[PistolPaknMama]

If the judge did say a comment along the lines of how long Terri lasted last time and that he has time, I'm thinking (not a lawyer!) that it shows clear prejudicial disregard for the life of the plaintiff. I don't think I said it correctly, but I believe you can get the gist of it.

I'm with you on that. The difference between us and the judge, however, is that we care about her life. The judges have been/are only interested in facts (as they interpret them) and the law (as they interpret those too). Not saying at all that this judge isn't pro-death. It isn't like this is a case the judge hasn't heard about already or even discussed with his peers for the last year. There is no way he came on the scene without an impression of what he would have done had he been in Greer's seat.

But to let her lie there and deteriorate futher while he's out have dinner tonight, thinking about things, is just evil. If he decides in two days the case has merit, it won't do any good if Terri is dead.

[harpo11]

"But to let her lie there and deteriorate futher while he's out have dinner tonight, thinking about things, is just evil. If he decides in two days the case has merit, it won't do any good if Terri is dead."

Thomas Jefferson, wrote in a letter to Monsieur A. Coray, October 31, 1823:

"At the establishment of our constitution,
the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless
and harmless members of the government.
Experience, however, soon showed in what
way they were to become the most dangerous..."