|
Ed Snell’s Assailant Goes to
Trial
By Michael Whitcraft
I arrived at Dauphin County Prison
Courthouse early on January 31. The preliminary proceedings
against Nathan Richardson, assailant of pro-lifer Ed Snell,
were scheduled for 9:00 am and it was still before 8:00
am. I decided to take a short drive through the area and
think through the events as I remembered them.
The Attack
On the brisk morning of December 22,
2007, Mr. Snell, 69, arrived at Hillcrest Abortion clinic
in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to start the day as he is accustomed
to starting most Saturdays of the year: by counseling women
entering the building not to kill their pre-born children.
Mr. Snell and his fellow pro-lifers have
been effective – so effective, that Hillcrest erected
a 7-foot fence to prevent their contact with the clinic’s
“patients.” Undeterred, the pro-lifers started
bringing ladders that would elevate them above the fence
and allow them to continue their life-saving work.
Rather than spend long hours on the rung
of a ladder, Mr. Snell fastened a sheet of plywood to the
roof of his car. From this makeshift platform, he had a
good vantage point and soapbox to spread his message.
This particular morning, a couple parked
opposite Mr. Snell, on the clinic’s side of the fence.
When the 69-year-old pro-lifer warned the woman about the
proven link between abortion and breast cancer, her boyfriend,
Nathan Richardson, became enraged, scaled the fence and
shoved Mr. Snell to the asphalt 5 feet below, where he suffered
two broken ribs, a broken shoulder, two fractured vertebrae
and bleeding inside the skull.
Mr. Snell was rushed to the hospital, the
police threatened the other pro-lifers with arrest and Nathan
Richardson was let free.
(For more details on this story, click
here.)
“He Got What He Deserved!”
I first heard this story at Sunday
Mass and I wanted to learn more about it. After searching
for details on the internet, I realized that no one had
broken the story. Fearful that it would be swept under the
rug by the liberal mainstream media, I decided to write
an article and do whatever I could to spread the news.
While researching the story, I called Hillcrest
Abortion clinic for a statement, assuming they would try
to divorce themselves from the violence perpetrated at their
center. I was wrong. When I asked for a statement, a receptionist
screamed at me: “He [Mr. Snell] got what he deserved!”
and hung up the phone.
As these memories replayed in my mind,
I looked at my watch. It was now 8:30 am, so I decided to
return to the courtroom. By this time, various pro-lifers
from the area had begun to congregate in the lobby.
Indomitable Hope
Around ten minutes later, Mr. Snell
came in, using a walker and a cumbersome back brace that
his doctor still insists he use whenever he is up for any
length of time. In spite of the pain he still suffers from
his injuries, he is upbeat and jovial.
By the time the trial was set to begin,
more than forty pro-life activists filled the room. When
I stood back and observed them, their jovial demeanor inspired
me. It reminded me that thirty-five years of dogged struggle
has not broken American pro-lifers. Rather, it has forged
in them an indomitable spirit that compels them to continue
their work until abortion is defeated entirely.
Rather than attempt to accommodate the
large group present, one bailiff called out that only 11
people would be admitted into the courtroom. Since I was
the only reporter present, I was chosen to be one of the
attendees.
The Trial
The purpose of the proceedings was
to see what charges Richardson would face in trial. While
the prosecutor hoped he would be charged with aggravated
assault, reckless endangerment and plain assault, he had
already warned Mr. Snell that the aggravated assault charge
might be thrown out, since this requires proof of the assailant’s
intent to inflict permanent bodily harm on his victim –
not always an easy task.
Magisterial District Judge Barbara Pianka
began the proceedings and the prosecution called Mr. Snell
to the stand. I was surprised to see that Richardson’s
steely cold gaze did not soften or change as Mr. Snell outlined
the full extent of his injuries.
Next, eyewitness John McTernan was called
to the stand. Though he and Mr. Snell gave a detailed description
of what had taken place, neither was able to identify Richardson
as the assailant. Officer Alrich, the first cop to arrive
on the scene, provided this missing link when he was called
to the stand. He recounted how Richardson had admitted to
losing his temper, jumping on the car and shoving Mr. Snell
to the ground below.
Surprisingly, the next witness contradicted the fact. Anita
Stabile helps at the abortion mill, escorting women into
the clinic to “protect them” and ensure that
they are able to terminate the lives of their preborn children
without being deterred by pro-lifers. She took the stand
and testified that Richardson had never set foot on Mr.
Snell’s car.
She claimed to have witnessed a different
scene in which Mr. Snell had been “hanging over the
fence” and only fell when Richardson bumped into him
while scaling the barrier. This seemed unlikely since Mr.
Snell had landed a full six feet behind his car. In spite
of being questioned by both attorneys on her testimony,
she was adamant that she had seen the whole encounter and
stuck to her story.
After closing arguments, Judge Pianka decided
that throwing an elderly man off of a car onto asphalt did
not demonstrate “intent to do permanent bodily harm”
and threw out the aggravated assault charge. Nevertheless,
the plain assault and reckless endangerment charges still
stand and Nathan Richardson will stand trial for these in
approximately three months.
 |
|
Reactions
to the Verdict
The prosecuting attorney, Carlton
Smith, had hoped the aggravated assault charge would stand,
but remains confident that the other two charges will end
in conviction. He said: “I told the people involved
that there was a chance that the District Justice would
dismiss the aggravated assault charge…however, I think
the facts of this case will support the assault and reckless
endangerment charges.”
Mr. Snell echoed similar sentiments, saying: “We were
forewarned that the District Justice might throw out the
aggravated assault charge.” Nevertheless, he is satisfied:
“I think that both the District Attorney did a good
job as well as the witnesses. As far as I could tell, they
represented me as well as they could.”
He unassumingly hopes that this will result
in the conviction of Nathan Richardson, not so much for
himself, but for the pro-life cause in general. “This
isn’t about me. This is about pro-life counselors
and the people who go to the clinic. In general, we try
to present the facts to the girls going in, to speak our
minds under the First Amendment and exercise our constitutional
rights. There is a question at stake. Are pro-lifers to
be singled out and told no, if you go out there we’ll
throw you off a car and too bad? We need to be protected
too. We are American citizens just like everybody else.”
After I finished speaking with him
I could not help but be impressed. I silently said a prayer
that justice will prevail…and another one for Ed Snell.
|
