Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, pro-choice activists ran a campaign to sway public opinion that the decision was a mistake.
They apparently thought they had uncovered an ideal case when the Indianapolis Star reported that a 10-year-old rape victim who lives in Ohio traveled to Indiana for an abortion because new abortion restrictions in Ohio would not allow him to have one there. Like many other rush to judgment stories, this was wrong because there is a medical emergency exception in Ohio, although the state law is unclear and it’s unclear how it would have even been applied.
No one could initially confirm the accuracy of the rape story. There was no police report and the Ohio attorney general said he heard nothing. Although Columbus police received a report of the rape from a local Department of Children’s Services in late June, no Ohio hospital reported treating the girl. Even Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler said he was skeptical of the case.
When details emerged proving the story to be true, there seemed to be less enthusiasm about its usefulness for the pro-choice side. Indeed, according to ICE, the alleged rapist, Gerson Fuentes, 27, from Guatemala, entered the country illegally.
There are many questions about this case that journalists should be asking.
The first of these is how did Fuentes get to Ohio? Was he brought into the state on one of the Biden administration’s overnight flights that distribute immigrants across the country? Second, did Fuentes have a criminal record and was he a known sex offender?
Third, where did the alleged assaults take place? According to police, Fuentes admitted to raping the victim twice. If the rapes took place in the girl’s home, where was her mother? Did she fail to exercise parental supervision? Did the attacks take place on different days?
Fourth, did the daughter tell her mother about either incident? If she did, why didn’t her mother call the police and have Fuentes arrested? Police say they eventually called them. After the first assault, or the second? In a bizarre twist, the girl’s mother denied the charges against Fuentes, even though police say he confessed.
Fifth, was Fuentes living with the girl’s mother as a boyfriend? If not, how did they meet? Where was the girl’s father?
There is a legal maxim that hard cases breed bad laws. This means that an extreme case, such as this, is a “poor basis for a general law that would cover a wider range of less extreme cases. In other words, a general law is best drafted for the average circumstance.
Pro-choicers may be going too far. Churches have been ransacked and burned. The same goes for pregnancy counseling centers, which offer their services for free, unlike most abortion providers who charge a fee. Not-so-subtle anti-Catholicism has also been directed against Supreme Court justices who are Roman Catholics. Pro-lifers retaliated by targeting abortion clinics and threatening the lives of abortion providers. Where will this end?
The 10-year-old girl deserves compassion, guidance and help to overcome this double trauma. Authorities need to answer the questions raised above and many more as more information about the case comes to light. The results of their investigation should be made public.