[fight_truth_decay]

"Jeb does not have the LEGAL power to do this. He did all he could, LEGALLY to stop this as did George Bush and Congress. This is unprecedneted!"

Alan Keys...not impressed let's say!

You might want to read the facts, as I directed you earlier and not depend so much on World Net Daily (winks)..that is only the Cracker Jack version of the news. Many have thought the same out of frustration, but when "collected" heads gather, reason abounds. We all want a scapegoat. The attornies failed..that's what happened.

I direct you again to "the grown up page of thought and reason and legal opinions"..then make your conclusion from the think tank that be on FR.

SOURCE

Keep your passion! Better to be with passion to save a life, than be one who claims: "starvation and thirst for water" will lead to "dying with diginity"-"let her die in Peace."

F_T_D

[Yosemitest]

I read a good amout of your post and will admit that it is worth my time.

However, the movie I am recommending to be made ... isn't concerned with the letter of the law ... but the spirit of the law.

Romans 7:6

But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

I believe that money is an issue, on both sides. Terri's parents don't have enough money to put forth a "no bars held" legal battle, and that Micheal is motivated by the remaining funds won from the previous law suit that were provided for care-taking. I also believe that Satan manipulates people towards his goals, and that prolonged pain and suffering is his desire. There is a real struggle between good and evil here (Rev 12:7-9).

You have a great analytical mind, and I appreciate your time and effort. I want to make people think and reconsider their actions, before it's too late. This movie will be about ... the FINAL COURT of Justice, ... not flawed by man's selfish motivates.

[Yosemitest]

From your post
How the Schiavo Federal Court Case Might Have Been Won By MICHAEL C. DORF
I found several worthy quotes.

From the original article:

In sum, what the Schindlers needed--but what they failed to include in their original complaint--was some plausible allegation that would have required the district court to take evidence anew on two critical questions: (1) Was their daughter in a persistent vegetative state? (2) What would her wishes be, given her condition?

Post 27on 03/28/2005 2:44:16 PM EST by Ronzo (God ALONE is enough.)

`Yet, both Judge Whittemore and the Eleventh Circuit failed to come to grips with the fact that Judge Greer issued an order instructing Michael Schiavo to remove Terri's feeding tube, even specifying the exact date and time when he should do so. The state court did not merely stand idly by while permitting Michael to take such action; the court affirmatively mandated the disconnection. That ought to have counted as state action by a state actor--Judge Greer--who was a named defendant in the federal court lawsuit.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! The STATE (as represented by Judge Greer) ORDERED the feeding tube removed! What does this mean? It means that Terri's constitutional rights were violated, since no one in government can deny someone LIFE without due process. This dude argues that Terri did receive due process, but in actuallity, it was only her husband's wishes that were under consideration, not Terri's. Judge Greer is WAY OUTA BOUNDS here. (As most of us already know.)

For those of you blaming Jeb Bush for Terri's death, the blame can be more appropriately placed right at the feet of the Schindler's lawyers.

Post 31 on 03/28/2005 2:48:31 PM EST by Pinetop

I think the initial fatal mistake in this case was the failure to object strenuously to the ex parte communication with Judge Greer that led to the appointment of Felos as co-counsel. In that communique, counsel for Schiavo claimed that the Schindlers were aware of the decision to bring in "right-to-die" counsel on issues of prolonging her life. While Mr. Schindler has said that he was unaware of any such decisions, Schindler counsel did not aggressively protest the appointment.

But, in looking this over, there have been many injustices and instances of ineffective counsel for the Schindlers. (And, having had experience with judicial corruption in a county court, I am not ruling out cronyism and judicial impropriety in this matter.) But the failure to demand the potential relief provided by Congressional action was a staggering lack of advocacy. Personally, I was appalled when I heard the nature of the complaint before a federal court.

Post 51 on 03/28/2005 3:15:13 PM EST by UCANSEE2

Mary and Bob Schindler Sr., her parents, consulted a St. Petersburg attorney about removing Michael Schiavo as their daughter’s guardian and discussed the case at length with him. Unfortunately, the Schindlers did not have the amount of money the attorney demanded as a retainer to take the case. That attorney then became the judge in the case-----a totally prohibited conflict of interest.

Thanks, agrace.

These all add evidence of government failure, and human failure. But UCANSEE2's post really highlights a problem.