Posted on 03/24/2005 10:56:33 PM PST by ambrose
Judge is considering ruling from late hearing
PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (AP) - Another court, and another decision pending in the bitter dispute over the removal of the feeding tube from a brain-damaged Florida woman.
A federal judge in Tampa says he'll work overnight to issue a ruling following a hearing on an emergency request to have Terri Schiavo's feeding tube reconnected.
It was removed Friday. Tonight's hearing follows a refusal by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. And Florida's Supreme court issued a late ruling backing a lower court judge's refusal to allow the state to take custody of Schiavo.
Judge James Whittemore asked the parents' lawyer to focus on the legal issues.
As attorney David Gibbs attempted to liken Schiavo's death to a murder, the judge interrupted. Whittemore called the comparison "emotional rhetoric" and said it wouldn't influence the court.
Meanwhile, the area around the federal courthouse was evacuated during the hearing after a suspicious backpack was found outside. The hearing was not interrupted.
But apparently the en banc hearing of the 11th Circuit went against the Schindlers 10-2.
That means there was only one other judge there (besides Wilson) who understood the law passed by Congress the way Congress intended it.
I would think if there were any judges on that court who were inclined to give a chance to the Schindlers, they would've already voted at least to re-instate the tube.
"Judges on appeal focus on the law, and are trained to accept the findings of fact made by the "court of first instance." Generally, facts not part of the "record" in the original proceedings can't even be considered on appeal. This is because an appeal is supposed to be limited to errors made by the trial court in the interpretation of the law, and is not supposed to provide a "second opinion" on the facts of a case."
That's what I was afraid of. This has been the problem this whole time.
I see no more chances for Terri.
He's not as smart as Jesse.
Btw, did you know Jesse Jackson is on Terri's side?
"Incidentally, if you didn't catch David Boies on Hannity earlier, he's about to come on FOX in a few minutes (rerun). He's a brilliant though at times exacerbating lawyer."
Bill Bennett was great too. I loved seeing him put Holms in his place. "Oh, please yourself" (referring to how bad a husband Terri has)
You know the world is turned on its head when Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson, and Christian conservatives are pitted against an alliance of Democrats and federalists.
Randall Terry has done more to descredit the pro-life movement in the eyes of middle America than just about any other person I can think of.
Looks to me like the Democrats are becoming "The Party Of Death".
New name --- The Deathocrats
Actually I've been really impressed with David Boies the last few nights he's been on TV. He seems to be a decent and thoughtful guy. What a surprise.
"No, the judge is stalling in the hopes that kidney failure is the 'final solution.'"
I agree.
Whittemore did the same thing, when the case went to him the last time, he was running out the clock.
He isn't going to be working on this case, he will be sleeping without a care in the world on his couch in his chambers, to keep up appearances of how hard he is contemplating this case.
I just hope he has nightmares of him being in Terri's condition, screaming out in agony for a drop of water and nobody would give it to him...
And I hope that Greer, Whittemore and all the other judges who so cavalierly refused to save Terri's life, will have similar nightmares every night.
He looks like death warmed over. He probably goes home and puts on some slippers and a Dracula cape.
OK, but what exactly has he done?
LOL! That must've been embarassing. Getting a good scolding from the judge.
Heh, my "wishes" precisely. I'm going to add that to my "living will."
Let's pretend that a woman's life is not in balance, and let's just focus on some legal technicalities -- that's what he is saying.
He wants to ignore reality, that his decision WILL mean life or death to an innocent woman.
It's amazing how decent some lawyers can be when they're not being paid to lie through their teeth.
Sir SuziQ and I were discussing this case with our son who is home for the weekend from Law School. We were talking about how mystifying the whole thing is for people who don't understand the minutiae of the Law. It is the type of case that can seriously diminsh the average citizen's trust in the Judicial system when they see that this poor woman has been literally condemned to death, and no one seems to be able to do anything about it, while folks who have committed heinous crimes can have their sentences commuted or can be pardoned based on technicalities in the judicial process.
So why do you think the Congress put in the "de novo" clause, exactly so the Federal judges would start from the beginning, which they refused to do.
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.