Your points are well taken..however, we don't know in what context these statements were offered. Were they solicited...were they in response to a question as you state. Having been in a courtroom many times (no, I'm not a lawyer..retired law enforcement) people always paraphrase what the conversation was in their simplest terms. Since there is also evidence that she made statements to the contrary, and since the Schiavo witnesses have an interest in the outcome of the case, you decide. The point that I don't underatand that is not getting the attention of the media is the conflict of interest of Greer acting as Teri's guardian and as trier of fact.
Here is what the judge said about the testimony of Scott and Joan:
The court has reviewed the testimony of Schott Scfhiavo and Joan Schiavo and finds nothing contained therein to be unreliable. The court notes that neither of these witnesses appeared to have shaded his or her testimony or even attempt (sic) to exclude unfavorable comments or points regarding these discussions. They were not impeached on cross-examination. Argument is made as to why they waited so long to step forward but their explanations are worthy of belief.
Since there is also evidence that she made statements to the contrary, and since the Schiavo witnesses have an interest in the outcome of the case, you decide.
Apart from the fact that they know Terri (she would have been unlikely to talk with strangers about such a topic), Scott and Joan 'have [no] interest in the outcome of the case.' In contrast, the judge found that both the husband and the parents had a monetary interest in the outcome of the case. That is why, in my opinion, he gave so much weight to the testimony of Scott and Joan.
The point that I don't underatand that is not getting the attention of the media is the conflict of interest of Greer acting as Teri's guardian and as trier of fact.
The judge has never acted as Terri's guardian. Her guardian is now and has always been the husband. The judge reviews the conduct of the guardian, but that is part of the judicial role. There is no conflict. That is perhaps why it is "not getting the attention of the media."