Posted on 03/20/2005 12:29:52 PM PST by kcvl
Per Fox News...
i find it one of the driving forces on the side of keeping her alive. conflicted to the max and equally resolute in not giving her up to the care of her ready willing and able parents. reasonable people cannot comprehend it.
"I wish you would stop muddying the waters by posting facts, Peach."
I have not seen a post with a so called fact of the matter, which I have NO seen the absolute counter fact.
I would posit that there is no one on earth that knows all the facts and I would go farther and say there are damn few on FR that KNOW many of the facts they post as God's truth. That is why I would like to see more hearings and an examination by a disinterested qualified doctor.
I'm not at all sure what your deal is. I posted a report that I saw a video of Terri and her father on Fox News. Do you disagree with that? I posted a report that I also saw a video on Fox News of the Schindlers being turned away from the hospice by a police officer? Do you disagree with that? I posted that Fox News was saying the Schindlers were now inside the hospice. Do you disagree with that? I posted I'd be surprised if the video is seen again. Do you disagree with that? I posted that I was aware that there were medical experts who had examined Terri and disagreed about her diagnosis. I don't think you actually disagreed with that, since your next post seems to confirm it. But, unless I misunderstand your next post, you now want to debate with me about the credibility of the doctors. So, what's the deal? If you want to argue with someone you seem to have plenty of other takers on this thread. Please leave me out of it.
if the bill truly provides representation to Terri, who has never had it, it does provide some hope for her.
Posted as a response to a post with which I agree. Affirmation, if you will.
Did I misaddress it?
By James Harper
St. Petersburg Times Staff Writer
February 4, 1994
TAMPA - A secretary at the University of South Florida who says she was injured during a faculty fracas just before Christmas filed a civil suit Thursday against one of the professors involved.
Jay Wolfson, a USF professor and member of the Hillsborough County Hospital Authority, threatened secretary Yolanda Santos, grabbed her and jumped on her back - all in a struggle over Santos' personal tape recorder, the suit charges.
"This is something one would expect to read about in grade school," said Santos' attorney, Steve Yerrid. "It's ironic in a place of higher learning that the very basics we learn as children were cast aside."
"We're comfortable that Dr. Wolfson did nothing inappropriate that day," said Tracy Sheehan, one of the lawyers representing him.
Santos' story is nothing but "a fabrication" designed to fuel a bitter faculty turf war at USF, she said.
The suit claims that Wolfson's actions amounted to assault and battery, false imprisonment and negligence and asks for $300,000 in punitive damages.
State prosecutors and USF officials are still investigating the Dec. 17 incident, which occurred at a faculty meeting in the Department of Health Policy and Management in the College of Public Health.
Details of the incident have been sketchy.
Department chairman James Studnicki, who along with Santos filed a criminal complaint, has declined to speak with reporters about it. Wolfson and interim public health dean John Skinner, who were both at the meeting, have said there was a lot of yelling that day, but nothing violent.
Santos' lawsuit offers different version of events.
The meeting, which Santos was there to record, began with an argument between Studnicki and Wolfson. When Studnicki tried to adjourn the meeting and asked Santos to leave with him, Wolfson grabbed her by the arm and thrust her back into her chair, the suit says. Santos said she was frightened by Wolfson's yelling and threats.
A few moments later, Studnicki again asked Santos to leave the room and to take her tape recorder with her. When Santos reached for the recorder, Wolfson "jumped on her back and reached over her in an effort to wrestle the records from her possession," the suit says.
"As a result of (Wolfson's) unexpected attack, (Santos) was violently pushed headfirst into the chair upon which the recorder had been resting and as a result sustained personal injuries."
The Provost Office has asked three professors to decide whether faculty rules were broken.
******
Wolfson made comments about the law last week during an interview with a local television station, and the parents took that to indicate his opposition to the governor's actions. Demers said he did not find those comments to be biased, but even if they had been he believes Wolfson could be fair and impartial.
"This law raises the question, perhaps even if you do have a living will, if there is a family member who has a legitimate concern about the application of the will, could that concern translate into ignoring the living will," Wolfson said in an interview with WFTS on Wednesday.
More than likely it was the condition her body was in due to bulemia.
Where is there evidence of strangulation?
I saw the same video. Unfortunately, I feel I am not medically qualified to be stating as fact that she was actually responding.
Unless they get a friendly federal judge, the law will find differently. We'll see.
Wolfson's appointment was agreed to by Jeb Bush. Why would Bush do this if there was such a conflict of interest?
The fiance kind of complicates his interests. Unless you are asserting that polygamy is the law of the day?
Wolfson has been out of the picture for some time now.
Since this is a legal matter, where in Florida law does it say this?
And if his wife is killed, and it comes out later that Schiavo did indeed lie, what happens then?
My first post on this thread is about the video that Terri's father gave to Fox News today. It's very recent vintage, perhaps as recent as this week. I posted what I saw in the video and you can search back to find it.
Hey, it's not about life. It's just about sex. Move along, let 'er die. She's in the way of Michael's healthy sex life. He can't be bothered with divorce--he wants to be a widower.
Wonder if Michael got money for loss of consortium when he was consorting...all along?
in any OTHER type of court proceeding a guy with his conflicts would be discredited as a witness in a nanosecond. but here he is permitted to decide whether she lives or dies.
But why not just divorce her then? Really - why not? Why hang around and insist on her death? I think he's going to an extraordinary effort to see that the deed is done (staying "married" to an invalid, fighting for her death in court) - and I have to ask myself why that is. Just a comment made in passing about not wanting to live on life support doesn't seem like enough of a reason to do all this.
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.