State judge rules in favor of Center for Medical Progress investigators

The Center for Medical Progress posted an update to the group’s Facebook page today, noting that a state judge had granted “most of defendant Daleiden’s and Merritt’s demurrer motions, knocking out the 14 recording charges until the CA AG amends their complaint” and had “also denied the AG’s request for contempt sanctions against David’s defense counsel, and agreed Judge Orrick’s federal gag order in the civil lawsuit should not prevent defendants from using the videos in our defense.”

Liberty Counsel, the attorneys defending CMP’s Sandra Merritt, released a statement on Wednesday, detailing that the San Francisco Superior Court judge dismissed 14 of 15 criminal counts filed against Merritt on the grounds that they were “legally insufficient.”

“The state has the opportunity to amend if it can plead a more legally sufficient and specific complaint,” writes the pro-life legal group. Liberty Counsel goes on to say:

… [T]he criminal complaint for illegally recording supposedly “private” conversations (in restaurants, hotel lobbies and other public places) – the first ever filed against undercover journalists – was legally deficient for numerous reasons, not the least of which was the Attorney General’s decision to prosecute Merritt in secret proceedings, without identifying even the names of her accusers or purported “victims.” … The complaint was also vague and full of inconsistencies.

… The 15th charge was for “criminal conspiracy” to invade “privacy.” However, the videos produced by Merritt and Daleiden exposed unethical and potentially illegal conduct by Planned Parenthood, and Planned Parenthood itself has admitted, under oath, that the recorded conversations took place in “non-confidential” and public venues.