Dr. Caitlin Bernard signals she'll sue Indiana AG over comments

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who gave the girl a medication-induced abortion on June 30, filed a tort claim notice over what she says are false statements that Attorney General Todd Rokita has made about her and her work.”

Abortion doctor signals she'll sue Indiana AG over comments

An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

apnews.com

Very good.

 

[two_iron]

She "signaled" it.... or is she actually going to do it?

I'm hearing her license is being burned and a cage is being constructed in the bowels of a state prison with her name on it.

 

[MarathonMike]

“An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who gave the girl a medication-induced abortion on June 30, filed a tort claim notice over what she says are false statements that Attorney General Todd Rokita has made about her and her work.”

Abortion doctor signals she'll sue Indiana AG over comments

An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

apnews.com

Very good.

She clearly did not follow protocol and faces decertification herself. She also completely f*d up the Ohio abortion law with her ridiculous "6 weeks and 3 days" nonsense. It is also medically IMPOSSIBLE to estimate fetal age to within 3 days. The 10 year old also qualifies for exemption due to life risk. She doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

 

[okfine]

“An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who gave the girl a medication-induced abortion on June 30, filed a tort claim notice over what she says are false statements that Attorney General Todd Rokita has made about her and her work.”

Abortion doctor signals she'll sue Indiana AG over comments

An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

apnews.com

Very good.

I bet she has a good defamation suit. Indiana should settle muy pronto.

 

[Coyote]

She clearly did not follow protocol and faces decertification herself. She also completely f*d up the Ohio abortion law with her ridiculous "6 weeks and 3 days" nonsense. It is also medically IMPOSSIBLE to estimate fetal age to within 3 days. The 10 year old also qualifies for exemption due to life risk. She doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

What specific protocol did she not follow? She is not the villain here.

 

[whitehall]

Dr. Bernard is an abortion activist. She should be in jail for using a 10 year old as a political tool. Suing the A.G. that would prosecute her is a slick political tactic.

 

[theHawk]

“An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who gave the girl a medication-induced abortion on June 30, filed a tort claim notice over what she says are false statements that Attorney General Todd Rokita has made about her and her work.”

Abortion doctor signals she'll sue Indiana AG over comments

An Indianapolis doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio took the first step Tuesday toward suing Indiana’s attorney general for defamation.

apnews.com

Very good.

“Signals”

 

[BackAgain]

An inaccurate comment by the AG (if it was inaccurate) would have to defame her to justify the prospective lawsuit.

Question: how exactly do you defame an abortionist?

 

[initforme]

She's a hero. In this case, it's a ten year old kid. To make her carry the kid should be a crime. I fully support this hero.

 

[MarathonMike]

What specific protocol did she not follow? She is not the villain here.

She deceived the American public on the Ohio rape law. She ignored the Ohio exception for life risk of the mother so that she could grab her moment of fame. The 10 year old did not have to leave Ohio. Furthermore WHY is that girl's mother not being charged with anything? She is supporting the rapist and obviously exposed her daughter to the risk of this man. But the Democrats could care less about that, they turned it into the crisis they wanted like they always do.

 

[BackAgain]

The thread topic is the proposed lawsuit against an abortion doctor. If the AG’s statement against the doctor is factually wrong or mistaken, that alone is not actionable. It would have to be both false AND defamatory to warrant a libel or slander suit.

That raises the question: even if mistaken, how is it defamatory? How does one damage the reputation of an abortionist? Hell. The doctor is also an abortion activist.

So how is she defamed?

For example, can you really defame a criminal? If you say that John Wayne Gacy was a homosexual murderer and had killed over a hundred young men or boys, but in fact you were mistaken (like, he didn’t kill maybe more than “only” 30 victims), could he sue you for defamation (if he were still alive)?

 

[mamooth]

She's followed through and sued him.

Should be a slam-dunk win for her. She's the cream of humanity, he's fascist filth, much like the previous poster.

 

[mamooth]

So how is she defamed?

Try to remember just how abnormal and depraved you are, and that decent people aren't like you.

I know why you hate her, of course. She helped the girl who was attacked by a pedo. That's now enraging many Republicans.

I bet you really wish you had the girl's name, so you could attack her character.

 

[initforme]

She's going to win this one. Rightfully so

 

[Coyote]

She deceived the American public on the Ohio rape law.

How? The Ohio law has no exceptions for rape.

She ignored the Ohio exception for life risk of the mother so that she could grab her moment of fame.

Read how the exceptions are described: Ohio Attorney General's Office Issues Legal Explainer Regarding Heartbeat Law - Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost

What would constitute a serious risk to a major bodily function? The AG lists some examples, none of which would apply, so it is unclear whether it would be legal or if some overzealous prosecutor might choose to go after it. It is doubtful you’d find a doctor in Ohio willing to do it.

The 10 year old did not have to leave Ohio. Furthermore WHY is that girl's mother not being charged with anything? She is supporting the rapist and obviously exposed her daughter to the risk of this man.

Are you sure she isn’t being charged?

But the Democrats could care less about that, they turned it into the crisis they wanted like they always do.

Don’t see the Republican’s caring much.

 

[Seymour Flops]

From a link in your article to another article in the same outlet:

Rokita told Fox that he would investigate whether Bernard violated child abuse notification or abortion reporting laws. He also said his office would look into whether anything Bernard said to the Indianapolis Star about the case violated federal medical privacy laws. He offered no specific allegations of wrongdoing.

Federal privacy laws are pretty strong, especially about medial privacy for children. The AG was right to say he would look into it, and righter still if they do look into it.

Where's the defamation?

 

[2aguy]

She deceived the American public on the Ohio rape law. She ignored the Ohio exception for life risk of the mother so that she could grab her moment of fame. The 10 year old did not have to leave Ohio. Furthermore WHY is that girl's mother not being charged with anything? She is supporting the rapist and obviously exposed her daughter to the risk of this man. But the Democrats could care less about that, they turned it into the crisis they wanted like they always do.

You know another problem? What did she tell the mother about Ohio abortion law? Did she lie to the woman so that she could send her to Ohio, in order to make a false claim in the press about the 10 year old not being able to get an abortion in Ohio?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Read how the exceptions are described: Ohio Attorney General's Office Issues Legal Explainer Regarding Heartbeat Law - Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost

What would constitute a serious risk to a major bodily function? The AG lists some examples, none of which would apply, so it is unclear whether it would be legal or if some overzealous prosecutor might choose to go after it. It is doubtful you’d find a doctor in Ohio willing to do it.

I have to disagree with that. From your link:

"Inevitable abortion" wouldn't likely apply. I highlighted that in error.

But premature rupture of the membranes? If that's not the primary physical danger of a ten year-old being raped and impregnated, I don't know what is.

What happened here seems obvious. The mother of this child has been made the Norma McCorvey of the Dobbs decision. Like Norma, this mother is a weak-minded and easily led individual being used to promote the cause of unlimited abortion on demand.

My evidence that this mother is weak-minded and easily led is that she gave her ten (possibly nine) year-old daughter to her boyfriend as a sex toy, and now defends her daughter's rapist as having done nothing wrong.

 

[BackAgain]

Try to remember just how abnormal and depraved you are, and that decent people aren't like you.

I know why you hate her, of course. She helped the girl who was attacked by a pedo. That's now enraging many Republicans.

I bet you really wish you had the girl's name, so you could attack her character.

Nah. You’re just a retarded scumbag. Slaughtering about 65 million preborn humans as they’re in the womb, totally helpless and completely innocent just since Roe is an abomination. Onky completely depraved ghouls — such as you — would approve of that.

Grasp reality. You’re the abnormal one. And you’re utterly depraved. So, gfy.

 

[Coyote]

I have to disagree with that. From your link:

View attachment 672136
"Inevitable abortion" wouldn't likely apply. I highlighted that in error.

But premature rupture of the membranes? If that's not the primary physical danger of a ten year-old being raped and impregnated, I don't know what is.

What happened here seems obvious. The mother of this child has been made the Norma McCorvey of the Dobbs decision. Like Norma, this mother is a weak-minded and easily led individual being used to promote the cause of unlimited abortion on demand.

My evidence that this mother is weak-minded and easily led is that she gave her ten (possibly nine) year-old daughter to her boyfriend as a sex toy, and now defends her daughter's rapist as having done nothing wrong.

Premature rupture has to occur first, before it is a danger and at that point even though the fetus is alive and might live for some days, it will never make it to term. The threat to the health or life of the mother is from infection if an abortion is held off until the fetus is dead. This would not apply to the ten yr old.