Replies

Since when do we need a bunch of lawyers to tell us who is a public person and who is not.

Since the case Sullivan vs. New York Times.

The mere fact that so many people know about him makes him a public figure, people who are not public figures do not go on Larry King.

That's not enough in and of itself. That's why this stuff gets litigated.

Well it is funny . I haven't heard any general announcements that this person is a public figure, so go ahead America and think about, talk about and write about this person. Okay America this person is not a public person, so you can not talk about them or write about them.

If Freerepublic gets sued or any freepers get sued we are in good company.. the list is huge of those who have speculated about what has gone on in this case. The list of Americans who ahve speculated about millions of things is endless. The New York Times is not Freerepublic and posters here are not journalists. Your point is apples and oranges.

We are here posting our opinions, based on news articles, press releases and court documents. Diverse opinions on a matter of public interest are expected; sharing our opinions here is protected under the First Amendment. Unless we claim personal knowledge as a direct party to the matter of concern, our opinions are protected as part of free-wheeling, public debate. As others have stated, this is a site for sharing opinions, and while some may find some opinions offensive or possibly actionable, I agree with those who say that they are not. It goes without saying that one cannot be held liable for an opinion based on media accounts.

Furthermore, I believe that by virtue of government intervention in the matter, Michael Schaivo has become a limited public figure, whose actions are subject to criticism, or praise, as the case may be.

I personally believe Terri's Law will withstand legal challeges based on the idea that it is against public policy to allow a single Probate Court judge to hand down what can be construed as a death sentence based on hearsay evidence presented by a party (Michael Schavio) with a vested interest in seeing Terri Scavio straved to death. In every state in the U.S., death penalty cases are subject to rigorous review and numerous checks and balances along the way, prior to execution.

That Terri Schavio, an innocent disabled person, who cannot speak for herself and left no specific directive to be starved to death should she become disabled - could be put to death by a person with a financial interest in her fate, in a manner which would be considered "cruel and unusual" were it to be applied to a death row inmate - calls for, nay, DEMANDS governmental intervention and review.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that convicted murderers are entitled to due process, including appeals and judicial review, prior to the ultimate penalty (DEATH) being exacted.

Terri Schavio has been deprived of those same rights under the law, if one believes she may not want to die. Michael Schavio, Judge Greer and George Felos have attempted to carry out an execution of an innocent person through civil litigation.

I don't think you can stifle debate on this matter by saying we can only post "facts." Everything we know about this case is coming to us through the media or a third party - therefore everything being voiced here is opinion whether or not it is stated as such!