To: Luis Gonzalez
I've seen an interview with the second one, and he described the first one. My understanding is that neither one was a lawyer, and therefore neither filed any pleadings on her behalf. If that is true, then neither had the capacity to file a divorce action in her name, to get free of Michael.
Billybob
117 posted on
04/01/2005 9:07:07 PM PST by
Congressman Billybob
(Proud to be a FORMER member of the Bar of the US Supreme Court since July, 2004.)
To: Congressman Billybob
The decision was reached based on Terri's wishes not to be sustained alive, not on what Michael Schiavo wanted to do, obtaining a divorce would have changed nothing.
Secondly...if you are arguing that tyhe problem here is that there were decisions on Terri's life reached without Terri's consent, how can you advocate one more decision being made (a divorce) without her consent?
135 posted on
04/01/2005 9:14:04 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: Congressman Billybob
I could be wrong but my understanding is that a Guardian Ad Litem is appointed for a specific purpose and I don't think that, at any time during their tenure, MS was removed as Guardian. Could be wrong - Maybe someone else knows different?
143 posted on
04/01/2005 9:15:52 PM PST by
drt1
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson