How did the jury come to its decision to acquit Mark Houck in the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances so quickly? Now that the trial is over, video evidence submitted at the trial has become available for public view. That evidence clearly demonstrates that the Justice Department never really had a case against Houck from the beginning.
In a surveillance video taken on the day of the incident, Houck and his son can be seen standing 50 feet away from the entrance to the clinic. Love is then seen approaching the pair, and standing close to the young son. Houck than points over Love’s shoulder, in a gesture that unmistakably conveys a request to leave, and Love begins to comply, but then turns back to face Houck. Houck then pushes Love, who collapses to the ground, but then returns immediately to his feet.
All of these actions occurred approximately 50 feet away from the entrance of the clinic. Love is not in the process of escorting any patient into the clinic – in fact, Love leaves the front of the clinic to approach Houck and his son, who are obviously minding their own business.
As described by Houck’s attorney, Peter Breen of the Thomas More Society, the video clip from the surveillance camera, available on YouTube, was the only film available of the incident, the director of Security at the clinic having erased the footage from all other surveillance cameras. He also noted that this video was available to the Justice Department from the time their office decided to bring a case – video which shows Houck NOT blocking the entrance to the clinic, or interfering in any way with anyone’s receipt of services at the clinic.
As Attorney Breen stated to Fox News, “What we did was win a big victory for the pro-life movement against the Biden administration…(t)hey were trying to scare pro-lifers from coming out on the sidewalks and being active. Biden, that DOJ, sent their best prosecutor, the top guy for (FACE) prosecutions from Washington, to help deal with this case in Philly and that jury, once we finally got it seated fully, took about an hour to find Mark not guilty on all charges.”
It is no small thing to assert that the Justice Department is using its authority and power to intimate private citizens. But here, the evidence is clear. From a large contingent of armed government agents used to effect the arrest, to a jury trial conducted over five days, it only took a jury one hour to see what the government would not – that this incident may have been a misdemeanor assault, but it was not, in any way, a violation of a federal statute.
Sadly, the progressive District Attorney of Philadelphia showed more sense than the US Attorney’s Office. But Krasner doesn’t have the same agenda as the Justice Department.
We can also point to another positive development, a glimmer of hope that the Justice Department has recognized the failure of their heavy-handed attempt at intimidation of just one side in the abortion debate.
“Jane’s Revenge…claimed responsibility for at least 18 arson and vandalism attacks on crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) and other faith-based organizations throughout the U.S. since the May 2 (2022) leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization…(yet)…Not a single arrest has been made.”
That is – until now.
“Two Florida residents were indicted by a federal grand jury for spray-painting threats on reproductive health services facilities in the state,” according to a Press Release from the Justice Department. “The indictment, returned by a federal grand jury in the Middle District of Florida, alleges that Caleb Freestone, 27, and Amber Smith-Stewart, 23, engaged in a conspiracy to prevent employees of reproductive health services facilities from providing those services. According to the indictment, as part of the conspiracy, the defendants targeted pregnancy resource facilities and vandalized those facilities with spray-painted threats….including ‘If abortions aren’t safe than niether [sic] are you,’ ‘YOUR TIME IS UP!!,’ ‘WE’RE COMING for U,’ and ‘We are everywhere,’ on a reproductive health services facility in Winter Haven, Florida. The indictment further alleges that facilities in Hollywood, Florida, and Hialeah, Florida, were also targeted.
Most likely ignorant of the concept of irony, Pro Abortion activists have decried the use of the FACE Act to prosecute Freestone and Smith-Stewart. “’This is yet another example of the government disproportionately charging alleged activists with serious crimes in an attempt to deter political opposition to the fall of Roe post Dobbs,’ Lauren Regan, the director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center and attorney for defendant Smith-Stewart, (said). ‘Tagging private property might be a violation, but it should not be a federal crime’…’The level of bothsideism here by the DOJ goes beyond absurdity. Frankly, this is something I would have expected to see from the Trump Administration,’ said Hayley McMahon, a public health researcher who studies abortion and criminalization at Emory University…the Justice Department is ‘setting an incredibly irresponsible precedent for recognizing CPCs as medical facilities that provide reproductive health services.’”
Both Freestone and Smith-Stewart are allegedly members of Miami Antifa. According to Antifa Watch, “Freestone has a history of attending school board meetings, where he was making lists of parents and community members concerned about CRT. (Smith-Stewart) openly ID’s as Miami-Dade antifa on Facebook…”
The two activists were arrested at the end of January, apparently without the use of 20-30 FBI Agents, and were both granted release pending trial, unlike Houck, who was required to post $10,000 bond, surrender his passport, and “restrict() his travel to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania unless he receive(d) permission to leave from Pretrial Services, (as well as)…surrender any firearms he may possess.”
Is there still disparate treatment between Pro Life and Pro Abortion defendants? Clearly. But the acquittal of Houck and the indictments of Freestone and Smith-Stewart at hopeful steps in the right direction.
Judge John Wilson (ret) served on the bench in NYC
Illustration: Pixabay