Skip to comments.
Terri Schindler Schiavo Guardianship Hearing Wednesday November 5, 2003
www.terrisfight.org ^
Posted on 11/04/2003 9:30:54 PM PST by supercat
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 next last
I don't know why nobody's posted this as its own thread; it certainly seems worthy. The hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, but the web site doesn't say the time. Key observation: at the time of the last guardianship hearing, Michael and Jodi had not moved in with each other. Lewd and lacivious behavior, including cohabitation, is explicitly forbidden by guardians per Florida statute (cited in the petition above), and I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that Michael and Jodi have been cohabiting for some time and such cohabitation has been of a sexual nature (evidenced by Michael's children).
[PS--I hope this posts right; the preview window shows it being too wide, but it's funny that way sometimes.
1
posted on
11/04/2003 9:30:54 PM PST
by
supercat
To: supercat
To: supercat
Thanks for putting this one up. I'll be checking in tomorrow periodically for updates, so when those of you who are closer to the scene get the opportunity, please post what you know. I'm sure there will be many who will be interested in how this pans out. FWIW, I'll be praying and fasting tomorrow if anyone would care to join me.
To: supercat
This is a top-of-the-line petition. Yet, why I am I pessimistic that the FL court will not even bother to read it?
FL COURTS ARE CORRUPT!
People should start bumper stickers saying such. We should undermine this judiciary at all costs.
To: Theodore R.
Yet, why I am I pessimistic that the FL court will not even bother to read it? Under Florida statutes, guardians are forbidden from doing certain things which would not otherwise be legal, including lewd and lacivious cohabitation (except between married people). Unless Michael and Felos can convince a court that Michael's children were not produced by lewd and lacivious means, it would seem difficult for a court to deny the petition. Of course, I wouldn't be too surprised if a judge ruled that reproductive sex was not lewd and lacivious--such a finding would go along with all the other findings of fact in this case.
5
posted on
11/04/2003 10:11:06 PM PST
by
supercat
(Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
To: Ohioan from Florida
I'll join you.
6
posted on
11/04/2003 10:16:45 PM PST
by
Judith Anne
(Cyanide, mercury, and botulinum toxin are medically and industrially useful friends to mankind.)
To: supercat
Hand Delivery to GEORGE FELOS, this 15th day of November, 2002 So this ISN'T a petition for tomorrow? This is the one from LAST YEAR that Greer ignored? What has changed since then that gives us hope Greer will change heart tomorrow?
To: FL_engineer
Amazing. The "Greer-is-not-blind" howler trolls really ought to explain this one to us.
8
posted on
11/04/2003 10:26:25 PM PST
by
drlevy88
To: Judith Anne
Thanks. The more the merrier!
To: FL_engineer
LOTS more people watching?? (Not that I have much optimism, either.....)
To: FL_engineer
Maybe it was filed last year and Greer has been rubber-stamping motions to continue by Felos? Could it be that this is the first hearing of the Nov 2002 petition?
11
posted on
11/04/2003 10:33:11 PM PST
by
lonevoice
(Legal disclaimer: The above is MY OPINION)
To: supercat
I certainly hope they remove him as guardian and that they do not appoint one of his cronies as guardian. Let's hope and pray that guardianship goes to the Schindlers.
12
posted on
11/04/2003 10:35:34 PM PST
by
ET(end tyranny)
( Deuteronomy 32:37 -- And he shall say, Where are their gods, their rock in whom they trusted,)
To: Judith Anne
Greetings JA! Long time no see... Welcome to the 'Terri threads'
If you'd like a quick summary of issues, I might recommend reviewing post #6 here, as well #8, #17, #25, #26, #50, and most responses throughout.
-FLE
To: supercat
26. After receipt of the award, Schiavos conduct includes every attempt to facilitate the death of Terri before the money ran out.8/Bottom line.
14
posted on
11/04/2003 10:52:49 PM PST
by
Saundra Duffy
(For victory & freedom!!!)
To: FL_engineer
I thought this document referred to the HINO and his attorney's appearance on Larry King Live. How could this be dated Nov 2002? I'm confused.
15
posted on
11/04/2003 10:55:20 PM PST
by
Saundra Duffy
(For victory & freedom!!!)
To: FL_engineer
Was this document rejected in 2002? Is something really happening tomorrow, Wed., 11/5?
16
posted on
11/04/2003 10:56:30 PM PST
by
Saundra Duffy
(For victory & freedom!!!)
To: supercat
Oh, I remember now, Greer scheduled Terri's DEATH for October 15th, (+roughly 10 days),
and he scheduled her GUARDIANSHIP HEARING for 20 days AFTER that!!!
Greer is human garbage hiding behind a black robe.
Only his heart is blacker.
To: supercat
I will bet you any amount you care to name that the "lewd and lascivious behavior" clause was intended to protect a minor ward living in the same household with the guardian. It's hard to see how such a provision would apply in a case like this.
18
posted on
11/04/2003 11:12:55 PM PST
by
Brandon
To: Brandon
I will bet you any amount you care to name that the "lewd and lascivious behavior" clause was intended to protect a minor ward living in the same household with the guardian. It's hard to see how such a provision would apply in a case like this. Well, I don't think the legislators would have expected anyone to be living with a mistress while retaining guardianship of his wife. But I see no reason why the statute should not be applicable here.
19
posted on
11/04/2003 11:18:36 PM PST
by
supercat
(Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
To: supercat
And I don't see why it should apply. There's been no suggestion that Schiavo has been sleeping around or leading a scandalous life. He has formed a long-term committed relationship with one woman, who he intends to marry. I understand that some people have a problem with him doing this while his wife is still technically alive, but I don't think you can view this as adultery in the usual sense of the word. More importantly, there is no chance whatsoever that his behavior, no matter how outrageous, will corrupt the morals of his ward, which is almost certainly why that clause was included in the statute in the first place.
20
posted on
11/05/2003 12:50:02 AM PST
by
Brandon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson