LogFAQs > #883474317

Yeah, the outlet here is biased; the problem is that it's misleading. Here is PBS, which is also biased, but actually explains why the guy was held in contempt of court

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/judge-finds-pro-life-activist-contempt-court-planned-parenthood-videos/

U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick said David Daleiden, a leader of the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress, had violated the judge’s injunction against releasing additional videos.

Orrick ruled Daleiden’s lawyers, former Los Angeles prosecutor Steve Cooley and Brentford Ferreira, had also violated his injunction. Ferreira said Monday they would appeal the judge’s contempt ruling.

He's not being punished for being pro-life, he's being punished for doing what the court already told him not to do. You would not know this from reading the article TC posted.

Here's the LA Times, also biased, providing helpful context in this story from before the Judge's decision
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-planned-parenthood-videos-20170525-story.html

Daleiden is facing felony charges in California accusing him of recording people without their permission in violation of state law.

Orrick issued a preliminary injunction that blocked the release of videos made by the Center for Medical Progress at meetings of the National Abortion Federation, an association of abortion providers. He also blocked the release of any names of NAF members.

The National Abortion Federation had argued that releasing the videos and names would endanger its members.

A federal appeals court in March upheld Orrick's ruling.

---

kin to all that throbs