Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: All

I thought the law was for her to have an entirely (from day 1) new trial, not based on anything that has happened in the old case. And that since it would take time, her feeding tube would be reinserted. This just sounds like another appeal hearing on the old case.

What did I miss?


3,368 posted on 03/22/2005 4:32:30 AM PST by Abby4116
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3364 | View Replies ]


To: Abby4116

You missed nothing. The judge is the one who didn't get the picture.


3,370 posted on 03/22/2005 4:33:36 AM PST by phenn (http://www.terrisfight.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3368 | View Replies ]

To: Abby4116

You didn't miss anything. Whittemore just disregarded the federal Terri's Law.


3,375 posted on 03/22/2005 4:35:10 AM PST by Tree of Liberty (requiescat in pace, President Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3368 | View Replies ]

To: Abby4116

The Courts are ignoring the de novo, or new trial part, of the law. They don't consider it law, apparently, if they don't want to do it. After all, they are the Courts...the new gods.


3,376 posted on 03/22/2005 4:35:11 AM PST by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3368 | View Replies ]

To: Abby4116

That is exactly how this judge handled it...he reviewed everything to see if HE thought there were grounds to start a de Novo procedure, and he ruled that there wasn't. And wasted a precious 24 hours doing it.


3,390 posted on 03/22/2005 4:52:52 AM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3368 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson