Professor Appointed to Probe Schiavo Case

Guardian Unlimited ^ | Nov 1, 2003 | Vickie Chachere

[Future Useless Eater]

Professor Appointed to Probe Schiavo Case

Saturday November 1, 2003 1:01 AM

By VICKIE CHACHERE
Associated Press Writer

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A judge appointed a University of South Florida professor on Friday to independently investigate the case of a severely brain-damaged woman at the center of a right-to-die battle.

Jay Wolfson, an expert on health care financing, will report to Gov. Jeb Bush and recommend whether the stay the governor enacted to keep Terri Schiavo alive should be allowed to remain.

Schiavo suffered severe brain damage when her heart stopped due to a chemical imbalance and has been in a persistent vegetative state for more than a decade. Doctors have said there is no hope for her recovery.

Her husband, Michael Schiavo, has fought to have her feeding tube removed, saying his wife did not want to be kept alive artificially.

Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, dispute that claim and have fought to keep their daughter alive, saying they believe she could be rehabilitated.

Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for six days in October before the Florida Legislature and Gov. Jeb Bush enacted a special law to have it reinserted. The law also required a guardian to be appointed.

George Felos, the attorney for Michael Schiavo, and the American Civil Liberties Union filed briefs this week challenging the constitutionality of the governor's action. The state is expected to respond on Monday.

The judge said that if the law is found to be unconstitutional, Wolfson is to cease his work.

The Schindlers had objected to Wolfson's appointment, claiming comments he made to a television station indicated he was biased against the newly enacted law. The judge said he found no evidence of bias.

Wolfson did not return calls seeking comment.

The judge ordered Wolfson to report to the governor in 30 days, but said the deadline could be extended if needed.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

Hi Saveterri1 - I know youare new here, butIthink you should still answer my questions. Where is your proof that Terri had an eating disorder.. And where are any links or supporting info. for us to verify this PAC for Terri you calim to represent.

I would like some "clarity" on those issues.

BTW, You sure do seem to be much nicer today. Did you turn over a new leaf last night? Just curious.

Perhaps you could answer my post tonight. Or will you avoid my questions again , will you claim that it is irrelavant to "our " cause.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

So does that mean no linky?

If you are going to challenge me to a dual or something.. you should scream out... ARE YOU GAME MAN.....just a bit of advice for future threats and rants :}

[saveterri1]

Sorry about that, my apology’s. PM me and let me know what you want to do here!

[Diva Betsy Ross]

Another apology? Another invitation to talk by "PM" Haven't we been through this already?

[supercat]

Try reading the decisions of the Second District Court of Appeal- all four of them.

One of the major misconceptions about the appeals-court system in this country is that it serves as a backup fact-finder. It does not. If a trial court declares something to be true, even if that finding is contradicted by 99.44% of the available evidence, an appeals court will almost never go against that finding of fact. If there is evidence that was not properly considered, an appeals court may direct a trial court to consider the appropriate evidence, but if the trial court judge claims to have done so, the appeals court will not challenge his judgement.

In the cases related to Terri Schindler Schiavo, there are at least two findings of fact which the trial court made which defy common sense. Unfortunately, trial court findings of fact which are 'procedurally correct' cannot be challenged on the basis of being just plain wrong. Since Judge George Greer has been the only finder of fact in these cases, his blindness (literal and figurative) renders the appeals court system useless.

First dubious finding of fact: that Michael Schiavo's contradictory hearsay testimony constitutes "clear and compelling" evidence that Terri wishes to be starved to death in her current situation. The "clear and compelling" standard is the same standard applied in criminal cases when juries are instructed to find a defendant guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt". Judge Greer may not see any room for doubt, but it seems pretty clear to me that there's lots of room for doubt:

• Michael could be lying, as it would be in his best interest to do so.
• Michael could simply be misremembering things, since at least eight years had elapsed between Terri's alleged remarks and Michael's recollection of them, especially since the remarks would not have been noteworthy at the time they were made.
• Michael's two relatives who corroborated his statement would have had even less reason to remember it than Michael himself. Whether they are lying or merely mistaken, I would not expect anyone's memory of an apparently-unremarkable event eight years in the past to be reliable.
• One of Terri's relatives (brother I think) claims to have heard Terri's remark, and claims that she said something very different from what Michael et al. claim. If, as he recalls, the remark was confrontational that would have made it more memorable for him.
• Even if Terri had said the things she's alleged to have said (and that's hardly a given), that would still not prove that she made such statements with the intention that they result in her being starved and dehydrated. If someone sees a homeless person and says "I'd never want to live like that", that doesn't mean the person would want to be killed if he lost his home.

An appellate court may not be allowed to question Greer's judgement, but it sure looks to me as though he's willfully ignoring lots sound reasons for doubt. As outrageous as his findings of fact there are, however, he's made another that's even more outrageous: he has declared that there exists no potential conflict between Michael's interests and Terris. This after Michael's lawyer asked Greer to dismiss a guardian ad litem who sought to point out that such conflicts clearly existed.

Here again, the appeals court merely notes that since Judge Greer didn't find there to be a potential conflict of interest, he must have had a good reason for so finding. Never mind that:

• Michael is living with a woman whom he calls his "fiancee" and by whom he has fathered two children, but whom he cannot marry unless or until Terri dies.
• Michael stands to inherit a trust fund upon Terri's death.
• Terri's death avoids the possibilities of a trust-fund audit by a future guardian, and of Michael's having to pay allimony in the event that a future guardian seeks (and gets) a divorce for Terri.
• Michael is actively working to get Terri put to death.
• Felos, the attourney who claims to be representing Terri's interest, has been taking money which was supposed to fund her therapy, and has instead accepted such money to try to get her put to death.
• Felos is working on a book about this case, and has his own reasons for wanting Terri dead.

One might reasonably argue whether such facts demonstrate sufficient conflict-of-interest to absolutely disqualify Michael Schiavo as a guardian. On the other hand, to suggest that there isn't even a potential conflict of interest sufficient to justify appointing a guardian ad litem is absurd. Note that the court wouldn't have to find any wrongdoing to require a guardian ad litem in a case like this; the potential alone is sufficient to mandate that a guardian ad litem be appointed to ensure that Michael is acting reasonably as guardian. Of course, the fact that such a guardian ad litem would find Michael's actions very unreasonable is probably the reason Terri has gone for years without one.

Yes, Terri's case has gone through lots of appeals. But since the appeals courts are effectively forbidden from examining the key facts of the case and are instead bound by Judge Greer's findings, it really doesn't matter. Fundamentally in this case Judge Greer has made findings of "fact" which go against the clear letter and spirit of existing statutes, and so the legislature and governor have acted to try to have the law carried out in the manner they intended and directed in the first place.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

Exactly.

[supercat]

If you would take the time to read this opinion in its entirety you will see the lengths the Court went to in arriving at their decision.

Do you have a link?

[Tammy8]

Hello Harv,
Just had to cut in and ask how you are doing over here? I see your friend, lawyer Ed is here with you. Has Dr.Nancy showed up yet to back you up? Maybe you have new friends here, that weren't with you before on my site.
Curious that you are spinning like a top again- for the Schindlers on one turn and against them in another. I thought by now you would have decided whether you were on their side or against them, but I guess not. If you are not careful you could get dizzy. Or forget who you are or who's side you are on.
I don't post here often- but I have read enough on here to know there are some really good researchers here, and maybe even some lawyers and Drs and PI's, other than yourself and your friends of course.
I would be real careful not to slip up here Harv.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

Why Tammy8 , you are not sugessting that you have prior knowledge to this Harv and his PAC for Terri are you? Sounds like he never gave you a link or info to verify he is being honest about his group of experts. Do tell....

[zip]

GREAT HOMEPAGE

[saveterri1]

>>Wolfson's already made some boo boos that I'm not at >>liberty to discuss imo.

---

Excellent, I/we definitely felt better after the hearing late Friday. I liked Felos “crying around” comments in the print media over some of Judge’s Demer’s rulings. But you got to admit the man is eloquent in this speech:

>>George Felos, the attorney for Michael Schiavo, said he >>believes the order Demers signed "reflects a little bit >>of puzzlement on the party of the judiciary on the >>involvement of the governor."

I am not real good with all that fancy English – but I think what George is saying is, 1) that his National Right-To-Die Test Case is starting to unravel, 2) he has already blow all of Terri’s Medical Trust money (we got some docs here you are going to love!), 3) and Felos is realizing he has NO plan C. That is what this “country boy” thinks he said in that above noted press “ACLU smoke signal”.

I/we have dealt with Felos types before. Felos & Co. plays VERY dirty, using passive-aggressive “slant” approaches. Felos & Co. likes to hide behind books, loop-holes in the Laws, and “Judge’s robes”. But he/they will fold in a second if taken straight on; with the hard NO BS FACTS (dump all this other stuff!); you don't stop the pressure; and you “draw him out into the street” with your “line” of legal offense. Works every time!

Felos is already rattled, making uncharacteristic mistakes, and totally blew it letting Michael "out of his cage" to do Larry King Live. I wish many FR posters that blasted Larry over that “power puff” interview, (and I will not state publically what else transpired post-show which was ridiculous) could understand how well Mr. Larry "came out of the hard streets of Miami, with a PhD in hard-knocks, and a grand-larceny arrest record) King set Michael up in that interview. King is a "street pro" and it was beautiful!

Michael never knew what hit him. The interview did WONDERS for the Terri’s Right-To-Life Movement and the media finally starting to “open up their eyes” on this case.

Thanks for the heads-up on Wolfson!

Harv

C-34573-IA

[zip]

No. I won't. Judge Greer has refused to hear the Schindler's doctors and that is troubling. One doctor not showing up doesn't expain that away.

He actually allowed 12 Drs to testify (10 honest and 2 bought and paid for by Michael baby) but refused to listen to the 10 honest doctors. This one sided ruling really bothers me.

[floriduh voter]

There will be more breaking tomorrow. AND, THE SCHINDLERS WILL BE ON LARRY KING LIVE maybe on Friday instead of Thursday. Everyone should check their local listings. I've heard both days now. 9:00 est

[Graymatter]

Now that's de novo! Someone suggesting that I, Graymatter, do more reading :)
Your original remark was about the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court. "Are all the judges biased?" Now you are talking about the DCA. As you point out they refused to re-try the case, which is what I said also. BTW, examining all the evidence, as they claim to have done, is not all there is to re-trying the case.

[Graymatter]

>>When I read this extrordinary decision, I wept.

For what? The "freak of nature?"

[AnimalLover]

(2) Our PAC’s Second “Right’s” Mission Statement is:

The Michael Schiavo & George Felo’s “Right-To-Go-Straight-To-Prison” Mission and successful implementation

I love Item #2! How can we accomplish this? I would be willing to donate to a fund to make it happen. These poor excuses for human beings need to be locked up and the key thrown away.

Just one other question - how would one go about getting Felos disbarred?

[Tammy8]

I was never given one shred of evidence of any of his claims. When I asked too many questions, he came over here to post and some of his "friends" stayed just long enough to try to cause problems on the site. They offered no proof, or evidence of their claims either.
I suggest if Harv and his friends are for real and really do want to support the Schindlers they should get in touch with the family through their website: www.terrisfight.org. I know if they post their credentials there,in a message to the family- they could help in a way that would do much more good than posting on message boards.

[Republic]

You discount that MS stopped rehabilition...and by that I am not only writing of speech pathologists, therapists-physical, outings (you know, sitting in the sunshine), any color in her room-ie flowers, no noise, ie TV or radio or even MUSIC!!!

And when did he do this...soon after he received the money to cover the COSTS of rehabilitation.

Oh yes...he spent a little over two years proving himself to be a GREAT PROVIDER of REHABILITATION while he busily formed his lawsuit.

Once one...this man changed from the 'good husband' into a MONSTER who not only demanded his wife NOT BE HELPED if she should, for example, CHOKE, catch an infection, etc.

But worse-he has made what life Terri has a living HELL.

And he has punished, in the most breathtakingly way possible, her parents. Whose suffering, knowing what Michael has been doing, must be unbearable.

They are denied accesss to their dtrs medical records, which if in order, could grant them some relief.

They are even punished by NOT BE ALLOWED to visit and love their dtr up....during those times when Michael needs them to shape up and toe the line better.

Michael has TREATENED nurses with FIRING if they offer ANY therapy to Terri...note the affidavit of Carly Iyers, who was afraid of Michael, like many of the health care workers were.

She placed a balled up wash cloth in terri's CRUMPLED UP HAND-to relieve the pressure of her drawn up, curled fingers, and to help absorb the sweat on her palms, and Michael HIT THE FAN over that mild gesture of comfort...calling it therapy.

There is something deeply and horribly wrong with MS. Deeply. The evidence is astounding.

And to have to know your dtrs fate rests at the whim of this vampire, this monster who SPENT his wife's, THEIR DTRS. rehabilitation money, ON A LAWYER who wants to see her put to death, based a a late memory by MS that this was her wish (WHY WASN"T HE TELLING THIS WISH TO THE FOLKS WHO FORKED OVER THE MONEY TO HIM IN THE LAWSUIT...ANYWHERE IN THE LAWSUIT DID IT SAY THAT TERRI WANTED TO DIE???? Nope.)

Nice, huh! A nice living hell to know your daughter not only has to suffer her injury (which was NOT a heart attack) but has to suffer zero gentle comforts everyday of her life. Because someone (s) in her life...want her dead.

[saveterri1]

NO, I don't know who you are nor have I heard via PM from you.

YES, this is my final post to you.