 |
Posted on 03/28/2005 7:48:32 PM PST by Theodore R.
Schindlers Were Outgunned by Lawyers Early
In case you were wondering, with so many facts in dispute about the Terri Schiavo case, the answer is relatively clear: The Schindlers, well-intentioned as they have been, were outgunned in the early legal fight that sealed their daughter's fate.
The early legal maneuvering created "facts" that are now beyond dispute in higher courts. One is the unbelievable claim by Michael Schiavo that Terri wanted to be starved and dehydrated to death.
One Florida attorney told the story on Steve Sailer's Web blog (www.isteve.com).
Here's what the lawyer wrote:
"I have been following the case for years. Something that interests me about the Terri Schiavo case, and that doesn't seem to have gotten much media attention: The whole case rests on the fact that the Schindlers (Terri's parents) were totally outlawyered by the husband (Michael Schiavo) at the trial court level.
"This happened because, in addition to getting a $750K judgment for Terri's medical care, Michael Schiavo individually got a $300K award of damages for loss of consortium, which gave him the money to hire a top-notch lawyer to represent him on the right-to-die claim. He hired George Felos, who specializes in this area and litigated one of the landmark right-to-die cases in Florida in the early '90s.
"By contrast, the Schindlers had trouble even finding a lawyer who would take their case since there was no money in it. Finally they found an inexperienced lawyer who agreed to take it partly out of sympathy for them, but she had almost no resources to work with and no experience in this area of the law. She didn't even depose Michael Schiavo's siblings, who were key witnesses at the trial that decided whether Terri would have wanted to be kept alive. Not surprisingly, Felos steamrollered her.
"The parents obviously had no idea what they were up against until it was too late. It was only after the trial that they started going around to religious and right-to-life groups to tell their story. These organizations were very supportive, but by that point their options were already limited because the trial judge had entered a judgment finding that Terri Schiavo would not have wanted to live.
"This fact is of crucial importance -- and it's one often not fully appreciated by the media, who like to focus on the drama of cases going to the big, powerful appeals courts: Once a trial court enters a judgment into the record, that judgment's findings become THE FACTS of the case, and can only be overturned if the fact finder (in this case, the judge) acted capriciously (i.e., reached a conclusion that had essentially no basis in fact).
"In this case, the trial judge simply chose to believe Michael Schiavo's version of the facts over the Schindlers'. Since there was evidence to support his conclusion (in the form of testimony from Michael Schiavo's siblings), it became nearly impossible for the Schindlers to overturn it. The judges who considered the case after the trial-level proceeding could make decisions only on narrow questions of law. They had no room to ask, "Hey, wait a minute, would she really want to die?" That "fact" had already been decided.
"In essence, the finding that Terri Schiavo would want to die came down to the subjective opinion of one overworked trial judge who was confronted by a very sharp, experienced right-to-die attorney on one side and a young, quasi-pro bono lawyer on the other.
"Nothing unusual about this, of course. It's the kind of thing that happens all the time. But it's an interesting point to keep in mind when you read that the Schiavo case has been litigated for years and has been reviewed by dozens of judges ... yadda yadda yadda.
"By the way, I'm guessing that George Felos is probably quite happy to work the Schiavo case for free at this point since it's making him one of the most famous right-to-kill -- I mean right-to-die -- lawyers in the country. His BlackBerry has probably melted down by now, what with all the messages from the hurry-up-and-die adult children you've been blogging about."
|
I believe it is illegal to sell organs .. but they can be donated
But I don't think her organs would any good after her death since she's being dehydrated to death
Good post
Because they don't want to
Scary ain't it?
They can't create, but they can try to destroy what God has created.
Pure, unadulterated, rebellious envy.
Legitimate or intelligent was the key word here..morbid
Added to Terri Bookmark Mountain. Good find. FReegards....
(Btw, did anybody see "Dr." Cranford blow his gasket on the Joe Scarborough show last night? Calling lovely reporter Lisa Daniels "stupid" because she dared to ask questions Cranford didn't like?!)
Other Monday-morning-lawyering I've heard is that the Schindler's lawyers should've pursued a divorce case against Michael Schiavo much earlier and more aggressively.
Even if its under the guise of "Scientific Research"? In re selling organs? I would think the study of Terri's brain would be a much sought after item -- effects of dehydration, starving; plus possibly in re the onset of her current condition. Perhaps the "autopsy" Mr. Schiavo is demanding aims to do just this; perhaps not. This is my real question. Why is he demanding an autopsy? What will be requested for study in that autopsy?
As none of you addressed the point - I take it none of you can be counted on to defend the country as that usually means innocent people die somewhere.
All of you make the point that Terri is pleading for her life. She's not. To say she is to make a leap in logic and fact to suit your argument. Come on. This has been going on for years. Why is it that she's had nothing to utter about the matter but all of a sudden the family claims "oh yes, she said x, she said y." They'll say anything, that's why.
If you all were to be taken for your word I suspect a living will wouldn't really matter either because that would be suicide, wouldn't it? Assisted suicide is off limits too in your worldview so no one could pull a plug without you damning them to hell.
And, since all of you seem to think my reference to costs makes me a Nazi (how conveniently and easily you slip into the insunuation that conservatives are Nazis, gee, where have I heard that before?) . . . you miss one convenient fact. This woman's lawful husband is making the call. In this case that creates problems because of the dispute within her family. I go back to the point of putting it down in writing. She didn't.
Is Michael's decision within the realm of a reasonable and compassionate response to the situation? Absolutely.
They say you can tell a man by the company he keeps. Well, you guys have the kook from Kansas and Jesse Jackson leading your circus over poor Terri's body. That should tell you something. The biggest grandstanders our country has to offer are leading you over the cliff of reason.
I just don't trust People who push U-health, Euthansia, and have secret medical meetings while sitting in the highest offices in the land.
Liberals are always screaming about the evil Pharmaceutical industry and "connections" to Republicans. Leftists are fully unaware that the real medical-time-woofers are on their own side of the political aisle, and like to experiment on real people, and without their "genuinely cognizant" consent or knowledge. (Oh, those forms that get signed!) Really uncute. But don't dare experiment on Animals! Heavens, no. And the left fell for this BS so long ago. I remember the attacks on the animal labs at UC Davis, CA. Never forgot.
All of this evidence was in the record that the federal judge (Whittemore) was to review _de novo_. _He_ claimed that they did not adequately make the case for a de novo review, but that's his CYA effort. If Judge Whittemore had done what Congresss asked him to do, all the nurse affidavits, all the counter-Michael testimony that _was already introduced_ in the 2000-2003 court proceedings but simply brushed aside by Greer, would have been taken seriously. Judge Whittemoree punted. Terri's death is his fault, Greer's fault, Felos's fault. Let's keep focused.
It bothers me considerably that, in our justified anger and frustration at the sheer criminality of what has been done to Terri Schiavo we lash out at our own side, at Jeb Bush, at the Schindler lawyers.
Look, a great evil was done by George Greer, Michael Schiavo, George Felos. The article to which this thread responds point that out--the Schindlers were outlawyered by evil people, dishonest people, liars. Place the blame there, where it belongs so that we can keep our focus on what needs to be done to change things.
Blaming the victim only permits the perps to walk free and do it again. Yes, we are frustrated, yes, we are tempted to say, "if only so and so had done this and this." Perhaps, yes, it might have made a difference. But the real villains here are Greer, Felos and the MSM, the RINOs in the legislatures etc. Let's keep the drumbeat there, where it belongs
Thank you very much for sharing this information with me.
I don't think you meant to include me in your response, because nothing of what you said addresses anything I said.
Reading your post, it sounds like you are making generalizations (you all make the point, you all think, damning to hell, etc) It also sounds like you are repeating what the talking heads are saying - this has been going on for years - so does that make it right? Or its compassionate - how?
You might think I would never want to live that way or most people would not want to, but do you really know? Did Christopher Reeve want to live that way- probably not, but he still wanted to live - its called being human - we want to live - its in our nature. People that want to die are people who are suffering physically or mentally. Terry is not.
And like I said, when the government (court) steps in and uses hearsay as a fact, and then decides on the side of death, we are in trouble.
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.