The sad case of the child who was used by left-wing media and abortionist Caitlin Bernard to prop up their abortion narrative back in July is still roiling with controversy. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has filed an official investigation into Bernard’s actions, accusing her of violating her patient’s privacy by talking to media, and also of not reporting the crime to Indiana authorities properly. New documents obtained by PJ Media reveal more information than we were told initially.
Readers may remember that we suspected that Ohio child welfare and Ohio police allowed the child to go back to her abuser, who lived in the same home as the girl. Gerson Fuentes was listed on the lease of the apartment that neighbors confirmed to Telemundo was the home where the victim lived with her mother. PJ Media reported this in July.
The Columbus Dispatch initially reported, “Columbus police were made aware of the girl’s pregnancy through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother on June 22, Det. Jeffrey Huhn testified Wednesday morning at Fuentes’ arraignment.”
According to an interview with Telemundo, the mother says she did not report the rape, which should raise more than a few eyebrows: “Telemundo News confirmed with two people who know [the child’s mother], who confirmed she is the girl’s mother.” The witnesses also told Telemundo the woman is in a relationship with Fuentes and was interviewed at his home address, where she apparently lives with the victim and her other children. “Everything they are saying against him is a lie,” the unnamed mother told Telemundo. PJ Media reached out to Columbus Police requesting the official police report and was denied. We were told “the initial report for this investigation was initiated by a mandated reporter and therefore is not subject to release pursuant to ORC 2151.421,” and the records will not be released until after a conviction.
The strange part about this story is that it seems the child was not removed from her home by social services or police after it was found that she was pregnant. Several nurses PJ Media spoke to had never heard of releasing a pregnant 10-year-old to the person who brought her to a hospital. Every nurse we spoke to said protocol demands that the hospital and social services take custody of her until an investigation is done.
And yet, new evidence from the Indiana complaint that cited court transcripts suggests Dr. Bernard and the social services at Indiana University Hospital may have turned the child back over to her mother after performing the abortion. Noting that Ohio child services and Ohio police were involved, the complaint filed by Rokita alleges that Bernard failed to call Indiana police and released the child to go back to her home in Ohio after the abortion. If Ohio child services dropped the ball, and new information in the complaint seems to support that they did, then Bernard failed to protect the child by giving Indiana police the chance to take her into Indiana custody. Rokita’s complaint had the details.
The next day, on July 2, 2022, Respondent [Bernard] submitted a terminated pregnancy report to the Indiana Department of Health. And at 3:59 p.m. on July 2, 2022, Respondent emailed the TPR form to DCS, noting “this case was already reported through DCS in Ohio.” Ohio law enforcement also travelled to Indianapolis on July 2, 2022, to retrieve the “product of conception” as evidence.
Within two weeks of the IndyStar article, on July 14, 2022, a reporter located Respondent’s patient’s home in Ohio and knocked on her door with video cameras. That same day, during a media interview with 13WTHR, Respondent [Bernard] said, “It is important to tell our patients’ stories as much as we can.”
At no time prior to the 3:59pm email on July 2, 2022, did Respondent notify local law enforcement in Indiana or DCS concerning the possible child abuse she learned of on or before June 27, 2022.
After the child left the care of Respondent, she returned to Ohio, and upon information and belief, resided in the same home as her alleged rapist.
If accurate, this is important. It would mean that both Ohio DCS and Indiana DCS failed to protect a child rape victim from her abuser. Fuentes wasn’t arrested and charged until July 12. If he was still living in the home with the child, that means both child services departments in two states sent her back to her home, possibly to be abused further. Court transcripts seem to corroborate that theory. Rokita included the judge’s statements during Fuentes’s arraignment that the press never reported.
The Ohio judge in the matter denied Fuentes’ bond because “[t]o allow him to return to that home, the traumatic and psychological impact would be undeserving to the alleged victim.” The judge explained that “when a child who has gone through the physical trauma of being raped, the physical trauma of being 10 years old and being impregnated, the physical and mental and emotional trauma of having to drive to another state, have this whole entire incident in this child’s life become a national hot point to the point to where the President of the United States is referring to this case, the Court finds that that trauma is enough to never have that child be around the alleged defendant.”
If the child had been in the custody of the state, there would have been no reason for the judge to make this statement since foster care placements are confidential, and the offending parents would not be told where the child was staying. This could explain why Ohio DCS refused to answer the simple question PJ Media posed: Did you take the child into state custody?
Hiding behind confidentiality, Ohio DCS repeatedly refused to comment. If they did not take custody of a pregnant 10-year-old, heads should roll. Their only job is to protect children who are being abused, and there was no question this child was abused while in the care of her mother.
Rokita’s complaint also alleged that Bernard used her patient for political gain and notoriety without care for her privacy.
Respondent has repeatedly and regularly spoken to the press to per- petuate the coverage of her patient’s private life since the July 1st IndyStar article was published.
On or about July 24, 2022, Respondent wrote an op-ed for the Wash ington Post.
On July 27, 2022, Respondent sat for an exclusive interview on CBS Evening News to discuss the abortion she performed on the child and the fallout from her decision to leak that information to the press.
On July 28, 2022, Respondent was featured in the New York Times.
On August 5, 2022, Respondent appeared on CNN.
On October 12, 2022, she was featured in an issue of Vanity Fair.
Bernard has sued Rokita in court to stop him from investigating her. The judge ruled Rokita broke the confidentiality rule by announcing his investigation into Bernard, but also ruled that his investigation can go forward. As the attorney general, it is his job to find out through investigations if people like Bernard are not serving the people of Indiana as required by law. It’s good to see one Republican actually fighting hard.
Fuentes is scheduled to go on trial on January 9, and several local media outlets have been granted access to film the trial. PJ Media has submitted a request to carry that trial live through web access. We will let you know if that request is granted. It is imperative that a media outlet live-streams this trial, or we will be left with only the bits and pieces the mainstream local press want us to know. Fuentes has pleaded not guilty and claims he was set up.
Proposed Order (No Motion) (4) by PJ Media on Scribd
Join the conversation as a VIP Member