Dr. Leslie Drummond Hay testified in the Planned Parenthood case against David Daleiden on Friday, October 11. She admitted 98 percent of her practice was “abortion care” for Planned Parenthood Northern California.  In questioning by the Planned Parenthood attorney, Drummond-Hay describes her experience at the National Abortion Federation meeting in San Francisco in April, 2014, where she met “a gentleman who seemed young. He had very dark hair …. the subject of money came up…. I didn’t know what money had to do with this…. There really wasn’t anybody within earshot around us.”

Much of Drummond-Hay’s conversation with the young gentleman, on a tape suppressed by court order in the National Abortion Federation case against Daleiden, was seen by the jury on video segments showing flaws in Drummond’s testimony. The jury got to hear about Stem Express’s “oohs and aahs” over the abortionist’s ability to get intact baby parts.

Paul Jonna, one of David Daleiden’s defense attorneys, led the cross-examination of Drummond-Hay:

  1. Let’s take a look at some of the clips to refresh your memory.
  2. Sure.
  1. JONNA: Let’s play Exhibit 5395-1.

THE CLERK: And what is our status here?

THE COURT: I’m waiting to see.

  1. MAYO: Yeah, just looking at this one. No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right, go ahead.

(Trial Exhibit 5395-1 received in evidence)


  1. I’m sorry. Before you play it, I want you to pay attention. I think earlier you said you don’t remember anyone else within earshot. So as we play these clips today, I want you to pay attention to that.

And in this clip, I want you to pay particular attention to a waiter that approaches.

(Portion of videotape played with audio)


  1. Doctor, you are the one who mentioned money in that clip. No one mentioned it to you. You said you were under the impression that researchers paid a lot of money for fetal tissue. Correct?
  2. Yes, but also, as the conversation —
  1. MAYO: Objection, Your Honor, 403.
  2. JONNA: Your Honor —

THE COURT: The clip was just played. It was just admitted. Overruled.

  1. JONNA: Yeah.


  1. I think you’ve answered my question.

THE COURT: No. Let her answer the question,

THE WITNESS: Okay. That comment was about the fact that the tissue donation companies could get money from the researchers. The conversation then segued into the defendants saying that they could give us — they could give us money to do this. And that was when the more-money conversation came up.


  1. But you were the one who brought up money. You earlier testified that it was brought up to you —
  2. I’m not denying that.

THE COURT: If you would wait until Mr. Jonna finishes —

THE WITNESS: Oh, I’m sorry.

THE COURT: — we’ll get a good record, and that’ll be great.

THE WITNESS: I’m sorry.


  1. You are not denying you brought up money first.
  2. No.
  3. And did you see the waiter in the clip that approached?
  1. Yeah. I saw saw somebody go, yeah.
  2. You did?
  1. Yeah, there was one.
  2. And do you agree that he was within earshot?
  1. I don’t know. It was really loud in that conference room. I’m not sure he would have been able to hear but maybe he could….
  1. You would agree that that waiter we saw in the clip could have been within earshot of your conversation. Correct?
  2. Yes.
  1. MAYO: Objection, calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.


  1. And you didn’t make any effort to avoid being overheard in the clip we just saw, correct?
  2. Correct….

PlannedParenthood trial-transcript-Oct. 11

“No comment” – Drummond-Hay video following testimony