Does Planned Parenthood break the law?

[Zealot]

Jeff Katz, another famed talk show host like Rush told of a letter that was honored by the Golden Gate Planned Parenthood.

The letter, which is posted on the Jeff Katz Web page of KSFO radio SF., is written by a seventeen year old girl in appreciation to PPGG. When the girl was 11 she was raped by her boyfriend. She went to PP and they helped her thru the ordeal without notifying the parents or the law. At 14 she came to the PP to get birth control medication. Again without notifying the parents.

Now at 17 she tells how grateful she is to the PP and they are using her letter for advertisment. She also informs the world that she has been tested for STDs and Aids about four times already in her life time. How proud the PP must be for helping this young lady in her dangerous life of promiscuity. Wonder if she had any abortions, huh?

[phoenix_fire]

Disgusting.

[shield772]

What an Oxy-moron Planned parenthood, it should be planned abortions

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Zealot Jeff Katz, another famed talk show host like Rush told of a letter that was honored by the Golden Gate Planned Parenthood. The letter, which is posted on the Jeff Katz Web page of KSFO radio SF., is written by a seventeen year old girl in appreciation to PPGG. When the girl was 11 she was raped by her boyfriend. She went to PP and they helped her thru the ordeal without notifying the parents or the law. At 14 she came to the PP to get birth control medication. Again without notifying the parents. Now at 17 she tells how grateful she is to the PP and they are using her letter for advertisment. She also informs the world that she has been tested for STDs and Aids about four times already in her life time. How proud the PP must be for helping this young lady in her dangerous life of promiscuity. Wonder if she had any abortions, huh?

Your comments have no bearing to the topic question.

The answer to your question is quite easy to find.

The answer to the topic question is almost certainly NO. A parental notification law was passed this year and there was no such law in place prior to this year's election. Therefore, for services provided prior to November of this year, no laws were broken. I could not tell in the text of the proposed law when it was to take effect so I will assume that if services were provide after election day of this year they would have been illegal as the person in question is still under the age of 18.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_no...f/entire73.pdf

Keith

[Cephus]

The only thing disgusting was that girl and her lack of morals. PP had nothing whatsoever to do with anything that she did, and if there was no parental notification law requiring them to tell her parents, then they weren't breaking the law either.

Clearly PP is providing a necessary service, but they didn't create the problem, it's the parents and their lack of moral guidelines that did it. Place the blame where it belongs.

[Zealot]

Quote by: Cephus The only thing disgusting was that girl and her lack of morals. PP had nothing whatsoever to do with anything that she did, and if there was no parental notification law requiring them to tell her parents, then they weren't breaking the law either. Clearly PP is providing a necessary service, but they didn't create the problem, it's the parents and their lack of moral guidelines that did it. Place the blame where it belongs.

Are you saying that the rape was legal and the law had nothing to do with it? Did PP help the problem? Aiding a rapist to escape responsibility of his crime? Did their help encourage her to take better care of herself. Did they encourage better parental responsibility?

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Zealot Are you saying that the rape was legal and the law had nothing to do with it? Did PP help the problem? Aiding a rapist to escape responsibility of his crime? Did their help encourage her to take better care of herself. Did they encourage better parental responsibility?

Well, perhaps in the first and third sentence there you may have found a violation of the law. But, I doubt we'll ever know whether or not that is the case. We don't know how much was actually told by the girl to the people providing help at the time. We don't know if Planned Parenthood reported what could very well have been a crime to authorities.

It may very well be true that not reporting such a crime could be a crime in itself but we don't have any information as to what really happened five years ago.

Keith

[Cephus]

Quote by: Zealot Are you saying that the rape was legal and the law had nothing to do with it? Did PP help the problem? Aiding a rapist to escape responsibility of his crime? Did their help encourage her to take better care of herself. Did they encourage better parental responsibility?

Of course the rape was illegal, but PP didn't rape her. Neither did they aid, in any way, the rapist to escape responsibility for the crime. It is the girl's responsibility to report it to police. If she doesn't, then it's her fault, not PP's. You seem so ready to point fingers at PP for absolutely nothing, just because you've got a problem with them, your irrationality shows through clearly.

[Zealot]

Quote by: Cephus Of course the rape was illegal, but PP didn't rape her. Neither did they aid, in any way, the rapist to escape responsibility for the crime. It is the girl's responsibility to report it to police. If she doesn't, then it's her fault, not PP's. You seem so ready to point fingers at PP for absolutely nothing, just because you've got a problem with them, your irrationality shows through clearly.

Ho ho ho ho, to hire you as my lawyer would be a fatal mistake, wow!

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: shield772 What an Oxy-moron Planned parenthood, it should be planned abortions

Beats the hell out of Planning for Kids.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: Cephus The only thing disgusting was that girl and her lack of morals. PP had nothing whatsoever to do with anything that she did, and if there was no parental notification law requiring them to tell her parents, then they weren't breaking the law either. Clearly PP is providing a necessary service, but they didn't create the problem, it's the parents and their lack of moral guidelines that did it. Place the blame where it belongs.

Precisely.

[Cephus]

Quote by: Zealot Ho ho ho ho, to hire you as my lawyer would be a fatal mistake, wow!

Yes, we know you can't actually ANSWER anything anyone says, so you have to come up with these smart-ass comments. That's alright, we realize that it's the best you can do. We just treat you like the special-ed kid who doesn't know any better.

[shield772]

If someone has knowledge of a crime and does not report it they are under the law accesories after the fact of that crime, so yes they are violating the law.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Quote by: shield772 If someone has knowledge of a crime and does not report it they are under the law accesories after the fact of that crime, so yes they are violating the law.

The argument is over whether or not its a crime in the first place, your statement assumes so.

[bugsbunny04]

you guys are coming down a little hard on the kid, geez.

Does it not occur to anybody that her behavior could be the result of PTSD in the wake of being raped at eleven? PP is irresponsible for not getting her psychological wounds treated and just encouraging the symptoms.

But no, they didnt break the law. They acted irresponsibly in this case and fight to keep it legal to murder your unwanted kids as long as they aint birthed of woman yet. But no they arent doing anything "illegal"

[shield772]

it does not assume anything, it is fact, look up the legal definition of accesory.

[shield772]

ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT - Whoever, knowing that an offense has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact; one who knowing a felony to have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists the felon in order to hinder the felon's apprehension, trial, or punishment. U.S.C. 18

[bugsbunny04]

shield is refering to the fact that they didnt report the rape, guys. In that case they could be construed as an acessory after, but they would have been violating the very right to privacy they are fighting so hard for. At least they are consistent.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: shield772 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT - Whoever, knowing that an offense has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact; one who knowing a felony to have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists the felon in order to hinder the felon's apprehension, trial, or punishment. U.S.C. 18

I don't think they "received, relieved, comforted or assisted" the OFFENDER. They may have done that for the victim but, by what you've quoted, that isn't a crime.

You may be able to do better, but this one won't cover it.

Try for one that was in effect five years ago that states that failure to report is a crime. It may exist but what you cited isn't it.

Besides, from the format it doesn't appear that you have quoted a law but a legal definition. Just because you may have defined an "accessory after the fact" doesn't mean that a crime has been committed. Plus, that definition isn't California code, it appears to be US Code. Rape isn't a federal offense unless a minor is transported across state lines. No claims to that effect have been made.

You may be on the right track to finding that a crime was committed but you're not quite there. Even that is assuming that the 12 year old girl actually told PP that she was raped rather than being concerned because of sexual activity. That hasn't been established, either.

Keith

[shield772]

they assisted the offender by not having reported a crime against a minor.