Posted on 10/17/2003 3:47:56 PM PDT by ex-Texan
They Are Going to Murder Terri Shiavo --Starve Her Until She is Dead
Terri Shindler-Shiavo Foundation
(Excerpt) Read more at terrisfight.org ...
Pinellas(sp?) county, anyway.
To my mind, what this case fundamentally shows is that there needs to be reform in the court system to limit the damage that one corrupt judge can do. The way the court system is set up, one judge can act as gatekeeper for all matters and evidence relating to a particular case; appeals courts are 99.44% bound to regard in the same light as the trial judge hearing the original case. If Terri had been brought into court, gotten up, and danced a jig but Schiavo had Doctor Nick Riviera testify that her dancing was merely "reflex", then if Greer chose to regard Doctor Nick's testimony as credible, appeals courts would be bound to do so as well.
I don't know what the best solution to this issue is, since there would typically be some value in having multiple related cases dealt with by the same judge rather than having to have different judges familiarize themselves with the case. But there needs to be some procedure by which judges which could be prejudiced against a particular person could be gotten around.
Just wish he would wake up and see that the Nazi trained Arafat and his followers are a bunch of thugs and terrorists. Oh, well . . .
He is right about Terri Shiavo. Seven million people each month view his web site. I know he surfs into Free Republic and NewsPundit.net every day. Maybe he will discover the truth eventually.
|
Vigil Continues |
|
| Supporters of Terri Schindler-Schiavo and demonstrators continue to hold peaceful vigil at Hospice Woodside in Pinellas Park, Florida. Hospice Woodside is located at 6774 102nd Avenue North in Pinellas Park and is just west of 66th Street North. Diane Coleman, President of Not Dead Yet will be arriving to show her support of Terri Schindler-Schiavo and to speak out about the mistreatment of this disabled and vulnerable person. |
|
Essentially, what's happened is that Judge Greer has been in a position to state as fact anything he wants, and other courts are bound by his statements.
He has decreed that there is compelling evidence that Terri is in a permanent vegitative state (i.e. he has held that reports by doctor relatives of the Schiavos are more compelling than either reports by other doctors who contradict them or videos which actually show Terri). He has decreed that compelling evidence exists that Terri did not want to be artificially sustained (i.e., that Schiavo's statements to that effect--made after he received a $750K payout for Terri's care--are more compelling than any statements made by anyone else).
Tell me--how can any appeals court that accepts Judge Greer's decrees as facts (as appeals courts are generally bound to do) possibly reach any conclusion other than the one they've reached?
October 17, 2003
Even before the rise of Adolph Hitler's Third Reich, the way for the gruesome Nazi holocaust of human extermination and cruel butchery was being prepared in the 1930 German Weimar Republic through the medical establishment and philosophical elite's adoption of the "quality of life" concept in place of the "sanctity of life." The Nuremberg trials, exposing the horrible Nazi war crimes, revealed that Germany's trend toward atrocity began with their progressive embrace of the Hegelian doctrine of "rational utility," where an individual's worth is in relation to their contribution to the state, rather than determined in light of traditional moral, ethical and religious values.
This gradual transformation of national public opinion, promulgated through media and education, was described in an article written by the British commentator Malcolm Muggeridge, entitled "The Humane Holocaust," and in an article written by former United States Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, M.D., entitled "The Slide to Auschwitz," both published in The Human Life Review, 1977 and 1980 respectively.
Malcolm Muggeridge stated: "Near at hand, we have been accorded, for those that have eyes to see, an object lesson in what the quest for 'quality of life' without reference to 'sanctity of life' can involve....[namely] the great Nazi holocaust, whose TV presentation has lately been harrowing viewers throughout the Western world. In this televised version, an essential consideration has been left out - namely, that the origins of the holocaust lay, not in Nazi terrorism and anti-Semitism, but in pre-Nazi Weimar Germany's acceptance of euthanasia and mercy-killing as humane and estimable.... It took no more than three decades to transform a war crime into an act of compassion, thereby enabling the victors in the war against Nazi-ism to adopt the very practices for which the Nazis had been solemnly condemned at Nuremberg."1
The transformation followed thus: the concept that the elderly and terminally ill should have the right to die was promoted in books, newspapers, literature and even entertainment films, the most popular of which were entitled Ich klage an (I accuse) and Mentally Ill. One euthanasia movie, based on a novel by a National Socialist doctor, actually won a prize at the world-famous Venice Film Festival! Extreme hardship cases were cited which increasingly convinced the public to morally approve of euthanasia. The medical profession gradually grew accustomed to administering death to patients who, for whatever reasons, felt their low "quality of life" rendered their lives not worth living, or as it was put, liebensunwerten Lebens, (life unworthy of life).2
In an Associated Press release, published in the New York Times, October 10, 1933, entitled "Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move," it was stated: "The Ministry of Justice, in a detailed memorandum explaining the Nazi aims regarding the German penal code, today announced its intentions to authorize physicians to end the sufferings of the incurable patient. The memorandum...proposed that it shall be possible for physicians to end the tortures of incurable patients, upon request, in the interest of true humanity. This proposed legal recognition of euthanasia - the act of providing a painless and peaceful death - raised a number of fundamental problems of a religious, scientific, and legal nature. The Catholic newspaper Germania hastened to observe: 'The Catholic faith binds the conscience of its followers not to accept this method'...In Lutheran circles, too, life is regarded as something that God alone can take.... Euthanasia... has become a widely discussed word in the Reich.... No life still valuable to the State will be wantonly destroyed."3
Nationalized health care and government involvement in medical care promised to improve the public's "quality of life."4 Unfortunately, the cost of maintaining government medical care was a contributing factor to the growth of the national debt, which reached astronomical proportions. Double and triple digit inflation crippled the economy, resulting in the public demanding that government cut expenses.5
This precipitated the 1939 order to cut federal expenses. The national socialist government decided do remove "useless" expenses from the budget, which included the support and medical costs required to maintain the lives of the retarded, insane, senile, epileptic, psychiatric patients, handicapped, deaf, blind, the non-rehabilitable ill, and those who had been diseased or chronically ill for five years or more. It was labeled an "act of mercy" to "liberate them through death," as they were viewed as having an extremely low "quality of life," as well as being a tax burden on the public.
The public psyche was conditioned for this, as even school math problems compared distorted medical costs incurred by the taxpayer of caring for and rehabilitating the chronically sick, with the cost of loans to newly married couples for new housing units.6
The next whose lives were terminated by the state were the elderly in institutions who had no relatives and no financial resources. These lonely, forsaken individuals were needed by no one and would be missed by no one. Their "quality of life" was considered low by everyone's standards, and they were a tremendous tax burden on the economically distressed state.7
The next to be eliminated were the parasites on the state: the street people, bums, beggars, hopelessly poor, gypsies, prisoners, inmates and convicts. These were socially disturbing individuals incapable of providing for themselves, whose "quality of life" was considered by the public as irreversibly below standard, in addition to the fact that they were a nuisance to society and a seed-bed for crime.8
The liquidation grew to include those who had been unable to work, the socially unproductive, and those living on welfare or government pensions. They drew financial support from the state, but contributed nothing financially back. They were looked upon as "useless eaters," leeches, stealing from those who worked hard to pay the taxes to support them. Their unproductive lives were a burden on the "quality of life" of those who had to pay the taxes.9
The next to be eradicated were the ideologically unwanted, the political enemies of the state, religious extremists, and those "disloyal" individuals considered to be holding the government back from producing a society which would function well and provide everyone a better "quality of life." The moving biography of the imprisoned Dietrich Bonhoffer chronicled the injustices. These individuals also were a source of "human experimental material," allowing military medical research to be carried on with human tissue, thus providing valuable information which promised to improve the nation's health .10
Finally, justifying their actions on the purported theory of evolution, the Nazi's considered the German, or "Aryan," race as "ubermenschen," supermen, being more advanced in the supposed progress of human evolution. This resulted in the twisted conclusion that all other races, and in particular the Jewish race, were less evolved, and needed to be eliminated from the so-called "human gene pool," ensuring that future generations of humans would have a higher "quality of life."11
C. Everett Koop, M.D., stated: "The first step is followed by the second step. You can say that if the first step is moral then whatever follows must be moral. The important thing, however, is this: whether you diagnose the first step as being one worth taking or being one that is precarious rests entirely on what the second step is likely to be.... I am concerned about this because when the first 273,000 German aged, infirm, and retarded were killed in gas chambers there was no outcry from that medical profession either, and it was not far from there to Auschwitz."12
Can this holocaust happen in America? Indeed, it has already begun. The idea of killing a person and calling it "death with dignity" is an oxymoron. The "mercy-killing" movement puts us on the same path as pre-Nazi Germany. The "quality of life" concept, which eventually results in the Hegelian utilitarian attitude of a person's worth being based on their contribution toward perpetuating big government, is in stark contrast to America's founding principles.
This philosophy which lowers the value of human life, shocked attendees at the Governor's Commission on Disability, in Concord, New Hampshire, October 5, 2001, as they heard the absurd comments of Princeton University professor Peter Singer. The Associated Press reported Singer's comments: "I do think that it is sometimes appropriate to kill a human infant," he said, adding that he does not believe a newborn has a right to life until it reaches some minimum level of consciousness. "For me, the relevant question is, what makes it so seriously wrong to take a life?" Singer asked. "Those of you who are not vegetarians are responsible for taking a life every time you eat. Species is no more relevant than race in making these judgments."13
Singer's views, if left unchecked, could easily lead to a repeat of the atrocities of Nazi Germany, if not something worse. Add to that unbridled advances in the technology of cloning, DNA test which reveal physical defects, human embryos killed for the purpose of gathering stem cells to treat Diseases...and a haunting future unfolds before us. President Theodore Roosevelt's warning in 1909 seems appropriate:
"Progress has brought us both unbounded opportunities and unbridled difficulties. Thus, the measure of our civilization will not be that we have done much, but what we have done with that much. I believe that the next half century will determine if we will advance the cause of Christian civilization or revert to the horrors of brutal paganism. The thought of modern industry in the hands of Christian charity is a dream worth dreaming. The thought of industry in the hands of paganism is a nightmare beyond imagining. The choice between the two is upon us."14
In his State of the Union address in 1905, President Theodore Roosevelt stated:
"There are those who believe that a new modernity demands a new morality. What they fail to consider is the harsh reality that there is no such thing as a new morality. There is only one morality. All else is immorality. There is only true Christian ethics over against which stands the whole of paganism. If we are to fulfill our great destiny as a people, then we must return to the old morality, the sole morality.... All these blatant sham reformers, in the name of a new morality, preach the old vice of self-indulgence which rotted out first the moral fiber and then even the external greatness of Greece and Rome."15
In biblical comparison, Jesus showed mercy by healing the sick and giving sanity back to the deranged, but never did he kill them. This attitude is exemplified today by Mother Teresa of Calcutta, whose version of "death with dignity" is to gather the dying from off the street, and show compassion to these rejected and abandoned members of the human race, all the while knowing that they may only survive for another half hour. Her "mercy-living" movement goes to great trouble to house, wash and feed even the most hopeless and derelict, because of inherent respect for the "sanctity of life" of each individual. This attitude is summed up in her statement: "I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve because I love Jesus."16
Will America chose the "sanctity of life" concept, as demonstrated by Mother Teresa, or will America chose the "quality of life" concept, championed by self-proclaimed doctors of death court decisions - such as in the case of Terri Schiavo - and continue its slide toward Auschwitz? What kind of subtle anesthetic has been allowed to deaden our national conscience? What horrors await us? The question is not whether the suffering and dying person's life should be terminated, the question is what kind of nation will we become if they are? Their physical death is preceded only by our moral death!
1 Malcolm Muggeridge, "The Humane Holocaust," The Human Life Review, Winter, 1980. Ronald Reagan, Abortion & The Conscience of the Nation (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, Inc. 1984; The Human Life Foundation, Inc.), pp. 85 - 87.
2 C. Everett Koop, M.D., "The Slide to Auschwitz," The Human Life Review, Spring, 1977; quoting from Leo Alexander, "Medical Science Under Dictatorship," New England Journal of Medicine, July 4, 1949, 241:39 - 47. (C. Everett Koop, M.D., originally delivered as an address to The American Academy of Pediatrics, on the occasion of his receiving the William E. Ladd Medal, the highest honor given to pediatric surgeons in America.) Ronald Reagan, Abortion and The Conscience of the Nation (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, Inc. 1984; The Human Life Foundation, Inc.), pp. 61 - 63. Die Freigabe der Vernichtung liebensunwerten Lebens (Permission to Destroy Life Unworthy of Life) 1920. Adolf Jost, Das Recht auf den Tod (The Right to Death) 1895. Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors (N Y: Basic Books, 1986), p. 27.
3 New York Times, October 10, 1933, Associated Press release, "Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move." Noah H. Hutchings, "Nazi Euthanasia" (Oklahoma City, OK: Bible in the News, published by the Southwest Radio Church, P.O. Box 1144, Oklahoma City, OK 73101, October 1996), Vol. 1996, No. 10, p. 16.
4 Koop, p. 70.
5 Ibid., pp. 61, 70. Muggeridge, p. 90. The World Book Encyclopedia 19 vols. (Chicago, IL: Field Enterprises, Inc., 1957), vol. 7, p. 2975.
6 Koop, pp. 61 - 63; Muggeridge, pp. 86 - 89.
7 Ibid,
8 Ibid, 9 Ibid, 10 Ibid, 11 Ibid,
12 Koop, pp. 67 - 70.
13 Peter Singer. October 5, 2001, comments at the Governor's Commission on Disability, Concord, New Hampshire. Harry R. Weber, Associated Press, Boston Globe,10/5/2001 17:46 "Singer gets respectful reception." http://www.boston.com/dailynews.
14 Roosevelt, Theodore. 1909. Noah Brooks, Men of Achievement - Statesmen (NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1904), p. 317. George Grant, Third Time Around (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Inc., 1991), p. 118. George Grant, The Quick and the Dead (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1981), p. 134. John Eidsmoe, Columbus & Cortez, Conquerors for Christ (Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press, 1992), pp. 296-297.
15 Roosevelt, Theodore. 1905, in his State of the Union address. David, L. Johnson, Theodore Roosevelt: American Monarch (Philadelphia: American History Sources, 1981), p. 44. George Grant, Third Time Around (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Inc., 1991) pp. 118-119.
16 Mother Teresa of Calcutta. Statement. Bless Your Heart (series II) (Eden Prairie, MN: Heartland Sampler, Inc., 1990), 10.15. Muggeridge, pp. 91 - 92.
Other sources include: Fr. Virgil C. Blum, S.J. & Charles J. Sykes, "The Lesson of Euthanasia," The Human Life Review, Spring, 1976. A.J. Dyck, "The Value of Life: Two Contending Policies," Harvard Magazine, Jan., 1970, pp. 30 - 36. Henry Friedlander, The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution (N.C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1995). Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing & the Psychology of Genocide (Basic Books, 1986). William Brennan, Medical Holocausts: Exterminative Medicine in Nazi Germany and Contemporary America (Norland, 1980). William Brennan, Dehumanizing the Vulnerable: When Word Games Take Lives (Chicago, IL: Loyala University Press, 1995; 3441 N. Ashland Ave. Chicago, IL. 60657). Eleanor Schlafly and John D. Boland, "Word Warfare: Giving Evil a Tolerable Name" (Mindszenty Report, Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation, P.O. Box 11321, St. Louis, Mo. 63105), Apr. 1996, Vol. 38, No. 4. "Protection of Life" series, Sanctity of Life or Quality of Life, Law Reform Commission of Canada. Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, M.D., What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (1979).
From: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/Federer20031017.shtml
MEMORANDUM
TO: CHRISTA CALAMAS
FROM: HERBERT W. TITUS, ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
TROY A. TITUS, P.C.
2400 CAROLINA ROAD
CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA 23322
SUBJECT: TERRI SCHINDLER-SCHIAVO
DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2003
In response to a request, this memorandum is submitted addressing whether the governor of the State of Florida has the constitutional power to stop a Florida court order conferring upon the husband of Terri Schindler-Schiavo the sole discretionary power to disconnect his brain-disabled wife’s feeding tube. Not only does the governor have such power, but the governor has a constitutional duty to prevent any action taken pursuant to such a court order, because such action would violate Ms. Schindler-Shiavo’s constitutionally guaranteed “inalienable right to enjoy and defend life” regardless of her “physical disability” as secured by Article I, Section 2 of the Florida State Constitution.
According to Article I, Section 2, “[a]ll natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law, and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life ....” Additionally, Article I, Section 2 provides that “no person shall be deprived of any right [including the right to enjoy life] because of ... physical disability.” According to Article IV, Section 1, “the supreme executive power” of the state of Florida is vested in the “governor ... who shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Thus, the governor has the power, indeed the duty, to ensure that this constitutional guarantee of the “inalienable right ... to enjoy and defend life,” regardless of physical disability, is preserved.
In the exercise of this his “take care” powers, the governor is not bound by a court order, such as the one in the Schindler-Schiavo case, when that court order is inconsistent with the actual constitutional guarantee. As President Andrew Jackson once observed, judicial “precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power.” This observation is especially significant in determining the scope of the constitutional powers of the office of governor, a separate and independent branch from the judiciary. Again, as President Jackson put it, the chief executive officer of a government is bound by his oath of office to decide matters of constitutional right and power according to the executive’s interpretation of the constitution, not according to the judiciary’s interpretation. Therefore, if the governor believes that Ms. Schindler-Schiavo has the constitutional right to “enjoy life” regardless of her present disability, as he has stated in filings submitted to the courts, then the governor is duty bound to stop any action taken pursuant to that unconstitutional order that would result in the deprivation of Ms. Schindler-Shiavo’s constitutional right to life.
Such executive intervention into the judicial processes does not violate the separation of powers. To the contrary, as Alexander Hamilton stated in Federalist No. 78, the exercise of judicial power is subject to the check and balance of the executive branch which, alone, has the power to enforce a judicial order. Thus, if a court order is contrary to the law of the inalienable right to life — as the order in the Schindler-Schiavo case surely is — then according to Article IV, Section 1 of the Florida Constitution, the governor, vested with the “supreme executive power,” should intervene to stop any action taken puruant to that court order. After all, as the great English legal authority — Sir William Blackstone stated — a court opinion or order and the law are not the same thing, in that a court opinion or order may be contrary to law, and therefore, not law at all. I W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 71 (Univ. Chi. Facs. Ed: 1765). If the governor allows a court order granting discretion to one person to decide for another person whether the latter person lives or dies to go unchallenged, then he would fail to “take care” that the “law” of the equal right to life, as secured by Article I, Section 2 of the Florida Constitution even for the physically disabled,” is “faithfully executed.”
John B. Thompson, Attorney
1172 South Dixie Highway, Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146-2750
October 16, 2003
The Honorable Jeb Bush
Governor, State of Florida
C/o Governor's General Counsel,
The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida Via Fax to 850-488-98
Re: Execution of Terri Schiavo is “Cruel and Unusual Punishment”
Dear Governor Bush:
I have been asked by the family of Terri Schiavo to do what I can to save her life in light of your request yesterday for assistance from legal counsel inside and outside your Administration toward that end.
Governor, you have the power, by the mere stroke of a pen, to prohibit what is, in every sense, the execution of Terri Schiavo by a means that is both cruel and unusual in violation of Article I, Section 17 of the Florida Constitution and the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Death by dehydration and starvation is arguably the most brutal, inhumane, and pain-inducing way to kill any living creature. The United States Department of Agriculture in its own regulations at 9CFR2.131 prohibits the withholding of food and water from farm animals. Terri Schiavo is not less than a farm animal.
If you, as Governor, were to order the execution of a serial killer on death row by means of withholding food and water, you would be ordered by any number of courts not to do so. The horror of dying by dehydration makes death by electric chair, by comparison, an act of compassion.
The fact that this woman is neither accused nor convicted of any crime makes absolutely no difference. In fact, the lack of criminality makes the execution even more cruel and unusual, for a criminal sanction is being imposed upon an innocent woman.
You have the power and the duty, under both the Florida and United States Constitutions, which you took an oath to uphold, to enter an Executive Order, today, to prohibit the imposition of any cruel and unusual punishment in this State. Upon entering such an Order, you then have the power, right, and duty to give force to that order by dispatching state law enforcement officials to take custody of Terri Schiavo and stop her forced starvation and dehydration.
Governor Bush, you do not need a court order to do any of this. No court at any level has the power to revoke the Florida and United States Constitutions. They cannot revoke your oath of office. You are an enthusiast of the James Madison Institute, and as such you know that the Executive branch of government is co-equal with the other two branches. No judge has the power to elevate the judicial branch over the executive branch thereby abrogating your state and federal constitutional duties and powers.
On behalf of the family of this innocent woman, and with all respect for the responsibilities of your office, we ask that you act immediately.
Respectfully,
Jack Thompson From http://www.terrisfight.org/memorandum2.htm
To: Christa Calamas, Esq.
From: Brian Fahling, Esq.
Re: Authority of Governor Bush to Issue Executive Order
Date: October 16, 2003
Question 1: Does Governor Bush have authority to issue an executive order pursuant to Section 943.04(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2002) to order the Department of Criminal Justice Investigations and Forensic Science to conduct an investigation of an alleged violation of Section 782.08 Florida Statutes (assisted suicide)?
Question 2: Would such an order under the circumstances of the present case constitute an intrusion of the executive branch into, or create a conflict with, the lawful authority of the judicial branch?
DISCUSSION
I. Authority To Issue Executive Order
The governor of the State of Florida possesses authority under the Florida Constitution, Article IV, Section 1(a), to see that the laws are faithfully executed. Section 943.04 authorizes the governor, upon written order, to direct the Department of Criminal Justice Investigations and Forensic Science (“Department”) to “investigate violations of any of the criminal laws of the state.” In Thompson v. State, 342 So.2d 52 (Fla. 1976), the Florida Supreme Court upheld the authority given to the governor under Section 943.04, saying “[t]he power to see that laws are faithfully executed, which is essentially what Chapter 943 is designed to achieve, derives from Article IV, Section 1(a) of the Florida Constitution.” Thompson at 55.
The brief filed by the Governor in the Middle District of Florida sets forth significant reasons to believe that Section 782.02 is being violated because “Terri’s right to life is violated by the state when the state, acting as her guardian, assumes that her wish to live without artificial sustenance is the same as a wish not to be fed at all. The state has an ‘unqualified’ interest in life.” Brief at 5. Moreover, Terri is being denied oral sustenance, which creates “an unnecessary conflict with Florida Statutory law by implying that physicians may cooperate with a person’s alleged express wish not to feed herself . . . .” Id. at p. 6. A denial of Terri’s right to life under these circumstances, it appears, results in a violation of Section 782.08.
The laws of the State of Florida, then, as set forth in the Governor’s brief, are not being faithfully executed. The authority of the governor to issue an executive order in this case is consonant with his duty to see that the laws are faithfully executed.
II. An Executive Order Does Not Impugn the Authority of the Court
The trial court order merely authorized Terri’s husband to direct that oral sustenance be denied her. An executive order that orders an investigation in this matter, with the concomitant appropriate actions that would be taken if a violation of Section 782.08 is found, does nothing to impugn the authority of the court. The executive order would ultimately operate only upon the husband’s decision which he is merely permitted to make. It is interference with private discretion, not with judicial authority. If the consequences of the husband’s exercise of discretion are determined to result in the unlawful taking of life, it is entirely appropriate that such actions be interdicted by law enforcement at the direction of the governor.
From: http://www.terrisfight.org/memorandum3.htm
Common Good Foundation
Legal Defense Fund
448 Viking Drive, Suite 370
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452 Office of the President
___________________________________________________________________
October 15, 2003
TO: Governor Jeb Bush
FROM: Keith Fournier, Attorney-at-Law
Common Good Foundation Legal Defense Fund
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
Re: Terri Schindler-Schiavo; Your Legal Authority and Moral Obligation to Protect a Disabled Citizen
In response to your request for a legal opinion as to whether you have the authority under Florida law to act so as to prevent the imminent death of Terry Schiavo, please be advised that the Florida Constitution vests you with supreme executive power. Fla. Const. Art. 4, § 1(a). While acting in your official capacity as Governor, you shall ensure that the laws of Florida are “faithfully executed.” Id.
Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 14.01, and § 14.022 the Governor not only has the authority but the inherent obligation to prevent the killing of Terry Schiavo.
Under Fla. Stat. § 14.01 the Governor has the obligation and the “authority to protect [the] life, liberty, and property” of the citizens of Florida. According to this statute the Governor has the authority to “procure and secure protection to life, liberty, and property of the inhabitants of the state [Florida],” as he or she “may deem necessary.” Id.
Furthermore, under Fla. Stat. § 14.022, the Governor of Florida is “authorized and empowered to do all and every act and thing which she or he may deem necessary in order to prevent overt threats of violence or violence…[to] any citizen…of the state.” This statute gives the Governor the power to proclaim that “in her or his opinion” that a “danger exists to the person…of any citizen or citizens of the state.” Fla. Stat. § 14.022(2). Once the Governor has made this proclamation he or she is authorized to exercise the following powers: 1.) He may “authorize order or direct any state, county, or city official to enforce the provisions,” of an order or proclamation aimed at preventing or remedying the danger aimed at any individual citizen or citizens of the state. Fla. Stat. § 14.022(3) (d). These provisions may be enforced in “each and every and all of the courts in the state by injunction, mandamus, or other appropriate action.” Id. 2.) Most importantly, the Governor is obligated and authorized to “intervene in any situation where there exists violence, overt threats of violence to persons or property and take complete control thereof to prevent violence.” Fla. Stat. § 14.022(4). The Governor is given these powers and they are vested under the Florida Constitution in concert with the statutory laws and the police powers of the state of Florida.
Therefore, it is clear that, as Governor of the State of Florida, you not only have the inherent power and authorization to intervene and prevent Terry Schiavo’s inhumane and violent murder, pursuant to valid Florida statutes, you in fact are under a moral obligation to do so.
The Governor is also extended the executive power to provide clemency to individuals that are sentenced to death. The Florida courts have held that this executive power is inherently held by the Governor and is therefore a valid limitation on the powers of the judiciary. It can therefore be implied that if the Governor has the inherent power to override the authority of the Judiciary in order to save the life of a convicted criminal or felon he must therefore have the power to save the life of an innocent individual.
Currently, no state of the union has sanctioned the involuntary termination of a patient’s life via the removal of nutrition and hydration. Specifically, the Florida legislature has expressed a strong disfavor regarding mercy killing when enacting laws such as the Life-Prolonging Procedures Act, which affirmatively states that the law shall not be construed to condone, authorize, or approve mercy killing or euthanasia, or to permit any affirmative or deliberate act or omission to end life other than to permit the natural process of dying. Fla. Stat. § 765.309.
The involuntary removal of nutrition and hydration in no way resembles natural death. legally be equated with the natural process of dying. To the contrary, any individual who has been deprived of food and water would quickly die.
As the Chief Executive Officer of the State, and acting in a manner consistent with your grant of authority, you do not in any way risk a violation of the separation of powers. Fla. Constitution Art. 2 Sec. 3. In fact, where the circumstances warrant, the constitution grants executive authority to the Governor to protect and defend citizens, to promote the general welfare and to serve the common good. Governor, the starvation of a disabled citizen, against her will, is just such a circumstance.
Depriving a person of nutrition and hydration (engaging in euthanasia) is also criminal under Florida law (See Fla. Stat. Sections 782.04(2)(i) and 777.04) as well as under Federal Law. You also know that it violates a higher law upon which all of these laws are based.
Terry Schiavo is being killed by starvation and dehydration. Without your Executive action her death will occur. You not only have the legal authority to do so, you have the moral obligation to do so. Governor, the world is watching!
Cc: John G. Stepanovich, Esq.
Chief Counsel
Common Good Foundation Legal Defense Fund
National Catholic Partnership on Disability (NCPD) 415 Michigan Avenue, N.E. – Suite 240 Washington, DC 20017-4501 Executive Director: Mary Jane Owen, TOP, MSW Nancy C Thompson, D.Min. Chairperson Francis Cardinal George, OMI, Episcopal Moderator Michael J. Degnan, Ph.D., Treasurer -Grace M. Rinaldi, Secretary – Thomas J. Blee, Esq. – Most Rev. Thomas V. Daily, DD - Most Rev. Daniel N. DiNardo, STL – Most Rev. Michael P. Driscoll, MSW – Jerry D. Freewalt - Jackie Johnson, RN - Sr. Eleace King, IHM, EdD – Msgr. Louis A. Marucci, DMin - Thomas J. Marzen, JD – Palmira Perea-Hay, LISW, ACSW
Press Release
CONTACT: Mary Jane Owen
Tel: 202/529-2933
Fax: 202/529-4678
National Catholic Partnership on Disability
Highlights Differences Between Two Neurologically Disabled Individuals Washington, DC – July 10, 2003: The National Catholic Partnership on Disabilities (NCPD) was gratified by the news that Terry Wallis’ awoke from a coma after 19 years. Executive director, Mary Jane Owen noted: "Whether one considers this a miracle or evidence that the body can heal itself over time, the fact is that our knowledge of what is possible for people with neurological disabilities is limited and the role of negative judgments of the value of a given life can result in devaluation of those of us who live with disabilities. Terry, a young man injured in a car accident, was fortunate to have a family who never gave up; that took him on visits even when he was unresponsive; who continued to celebrate holidays with him. The contrast between what happened to Mr. Wallis is in stark contrast to the other Terri – the unfortunate wife of Michael Schiavo. He has done everything possible to prevent her family from interacting with her and has insisted that her feeding tube be withdrawn. Death by starvation and dehydration has been the goal for Terri Schiavo." In July, 1984, Terry Wallis was injured in a car accident which killed the friend with whom he was traveling. In February, 1990, Terri Schiavo suffered cardiac arrest which cut off oxygen to her brain for several minutes. Both became neurologically disabled; Terry going into coma while Terri has continued to respond in limited ways according to her parents and siblings, who have faced repeated rejection by the court system in Florida to intervene to assure basic medical care or appropriate rehabilitation for Terri. In November 1992, in a trial involving medical malpractice, her husband, Michael Schiavo, requested $20 million for Terri’s future medical needs. He assured the jury, which awarded $9,400,000.00 for Terri’s medical care and rehabilitation, that he would take care of Terri, "in a heartbeat. . . . She’s my life and I wouldn’t trade her for the world. I believe in my wedding vows." The malpractice jury also awarded Michael $640,000 for loss of consortium of his wife. Less than a year later Mr. Schiavo initiated the first of a long series of threats to his wife’s well being. At his request hydration and nutrition were terminated for 48 hours and were continued only because of her family’s intervention. Such "treatment," if continued, would have resulted in Terri’s death. This in spite of video-tapes of her interactions and responses which would seem to indicate she is not in a persistent vegetative state. Currently the only accommodation she is receiving as a neurologically disabled individual is tube feeding. A 1991 medical report about Terri’s condition was not released at the insistence of Mr. Schiavo. Only recently has the information contained in that transcript been available. The unnamed physician who reviewed that nuclear imaging bone scan found evidence of ‘multiple fractures.’ ‘Somebody worked her over real good.’ Janice Benton, a staff member of NCPD, illustrated how dissimilar the two cases are: "The Wallis family has been rewarded for their faith and patience. Rather than fighting for death for their loved one, wife Sandi, daughter Amber, parents Angilee and Jerry, and brother Perry kept up a loving vigil, even as years turned to decades. They didn’t presume to know what was best for Terry, or to make judgments of his ‘quality of life.’ We can only hope that the witness of this loving family will guide other families and judges who find themselves faced with a similar situation. We would do well to head their advice to ‘keep the faith and never give up’." NCPD had earlier requested that the Florida legal system protect those funds originally designated for Terri’s rehabilitation. They have been drastically depleted with little regard to the purpose intended. Instead the money has been used in pursuit of legal and medical testimony from well-known advocates of euthanasia. Michael has moved on with his life with little apparent adherence to the commitments he made to the court in 1992. Nancy Thompson, Chair of the Board of NCPD reflected, "Unfortunately the Schiavo case is one of too many in recent months in which the guardians of people with neurological disabilities have the potential to gain financially from the termination of basic medical care and potentially helpful rehabilitation." Owen, a disability advocate since 1972 added, "A particularly frightening outcome of the battle between Mr. Schiavo and his live-in girlfriend and Terri’s family and friends is the statement by Attorney George J. Felos. In August 2001 he said in describing Terri’s quality of life: "The litmus test is whether a person can bring a spoon to their own mouth." That "litmus test" for survival could not have been passed by many of friends who live productively in spite of significant disabilities. And those of us who live with assorted disabilities are aware that when any of us is deprived of their essential dignity and worth, each of us face that same discounting by the judgments of the culture of death." Mr. Rus Wester, who writes for the Catholic press, emphasized this point: "Let’s pray that someone, perhaps many, in the media, will develop the story of Terry Wallis in such a way that the true message is conveyed. Whether we call what has happened within the Wallis family a miracle or just a fluke of nature, may heaven grant sufficient clarity in the reporting of such cases that we learn respect for ALL human life." # # # NCPD was established in 1982 to advocate for welcome and justice for people with disabilities and their families within the Catholic Church and their communities.
http://www.terrisfight.org/Headlines/NationaCatholicPartnershipPressRelease.htm
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.