Suspicious evidence has been there right from the start; It's simply been ignored.
World Net Daily reports:
"Another component of the Schindlers' contention of Schiavo's conflict of interest as Terri's guardian is medical evidence suggesting Terri may have been the victim of physical abuse. The report of a total-body bone scan done on Terri Schiavo while she was in a rehabilitation facility in March 1991 – 13 months after her collapse – describes what are known as "hot spots" suggestive of multiple fractures in her ribs, first lumbar vertebra, several thoracic vertebrae, both sacroiliac joints, and both knees and ankles, all deemed "presumably traumatic." The report states, "the patient has a history of trauma" and "the presumption is that the other multiple areas of abnormal activity ["hot spots"] also relate to previous trauma." It speculates an alternative explanation to trauma would be "neoplastic bone disease."
George W. Greer is derelict in not pursuing the possibility
that Michael Schiavo was responsible for the original 1990
injury. And, while the WND report is purely circumstantial evidence, as I recall, that's all it took to convict Timothy McVeigh.
The x-rays do provide a motive for why he might want to deny her rehabilitive care and for his decision to cremate the body. While she may never have regained the ability to speak, there are other ways to communicate.
Just like Sandi Burger, Michael appears to be destroying everything that could provide the clues as to what really happened to Terri. And, he has had the right help from George W. Greer of the Florida 6th circuit court. The fact that his attorney was instrumental in revising a Florida law that permits only one medical opinion before determining that someone 'wants' to die ssems more than a coincidence to me.
Good points. And if these reports can be verifed, and taken out of the realm of "reports", and into the realm of "evidence", then a lot of people are going to have a lot to answer for. Perhaps several in courts of law.
I worry most that reports are heard and then later "contradicted" with no way left to make life-dependent decisions upon them. A price also needs to be attached to those reports which turn out to be bogus... so that more reliance can be laid upon the remaining reports which turn out to be accurate, but which suffer a dilution of impact based upon earlier, debunked reports.
It is easier to try to do the right thing, if you can be sure that what you have heard is true. At least it is for me...
If I seem clinical and detached about the fate of this woman, it is because many, many deaths contnue to occur in the ongoing cultural battle, and while I grieve for this woman, I will also grieve for many other little victims yet unborn, who may be impacted by this and other law. Many folks have enumerated the large questions posed by this "judicial determination that she wanted to die," as well as many other issues of State versus Federal powers of intervention.