Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

Tuesday, March 11, 2003     Page: 7A

ACCORDING TO AN ARTICLE BY L. ROTH RECENTLY IN THE TIMES LEADER, MATTHEW
BULLOCK IS BEING CHARGED IN THE DEATH OF AN UNBORN BABY (LATIN, “FOETUS” OR
“FETUS”) UNDER THE “CRIMES AGAINST THE UNBORN ACT” IN PA, PASSED IN 1997.
WHY IS NOT JUDGE MICHAEL CONAHAN BEING CHARGED UNDER THE SAME ACT FOR HIS ROLE
AS A CO-CONSPIRATOR IN THE MURDER OF THAT WOMAN’S BABY THIS SUMMER (WHOSE NAME
I DO NOT REMEMBER) THAT MADE NATIONAL NEWS? THE CASE WAS THAT THE FATHER TRIED
TO STOP THE MOTHER FROM KILLING THE CHILD AND CONAHAN CONSPIRED WITH THE
MOTHER IN THE MURDER. WHY WERE NOT THE CLERGY IN THE WYOMING VALLEY, THE ONES
THAT MAINTAIN THAT ABORTION IS MURDER, CALLING FOR THE JUDGE’S IMPEACHMENT? I
DO NOT READ THE LOCAL PAPERS; JUST HAPPENED TO BE IN THE DENTIST’S OFFICE THAT
MORNING. Robert R. Poole, MD
   
Bear Creek