A perfect storm is brewing in Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against David Daleiden and his fellow investigators at the Center for Medical Progress (CMP). On Wednesday July 17, federal District Court Judge William Orrick will hear nine motions brought by the pro-life defendants, represented by Life Legal and other legal groups, and one motion brought by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the nine Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Four years ago today, CMP released the first of a series of videos showing Planned Parenthood officials negotiating the sale of baby body parts for profit. Shortly after the release, Planned Parenthood sued CMP and its board members for millions in damages. The abortion giant maintains it had to increase security at many of its affiliates because of a “dramatic increase in the threats, harassment, and criminal activities targeting abortion providers,” including nearly 850 incidents of vandalism alone in July and August of 2015 and a nine-fold increase in “security incidents” following the release. 

Through extensive discovery, Life Legal attorneys found these assertions to be blatantly false. Instead of 850 incidents, there were 20—none of which had anything to do with the videos. For example, one act of vandalism Planned Parenthood blamed on CMP was actually committed by the ex-partner of a PP employee.

We discovered that Planned Parenthood equated a “dramatic increase in harassment” with non-threatening letters and phone calls. Anyone who expressed opposition to abortion was characterized as a security threat. Some of the offending letters were from individuals who simply wrote “Jesus loves you” or “our church is praying for you.”

Planned Parenthood Medical Director Mary Gatter, who was shown on video haggling over the price of baby parts, joking “I want a Lamborghini,” insisted that she received numerous death threats through social media, but when pressed, Gatter admitted she is not actually on any social media platforms. 

Moreover, we learned that PP defines “security incidents” as any incidents that are simply “unusual” or “out of the ordinary.” Some of the more comical “security incidents” reported included a male patient asking a staffer on a date, staffer boyfriend troubles, and an aggressive telemarketer. PP tried to attribute all of these so-called security issues to the CMP videos to justify extorting millions of dollars from CMP for additional security measures. 

Full story at Christian Newswire.