Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/28/2005 12:33:11 PM PST by Dat Mon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Dat Mon

Wow. Thanks for finally ending the suspense. I've seen several comment in other Schiavo threads, "I wonder what Dat Mon" thinks about all this.


2 posted on 03/28/2005 12:34:50 PM PST by SittinYonder (Tancredo and I wanna know what you believe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dat Mon

Thanks, for posting that. I have been holding my tongue for ten days, so to speak. LOL. my doctor asked me what I had been doing when I told her my jaw was hurting. I told her I had been grinding my teeth.


4 posted on 03/28/2005 12:59:41 PM PST by mother22wife21 ( I believe that Rough Beast Yeats was talking about just got the keys to the city.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dat Mon
There may be a strategy here:

You say: And so I ask just what is the 'rule of law' in this particular case of Terry Schiavo...what is the legal precendent to starve a woman to death who has NOT BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME.... there is none. Not in our legal system that I am aware of. So perhaps the 'rule of law' at its most basic level is NOT being followed here.

Why can't Bush have his police arrest all persons interfearing with her parents giving Terri food and water by non-extrordinary means (ice chips) and instruct the AG to present them up for Jury trial on charges of conspirasy to murder in the 1st degree. This would include Sherriffs, local cops, lawyers and judges.

There is no constitutional legisllation demanding starvation by nonextrordinary means.

8 posted on 03/28/2005 1:33:47 PM PST by Harry Jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dat Mon

Awesome and well considered post.


10 posted on 03/28/2005 2:59:26 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dat Mon
And then there is motive...does Michael have a conflicting motive which would require that multiple witnesses be provided to establish the truth of the matter.

Excellent tinfoil-free post. I agree!!

13 posted on 03/28/2005 4:13:44 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Maybe it's not the Alinsky Method. Maybe you appear ridiculous because you are ridiculous!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Dat Mon
It seems to me (JMHO) that Jeb probably does NOT have precedent to go in and physically remove Terry, but that he DOES have legal authority to insure that the responsible state agency (DCF) be ALLOWED TO ITSELF investigate, and, using their own experts, determine a finding of fact in Terry's physical condition.

Excellent point. From the state's POV, as an objective investigater, they should be looking at this as an abusive situation. The state should take custody and presume all principles in the eight year legal battle, judge included, as possible contributors. Everyone seeking access to Terri, once the state stabilized her condition, should be screened and monitored until the state resolves this.

16 posted on 03/28/2005 9:55:36 PM PST by TigersEye (Are your parents Pro-Choice? I guess you got lucky! ... Is your spouse?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson