Posted on 03/25/2005 11:32:07 AM PST by WBurgVACon
The judge who tried the Terri Schiavo case and most recently rejected Gov. Jeb Bush's request to intervene, received a campaign contribution from the lawyer pressing for the brain-injured woman's death, raising questions of a conflict of interest.
According to Florida's Department of State, Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge George W. Greer received a contribution of $250 for his 2004 re-election campaign from Felos & Felos, the law firm of George Felos.
Felos, known as a "right-to-die" advocate, represents Terri Schiavo's estranged husband, Michael Schiavo, who won a court order from Greer to have the woman's life-sustaining feeding tube removed one week ago.
The contribution's apparent conflict of interest was raised by an Internet site investigating the Schiavo case, the Empire Journal, and by Rev. D. James Kennedy's group Renew America.
The contribution from Felos came May 7, 2004, one day after Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge Douglas Baird ruled "Terri's Law" unconstitutional. The Florida Legislature's measure was designed to enable Gov. Bush to intervene in the previous instance in which Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed.
The contribution from Felos was the only one made that day, indicating it was not part of a fund-raising effort.
The Empire Journal also reported contributions to Greer were made by three other lawyers who represented Michael Schiavo at various stages in the case.
Deborah Bushnell, Gwyneth Stanley and Stephen G. Nilsson each contributed at least $250 to Greer's re-election campaign, as did court-appointed attorneys representing the husband's interest, Pacarek & Herman and Richard Pearse.
WND attempted to reach the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission, the independent body that investigates complaints against state judges, but there was no response.
Felos' office in Dunedin, Fla., also could not be reached.
The Empire Journal notes that in Florida, a judge is not required to recuse himself if he receives a contribution from an attorney in a case over which he presides.
Nevertheless, a contribution can establish the appearance of impropriety, and the state's code of judicial conduct requires a judge to remove himself in such a case.
Ronald D. Rotunda, professor of law at George Mason University, told the Empire Journal he sees such contributions as problematic.
He cites a 2002 poll of the American Bar Association concluding 84 percent of all Americans are concerned that the impartiality of judges is compromised by their need to raise campaign contributions.
Rotunda said judicial campaign contributions constitute or appear to constitute a tacit quid pro quo in which the judge favors or tilts towards the contributor-litigant.
Thank you for saying that. And that's just the official contribution--who knows what's being passed under the counter.
And, for some folks, justice is as cheap as a $50 bill. It hits the news once in awhile, locally.
Oftentimes, both sides are wrong.
But it's such a side issue. People want to find a grand conspiracy between everyone involved in the case. It's rampant here. It's a huge amount of noise to filter out to get to the real issues which are being contested.
Or maybe the other way around, Schivo knows things that the hospice doesn't want made public...so Greer's wife on board...Greer makes rulings to keep Schiavo's mouth shut. Just a thought....I wouldn't even think such thoughts except that the rulings have been so brutal, over and over again not accepting obvious evidence into consideration for Terri's sake.
The problem I have is motive for what seems an obvious bias...it's like the judge is on a crusade..so one begins to wonder why?
I have a great deal of trouble with the apparent conflicts of interest, and the fact that no recent tests on Terri have been done.
I also have a great deal of trouble with the horrible legal strategy of the Schindlers' attorneys. They blew it and Terri will die.
You give your imagination free reign, don't you? Scary.
And just think, I haven't had my daily dose of double-chocolate, triple caffine, latte, yet.
Give me time.
But thank you, for the compliment. It was nice of you to take the time to write me.
Can we spell 'woman hater."
Don't forget, in oh, what was it...1988 he denied a woman a restraining order and when they found her BODY, dear greer said he would have granted it if he knew the husband had a weapon.
Uh. The woman was stabbed to death.
HELLLOOOOOOO........ Anybody home up there?
It doesn't seem it (I can read my postings, too) that I'm a calm, rational human being, though I am.
How do I put this...
There came a time when I began to realize that not only does evil really exist, but that some people actually thrive on it. I mean, good old-fashioned, living off of the thrill, thriving on evil.
So many people have 'compromised,' that they actually cannot wake up: The cost for them would be so great that they actively chose to stay asleep, thinking thus so their hands are clean.
Making sense?
It did.
Perhaps I did not mistake you for someone else.
I agree.
I think that the Schindler's are right but are not sophisticated.
That's exactly what's going on in this case. Same as the participants in Satanic sacrifices getting off on the suffering and death of the victim. They feed of the vibrations like vampires. Terri Schiavo's case is a "civilized" lite version of it.
Paganism is full of satanic human sacrifices designed to propitiate dark spirts and dark gods. Paganism is alive and well in Pinellas County Florida.
Aria,
Looking aback through my missives.
The "Heelllllllllooooooooooooo," thingy wasn't aimed at you. It was named at the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
But they appear to have to home for the year.
The picture of the young boy on the Drudge Report.
Ten year old boy, wearing a "Jesus Christ" tee-Shirt.
"ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIER."
Tomorrow's leaders...Satan will not get them all.
They are God's.
I don't know if you did or didn't, but there's so much noise on both sides that it's difficult for someone with no preconceived opinion of what the outcome should be to get a clear picture.
This forum is probably 80% in favor of keeping Terri alive, regardless of what it takes. Any and all evidence indicating otherwise is dismissed as lies. Any and all evidence that she is still there is elevated to the status of overwhelming proof.
Anyone, and certainly including any long-standing Freepers, who think Terri's life should be terminated are villified.
On the other side is Michael and the MSM who also misrepresent the facts, conveying the impression that Terri is braindead or that this is a right to die case.
I'm sick of it. As of today, this forum is completely intolerant of anyone who hasn't already made up their minds, and the vast majority are so radically apart as to make any discussion of the issue between them a flame war.
You're just itching to launch into me. Don't do it. It should be possible to have discussions here without all the emotional baggage that accompanies a life and death decision. I understand why people are on edge, or even over the edge. But it's terribly damaging to the forum and it's a lack of self-control.
Whatever the outcome of this case, it's not a good thing, except for the fact that millions of people will be filling out living wills for the first time.
Not really.
But, this is a serious issue.
I won't buy into a conspiracy theory (even though there are enough links between them all to build a ladder to the moon), but I do believe that Greer has been neither objective, nor open-minded about this case.
More's the pity for Terri and the Schindlers. May God bless them all.
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.