Prosecutor Who Won’t Charge Woman for Killing Unborn Baby Had Planned Parenthood Backing

State   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Mar 27, 2015   |   1:25PM   |   Washington, DC

As LifeNews has reported, the Colorado woman who cut out a 7-month-old unborn baby from a mother’s abdomen, resulting in the death of the infant, will not be charged with murder. That’s because the state lacks an unborn victims law to hold criminals accountable when they kill or injure unborn children in such criminal attacks.

However, new information reveals the prosecutor in the case is an abortion advocate who has the endorsement of prominent pro-abortion groups in a previous campaign for state Attorney General and who endorsed legislation to not regard unborn children as victims of such crimes, which would allow murder charges to be brought.

Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett is expected to release more information today about what charges will be brought against Dynal lane, but murder charges are not in the offing. Though Colorado doesn’t have an unborn victims law that clearly allows murder charges to be brought against criminals for killing the baby before birth, Garnett is supported by the very groups that opposed such a law.

Colorado state law does not regard unborn children as human beings who deserve justice when they are killed. In 2013, Colorado Democrats killed a bill that would add the state to the list of more than 25 states that provide justice and protection for pregnant women and unborn children. Pro-abortion groups Planned Parenthood and NARAL opposed the bill – the very groups that endorsed Garnett in his race for attorney general.

SIGN THE PETITION demanding justice for unborn babies. Support Michelle Wilkins and her baby!

As LiveAction notes:

Garnett himself publicly supported the Democrats’ legislation to classify the killing of a preborn child as a minor felony instead of a homicide.

In addition, Garnett has proudly advertised endorsements garnered from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, both pro-abortion groups that oppose recognizing preborn children as human beings. Garnett specifically cited “the important work” Planned Parenthood does – work that includes opposing legislation that would have allowed for a murder charge in the Lane case. He also proclaimed that Planned Parenthood expressed “faith in my continued advocacy for their organization.”

“If you missed yesterday’s debate between my opponent and me on KOA’s Mike Rosen show, you can listen to it at this link, below. I’m really happy with how well our discussion went. On another note, yesterday I also picked up the endorsement of the NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado PAC. I’m honored to have their backing,” Garnett said on his Facebook page in October 2010.

And in August 2010, he added: “In recent days I’ve picked up another important endorsement that I’m honored to have, this one from Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado. They cite my “strong support of women’s health,” and express faith in my continued advocacy for their organization. These people do important work, and I very much appreciate having them in my corner.”

Kristi Burton Brown, a pro-life Colorado-based attorney, argues that Garnett could bring a murder charge if he wanted but worries pro-abortion politics ma be getting in the way.

While the results of the autopsy on baby Aurora have yet to be released, Garnett himself admitted that if she had lived outside the womb murder charges could be a possibility. Others say that the law would require the act that killed the baby to have been performed outside the womb. (One would imagine this would not be difficult to prove, as the time that passed between the baby being cut out of the womb and her being brought to the hospital almost certainly led to her death.)

Moreover, is clear that Garnett could have charged Lane with murder if he wanted to. If he believed Colorado law was unjust and unclear, he could have taken a big step in this case to remedy it. He could have helped the courts answer his own uncertainty:

The definition of “lived as a child” is difficult, too, and whether that means one breath or one hour, Garnett said.

“The Supreme Court and the court of appeals will get to tell us that eventually. The law is not, as in many areas, terribly clear in terms of that,” Garnett said.


Scott Robinson, a legal expert for 9News explains a charge that Garnett could have brought against Lane:

“If I were the prosecutor I would be very tempted to file an extreme indifference first degree murder charge,” said 9News legal expert Scott Robinson.

“After all, this is intentional conduct. We’ve never had a case in which a child was ripped untimely from the mother’s womb and then died, and this may be the case that sets the precedent,” Robinson added.

Instead of pursuing justice and helping to clarify the law in Colorado, Garnett has chosen to continue his advocacy for Planned Parenthood, even in these unimaginable circumstances. As attorney Gualberto Garcia Jones writes:

If the law now treats the seven-month unborn child of Michelle Wilkins as nothing more than a miscarried pregnancy, you can thank those who buy into the abortion mentality that an unborn child is somehow sub-human.

Report indicate the baby breathed a heavy last gasp before she died and that ought to be enough evidence showing the baby died after birth and a murder charge is warranted, whether Colorado has an unborn victims law or not.