Skip to comments.
Zogby Poll: Americans Not in Favor of Starving Terri Schiavo (poll with fair questions)
LifeNews ^
| April 1, 2005
| Steven Ertelt
Posted on 04/01/2005 8:05:46 PM PST by FairOpinion
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 701-715 next last
To: maine-iac7
Hey, my friend,
I don't have enough info- It would seem to me, without direct knowledge, he might have some protection against the Schinlers themselves. There something called collateral estoppal which means if the Court has already determined facts between 2 opposing parties, those facts would apply to another action between the 2 parties. And something called res judicata, which means that if a judgment has already come down as to 2 parties on the same issue, it can't be re litigated.
However, if that's what MS is relying on, I don't see why the sister and brother can't suehim. It's my understanding that just the mother and father opposed him in the first case. If the brother and sister filed suit, the parties to the second case would be between Different parties, and the issues of law I tried to explain above, would not apply because there's not a strict identity of parties any more.
That's just my first guess based on just general knowledge. But, I don't know the specific facts. But, I would love to see him get his before a jury.
Late again, my friend. Fight again tomorrow.
To: supercat
Thanks. For some reason, I didn't scroll down enough at terrisfight.org, but finally found the documents, after others posted the links.
This is worse, than anyone's worst nightmare.
To: HiTech RedNeck
You seem to have your Courts mixed up.
423
posted on
04/01/2005 11:02:41 PM PST
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
To: TAdams8591
And Glen Beck is banned from my radio.
424
posted on
04/01/2005 11:02:43 PM PST
by
KDD
(just the facts please)
To: EternalVigilance
In his time was when she was struck by the heart attack which destroyed her cerebral cortex.
425
posted on
04/01/2005 11:02:52 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting johnathangaltfilms.com and jihadwatch.org)
To: Destro
Giving someone food and water by mouth is an "experimental procedure"?
What's the harm, that it may kill her? (/sarcasm)
To: Luis Gonzalez
Krauthammer argued that where there was a disagreement between the spouse and the parents, and no living will, the party who was willing to care for the person in PVS state should prevail. I agree with Krauthammer. He has it exactly right in the sense that I agree with him. Within certain constrainst as outlined, choose life, choose the nurturing party, where there is a lack of certainty of the preferences of the PSV person, chosen with thought and gravitas, by virtue of having to pen and sign a written document.
427
posted on
04/01/2005 11:03:57 PM PST
by
Torie
To: PleaseNoMore
Not murder according to the law.
428
posted on
04/01/2005 11:04:03 PM PST
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
To: Luis Gonzalez
Are you aware of any testimony saying that she wasn't? I believe someone else testified to being her best friend. But even if that weren't the case, I'm curious what evidence, if any, was introduced to back up the sister-in-law's claim of friendship. Things like photographs of her with her sister-in-law, letters, autographed or personalized gifts, testimony of others about their friendships, etc. If you know of any, I'd like to hear of them.
429
posted on
04/01/2005 11:04:27 PM PST
by
supercat
("Though her life has been sold for corrupt men's gold, she refuses to give up the ghost.")
To: FairOpinion
No - the request the judge denied was placing her in experimental therapy that would allow her to swallow and chew food on her own. You can play at sophistry with others but not with me.
430
posted on
04/01/2005 11:05:14 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting johnathangaltfilms.com and jihadwatch.org)
To: hocndoc
"Letting her go" is not the same as deliberately going to the hospital to remove the tube and while forbidding food and water by "natural means." That is the definition of intervention to kill. This happens all the time when it comes to these sort of cases.
431
posted on
04/01/2005 11:05:20 PM PST
by
Jorge
To: Torie
"Krauthammer argued that where there was a disagreement between the spouse and the parents, and no living will, the party who was willing to care for the person in PVS state should prevail."Agreed.
However, in Terri's case, Florida Law, not a Charles Krauthammer Op Ed took precedent.
432
posted on
04/01/2005 11:05:30 PM PST
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
To: Destro
You are beyond help. I'm through talking with you.
To: Porterville
Well as with almost everything about this case, there is dispute about how cruel dying this way is. But one thing I do know. Lethal injection is less cruel, and it's quicker and cheaper. And killing is killing. The omission versus commission distinction is ludicrous. Count me out of that one.
434
posted on
04/01/2005 11:06:06 PM PST
by
Torie
To: supercat
Then read the text of the case. Obviously, it was sufficient for the Judge.
435
posted on
04/01/2005 11:06:45 PM PST
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
To: Luis Gonzalez
You are clearly correct. New laws are needed. Clearly.
436
posted on
04/01/2005 11:06:49 PM PST
by
Torie
To: Republican Wildcat
Can't argue with facts? Oh well.
437
posted on
04/01/2005 11:06:54 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting johnathangaltfilms.com and jihadwatch.org)
To: FairOpinion; Pride in the USA; Stillwaters
ping
-----------------------------------------------------
This is a real poll, instead of the slanted poll the MSM was doing.
"If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.
A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes."
Most of the MSM was careful to make sure people do NOT understand the situation and the facts of the case.
438
posted on
04/01/2005 11:07:18 PM PST
by
lonevoice
(Vast Right Wing Pajama Party)
To: Destro
Then why weren't her parents allowed to even give her ice chips? If this was just in reference to an experiment?
439
posted on
04/01/2005 11:07:19 PM PST
by
flowergirl
(Trust in the Lord with all your heart)
To: Luis Gonzalez
They had testimony from several different people, including one of Terri's best friends, who corraborated the fact that Terri's wish was NOT to be sustained alive by artificial means. I just looked at Greer's ruling again...he explicitly said he didn't need to rule on Michael Schiavo's testimony because he had Scott and Joan Schiavo's testimony. The only testimony of a friend of Terri's was that she wouldn't want the feeding tube removed. Interestingly Greer dismissed her testimony because he didn't know when Karen Quinlin died(the event that sparked the discussion between the witness and Terri) and questioned the actual date of the conversation.
440
posted on
04/01/2005 11:07:42 PM PST
by
Dolphy
(Fear The Greer(s))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 701-715 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson