I'm sorry. I usually try not get involved on these threads cuz I know it spells trouble. But seriously. You wanna be mad about people being wrongly prosecuted, go for it, but fin an ACTUAL example and don't mislead.
"pleaded guilty earlier this spring to one felony charge of concealing or abandoning a dead body; in exchange, the prosecutors dropped two other misdemeanor charges."
"The 42-year-old admitted to providing an abortion after 20 weeks of gestation, false reporting, and tampering with human skeletal remains. Two other charges â concealing the death of another person and abortion by someone other than a licensed physician â were dismissed. She faces up to two years in prison."
Burgesses attempted to burn the body before burying it.
"Self-managed abortion is not illegal in Nebraska"
"Court records show the Burgesses were each charged in June 2022 with a felony count of removing, concealing, or abandoning a dead human body, as well as two misdemeanor counts of concealing the death of another person and false reporting."
âC. Burgess talks about how she canât wait to get the âthingâ out of her body and reaffirms with J. Burgess that they will burn the evidence afterward,â
Medication abortion is recommended only up to ten weeks of pregnancy in the U.S., but research has shown that with the right dosage of a mifepristone-misoprostol combination, or misoprostol alone, it can be used to end pregnancies later.Â
Not to mention she decided to take these measures in April of 2022 and Roe vs Wade wasn't overturned until June, so at the point in time that she and her mother could have gone in for a relatively safer, legal abortion. Instead, her mother gave her pills that aren't recommended after 10 weeks, which very possibly could have endangered her daughter, and they decided to handle the stillborn baby that had occurred as a result of the pills she had taken by burning the corpse and burying it. They could have just gotten a legal abortion in the state of Nebraska, as it was still protected as a constitutional right.
Not to mention that the article is misleading because it mentions her taking pills to terminate the pregnancy and then says she had a stillborn birth in the shower. Which, if you study abortion, it is forcing the body to prematurely birth the baby and yes, the baby either comes out in broken up pieces after the abortionist breaks it up inside of you, or it is still born, so this was the "Natural" reaction her body had to taking the pills her mother obtained for her, and then they conspired to burn and bury the body all at a time when they very easily could have gotten a legal abortion.
And finally, it leads on the reader by suggesting that the police took these measures on account of her "Self-managing" her abortion, but actually she ended up serving jail time for concealing a corpse, false-reporting, and tampering with human skeletal remains, not for taking abortion pills. The tip they received was that she had a stillbirth and then secretly buried the body. It was not initially an inquiry into self-managed abortion, but an inquiry into concealing a corpse. Usually you don't conceal something if you have nothing to hide. And plenty of mothers who aren't trying to abort their pregnancies DO have stillbirths for a variety of reasons and they go to a medical professional about it. They don't burn and bury the corpse. Which is what a 28 weeks old fetus would look like. 15 inches and about 2 pounds.
So yeah, be mad about Roe v Wade, but don't back it with misleading evidence. Just makes you another person spreading divisiveness and misinformation. Plus, exaggerating your point in a debate doesn't make the argument stronger, it makes it seem like you have to lie to bolster your evidence. Not a good look.
The mother got in trouble for doing risky, experimental drug overdose on a young pregnant woman, and they both got in trouble for mutilating a corpse and burying it. They could have gotten a legal abortion, but they chose far more dangerous and disturbing, which is what they were charged for. She wasn't imprisoned for having an abortion and the tech companies didn't give the police her information because she had an abortion. That fact was auxiliary to the point, and framing it in the way the article and op framed it is intentionally misleading, misinformation and designed to get a rise out of people.