Posted on 03/21/2005 7:50:03 AM PST by Pendragon_6
Lets see, first Michael Schiavo beats and strangles his wife Terri, leaves her lying unconscious on the floor until her family arrives to get her to the hospital.
Then Michael Schiavo sues the hospital for $20 million because he needs the money to get his poor wife therapy.
Then Michael Schiavo pockets the money, denies his wife the care he said she needed and finally, claims she really wants to die.
Michael Schiavo killed his wife Terri's cat, melted down her wedding ring and then took up with his girlfriend and lives with her today with their children. Does this sound like a loving husband who really cares about his wife's wishes?
And what do we get on the tube every hour on the hour: “persistent vegetative state” as though any of the talking heads who ghoulishly proclaim Terri's life isn't worth that of a convicted serial killer sitting on death row (for 20 years, while due process goes on).
Michael Schiavo's supporters claim he loved his wife Terri enough to take a nursing degree so that he could take care of her. I think he got that nursing degree so he could inject her with insulin and hasten her death and his complete claim to all the money he won in litigation.
Just take a gander at the sworn testimony of an attending nurse: Carla Sauer Iyer (affidavit* below) but let me save you some time and report a quote of Michael Schiavo's after visiting his still living wife: "When is that bitch gonna die?"
Hmmm. Loving husband or man so afraid of not only not getting the money (what's left of the $20 million) but the prospect of facing a jury for his attempted murder, a charge which is possible as long as Terri lives. Sounds like motive to me.
Michael Schiavo says Terri said she never wanted to be kept alive on machines. Okay. Even if that was her statement (which there is absolutely no corroborating testimony and quite the unusual statement coming from a young, newly married woman still in her twenties and full of life); Terri is not being kept alive by machines!
Terri has a feeding tube from which she gets food and water. Had she had the care and therapy she was entitled to, there is every chance today Terri would be divorced from that louse and feeding herself just fine.
About that “loving husband” crapola: what husband do you know evinces his marital fidelity and love by living with another woman, having children with that woman and dumps his wife in a hospice while waiting for her to die? What loving husband kills his sick wife's pet? What loving husband denies his wife's family visitation?
I ask these questions because the media morons are still stuck with their new term: “persistent vegetative state” and are oblivious to the actual facts of this tragic case.
Continued
My understanding is that he settled two years after the event for about one mil....
I believe he is the sole beneficiary less expenses for her upkeep. One way to reduce these expense is to kill her.
Get it?
>>>Factually speaking, her HUSBAND, no matter what anyone thinks ABOUT him, IS the Next of Kin and LEGALLY, has the ONLY right to decide. Her parents, according to the LAW should lose the lawsuit. You may not like it but there it is. >>>
Well hell, we just gave free reign for every abusive husband in the country (even IF Michael Schiavo didn't abuse his wife, it still gives cause for those who do) to just make sure she is damaged, not actually dead. Then you can kill her legally, make off with some cash and not have to serve a day in jail.
This statement above is absolutely ignorant. By your logic, parents would have the right to abuse or kill their children. Because they are the NEXT OF KIN and responsible for them.
So then, using that logic, why get married? "For better or WORSE was in my vows, until DEATH do us part." Not, "my family, will take me off of your hands if I am incapacitated, etc."
Michael may very well be a scumbag, probably is, but he is the NOK and when you start to tamper with that, other things WILL follow. Where do you draw the line THEN?
Do you have no problem with the fact that he is living and has children with another woman? The parents have been and should be given legal guardianship. He didn't keep his wedding vows. He should no longer be considered her husband.
That's why law enforcement calls looking into things as "investigations", which LE has totally failed to do in this case. There is ample evidence of something untoward having happened to Terri, why is every attempt to look deeper blocked? Why indeed, well we know why.
I have never heard of such absolutism about a husband's "authority" in all my life. This should be VERY interesting to other husbands wishing to get rid of their wives... Imagine, the husband SAYS she wants to die, sorry, but if it ain't on paper, it just ain't. Where are screaming feminists?? WHERE ARE THEY??
What is totally mind-boggling are the airheads saying that starvation is a gentle, NATURAL way to die. Women butchering their very own babies in their wombs, "partial birth" (infanticide) butchering, this society is sick, past redemption.
For better or WORSE was in my vows, until DEATH do us part."
Your words on earlier post. Michael did not live by. He should no longer be considered the husband.
So you have PROOF he was abusing her? Videotape? Pictures? Arrest records? Eye witnesses?
if not, then guess what?
IT AIN'T A PART OF THE ISSUE!
Tossing a red herring is what the donks do to cloud the issues.
Unless YOU specifically where there to HEAR her wishes, guess what? It is SUPPOSITION. HERESAY.
You people crack me up.
Was there a DIVORCE?
NO.
Did she start proceedings?
NO.
Does Florida recognize common-law marriages?
NO.
Guess what?
They are STILL married in the eyes of the LAW.
It ain't about what you THINK it is about WHAT the LAW is.
If you DO NOT like the law, change it but until you DO, that law, doctrine, ethos, creed, edict, whatever, IS THE LAW!
Michael is a scum. The elephant in the room is
his involvment in her injury. Why didn't Matt Lauer ask this morning: "Did you attempt to kill your wife?"
So... you don't believe due diligence for due process is required in this case, because.....?
The evidence that has been accumulated by doctors and nurses, that could possibly allow for further inquiry,was adamantly not allowed into any of the determinations by the court.
Don't you think the arrangements of Judge Greer and the administration of the hospice are slightly unusual? Don't you think Michael Schiavo may have had some culpability? They bagged Scott Peterson on less evidence. Why would you not want to investigate all the possible causes of her original injury?
The debate over divorce versus til-death-do-us-part is a very long one and cannot be rehashed here. Suffice it to say Michael Schiavo has wanted out for a long time now (at least 7 years ?) and he has no legal means to do so. The legal fact that he is tied to her is causing him to act in ways that the rest of us don't like - any way to get out is what he seems to be doing. So why not allow him that choice - it seems the most common-sense thing to do.
In earlier days, husbands/wives didn't have to face these choices because the technology was not available to keep someone alive for so long. Not everyone is meant to be a saint or a martyr, so let him out, I say, and turn her back over to her parents. Legally.
I get irritated every time I hear MS beat and strangled Terri. Where were the marks on her body when she arrived at the hospital? Crap like that does not help Terri's case.
No, you are wrong!
If the husband is the legal guardian at the time of vulnerability, he remains the legal guardian UNTIL there is a court ruling to the effect that there is a conflict of interest impacting the welfare of the disabled and in turn dictates who the legal guardian will be.
All one had to do was watch this idiot and his lawyer on that CNN interview to know that he did it. Up until that point(and the data later released just inforced my new opinion), I pretty much had not made up my mind one way or another.
Makes you wonder about her alleged bullemia and what brought it on. Perhaps Michael was constantly harping on her over her weight.
Because it wasn't investigated at the time of the occurence. Sorry, you're positing still more conspiracy by a whole group of people who have no vested interest in covering up a possible murder attempt. It doesn't pass the smell test.
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.