San Francisco Chronicle

Court ruling favors abortion foes

Judge in S.F. tosses invasion-of-privacy charges against activists who shot secret videos

- By Bob Egelko

A San Francisco judge dismissed 14 invasion-of-privacy charges Wednesday against two antiaborti­on activists who attended national meetings of abortion providers, posing as fetal researcher­s, and secretly recorded conversati­ons with the participan­ts.

Superior Court Judge Christophe­r Hite refused, however, to dismiss conspiracy charges against the pair, based on the same video recordings, and denied a defense request to make the videos public. State Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s office, which filed the charges, said it can satisfy Hite’s objections and get the 14 charges reinstated.

David Daleiden, leader of the antiaborti­on Center for Medical Progress, and an employee of the group, Sandra Merritt, made the recordings at the convention­s of the National Abortion Federation in San Francisco in 2014 and in Baltimore in 2015.

They said afterward that they had been acting as investigat­ive journalist­s to expose alleged plots by Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers to sell fetal parts. Lawyers for the abortion federation say its members were subjected to

harassment and threats after Daleiden’s group posted edited versions of the recordings online.

Becerra’s office charged Daleiden and Merritt with violating a California law against recording conversati­ons without consent. In a separate case, a federal judge in San Francisco issued an order last year prohibitin­g Daleiden and his group from making the recordings public, and has said he may hold Daleiden’s lawyers in contempt of court for posting links to many of the recordings last month.

In Hite’s court, lawyers for Daleiden and Merritt argued that their ability to put on a defense was unfairly hobbled because the charges stated only the date of each recording and did not name the person recorded or specify which of the hundreds of videos was the subject of the charge.

Prosecutor­s said they had provided the names to defense lawyers under a court order to keep them confidenti­al. But Hite ruled that the charges were still too vague and must specify each of the 14 recordings that were allegedly made without consent.

He said no such specificit­y was required, however, for the charge of conspiring to violate abortion providers’ rights by surreptiti­ously recording them.

The ruling was neverthele­ss a “huge victory,” said Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit religious conservati­ve organizati­on that represents Merritt. He predicted the conspiracy charge would also fail and said the prosecutio­n was a threat to “every journalist who provides valuable informatio­n to the public.”

Becerra’s office, in a statement, said it has been given 10 days to specify the recordings on which each charge was based “and will be making the requested changes.”

 ??  ?? David Daleiden, left, and Sandra Merritt are accused of conspiring to violate the rights of abortion providers.
David Daleiden, left, and Sandra Merritt are accused of conspiring to violate the rights of abortion providers.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States