[ordinaryguy]

The facts, as I understand them, are that Dr. Cranford was in favor of starving Wendland, and that he did not believe that Wendland was PVS, but that PVS and slightly concious should be treated the same way - that the patients would not want to live that way, so they should not be provided with nutrition.

None of that is hearsay, because it all came from Dr. Cranford's own words.

Are you asserting that I am misunderstanding any of his positions, and if so which?

[Smartaleck]

It was Wendland's wife that decided to remove the feeding tube.
"Rose Wendland praised Dr. Ronald Cranford, a Minnesota neurologist and bioethicist, for providing her with medical and moral advice during Robert's final days. Cranford, ****a consultant in several high-profile right-to-die cases,***** did not personally treat Wendland but advised doctors on his care."

He was brought into the trial to testify as to the effects of dehydration from what I read.

His credentials. (He is a bioethicist)
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:q9tOfeXrVsUJ:www.bioethics.umn.edu/faculty/cranford_r_cv.pdf+Robert+Wendland++Dr.+Ronald+Cranford&hl=en