Before obtaining all the facts, the Fact Checker baselessly speculated about the veracity of the case
On July 1, the Indianapolis Star first reported that a 10-year-old rape victim had to travel from Ohio to Indiana for an abortion procedure because she was three days past Ohio’s six-week restriction, basing the story on an anecdote from Indiana OB-GYN Dr. Caitlin Bernard. Biden then mentioned the incident during a July 8 speech about his executive order to protect reproductive health care access following Roe’s reversal, saying, “Just last week it was reported that a 10-year-old girl was a rape victim in Ohio – 10 years old – and she was forced to travel out of the state to Indiana to seek to terminate the pregnancy.”
The following day, a fact check from the Post’s Glenn Kessler concluded that claims from the Star were difficult to confirm, despite Bernard speaking to the paper on the record, due to the lack of public knowledge about where the rape occurred, which hindered efforts to corroborate the story through local officials.
“With news reports around the globe and now a presidential imprimatur, however, the story has acquired the status of a ‘fact’ no matter its provenance,” Kessler complained. “If a rapist is ever charged, the fact finally would have more solid grounding.”
Then on July 12, after days of coverage casting doubt on the story, Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier confirmed that a 10-year-old did in fact cross state lines for abortion care. The next day, the Columbus Dispatch further corroborated the story, reporting that a Columbus man was charged and arrested for the child’s rape.
While the Fact Checker did update its piece to reflect new reporting once the story was confirmed, it still created an avalanche of right-wing outcry that denied the young girl's existence and maligned the doctor. Defending his initial read of the Ohio case, Kessler wrote, “This is an interesting example of the limitations that journalists face in corroborating this type of story without evidence confirmed by law enforcement,” implying that police sources are one of the only ways to confirm facts. (In reality, official police statements are often biased to protect the interests of law enforcement agencies – but they are still often uncritically cited by journalists.)
Kessler also tried to discredit the Star’s reliance on information from Bernard, an OB-GYN with a focus on abortion, by claiming that she is “an activist” based on a 2019 lawsuit in which Bernard sued members of the Indiana Medical Licensing Board to stop attempts to restrict a specific abortion procedure. As an expert on reproductive health, she, along with other care providers, knows firsthand the detrimental effects of restrictions on bodily autonomy and shouldn’t be shunned by journalists for her role in protecting access to crucial health care.