Pro-lifer Seriously Injuried at Abotion Clinic

  • Thread starter Thread starter SILVERNAME
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SILVERNAME

Guest
By Michael Whitcraft
At 6:30 am on Saturday, December 22, while most were snug in bed, resting up for Christmas activities, veteran pro-lifer Ed Snell was arriving at Hillcrest Abortion Center, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He had come with two other activists to persuade women entering the clinic not to abort their pre-born children.

The group customarily meets at the clinic and has saved many lives. In fact, they have been so effective, that the clinic erected a 7-foot privacy fence to cut off all communication between the women and the pro-lifers. However, their efforts were scuttled, when the activists began bringing ladders so they could speak over the fence.

Mr. Snell, age 69, preferred to stand on a more solid foundation, so he constructed a plywood platform on the roof of his car to elevate him above the fence.

tfp.org/TFPForum/TFPCommentary/injured_in_line_duty.htm
 
I don’t think I’m non-violent enough to protest in this way.
 
The saddest part is lack of media attention. You’d think at least the local paper would report the story. It’s a culture war. 😦
 
Well I do believe the ladders and platform are illegal in this case so the court has to rule it’s his own fault be the letter of the law.

However might be able to win via a law suit…

Edit: However I could be wrong.
 
cyberwolf001 said:
Well I do believe the ladders and platform are illegal in this case so the court has to rule it’s his own fault be the letter of the law.

However might be able to win via a law suit…

Edit: However I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty certain you are wrong. You can’t physically assault someone who is on a ladder or platform, regardless of the legal status of said ladder or platform. As far as the platform being illegal, I don’t see how it could be.

I am thankful that Mr. Snell is recovering and didn’t die. It sounds like the assailant’s unborn child wasn’t so fortunate. 😦
 
I want to make sure I got this right.

This clinic placed a seven foot fence around there property to keep the protesters to the distance the law requires.

The protesters use ladders and a platform to yell over the privacy fence and see over it. (Violation of the law right there. Remember everyone two wrongs do not make a right).

Mr. Snell yells at a couple and the man goes over the fence and onto this platform to confront him face to face. As a result of this the platform which is unstable is tilted knocking Mr. Snell off (at least when I think catapulted off I see this gentlemen landing on one end and the platform acting like a catapult sending Mr. Snell flying off as the part he is standing on flies up.

IF this is how it happened there really is no crime committed on the gentleman’s part that I can tell. Certainly not assault and battery at any rate…
 
cyberwolf001 said:
I want to make sure I got this right.

This clinic placed a seven foot fence around there property to keep the protesters to the distance the law requires.

The protesters use ladders and a platform to yell over the privacy fence and see over it. (Violation of the law right there. Remember everyone two wrongs do not make a right).
Click to expand...
I’m not a legal expert. Can you tell me what law is violated by having a platform on a car that is higher than a fence and then yelling at people on the other side of the fence? As long as he was still a legal length away and not trespassing on the property, I don’t understand what law was broken.
Mr. Snell yells at a couple and the man goes over the fence and onto this platform to confront him face to face. As a result of this the platform which is unstable is tilted knocking Mr. Snell off (at least when I think catapulted off I see this gentlemen landing on one end and the platform acting like a catapult sending Mr. Snell flying off as the part he is standing on flies up.

IF this is how it happened there really is no crime committed on the gentleman’s part that I can tell. Certainly not assault and battery at any rate…
Click to expand...
Someone with some legal knowledge please correct me if I’m wrong. Lunging at someone in a threatening manner and jumping on their vehicle sounds like assault to me. As far as battery, I don’t know - not enough detail on how directly the assailant caused the injuries.
 
rlg94086 said:
Someone with some legal knowledge please correct me if I’m wrong. Lunging at someone in a threatening manner and jumping on their vehicle sounds like assault to me. As far as battery, I don’t know - not enough detail on how directly the assailant caused the injuries.
Click to expand...
Yeah…I haven’t quite made it to law school yet, but even common sense leads us to understand that the injury was directly related to the assailant aggressively approaching the victim.

Now, filing a suit or length of sentence may depend on exactly what happened, which is unfortunate as there is no mention of evidence and witnesses on both sides seem to be dismissed by the officers. If it can be determined, for example, that the victim was specifically shoved or hit off the platform by the assailant’s body or an item used as a weapon, the sentencing may be much more severe.

This is why I always bring a camera on a wrist and a videocamera which is recording the entire time when I counsel.
 
The article did not say that Mr. Snell yelled at the woman. It said he tried to counsel her. There is a huge difference.

The assailant later said. “I didn’t assault him. I only pushed him.” So he did admit to pushing him off the platform on top of the car.

Due to the serious injuries sustained by Mr. Snell, police have belatedly charged the man with felony assault. No news on whether the officers who refused to arrest the man at the scene will be disciplined.

christiannewswire.com/news/518995200.html
 
I sent an email to the police chief expressing my concern over the conduct of these police officers. Their conduct is unacceptable. They’re supposed to protect people regardless of their views on an issue.
 
Can anyone tell me how to track the progress of this case? I want to see if the courts give Mr. Snell justice. Thank you.
 
Let me say first off that the man doing the pushing did the wrong thing, not just because of the injuries that were sustained by Mr. Snell.

But I have to say that the two reports linked on this thread about the incident are extremly one sided and decietfull (which really concerns me with the sites claim of christianity).

There is most definatly more to this than either of these reports are suggesting and I have to wonder how exactly one “counsels” another person while on a platform, over a 7 foot fence at what would obviously be a distance. I dont know what words were used, but it apparent that this man was quite protective of his female companion.

I only wish that these two web sites didnt feel the need for the deception in their articles.
 
Elric said:
Let me say first off that the man doing the pushing did the wrong thing, not just because of the injuries that were sustained by Mr. Snell.

But I have to say that the two reports linked on this thread about the incident are extremly one sided and decietfull (which really concerns me with the sites claim of christianity).

There is most definatly more to this than either of these reports are suggesting and I have to wonder how exactly one “counsels” another person while on a platform, over a 7 foot fence at what would obviously be a distance. I dont know what words were used, but it apparent that this man was quite protective of his female companion.

I only wish that these two web sites didnt feel the need for the deception in their articles.
Click to expand...
This is a good example of why I record every moment of counseling at the clinic in our city.

Without any documented evidence and other witnesses coming forward, it’s impossible to do more than speculate on this particular incident.

Keep in mind, however, that there are two specific actions in this field of work. One is known as counseling and one is known as protest. Counseling has the attributes of love, compassion, offering financial and medical assistance, offering a shoulder to cry and basically helping the woman in her time of need.

Protest is the well-known action as it garners an audience and makes good press.

I know in the counseling at our local clinic, the male partners become extremely aggravated and violent. This is not out of protection of their woman, but rather a response to loss of their control and power over the woman. I have seen woman kicked from cars, beaten, verbally abused, walked to the entrance with a bag over their head, etc.

When a man is coercing a woman to abort her preborn child, counselors offering help, love and a way out to the woman are the man’s worst enemy.

I invite you to spend time outside of a local clinic that offers abortive services. Saturday and Sunday are the busiest days. Make sure you spend time with a counseling group. Observe the male partners and decide for yourself.

Also, truth is truth regardless of who tells it to you. I regularly take facts directly from Planned Parenthood and the Alan Guttmacher Institute. Just because someone is Christian doesn’t mean they are “decietfull.”
 
Yeah I’ve seen this form of “love” before…

It’s the same sorta love that has had several of those clinics bombed. An then a second bomb waiting for rescue workers.

It’s this kind of love that has had many health care workers shot dead there children orphaned and wifes left as widows. All because they work at a women’s health clinic which the terrorist believed performed abortions.

It’s this same “love for the sinners” that has seen me threatened with physical violence for refusing to convert a persons individual brand of Christianity.

BTW I’ve seen and read manuals on this loving counseling. The manuals suggest calling a woman harsh names to get her attention, names that I’d get into trouble for typing here: This is also done at the ‘counseling sessions’.

Finally I agree with an above poster that this article is beyond one sided and is just trying to harp on the myth of Christian oppression which in American these days means “BOO HOO! We can’t force our religion on non-Catholics/Christians by making it law! Woe is we!”

Meh call me when:
Your getting your children taken away over your religion.
NOT when you refuse to give them an education.
NOT when you refuse to tell a little girl about her time of the month even though she is now having it and is scared to death.
NOT when you beat them till they are black, blue bleeding. But when it is only over your being Christian.

Being lynched on a large scale over it / being attacked in the streets on a large scale and the police doing nothing.
NOT Like the Columbine girl which was proven to just be a hysterical mother wanting her daughters death to mean something and local churches wanting to say only Christian students where targeted.

When on a large scale you have protesters break up your religious gatherings and the police ordering YOU off the property you rented because the local church protested and managed to block your faith from having it’s own house of worship.

There’s more but this is quickly becoming off topic. Suffice to say the woe is we mentality of this article annoys me.

(If a mod things this should be spilt into another discussion please do).
 
hasikelee said:
Yeah…I haven’t quite made it to law school yet, but even common sense leads us to understand that the injury was directly related to the assailant aggressively approaching the victim.

Now, filing a suit or length of sentence may depend on exactly what happened, which is unfortunate as there is no mention of evidence and witnesses on both sides seem to be dismissed by the officers. If it can be determined, for example, that the victim was specifically shoved or hit off the platform by the assailant’s body or an item used as a weapon, the sentencing may be much more severe.

This is why I always bring a camera on a wrist and a videocamera which is recording the entire time when I counsel.
Click to expand...
 
This looks like a jury question to me. I am waiting to see what the prosecuting attorney does with this case as it has hot button political overtones that an astute politician will avoid whenever possible.

I have serious misgivings about a 60+ person putting himself in such a precarious position on an elevated platform. I am 67 and wouldn’t try it. Over the years one’s agility and balance decrease markedly making the possibililty of a fall and serious injury much greater.
 
cyberwolf001 said:
Yeah I’ve seen this form of “love” before…

It’s the same sorta love that has had several of those clinics bombed. An then a second bomb waiting for rescue workers.

It’s this kind of love that has had many health care workers shot dead there children orphaned and wifes left as widows. All because they work at a women’s health clinic which the terrorist believed performed abortions.

It’s this same “love for the sinners” that has seen me threatened with physical violence for refusing to convert a persons individual brand of Christianity.

BTW I’ve seen and read manuals on this loving counseling. The manuals suggest calling a woman harsh names to get her attention, names that I’d get into trouble for typing here: This is also done at the ‘counseling sessions’.

Finally I agree with an above poster that this article is beyond one sided and is just trying to harp on the myth of Christian oppression which in American these days means “BOO HOO! We can’t force our religion on non-Catholics/Christians by making it law! Woe is we!”

Meh call me when:
Your getting your children taken away over your religion.
NOT when you refuse to give them an education.
NOT when you refuse to tell a little girl about her time of the month even though she is now having it and is scared to death.
NOT when you beat them till they are black, blue bleeding. But when it is only over your being Christian.

Being lynched on a large scale over it / being attacked in the streets on a large scale and the police doing nothing.
NOT Like the Columbine girl which was proven to just be a hysterical mother wanting her daughters death to mean something and local churches wanting to say only Christian students where targeted.

When on a large scale you have protesters break up your religious gatherings and the police ordering YOU off the property you rented because the local church protested and managed to block your faith from having it’s own house of worship.

There’s more but this is quickly becoming off topic. Suffice to say the woe is we mentality of this article annoys me.

(If a mod things this should be spilt into another discussion please do).
Click to expand...
You probably should just start a new thread in a different part of the forum. This post reads as though you have some personal problem totally unrelated to the incident the article outlines. I’m sure other posters would love to help you sort out your confusion in the proper forum. (maybe apologetics?..moral theology or social justice?)
 
OriginalJS said:
This looks like a jury question to me. I am waiting to see what the prosecuting attorney does with this case as it has hot button political overtones that an astute politician will avoid whenever possible.

I have serious misgivings about a 60+ person putting himself in such a precarious position on an elevated platform. I am 67 and wouldn’t try it. Over the years one’s agility and balance decrease markedly making the possibililty of a fall and serious injury much greater.
Click to expand...
I agree, but the man being on a platform should have no bearing on whether the accused assaulted him or not. That would be blaming the victim. It may make a difference though on the severity of the crime (i.e. if it was just a small shove and the injuries were due to the platform being unstable). Mr. Snell’s words he was yelling could also minimize the severity if they were provocative enough to warrant a shove.

These two details are unknown from the article.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top