[Viking2002]

The heathen, Godless lawyers have the judicial system turned @ss-backwards and inside-out in this country, and the know-nothing, listless, self-serving politicos we've elected will sit back on their haunches, wait for her to die, then put on a misty-eyed performance about how they TRIED to stop it before it was too late.

Just like the Florida legislature blew off the moratorium bill today.

We, as a country, are doomed.

[tessalu]

It is a sad day in the USA when USA courts condemn someone to die, who has committed no crime.

[supercat]

Just like the Florida legislature blew off the moratorium bill today.

Although a moratorium might have been a good idea, it really wouldn't solve the root problem, which is the complete lack of any check on trial-court judge's power.

As a simple example, once Judge Greer found that there was no possible conflict of interest regarding Michael and Terri, nobody else could do anything to force the appointment of a guardian ad litem for Terri.

I don't know how to fix the system without making things worse, but it's clear that some regulations which are designed to prevent "judge shopping" instead allow whatever party in a case controls venue to shop for a favorable judge and then keep that judge forever.

There are a few specific things that could have been done that would have helped Terri's case, and that might be reasonable to pass as legislation though the usefulness would be limited.

For example, the statute regarding guardians ad litem could enumerate some specific and indisputable circumstances in which a judge would be required to appoint a guardian ad lib, rather than merely using broad terminology. Such circumstances could include, but not be limited to:

• Cases in which the ward has a trust fund over a certain dollar amount, and the guardian wishes to make use of money in that trust fund.
• Cases in which the guardian seeks to perform any action to promote or cause the death of the ward.

To be sure, even with such a law in place there would have to be some means of protecting against "yes man" guardian ad litems, but I see no excuse for a judge not to appoint a guardian ad litem in the cases described above.