[shhrubbery!]

I'm no Michael Baden fan, but one important difference here is that in the O.J. case, Baden was hired to find holes in the prosecution's case. And thanks to the sloppiness of the forensic work, he found plenty.

But can you find anything unfactual about Baden's testimony?

In Terri's case, Baden has absolutely no financial interest. No one from the Schindler family hired him or had anything to do with him.

Why would Baden volunteer his opinion of Schiavo's culpability and thereby risk being sued for slander, if he didn't think he stood on very firm ground?

[shhrubbery!]

Sorry about double post.

[lugsoul]

First, self-aggrandizement is Baden's game.

Second, I am sure you know that an "opinion" is not defamation.

Third, of course there are faults in Baden's O.J. testimony, if you believe O.J. did it. He testified under oath that, in his EXPERT opinion, there were at least two killers. He testified that the crime scene evidence didn't point to O.J. because it was unreliable. Do you believe that? Are you THAT invested in the Schiavo case that you'll believe THIS hack?