After yesterday’s sentence in court, Malta should now prepare for another media onslaught in favour of the introduction of abortion.

Yesterday, Malta Today carried the news that a woman was given a conditional discharge for having done an abortion. I will not go into the merits of this case. However, one cannot but reflect that if a woman terminates her pregnancy, she is treated with velvet gloves and rightly so gets a conditional discharge. However, if someone writes that “gayyaġni” is worse than being possessed, he or she is handed a six-month suspended prison sentence.

What is worrying in this whole story is not the conditional discharge given to this woman but what Lara Dimitrijevic had to say about this case. I am sure this woman was going through difficult times, and it is fitting that the court took this into account. What I am questioning here is the way the media will be using this case. In other words, what is there behind this abortion story? Lara Dimitrijevic gives us the answer.

Dimitrijevic reveals the way how the Police handled this woman’s case. What should be stated is that the Police and our courts do not treat everybody equally. For example, Fr. Luke Seguna was treated differently by the Police and our courts. He was falsely accused of money laundering, and a whole media campaign was organized to destroy a man of the cloth; thus, if one is a priest and happens to be hated by the government and mainstream media that is in favour of abortion, an orchestrated campaign is mounted against him by the attorney general’s office to ensure that he is convicted.

A different type of orchestration is mounted if one is a friend of extreme gender activists. As in this woman’s case, the media will use her story to raise awareness about the need to introduce abortion in Malta. It is all part of a pre-planned strategy to give exposure to the need for abortion as much as possible. At least, this story confirms that the publicity the media mounted about the Prudente case has all failed. Thus, a new narrative has to be invented.

Suppose one asks for proof that the media has a pre-planned strategy to instrumentalise her case. In that case, this proof is not only found in what Lara Dimitrijevic wrote but also in the fact that this woman’s name was kept hidden by the media. Usually, when one is convicted, as in this case, his or her name is given in the media reports. If the press wants to keep the person’s name private, it should start by not reporting the story and not capitalise on it to suit somebody’s agenda. Therefore, why was the charged woman’s name not printed anywhere in the media while her story was made public? Nobody that is convicted of a crime in Malta has ever had his or her name not printed. This is another proof that the media could not find a better example to suit her abortion agenda.

Furthermore, why is Lara Dimitrijevic praising the police and the judiciary? When has Lara Dimitrijevic ever praised the police or judiciary? This story confirms that the Prudente case was all media staged. After the media strategy of using Prudente’s story to convince the public about the need for abortion failed, we now have another case that mainstream media will be using to have abortion introduced in Malta. It is not a coincidence that this article in Malta Today was penned by a journalist whose father has a programme on the Catholic Church’s media. The clique Archbishop Scicluna supports needs to find another ploy to have abortion introduced in Malta and seems to have found it in this new story. The foreign press had already used this story in the past to drill the abortion case. The below screenshots from the Guardian and tweeter messages are proof of all this.