Bill 409-31

THE UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ACT OF 2012

This is a photo of Tracy Marciniak holding the body of her son, Zachariah. Tracy was assaulted in her ninth month of pregnancy. She was seriously injured and Zachariah was killed. See story here.

Guam's Bill 409-31 would have given mothers like Tracy the right to hold perpetrators criminally liable for crimes of violence in which the unborn child is harmed or killed.

However, on November 26, 2012, 7 senators voted against the mother's right to do so. Their names are:

Tom Ada

B.J. Cruz

Judy Guthertz

Ben Pangelinan

Rory Respicio

Judi Won Pat

Aline Yamashita

While a mother (if she survives) can seek criminal damages for an attack on her own person, these senators voted against her right to pursue criminal charges against an attacker who harms or kills her unborn child.

36 states have an UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE law and a federal version was passed in 2004. Even California, the most left, liberal, pro-abortion state in the union has such a law, and in fact supplied the case (Laci & Conner Peterson) which provided the basis for the federal law. But Guam....?

On the morning after the vote Tim Rohr called K57 to straighten out an error in the news report which wrongly quoted Senator Blas, the sponsor of the bill. Blas had ONLY said that the bill "had nothing to do with abortion" and he is correct. In fact the bill contained a provision which excluded abortion from its application:

Section 17.20. Application. This Chapter shall not apply to acts which cause bodily harm to an unborn child if those acts were committed during any abortion, as defined in the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2008, as amended, to which the pregnant woman has consented.

However, the news consistently reported that Blas had said that his bill was not a "gateway to abolish abortion law on Guam." Blas did not say that. And, as anybody with a clue knows, abortion (unfortunately) is a constitutional right as per Roe v Wade and NO LAW is needed to make it legal. And even if there was a law, no law we could pass could ever "abolish" it because it Roe v Wade would first have to be overturned by the Supreme Court.

Rohr also noted that Bill 409 proposed nothing new to Guam law in defining the unborn child as a person, that such a definition was already present in Guam law, and that the bill simply criminalized acts of violence against the unborn child.

Bank of Guam president, Lou Leon Guerrero, a vociferous and fierce supporter of abortion on Guam, immediately followed Rohr on K57 and once again demonstrated monstrous ignorance about abortion facts.

After expressing her glee that the bill did not pass, she said that Rohr was wrong and that there was no provision in Guam law which defined an unborn child as a person - a rather amazing display of ignorance about Guam law from a former senator. See the following:

Title 19GCA § 1104. Unborn Child. A child conceived, but not yet born, is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.

With the no vote on Bill 409, the intrigue of the pro-aborts in the Legislature has reached a new level. They apparently learned well their lessons from the very public fights over the informed consent legislation (Bills 54-30 and 52-31). So rather than discuss the bill on the Floor and let their views be know, they simply voted to put it into the 3rd reading file to be voted on. And they, the majority, voted no.

It’s actually a brilliant strategy. There’s no public comment to note, no video of impassioned hostile speeches, just a quiet check mark in the NAY column. But there’s more to the story.

On the morning of the vote, certain members of the Legislature received a text message from Phil Tydingco of the Attorney General’s office, critical of the ability of the bill to technically comport with Guam law. Here is the text.

Aside from the actual content of the text, the text in fact acts as an official opinion from the Attorney General’s office and is a matter of public record. However, it was treated only as a private message to certain senators. Bearing as it did on pending legislation, this is no light matter. It is also curious that the senators addressed in the text requested an AG opinion on the bill just hours before the vote.

But as to what the text says, the meeting to fix the bill, held several months previously, so that it would comport with Guam law, actually involved the AG’s office (O’Mallan). The fact that it was not fixed, at least according to Tydingco, almost one year later is either a matter of gross negligence or more of the subterfuge as we have come to expect when it comes to legislation relative to the protections of the unborn.

In the end, a NO vote on Bill 409 did nothing to hurt an already dead child but does everything to hurt his mother. Let’s review those names: