Has Pearse changed his views in this case? THAT WOULD BE A NO.
Does Pearse now believe that his affidavit about Michael Schiavo's conflict interest is no longer applicable? THAT WOULD BE A NO.
You are dense, george
I beg to differ:
Was I missing something more clear to somebody on the inside of the case, like Pearse?Well, yes, I was. I didn't know that Pearse's views had changed since 1998. He no longer opposes the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.
Here's why:
Most of the medical testimony, given at trial and after Pearse issued his recommendations, concluded she would never recover.
The primary reason for Michael Schiavo's conflict of interest is gone. Only about $50,000 of the original $700,000 settlement remains. The rest reportedly went to Terri Schiavo's care and legal fees.
The case itself has been closely scrutinized by judge after judge, and their findings have been unanimous. The judges thought they knew what Terri Schiavo would have wanted.
They also found Michael Schiavo credible. Even with a conflict of interest, Pearse said, he could be right about his wife's wishes.
One day, this all must stop.
Pearse has a word for what is needed.
Finality.
That's what courts are supposed to provide, Pearse said. They are supposed to sort through our biggest disputes and put them to rest.
Once the governor and Legislature stepped in and pushed through Terri's Law, the courts were denied their usual role.
Pearse called the law stunningly bad policy.
Note to the GOP: Pearse is a Republican.