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."
How could they know a truck was about to hit them run by very organized groups with ruthless adherence to their beliefs and goals.
But that is the reason the US Congress wanted the Federal Court to have a "de novo" hearing, so they don't start with the false "established facts".
But the Courts refused.
Nice try, but I think the deck was stacked against Terri from the beginning.
Her husband's attorneys were campaign donors to Greer, for example (conflict of interest?)
Felos arranged to have the Florida law revised BEFORE he filed the Schiavo case.
And there are a lot of other odd things about this case,
which make it stink like three-day old fish. . .
Yes, of course this sounds grim; but does anyone know, now, had Terri signed to "be an organ donor"? No, I haven't give up on her at all. I'm hearing peeps (sneak previews?) via news, however...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1372471/posts
How the Schiavo Federal Court Case Might Have Been Won FindLaw's Writ ^ | Saturday, Mar. 26, 2005 | By MICHAEL C. DORF
Congress passed a law giving them the right to a trial de novo, but the lawyers didn't ask for that in their first federal lawsuit. Much of the anger here at FR that has been directed toward Jeb Bush and the judges really should be directed equally toward the lawyers for Terri's parents. Why on earth did they wait until the last minute to bring forth the evidence of Terri's statement that she wanted to live?
"How could they know a truck was about to hit them run by very organized groups with ruthless adherence to their beliefs and goals ghouls."
After the abuse she's suffered, I doubt her organs will be suitable for harvesting.
Then might I suggest Michael Schiavo enagage in consortium with himself?
The pro-death lobby set this case up long ago. They stacked the deck, they ran the table, and they ran the Schindlers like pigeons in three-card monty. They're organized evil like no other, and they want what they want. When they're willing to ennoble murder, you can't think there's a single thing they won't try.
it's a good question ... maybe a professional on this board can answer. I've assumed that her internal organs would not be usable as they will have shut down due to the dehydration. Perhaps her eyes could be used.
This analysis is spot on. The trial judge decides "the facts." And most cases are decided based on the resolution of disputed facts, not disputes as to the law.
Good question. They had time for TV and radio appearances during the week.
Actually, it does. It stems from the belief that the people, in the form of a jury, should be the triers of fact, and the judges should stick to interpreting the law. When you have a case where there's no jury trial, the judge ends up filling both roles but the appeals process remains unchanged. This is true for both civil and criminal cases. Frankly, I'm not sure there's a better way of doing it.
I know they had poor legal counsel for the trial, but I really question the attorney they have now. I have my doubts about him. Maybe he did not present the proper case to the fed. courts? ( I am not sticking up for the fed. courts)
Bingo. Why don't more people get it?
I know they had poor legal counsel for the trial, but I really question the attorney they have now. I have my doubts about him. Maybe he did not present the proper case to the fed. courts? ( I am not sticking up for the fed. courts)
I think an earlier poster hit it on the head. All they wanted was to take care of their daughter. I'm sure they never saw the tidal wave of animosity that their 'son-in-law' had for their daughter and for them. By the time they realized they were in fight to the death with major league players, it was too late.
"...Then might I suggest Michael Schiavo enagage in consortium with himself?..."
It is comments like these that keep me coming back to freerepublic. Kudos to atomicpossum for this very fitting phrase.
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.