19 year old in Nebraska. Never believe them when they say they didn’t want to punish women. It’s their main motivation. FB messages with her mom. The image says it all. This will please them to see
If this was a first trimester abortion, I could understand the angst with the sentence. But it was a THIRD trimester abortion. THAT is what’s uncivilized. * if health/life of baby and/or mother were in jeopardy, then my view would change … if pregnancy was normal, at 28 weeks, I just don’t understand how anyone could do that.
This is a tough case to highlight. The teen took pills approved for 10 week abortions at 30 weeks, delivered stillborn (supposedly), buried, dug up, and moved the remains 3 times including attempting to burn it. Even under Roe v Wade would that have been legal?
My earlier comments in the thread were without knowing the details of the case. You two are correct. I'll leave my comment up as a testament to my ignorance.
I did not know the facts either. But still, 90 days in jail? And it belies the fact that those seeking stricter abortion laws say they don't want to jail the women. Plus, we don't know why the abortion was procured late. Part of the problem with so-called compromise laws that talk about a defined cut off, which can make a lot of sense in theory, is that those seeking to procure an abortion earlier in their pregnancy are often practically or fully denied the option until it's too late. Some European nations have earlier cutoffs. But they also have much easier access early on. In that case, it's reasonable to assume that someone should have made the decision earlier or forfeit the option. And perhaps that applies here. But I suspect not. I think we need those facts too. And in any event, I still wouldn't anticipate 90 days incarceration. I still maintain that the movement is motivated and significant part by the desire to punish women.
And if you want full context, read this. Conservative AGs want routine use to OB/GYN records as a matter of course without a showing of specific need tied to a predicated investigation Over and over again, the anti-abortion movement claims it has no interest in prosecuting women for abortion. This isn’t true. They have already tried to pass laws that would impose criminal penalties on women who end pregnancies. And it simply makes no sense to argue that abortion is murder, but women who seek abortions should be in the legal clear. The reality is that prosecuting women for abortion is politically unpopular, and that’s the only reason it’s not happening yet on a wide scale. Republican attorneys general want the ability to easily investigate abortions as crimes because they are looking toward a future where abortion is a crime for which women are punished. Of course they don’t say this. Via POLITICO, here’s what the Republican Attorneys General claim in their letter opposing the HIPAA expansion: “Suppose that state officials had reason to believe that an abortion provider deliberately performed an abortion in violation of state law, resulting in serious injury to the woman, and that the provider then falsified medical records and referred the woman to an out-of-state provider to cover it up,” the Attorneys General write. “State officials would clearly have a basis to investigate that provider.” If state officials have a clear basis to investigate, they will still be able to investigate even with a HIPAA expansion. Frankly I wish they weren’t, and this hypothetical is pretty specious, but the truth is that a HIPAA expansion is not a law saying “police cannot investigate abortions ever.” If law enforcement were investigating criminal activity, they would have the option to subpoena the information they need, which honestly seems like far too lax a requirement. Even under the stronger version of the law being pushed by many Democrats, law enforcement can still do their jobs. They just have to demonstrate that their desire to engage in a profound privacy violation has some legitimate basis. The proposed HIPAA expansion, by the way, wouldn’t even get close to adequately protecting abortion records. It would just require that state officials have some reason why they’re going fishing into private medical information. That’s it. And that’s a bar that Republicans apparently don’t want to clear. Conservative Attorneys General Want Your Private Reproductive Health Information
Apparently (per link below) she was NOT sentenced for an abortion, and this all actually happened BEFORE either Roe was overturned or Nebraska passed their law. Sounds like ultimately she pled and was sentenced for the way she disposed of the remains, not for the abortion itself. Aside from the fact her actions were extreme, this isn’t really a great example as this all happened before any of the restrictive laws went into effect. She could have had a fully legal early term abortion but didn’t. Instead she committed things that would be criminal in most places. Sounds like a mixture of irresponsibility and desperation/mental illness. BUT while this case is a very poor example due to the timing of the crime, it illustrates the type of thing that will become more common as a result of such invasive laws which will only put more women in desperate situations (6 week ban, 12 week ban, anti-sex ed, anti-contraceptives, etc). https://www.axios.com/2023/07/20/nebraska-teen-abortion-jail#:~:text=A Nebraska judge sentenced a,her mother, per multiple reports.
We are a shithole country. Happened in the blink of an eye. But all great countries perish. This time it’s because our populace is rotten. They may be a minority but our political structure and judicial structure give them out sized influence (normally they’d all be in reeducation camps). I blame the FF’s and the internet which gave malignant morons a voice.
Even if you're pro choice (as I am) you have to agree there's a line somewhere. 30 weeks is definitely pushing it too far. I didn't see any indication in the article that she was denied care early on leading to her actions which would change my thinking if that were the case. Absent that, 90 days isn't entirely unreasonable, but I hate to see that in the case of someone who was 17 at the time.
Extremely misleading (if not downright defamation/libel) clickbait thread title, much like mainstream media. - First trimester abortion pills at 30+ weeks. - Buried and dug up remains. - Attempted to conceal/destroy evidence. And this is just what's reported, and what we know. Sounds like someone killed their baby post-birth and not only tried to hide the evidence, but lied to the authorities about it. Regardless if the abortion was legal or not, the cover-up is 100,000,000,000,000 times worse ala Jayson Williams and his cab driver incident. Martha Stewart didn't go to prison for Insider Trading, she went to prison for lying to the investigators about it. And this is coming from a Barack Obama and Gary Johnson voter btw.
The pregnancy was terminated in April 2022 according to the imbedded NYT article, this case has nothing to do with the overturning of Roe which didn’t occur until two months later, or the leaked draft report opinion, which was in May. This was a crime before all of that. “Jessica Burgess pleaded guilty in July to violating Nebraska’s abortion law, furnishing false information to a law enforcement officer and removing or concealing human skeletal remains. She faces up to five years in prison at her sentencing on Sept. 22, according to Joseph Smith, the top prosecutor in Madison County, Neb.”
Reason I say MSM is because they frequently have a habit of not only using clickbait article headlines, but also inaccurate reporting. When I say "inaccurate reporting," I mean specific circumstances where they paraphrase a subject to its bare minimums, while leaving out many important aspects. When discussing newly passed laws, they almost always use brief summaries; what we should be doing is reading the STATUTES, verbatim.
Looks like she might’ve gotten off light. From what I can tell desecration of a corpse is a Class IV felony, which carries a possible punishment of up to two years in prison and 12 month post-release supervision and/or up to a $10,000 fine.
Yeah. This is a stretch. This wasnt some 16 year old scared kid crossing a state line to get a morning after pill. This was illegal in most places 5 years ago.