{"id":171410,"date":"2017-09-03T16:59:59","date_gmt":"2017-09-03T20:59:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=171410"},"modified":"2017-09-03T16:59:59","modified_gmt":"2017-09-03T20:59:59","slug":"david-daleiden-attorneys-fined-200k-controversial-judge","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/david-daleiden-attorneys-fined-200k-controversial-judge\/","title":{"rendered":"David Daleiden, attorneys, fined $200K by controversial judge"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

The Center for Medical Progress lead investigator, David Daleiden, along with two of his attorneys, faced Judge William Orrick again on Thursday. The men walked away with an almost-$200,000 fine after being held in contempt of court<\/a> for releasing videos after the Planned Parenthood-connected judge had issued a gag order<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Washington Times reports<\/a>:<\/p>\n

U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick said the $195,359 tab would compensate the National Abortion Federation for \u201cexpenses incurred as a result of the violation of my Preliminary Injunction Order,\u201d which had banned the release of the video footage taken at NAF meetings.<\/p>\n

Mr. Daleiden\u2019s attorneys, Steve Cooley and Brentford Ferreira, were included in the sanctions intended to ensure \u201ccurrent and future compliance\u201d with the order.<\/p>\n

Mr. Daleiden described the sanctions as an attack on his rights to defend himself. Matthew Geragos, an attorney for Cooley and Ferreira, told the Associated Press that he is appealing.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Judg Orrick has come under fire<\/a> because of his longtime ties to Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry, as Live Action News reported last summer<\/a>. The judge’s wife has displayed her support for the abortion corporation<\/a> on social media as well. Despite his clear conflict of interest in the case, Orrick has been allowed to stay on it and has consistently ruled against the pro-life leader and his group.<\/p>\n

The California justice system continues its accusations against Daleiden’s free speech rights, as the Times notes<\/a>:<\/p>\n

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed 15 felony charges in March against Mr. Daleiden and a fellow investigator, Susan Merritt, for conspiracy to invade the privacy of those secretly recorded in the sting operation.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe right to privacy is a cornerstone of California\u2019s Constitution, and a right that is foundational in a free democratic society,\u201d Mr. Becerra said. \u201cWe will not tolerate the criminal recording of confidential conversations.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

While the right to privacy certainly is a foundational right, expecting privacy in a group gathering or a public place such as a restaurant is not a reasonable expectation, as even California’s own two-party consent recording law<\/a> notes:<\/p>\n

\"California<\/a><\/p>\n

Additionally, there are exceptions to the recording law when crimes are suspected<\/a>, as is the case with Planned Parenthood’s and NAF members’ activities — including the trafficking of human body parts<\/a>, an accusation of killing a baby boy born after a failed abortion<\/a>, and partial-birth abortions<\/a>.<\/p>\n