect sense. As pro-choicers say, it was only a cluster of tissue, or a fetus, until birth. But once the baby was born it became alive. Whereas before it was only a "medical procedure", now an actual human being was murdered.

MCAnthony, right!

Midnite,

I'm so happy to see you! I keep missing you when you post!

It's gotta seem pretty strange to the courts, the police, and the staff that the same woman who paid to have the child in question put to death is now suing over it. She got what she paid for.

On the other hand, the clinic has no grounds for fighting it -- if they're "prochoice", then the mother's mood of the moment determines if the entity in question is a baby or a pathology specimen. If she changes her mind, then PRESTO! It's a baby, right?

Actually, under pro-choice thinking, her lawsuit makes perfect sense. As pro-choicers say, it was only a cluster of tissue, or a fetus, until birth. But once the baby was born it became alive. Whereas before it was only a "medical procedure", now an actual human being was murdered.

Posted by: MCAnthony at November 28, 2007 4:37 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nope. She paid to have a fetus removed, and it was.
Once it cleared her frame alive and breathing it was a separate entity and was due all of the rights under law as any other American. This is a criminal case, and doesn't involve that woman at all.

ABL, the mill has been shut down, so the health dept. issue is now mute. As for prosecuting Basile and/or Gonzales on anything surrounding this case, that's the hope.

As for the mom filing a wrongful death suit, I say fabulous. She had a change of heart when she saw her baby. She changed her mind. I think she's brave to go forward, and it will help our side to have this played out in the courts.

Laura, it's just like any other wrongful death case, like Nicole Brown Simpson's filed on her behalf by relatives. Sure, this mom terminated her pregnancy. But then the abortion mill worker killed her baby. She didn't want that. Support her choice.

HUGE ::tacklehug:: for MK!

I've been wondering where you've been! I'm always on Facebook, so hit me up there :-)

Sure, this mom terminated her pregnancy. But then the abortion mill worker killed her baby. She didn't want that. Support her choice.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at November 28, 2007 5:13 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

She wanted it gone. It's gone.
She sought out and paid handsomely for a procedure that she knew would result in the death of her futus. She got her wish.
What the staff did after the fact was totally criminal, but she was fetus free - just like she wanted - when she left that clinic.

As for the mom filing a wrongful death suit, I say fabulous. She had a change of heart when she saw her baby.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at November 28, 2007 5:10 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Funny, she never called the cops. She apparently couldn't care less until the matter started to smell of cash. Her story has managed to change 2 or 3 times as well.

I'd like to see her win her case, but I don't think she should be allowed to keep any money. It reminds me of the Rasheedah Dinkins case. Rasheedah already had a baby. She went to the abortion clinic to have her second baby legally murdered. The abortion was botched. Now she wants money.

However, it's good to hear that another abortion clinic bites the dust.

Jill,
Thanks for the response. I think she's courageous, also. I didn't know she had a change of heart!

Which brings me to another question (thanks to Laura) - She may have paid to have the baby removed, and it was...but who's "property" (I really hate to use that word) is the baby once out of the womb? the abortion clinic's or the "mother's"?

Jill said, "Dade County prosecutors are hung up on whether the baby was viable or not, as if it matters"

I don't think that's the issue, either. Along with the baby being killed, any woman that would wait 23 weeks before she decided to abort must have had plenty of "changes of heart" along the way before the "final" decision was made. I think this is important because it supports her "change of heart" when she saw the child.

ABL, the mill has been shut down, so the health dept. issue is now mute. As for prosecuting Basile and/or Gonzales on anything surrounding this case, that's the hope.

As for the mom filing a wrongful death suit, I say fabulous. She had a change of heart when she saw her baby. She changed her mind. I think she's brave to go forward, and it will help our side to have this played out in the courts.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at November 28, 2007 5:10 PM
........................

Had a change of heart about what exactly? Watching her supposedly live born infant stuffed into a toxic waste container after the fact? If she in fact witnessed this, she is complicit in the infants death.

I thought you PL believed that 'unborn babies' were sliced and diced during an abortion. How did this one survive?

Sally, we are very aware of chemical abortions, which, I believe are just as disgusting, just on a different level.

Sliced, diced, and drown in bleach. We are too kind:(

I'm glad someone has brought us current on this case. I've been wondering about it and haven't been able to find out anything about it anywhere.

Should "mommy" get money for this? NO !!!
Should the clinic owners be held for murder? YES !!!

At 23 weeks pregnant, this girl KNEW what she was getting herself into. She was at an ABORTION MILL for God's sake...did she actually think the staff would try to SAVE her baby after it was born alive??? The staff at these places are there to KILL BABIES...not SAVE them.. She's an idiot to have thought this place would attempt to keep the child alive after it was born.

This entire case is a classic example of "the dreaded complication" that haunts abortionists.

I have no doubt that this type of thing happens far more often than we ever hear about.

Does this girl actually believe that any money she gets from this case is somehow going to change the fact that she was willing to have her baby killed and then when it backfired she
suddenly was "sorry" and "regretful", and that she should be compensated for it?

She is just as guilty of murder as the workers.

This is why the Infants Born Alive Protection Act is needed. It's a complete dichotomy, but at least offers SOME hope to the poor infants who manage to survive being aborted...and oh those poor doctors who will be so stressed out over these things...and what they must go through...

Mike, I agree. I would really like to take a look at what she wants to do with the money. I'd prefer to call it blood money. I'm very sorry for her mistake, but she did agree to have her child killed.

This is why I would love to see abortion made illegal. The mother would also be prosecuted along with the clinic workers. She would see a jail cell instested of a big cash reward. Either that, or she would have a hefty fine to pay. Women must take responsibility for their actions and their bodies.

Sally, we are very aware of chemical abortions, which, I believe are just as disgusting, just on a different level.

Posted by: AB Laura at November 28, 2007 9:17 PM
..............................
You are dodging. How was this infant born alive if chemicals were used to kill it in utero? What happened to the murder in the womb mantra?

Many infants survive the abortion process, especially when it is incomplete (cervix is dilated, but no one has gotten around to drawing and quartering the baby).

Gianna Jessen is a living example of this. That's what the whole "Born Alive Infant Protection Act" was all about.

Meanwhile, the baby's mother has retained the services of the Thomas More Society to pursue a wrongful death claim against Basile.

That's bull^&%^*. That woman killed her baby. The doctor was her instrument. She doesn't deserve a dime.

Sure, this mom terminated her pregnancy. But then the abortion mill worker killed her baby. She didn't want that. Support her choice.

I don't see it, Jill. We agree that terminating a pregnancy is killing the baby. So let's replace those words. Your statement is redundant:

"Sure this mom paid someone to kill her baby. Then the abortion mill worker killed her baby. She didn't want that. Support her choice."

Huh? She didn't want the worker to kill her baby after she paid them to kill her baby? I don't support that choice.

Now- I support giving medical care to babies after abortions. What happened with Angele, for example. This may be one of those cases.

If so, if this woman is repentant, that money still belongs to a pro-life organization. Thomas More should get it.

You are dodging. How was this infant born alive if chemicals were used to kill it in utero? What happened to the murder in the womb mantra?

Posted by: Sally at November 29, 2007 1:31 PM

Sally,
Why don't you do a little homework before you start spewing your ignorance. (again)

You start arguments that go in circles and never make any sense whatsoever.

You still continue to confuse elective abortion with medical procedures to remove a fetal demise.

And again, shame on you and Laura for the hurtful comments you threw at Kristi when she shared the story of her stillborn son on another thread.

Honestly, you both disgust me.

This woman paid someone to kill her baby, then changed her mind when the baby wasn't killed in the manner she wanted? What if someone hired a hitman to kill their 6 month old by suffocation, but the hitman decided to drown the baby instead? Should that "mom" elict any sympathy?

Should that "mom" elict any sympathy?

No...and she shouldn't get money either.

I am glad that a suit might be filed, but I don't think the mom should profit from this at all.

Jacqui, I am glad you agree with me. I'll admit it-I was waiting for fire cover from one of our heavy-hitters before posting about this. :) I expect to get alot of grief about my position on this.

Not to point out the obvious, but they could tell if the womans story is the truth - especially the part about the bleach.