Replies

I hate to say this, but by Florida law - the statutes written by the legislature - Judge Greer's ruling was legal. The flaw that I see in Florida is that when there is a dispute, it goes to a judge. The judge decides. By Fla law, in order to disconnect the feeding tube, Terri must be PVS, and there must be clear and convincing evidence that that is what she would want. We all know she isn't pvs, and the evidence is far from clear and convincing, however, Greer makes the call. If he is "convinced" on both counts, then it's legal to do it. The higher courts go along with it, and the fed courts won't intervene in a state issue. I still think that it's a violation of fed and state law to deny her the chance to eat by mouth before doing it, but again, none of the judges agree with me, so disconnecting the tube was "legal".

The courts in Florida don't seem to want to acknowledge that these Fla. statutes conflict with the U.S. and Florida constitutional right to life. So doesn't that make the statutes illegal? I think those are the laws they need to worry about being unconstitutional.

You are right. If anyone wants to argue Constitutionality of the law, then the Schindlers should because of the obscure nature of the law as written. The judge has no real direction in determining what clear evidence is. It's solely at his discretion, which allows a judge leeway to decide something that violates the rights of a person in the act of giving those same rights away.

Which might be good were it not for an activist FLSC that would determine this... It's like everything in the world is stacked against this poor woman.

Too bad Mikey couldn't get the max sixty days for adultery, and have a judge rule him unavailable to be Terri's guardian.

"The courts in Florida don't seem to want to acknowledge that these Fla. statutes conflict with the U.S. and Florida constitutional right to life. So doesn't that make the statutes illegal? I think those are the laws they need to worry about being unconstitutional."

That is the key issue and the one we really need to harp on over the next weeks as this thing gets dragged through the courts and the Constitution (US and state) is furthur mucked up.

I had a post to you all typed last night but when I clicked Post, it disappeared. Haven't time to redo it now. And I see today that the ACLU is taking Michael's side.

Judge Greer HAS to be taken to task by his peers. FReepers should put every effort into making formal complaints - and against Felos too.

Cal Thomas has a good article this morning. Ellen Goodman is her usual lefty self. But both mean the same thing - we lose our freedoms, one signature at a time.

Will be interesting to see what the solar flare disrupts in the next two weeks. We may all be "out of business."

I hate to say this, but by Florida law - the statutes written by the legislature - Judge Greer's ruling was legal.

Well, sort of. Maybe.

As an analogy, suppose someone stands accused of committing a robbery/murder in one location at the same time as they were singing the Star Spangled Banner at the opening of a widely televised sporting event. The only evidence against this person is the a surveillance tape which shows someone of the defendant's height and build but does not show the person's face or other distinguishing marks.

Would it be legal for the judge to convict and sentence the person for the robbery?