TERRI SCHIAVO DAILY MARCH 2005 PART 4, DAY 5 OF HER DEHYDRATION -- PLEASE HANG ON WITH US

Various | 3-23-05

[STARWISE]

Tonight it is, March 22, 2005, over five days since Theresa Marie Schiavo commenced her ordeal of purposeful and legally sanctioned dehydration and starvation. We await a decision from the three judge panel from Eleventh Judicial Circuit as to her fate, as her family struggles with seeing Terri's physical health deteriorate.

[sinkspur]

Whittmore's decision that Terri's civil rights were not violated is based on the findings of the trial court, findings which the law required him to set aside.

Schindler's lawyer, David Gibbs, may have fatally erred by dragging the previous court case into federal court as the basis for the stay.

Whittmore had to respond to what was presented to him, and Gibbs presented nothing new.

A major screw-up by Gibbs.

[Soul Seeker]

I understand, but to most people who hear the term the first thing that springs to mind is a vegetable. A piece of produce. The term doesn't sit too well, and combined with the forces almost gleeful at using the term, I've come to despise it.

[Torie]

The judge must advert to the pleadings. The pleadings complained about how the case was handled, and posed unpersuasive constitutional theories. It did not say in the pleading that Terri did not want to die in this circumstance, and was not PVS, as just an allegation. It for example complained that Greer must have blown it, because Terri was Catholic. Sad.

[Freepertwo]

Thanks for that gracious answer. ;-) My opinion on abortion was sealed from that moment.

[Theodore R.]

If it has been made but not yet posted, wouldn't Gibbs already know what was decided? Wouldn't they already have informed Gibbs about starting hydration? I am pessimistic again.

[supercat]

Gibbs had to plead a civil rights cause of action because that is what the law said. The court had to try the case de novo without regard to the rulings of the state court because that is what the law said. You are trying to argue that Gibbs pleadings gave the judge no option but to rule one way, when the law gave him no option but to try the case.

In other words, he has to cite many details of Greer's previous rulings while simultaneously arguing that Greer's rulings should be ignored in deciding the merits of his case.

Grrrr.....

[Cboldt]

thanks but if you go back and read what I said...I under stand what it means but I don't know how it will be done

Ahhh, I did't scan all the way back to the original question, but in yours, you noting something lik e"maybe hearing the lawyers arguments ... ". ANyway, a de novo review looks at all of the material in the case, all of the evidence is scrutinized. None of the legal conclusions that were drawn from the evidence in the original trial are assumed to be correct (or incorrect). The new court then compares its result with the trial court, and where they reach different conclusions, the new court explains why the old court was WRONG. Or, if they agree on the interpretation of evidence, they affirm.

Sort of a simplification. Some of the differences in legal conclusion have no bearing on the ultimate outcome of the case. The important thing though, the evidence is looked at "with fresh eyes." My concern is that teh trial attorney for Schiavo's was passive and did not advocate strongly, or dispute certain evidence. But as far as I konw, the absence of an objection in the orginal trial does NOT preclude raising that objection in the second, de novo trial.

[Lauren BaRecall]

Yes. I heard that about 8:00PM

[TAdams8591]

I know,

Jodi's mother worked for the Sheriff, who then introduced Michael to Greer and Felos. The Sheriff hired Michael for awhile. That is why the Sheriff NEVER investigated him. Michael moved Terri into the Hospice where she is held currently, after meeting Felos and Greer.

Michael struck GOLD when he met Jodi (and I don't mean because she was so wonderful) in more ways than one.

[sissyjane]

>>That's my opinion, based on the fact that NCLaw411 was able to obtain some kind of information concerning the Schaivo case<<

Was the info unreadable? Can anyone else here read it?

[valleygal]

If the 11th circuit rules for Terri, MS wants an 8 hour delay in restoring Terri's feeding tubeso he can appeal to the the USSC. Sorry is someone posted this already. I've fallen behind. The thread is moving too fast.

[pollywog]

Oh my feeble brain is having trouble processing this one. I was wondering why he brought up the violation of her religious rights.....so what SHOULD he have brought up?

[combat_boots]

"She was asked to appear before a Congressional Committee."

I'm with you on that. Terri has been subpoenaed by Congress. Guess he's got to kill her before that then, huh. Good Friday, too. Nice touch.

My God some people are truly evil. But then we knew that.

[nicmarlo]

See his post #44, in part, below:

Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo v. George W. Greer
File Date Entry Party Pending
03/18/2005 DC Order: COA Denied: Theresa Maria Schindler Schiavo No
03/19/2005 Motion for Certificate of Appealability No
03/20/2005 Supplemental Letter Brief Theresa Maria Schindler Schiavo No
03/20/2005 Response to Supplemental Letter Brief: Michael Schiavo No
03/21/2005 DKT2 (Docketing Notice) issued. To:Gibbs, David C., III;
c:Crist, Charlie; c:Destro, Robert A.; c:Sheryl L. Loesch; 
c:Tragos, George E. No

03/21/2005 DIS-4 (Letter to district court enclosing court
order) issued. 
To:Crist, Charlie; To:Destro, Robert A.;
To:Felos, George James; 
To:Gibbs, David C., III; 
To:Moody, James S., Jr.; 
To:Sheryl L. Loesch; 
To:Tragos, George E. No
03/21/2005 Judgment of the district court is Vacated and 
Remanded with instructions; Application for COA Granted In
Part & Denied As Moot In Part; Motion for Injunction Denied
Without Prejudice; Mandate issued immediately. (EEC/FMH/CRW)
No

[DJ MacWoW]

Besides, most neurologists claim she feels no pain.

Then why do they administer morphine? I've not heard one honest discussion on the pain this causes.

[atruelady]

Well, at some point you would have mentioned the previous court because that is the one that removed the tube that is killing her.

But, Whittemore ruled on the issue of a de novo trial IMMEDIATELY and did it on the conclusion that based on the OLD COURT info (wasn't supposed to be considered), that the Schinlder might not win. Dumb, or deliberately malicious to stall.

So...the only thing before the court regarding the de novo hearing was to SCHEDULE a new trial at a later date AND act on the INJUNCTIONS that he didn't even really consider.

[SeasideSparrow]

Please, please - let's not blame the shepherd (Gibbs) who has worked so tirelessly for the Schlindlers!

Goodness.

Keep the blame at the feet of the judiciary allowing this mess.

[Abby4116]

maybe they meant Pacific Time / sarcasm

[valleygal]

Let's save the topic of abortion for another night. Thanks.

[bust]

You are exactly right but, you know, how would that play on TV? The cops gun down her family trying to save her.... The country would explode in fury.