Posted: May 18th, 2017
“conception” traditionally meant fertilization though Crandel’s lawyer insists that the term today usually means implantation. Anyway, he says, the legislature could not have meant to ban a beneficial and now standard procedure like in vitro fertilization. The indictment should be dismissed if: a. Reading “conception” to mean fertilization is deemed to be an unforeseeable judicial enlargement of the statute’s definition of “human being.” b. There was no prior case holding that “conception” means mere fertilization without implantation. c. Dr. Crandel had reasonably (though erroneously) interpreted the statutory word “conception” to mean actual implantation. d. It was not completely clear prior to this case exactly what the statute meant by “conception.” e. Any of the above would legally justify dismissal
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.