Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AnnOutragedCitizen
Exactly. Any testimony that would suggest Terri didn't want to die or wasn't pvs was dismissed. In short, any testimony that erred on the side of her right to life was discounted.

Judge Greer made the decsion about this case before it was heard, that is clear.

511 posted on 04/01/2005 11:43:47 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Evil succeeds when good men don't do enough!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies ]


To: TAdams8591

It may not be that he made the decision before it was heard (although there is a lot a speculation about ties, friendships, associates, etc). It is just that once he made two decisions (that Terri was PVS, and that she would want to die), he legally NEVER had to consider any evidence or question or dispute or affadavit or even miracle break-throughs that conflicted with the two facts that he had already decided.

That's where procedure trumps justice. The "facts" of the court NEVER have to be revisited. That is why he was able to throw out the claim of the DCF doctor. It disagreed with a legally found "fact" in the case, so he did not have to consider it at all. It had no place in his court.

Now, why he couldn't consider reason and common sense is another matter. What, overturn your own findings? Admit you, the infallible judge, is wrong? Does that cause one to question all your other rulings in all your other cases? Does the court system fall apart?

(Of course, this doesn't even begin to touch the alleged conflicts of interest and guardianship law violations. They are a different story....)


526 posted on 04/01/2005 11:57:53 PM PST by AnnOutragedCitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson