Replies

Why was only one man, Judge Greer, the determinant of the facts in Terri's case?

In most other cases, it is a jury that determines the facts. Certainly the facts in all capital cases are determined by a jury.

Qualified individuals can make wise judgments. An individual can also make horrific judgments. Our society has determined that groups of individuals are more likely to be wise. That is why we have city councils, company boards of directors, and jury trials. Groups of people tend to be "less imperfect" than single individuals.

Setting aside personalities, as distasteful as they appear to be, having only one person determine the facts seems to be the central failing of the judicial system in Terri's case. For the future, that failing could be solved by legislative action.

Why was only one man, Judge Greer, the determinant of the facts in Terri's case?

Because that's how probate court works. If you want juries in probate courts, you'll have to increase jury call-ups appropriately.

Thank you for forthrightly making the point that juries must be brought into cases involving life and death ajudication.

If you agree with LOC1's point, please visit and contribute to a vanity thread I posted which includes draft legislation to require the consent of an impartial jury to any court action which would result in a death, and forbids application to persons not found guilty of crimes of treatment which would be judge cruel and unusual punishment for a capital crime:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1375230/posts

I would really like some FReepers with legal background to tighten up the language and fill in the gaps, and then for us to send the draft legislation to our senators and congressmen.

Our local hospital (I suspect all hospitals) has a review board when the question to discontinue support arises. I haven't heard anything like this happening in this case, but, certainly, it is a decision that should not be left in the hands of one man, in any situation. I can not for the life of me figure out how a judge could not order more modern tests to be run or why he would not listen to newer evidence. The judicial system let Terri day from day 1.

"Why was only one man, Judge Greer, the determinant of the facts in Terri's case?"

Have you read the opinions of the 2nd District Court of Appeals?

If you read them, it will quickly become obvious that the premise of your question is deeply flawed.

>> Why was only one man, Judge Greer, the determinant of the FACTS in Terri's case?

Thanks LOC1, you're the first person I see pointing that out besides me.

Contrary to the ugly liberal talking heads saying that DOZENS of judges and courts reviewed this, it was only Greer that decided the two supposed 'facts' that killed Terri.

Greer, and ONLY Greer, decided Terri was in PVS based on a slight majority of the evidence.
Greer, and ONLY Greer, decided Terri WISHED to starve to death rather than live with an inconspicuous feeding tube, OR to get swallowing therapy. Greer decided Terri's wishes, based on just a slight majority (in his mind) of the evidence.

I would also like to see post-mortem legal changes do away with the 'preponderance of evidence' standard for life and death cases. "Beyond ALL reasonable Doubt" is the ONLY way to go.

And Habeus Corpus (trial de novo's) make sense too; As long as serial killers can have 'em, then why not innocent disabled citizens with family members still wanting to care for them!!!

George W. Greer