Philly doc fights charge that aborted babies born alive
PHILADELPHIA — A lawyer for a Philadelphia abortion provider charged with killing seven babies born alive is working to show the first death occurred in the womb.
The young woman who aborted that baby when she was 17 testified Wednesday at Dr. Kermit Gosnell's murder trial.
Prosecutors believe she was nearly 30 weeks pregnant, well beyond the 24-week limit in Pennsylvania. And the limit in Delaware, where Gosnell began the three-day procedure, is 20 weeks.
A medical assistant from Gosnell's clinic in West Philadelphia has said the baby's large size and pinkish color disturbed her. She says babies were routinely cut with scissors after delivery.
But defense lawyer Jack McMahon, on cross-examination, suggested that no babies survive after the drug digoxen is administered.
Records show the teen's aunt was charged $2,750 for the procedure.
Steven Massof of Mt. Lebanon pleaded guilty in November 2011 to two counts of third-degree murder and conspiracy, and one count of participating in a corrupt organization connected to his work at Gosnell's clinic.
Massof's attorney, Jeffrey Lindy, said that because Gosnell is the primary defendant in the murder trial and Massof is scheduled to testify against him, his client's sentencing could not take place until after Gosnell's trial and sentencing take place. Massof is in state prison awaiting the conclusion of the trial.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.