David Daleiden, one of the pro-life activists who exposed the seedy underbelly of Planned Parenthood’s fetal body part business, says that the California Department of Justice raided his home Tuesday. The reported raid was apparently at the direction of Attorney General Kamala Harris, a Democrat currently running for U.S. Senate who Daleiden notes has received campaign donations from Planned Parenthood.
According to a Facebook post by Daleiden, California DOJ agents seized video footage and personal information from his Orange County apartment Tuesday in a raid related to his Center for Medical Progress video exposé series. Daleiden underscored that agents did not take some documents containing evidence damning to Planned Parenthood regarding its potentially illegal “fetal tissue” trade.
“Today, the California Attorney General’s office of Kamala Harris, who was elected with tens of thousands of dollars from taxpayer-funded Planned Parenthood, seized all video footage showing Planned Parenthood’s criminal trade in aborted baby parts, in addition to my personal information,” said Daleiden in a statement. “Ironically, while seizing my First Amendment work product, they ignored documents showing the illicit scheme between StemExpress and Planned Parenthood. This is no surprise – Planned Parenthood’s bought-and-paid-for AG has steadfastly refused to enforce the law against the baby body parts traffickers in our state, or even investigate them – while at the same time doing their bidding to harass and intimidate citizen journalists. We will pursue all remedies to vindicate our First Amendment rights.”
CBS Sacramento reports that Center for Medical Progress spokesman Peter Robbio confirmed the authenticity of Daleiden’s post but offered no further comment, while a spokeswoman for state Attorney General Harris said in an email that she cannot comment on an ongoing investigation.
“Harris said in July that she planned to review the undercover videos to see if center violated any state charity registration or reporting requirements,” reports CBS Sacramento. “She said that could include whether Daleiden and a colleague impersonated representatives of a fake biomedical company or filmed the videos without Planned Parenthood’s consent.”
“If David’s investigation had revealed evidence of criminal conduct in a meatpacking plant, his freedom would not be threatened. “
Attorney Alexandra Snyder
Planned Parenthood came under heavy fire last year after Daleiden’s Center for Medical Progress released a series of disturbing undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood officials and ex-employees discussing the organization’s massive “fetal tissue” trade business, which the organization’s officials admitted in the videos included the altering of abortion practices to better procure intact body parts from unborn children, including arms, legs, heads and organs.
A lawsuit in Texas against the abortion provider was turned on its head earlier this year when a grand jury absurdly charged Daleiden and fellow activist Sandra Merritt for attempting to purchase the body parts Planned Parenthood was selling (the abortion provider was inexplicably not charged for offering to sell them) and for using a fake ID.
“If David’s investigation had revealed evidence of criminal conduct in a meatpacking plant, his freedom would not be threatened. The videos would be seen as providing a valuable public benefit and prosecutors would act on the information,” Life Legal Defense Foundation attorney Alexandra Snyder told LifeNews in February. “We are confident that other agencies will take an objective look at Planned Parenthood’s willingness to engage in illegal activity, including altering the abortion procedure to obtain intact fetal cadavers, that is clearly evident in the videos. In the meantime, we will do everything we can to defend David from these baseless charges.”
Snyder also noted that the “tampering” charge against Daleiden and Merritt “is the same charge that would be leveled at a minor who used a fake ID to purchase alcohol. However, the law also provides a defense where the false information has ‘no effect on the government’s purpose for requiring the governmental record.'” Nonetheless, the charge carries a maximum of 20 years in prison.