Posted on 03/19/2005 11:30:38 AM PST by Ravi
Just heard on Fox that U.S. Senate will convene today in emergency session regarding Terri Schiavo.
As long as they can get Greer off this case. If they get the case moved to the federal court system, Greer is out of it, unless you think Bush is going to appoint him to the federal bench. Somehow I don't think a promotion is in Greer's future. |
Gosh, the only problem with that is that Michael hasn't filed any guardianship papers as per FL state statutes in a very long time.
$485,000 in Terri's Medical Trust money spent on lawyers trying to kill her. How romantic!
B: Not sure if it's true, but if so, that would dampen the idea that there is no money to be made from her death.
Well, if Michael Schiavo's attorney is telling the truth---a big if right there---Mr. Schiavo will not gain one penny from Terri's death. Ah, but that is lawyer talk. Schiavo might not be the beneficiary on record. That might be, instead, a child of his, or someone on whose behalf he acts as trustee. In which case Michael Schiavo would be in complete control of all insurance assets from any policy on Terri, yet technically not "gaining one penny."
Here's what MS had to say about the money earlier this week:
http://www.schnittshow.com/audio.html
Hildy - the poster who uses facts and reason.
I was offended by that vulgar post,,deeply offended. What a window into how this woman is viewed by some.
That's why OJ had real estate in FL. No matter, who he owed, no one can touch real estate when you own in FL!
I'm not blaming the Jews - I was responding to someone who couldn't understand how anyone that was Jewish not standing up for the least capable in our society. It does boggle my mind how easily the majority of the Jews in this country forget such recent history.
actually the way the law reads is that some substantive evidence has to be show to overcome the rebuttable presumption. Judge Greer said the evidence is not enough.
Part of the issue here is whether or not mothers and fathers have standing in these situations. What if it was adult children fighting a father's wish to pull his wife's plug?
If she was able to speak and be cognisant and said she wanted to die, the law would not allow it. (no suicide)
I think we should all not loose site of the fact that this is just putting the federal courts in play to review the, as you correctly say, CONTESTED right to die cases.
I would put forth to everyone here that the root cause of this getting so ugly is the fact you have a lawyer involved who is unwilling to advise his client to compromise. Most of these guardianship cases do end in a reasonable compromise.
It is sad to say that no matter how noble the effort to keep this woman alive, it has now reached beyond her life and into greater causes. I even saw a mention on FNC that somehow this might impact the abortion debate. (?!)
Have any people here been temporarily incapacitated? Car accident? Comas? Do you remember any of it?
How long would it take to starve Teddy?
Probably a year or so.
Keep praying. We have to admit we're seeing things happen. I can't wait for the big one--that of judges being confronted with their tyranny. This may be a blessing in disguise if it begins the descent of the run-away judicary.
Please God let it be so.
It's the very Nazi view of the disabled: useless eaters.
Approximately 150,000 people in this country alone are being kept alive by these machines, feeding tubes.
So if you are going to see them all killed, you will need a bigger boat.
"a retroactive bill"
One conservative on Fox said that 'ex post facto' only applies to criminal cases, and that the guy claiming this as an objective should've known this from basic law school.
You could probably starve Teddy after only a couple of meals! Four courses please, and dessert!
No kidding. I just came across it and wish I never had....
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.