Posted on 06/01/2006 7:20:27 AM PDT by 8mmMauser
Doesn't sound like Terri expressing her wishes. It sounds like Michael expressing "Terri's" wishes.
That is correct.
You stated that it was Michael's wish "on LKL". You were lazy by not providing me the link. I found the 10/03 Larry King Live interview myself, and discovered that you lied -- Michael did not make those statements in the 10/03 interview. I then posted the link to the audio, the link to the accompanying transcript, and a copy of what Michael said in that interview.
It wasn't until I scrolled down on the link provided by bjs1779 that I found the (buried) second interview that you were referencing. THAT interview contains the quote you cited.
As the whether or not you're a liar, well, the jury's out. Twice you've been caught, and twice you said you "misspoke". (Apparently you should be allowed to "misspeak, but Michael is not). I've twice asked you to provide me with a link to where Michael actually testified in court that it was his wish, not Terri's. That was your claim way back in your post #268.
Without a link to support that, it sure looks to me like you're not being truthful. Or you misspoke.
Correct. And wouldn't you think a professional interviewer like Larry King would have said something? If Larry King heard what YOU think you heard, would it go something like:
M. SCHIAVO: Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want...
KING: You say, "WE didn't know" ... I thought you said you DID know what she wanted. Can you explain?
Felos was there. Why didn't he jump in to correct his client's (mis)statement if he thought he made one?
Now that I look at it, it could very well be that Michael was paraphrasing the Schindlers -- that the Schindlers have said in the past, "We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want...".
Correct. At the time of the interview, Terri was PVS and wasn't able to express her wishes in any way, shape or form.
It is quite obvious by Keith Olbermann's statement that Michael said all along that these were Terri wishes that he was fulfilling.
It sounds like Michael expressing "Terri's" wishes."
No. Michael fulfilling the wishes that Michael said Terri had for these circumstances. What could be clearer than that?
Michael and two others said Terri had these wishes for these circumstances. The judge believed them.
Are you saying that all three conspired to lie under oath? Why would they do that? Do you have any proof?
Correct. So?
Terri made her wishes known to at least three people. According to court documents, "... and to Joan Schiavo following a television movie in which a man following an accident was in a coma to the effect that she wanted it stated in her will that she would want the tubes and everything taken out if that happened to her are likewise reflective of this intent."
The tubes and everything. Now what do you say? That in your opinion she was referring to different tubes and different everything?
"She could not possibly have made an informed choice to put herself to death by removal of hydration."
I have a Living Will and it does not specify how I am to be allowed to die (not your inflammatory "put to death") -- it merely specifies the conditions under which I do not wish my life to be artificially supported. I rely on my guardian for the rest.
"It is Michael Schiavo's name on the death order."
You state it and just let it hang out there. Why? Just like you did with your "Felos contributed money to Greer's campaign" and other statements. What's your point? Is it somehow improper that Michael's name is there?
T'wit: >>I don't quite follow. Is it not a "firm"? Does she work in some other firm? I've never heard this. Please explain.
Deborah Bushnell is (and has been for the past 20+ years) a sole practitioner in her own law firm, Deborah A. Bushnell, P.A.. George Felos' firm is (and has been for the past 20+ years) Felos & Felos, P.A.. At no time has Deborah Bushnell been employed by, as associate or partner, Felos & Felos, P.A.. At no time has George Felos been employed by, as associate or partner, Deborah A. Bushnell, P.A.. While both Deborah Bushnell and George Felos (along with several other attorneys) represented Michael Schiavo, the only thing the two had in common was a client.
Similarly, most of the attorneys employed over the years by the Schindlers had no law firm or business affiliation in common (an exception would be David Gibbs and Barbara Weller, who are both with the Gibbs Law Firm, P.A.--Gibbs is a partner, Weller is an associate employed by Gibbs Law Firm, P.A.). But Joe Magri, Pam Campbell, Jim Eckert, Larry Crow, Chris Ferrara, Pat Anderson, etc., etc., had no business (law firm) affiliation with each other, only a client in common.
Other than pocketing Terri's rehabilitation money to kill her, you may be right.
On the other hand, could you point out where the Schindler's attorneys collected a dime of Terri's rehabilitation money in the effort to save her life?
I don't believe I have ever suggested that they did. However, their failure to do so was not for lack of trying.
On 4/3/00, the Schindlers filed a petition for attorney's fees with the court, seeking payment of fees ($22,000) to their attorney, Pamela Campbell, from Mrs. Schiavo's estate funds. That petition (and an accompanying petition to "seal" (protect from view of opposing counsel and public record review) that, and future, fee petitions) was not successful; however, the very fact of that fee petition makes it clear that it is inaccurate to suggest that the Schindlers' attorneys (and the Schindlers, themselves) were averse to using "Terri's rehabilitation money" for their purposes.
It's really very difficult to claim a higher moral ground when one's actions make it obvious that, as the old verse goes: You would if you could; But you can't, so you won't.
Thank you. I'm sure I've seen Ms. Bushnell identified as a Felos associate, so there must be some misinformation in circulation.
The link had already been given to you in #364. I referred you to the correct LKL interview -- again -- by date, in #373 and yet again in #374.
>> Blame yourself for your laziness, not me.
That one made me laugh out loud :-)
That was obvious to everyone reading the thread. You were screaming us down and calling us liars, but all along, it was you who were wrong. When we gave you the link, you even had the nerve to call that incorrect. I specifically explained that there were two different interviews and that you were looking at the wrong one, but you went on having a hissy fit and blaming bjs1779 and me instead of yourself. It took at least five posts to you -- three with links and two others with references -- before any lights started to go on upstairs.
You still haven't had the character to apologize for your smears.
I'll bet you'll just write some jive talk pretending to be "T'wit" and won't make the slightest effort to tell the truth.
I'm going to peek now...
I win!
Ah. And you allowed that situation to continue, then blamed me for using the wrong interview. Then you have the cojones to ask for an apology. I explained myself in #422.
Third request. Provide me with a link to where Michael actually testified in court that it was his wish, not Terri's. Or have the character to retract it.
Second request. What's the point of your statement, "It is Michael Schiavo's name on the death order"?
That is preposterous. We made FIVE attempts to advise you of the error. Don't you blame the error on anyone but you! You refused to listen. You were too busy accusing us of being wrong and telling lies when it was you who were wrong.
You're welcome, T'wit. And I agree that the "association" of Ms. Bushnell with Mr. Felos is a pretty common misperception. "Misinformation"--from all sides and perspectives--in the Schiavo case seems to have characterized the conflict.
A whole lot of time and bandwith was wasted, and is still being wasted, because you took your sweet time to reference the proper interview. Get over it.
For the fourth time, provide me with a link to where Michael actually testified in court that it was his wish, not Terri's. Or are you going to continue your habit of not referencing any support for your outlandish libel.
Third request. What's the point of your statement, "It is Michael Schiavo's name on the death order"?
Second request. (from post #424) Are you saying that all three conspired to lie under oath? Why would they do that? Do you have any proof?
So, you still insist on being wrong even though your error has been exposed for you and everyone in forum to see.
I don't give a rat's rear what it LOOKS LIKE to you. That's just an exhibition of bad thinking. You were wrong. You were given an explanation of what happened, plus the two quotations, plus dated references that you could track down in a minute if you wished to, plus THREE LINKS. We tested the links in front of your eyes, too.
If so, you wasted the time and bandwidth yourself by trying to tell us the already posted link was wrong. You are still wasting forum time by refusing to accept responsibility for the error and for the atrocious comments you made based on a false premise.
I don't do request numbers. Provide yourself with the link. The quote has been posted in FR in the past. I've posted it myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.