Replies

Thank you, sweetliberty, for nominating my post #461 for quote of the day.

That is a first as far as I know. Too cool!!! /horn tooting

Thanks, RJayneJ and JohnHuang2!

I just got done reading the whole thing and found it very informative as to the perspective of the Florida Supreme Kangaroo court and the history of the assertions made by MS, and what the courts are relying upon as "facts" that Terri would rather die than be fed.....most interesting is the fact that everything is relying upon the "words of MS" which HE ATTRIBUTES to Terri allegedly saying.

Also, it points out the UTTER LACK of GOOD REPRESENTATION by counsel had by Terri's parents to this point......the Schindler's counsel was out of their league fighting Felos.

Now, I think, the tables have turned and Felos will be battling with top notch attorneys.....so, it would now come down to outrageous conduct/decisions on the part of the Kangaroo Court, once again.

"In the initial adversary proceeding, a board-certified neurologist who had reviewed a CAT scan of Mrs. Schiavo's brain and an EEG testified that most, if not all, of Mrs. Schiavo's cerebral cortex--the portion of her brain that allows for human cognition and memory--is either totally destroyed or damaged beyond repair. Her condition is legally a "terminal condition." 765.101(17), Fla. Stat. (2000). Although it is conceivable that extraordinary treatment might improve some of the motor functions of her brain stem or cerebellum, the Schindlers have presented no medical evidence suggesting that any new treatment could restore to Mrs. Schiavo a level of function within the cerebral cortex that would allow her to understand her perceptions of sight and sound or to communicate or respond cognitively to those perceptions."

...and this......

Almost as soon as the procedures were discontinued, the Schindlers were informed of new evidence that they believe establishes that their daughter would either not have made that decision fourteen months earlier at the time the original order was entered, or that she would make a different decision at this time. On April 26, 2001, the Schindlers filed a motion for relief from judgment in the guardianship proceeding. That motion alleged that the Schindlers had discovered new evidence in the form of testimony from a new witness. According to the motion, this witness was a former girlfriend of Mr. Schiavo. She allegedly would testify that Mr. Schiavo told her that Mrs. Schiavo and Mr. Schiavo never discussed what Mrs. Schiavo's wishes would be in her present condition. The motion alleged that this testimony was contrary to Mr. Schiavo's testimony at trial, and that it might prove Mr. Schiavo committed perjury in the proceedings.

The Schindlers attached two affidavits to the motion. Neither of these affidavits was executed by the witness.Instead, the affidavits were given by Mr. Schindler and by a private investigator hired by Mr. Schindler, and contained hearsay allegations regarding what this potential witness told them.

[FN2] Technically, the notary stated in each affidavit that the witness "acknowledged" the "foregoing instrument." The notary did not use the normal language "sworn to or affirmed and signed before me."

Hmmmmmm......

TigersEye,
I appreciated the posting of the Full Legal Complaint by daylate-dollarshort. In fact if daylate-dollarshort can post the written transcript of the Nov 5th hearing I would be even more grateful becasue I can't get the courts to call me back so I can find out how to get it myself.

I know I am going to get mobbed for saying this, but this is a Public Forum and I don't mind seeing an alternative opinion. If you don't want to engage the person then just don't reply and ignore their posts.