Impeach all Judges in the Terri Schiavo Case [MUST READ]

Reality Check ^ | 04/08/05 | Gary Amos

[tutstar]

In all my years dealing with constitutional law, I have always said no to judicial impeachment even when from time to time on various issues some conservative activists have argued for it in specific situations. I can generally provide people more arguments against impeachment than for it where judges are concerned. Sometimes I cannot provide arguments for impeachment at all, because all the valid arguments from my point of view mitigated against judicial impeachment in those situations.

see also: Dred Scott and Terri Schiavo -- The Long and Tortured Death of the 14th Amendment At the Hands of the Federal Judiciary - (pdf)

The Schiavo matter is dramatically different. Not only am I convinced that judicial impeachment applies here, I am convinced that it applies to every federal judge in the chain from the district court judge who first received the case under the act signed by President Bush, through the appeals judges of the 11th Circuit, to all nine sitting members of the U.S. Supreme Court, with the exception of the one or two judges that bucked the system.

This is the first time in my several decades of dealing with constitutional law that such a situation exists. I never imagined that I would see this situation in my entire lifetime or in my professional career.

The key points are summarized here. They are based on two one-hour radio talkshow interviews I did locally this week which laid out the matter in some detail.

First, Article III uses the words "good behavior" as the term of art dealing with the impeachment of federal judges. The Constitution uses the words "high crimes and misdemeanors" as the standard of impeachment for the executive and legislative branches. "High crimes and misdemeanors" is a higher and more rigid standard than "good behavior" in Article III. In the Schiavo matter, the misconduct on the part of the federal judiciary violates both standards. It violates the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard because by refusing to protect the substantive right to life of Ms. Schiavo under the 14th Amendment, and treating the matter as strictly procedural, the various judges made themselves accessories to murder. It violates the "good behavior" standard for the sorts of reasons explained by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England.

The federal courts obstinately refused in the Schiavo matter to employ a jurisprudence of constitutionally protected inalienable rights mandated by the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, the rights model of original American jurisprudence from the era of the Founders, and as extended to state misconduct by the 14th Amendment.

The federal courts refused to judicially notice that we prosecuted people for war crimes at Nuremberg for the very sorts of actions taken and required by the Florida state courts in clear violation of the original meaning of inalienable rights and due process of law.

Under our federal union, there has never been a power in any state to execute anyone not convicted of a crime and who has not been indicted and/or tried criminally. Under our federal union and under the constitutions and bills of rights of every individual state, the right to life is inalienable. At the state level, that right can only be lost by an individual person through an act of wrongdoing constituting a forfeiture and adjudicated as such through a criminal trial where due process would apply. Executing an innocent person through a civil process is ultra vires by definition and has been ultra vires for over two hundred years of American experience. Having occurred in the Schiavo matter, the question is not one of due process because there can be no such process, period. Where such occurs, as it has here, it is an act of state tyranny by definition, the ground upon which we fired the king of England.

When people say Ms. Schiavo received due process that is not true because the state is not permitted to have such a process, period. For any state to have a process that executes a person or citizen unconvicted of a crime is not a matter of due process because there can be no such process. The 14th Amendment mandates that the right to life be protected by the federal government if a state materially fails in its duty to secure the inalienable right to life. For any federal judge to fail in that 14th Amendment duty is "bad behavior" and criminal negligence. When the federal courts treated the matter pro forma as a procedural one rather than one of substantive rights, the courts materially breached their duty to a person who is also a citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment with both personhood and citizenship rights. In light of the fact that the federal judges' malfeasance has materially redefined (by inaction) something as fundamental to all persons and American citizens as the right to life, and demonstrated by precedent that the federal courts criminally disregard their duty to uphold the right to life, they have failed to maintain the standard of good conduct required of a federal judge and forfeited the respect and obedience of the American people.

For these and related reasons, every federal judge involved in the execution of Terri Schiavo has violated his/her office as judge and has committed the high crime of being an accessory to murder. Therefore every judge so tainted MUST be impeached by Congress and removed from the bench.

[philetus]

Unless you're talking about throwing peaches at these judges, I don't think it's going to happen."

If it doesn't happen, then the Congress of the United States is siding with murderers and like the judges, proclaiming themselves the masters of the American people.
Not much difference between that and full fledged communism.

[Diogenesis]

The relationship of "Judge" Murderer Greer to Scientology and the Murder of Lisa McPherson

Judgenfuhrer George Greer's biography

---

scientology_and_terri_schindler_schiavo_death_connection

---

This is the 'tip of the iceberg' of what Terri and her family were up against.

Here’s where Terri Schiavo Insurance money went:

These funds, the result of a malpractice suit, were meant solely to provide for Terri Schiavo’s care and rehabilitation.
=======================================================================================
Atty. Gwyneth Stanley - $10,668.05
Atty. Deborah Bushnell - $65,607.00
Atty. Steve Nilson - $7,404.95
Atty. Pacarek - $1,500.00
Atty. Richard Pearse (GAL) - $4,511.95
Atty. George Felos - $397,249.99
1st Union/South Trust Bank – $55,459.85
Michael Schiavo - $10,929.95
Total: $545,852.34

---

Neglect and abuse complaints is that Michael Schiavo:

* Has not allowed therapy or rehabilitation since late 1992.
* Has prevented swallowing tests or swallowing therapy since 1993.
* Ordered caretakers not to clean Terri's teeth since 1995, resulting in removal of five teeth in April 2004.
* Placed Terri in hospice in 2000, despite the fact she is not terminally ill.
* Refuses to allow Terri to leave her room. She has not been outside since 2000.
* Ordered doctors not to treat Terri when she had a life threatening infection in 1993 and 1995.

---

Virtually as soon as Michael Schiavo received the monies from the medical malpractice claim involving his wife, Terri Schindler-Schiavo,
he withheld all therapy and rehabilitation services from her.

Terri Schiavo had sustained a serious brain injury as the result of a suspicious incident in their home in 1990 and in 1992,
her husband had filed claims against several of her former doctors, claiming her “collapse” was caused by a misdiagnosis.
He received over $1.5 million in 1993 including $750,000 which had been specifically earmarked by the trial jury for Terri’s rehabilitation based on a life expectancy of 50 years.
Mary and Bob Schindler Sr., her parents, consulted a St. Petersburg attorney about removing Michael Schiavo as their daughter’s guardian and discussed the case at length with him.
Unfortunately, the Schindlers did not have the amount of money the attorney demanded as a retainer to take the case.
That attorney became the judge in the case-----a totally prohibited conflict of interest.
Thereafter, the attorney-judge approved the hiring of George Felos as the attorney for Schiavo to be paid from the trust fund and the stage was set for her judicial homicide.
The judge wasn’t George W. Greer.
It was Mark I. Shames.

---

The money was then diverted to the Judicide G reer.

	GREER DONOR	AMOUNT	POSITION	ACTION
Lawyers For Michael Schiavo	Hamden Baskin III    Felos & Felos            Deborah Bushnell     Gyneth S. Stanley    Steven Nilsson         Beth Wilson	$500  & $500 $250 $250 $150 and $250 $250 and $250 $250 and $100	Michael Schiavo’s Lawyer[s]	Greer denies many or all of Schindler’s in favor of Felos Greer Allows hearsay as evidence/disallows Schindler’s statements Felos former chairman of board of directors of Hospice of Florida Suncoast
	Daniel Grieco	$300	Employer of Michael Schiavo at time of Feb. 25, 1990 then attorneyOf record for Michael up until the malpractice award,	Incident when injuries occurred to Terri,Reappeared as attorney for selected pleadings
State/County Employees/Elected	Frank Nagatani	$50 and $50	DCF Attorney	Squashed testimony for DCF Investigator to appear on behalf of abuse allegations
	Bernie McCabe	In-Kind	State Attorney	Allowed underling to appear in campaign ad for Greer Will not call Grand Jury
	Everett Rice	$500 & In-Kind	Sheriff/State Rep	Didn’t conduct criminal investigation into what really happened to Terri or allegations of abuse after initial incident Allowed Deputy & use of county property to appear in campaign ad for Greer
	John Carassas	$100	Deputy Attorney General	Florida Deputy Attorney General, involvement with Rice in Sept. 2003 motion for Greer recusal dueTo improper discussion of case
	James Hellickson	$150 & In Kind	Assistant state attorney in office of Bernie McCabe, Pinellas/Pasco State Attorney	Appeared in Greer Campaign Ad
	Paula Shea	In Kind	Assistant Pinellas Public Defender	Appeared in Greer Campaign Ad
	Andrew Sasso	$100	Officer in Guardianship monitoring program and Guardian ad litem pool	Was supposed to: “evaluate information about the well-being and property of all persons adjudicated of having a legal incapacity so that the court can fulfill its legal obligation to protect and preserve the interests of the ward,” FL COURTS
Misc. People w connections	Richard La Belle	$100	Member of Board of Directors of Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities	Supposedly ACPD doing investigation into Schiavo case
	Battaglia, Ross, Disus and Wein	$250	Principal Kelli Crabb is past chairperson of Hospice Foundation of Florida Suncoast and member of Board of directors
	Gus Bilirakis	$40 cash	Former Hospice Board member and of American Hellonic Education Progressive Assoc. (AHEPA)	Felos past Governor
	Divito and Higham	$250 and $250	Law firm employed by St. Petersburg/Venice Dioceses	Terri’s Dioceses

 

 

 

 

MICHAEL SCHIAVO'S lies and contradictory testimony in easy to read format

[txrangerette]

"Did the SCOTUS give any reasons for not overturning the lower courts in this case?"

The Supremes never took the case, so they never had to give their opinion. They simply silently refused to hear the appeal.

For what it's worth, Judge Bork said on Hannity's radio show that he knew the Supremes would not take the appeal, because he knows they would never take a case about any law that was only about one person...in this case, Terri Schiavo. Yes, we know it had wider implications, but the law itself was only about Terri. He said it was doomed not to be heard, and the Congress should have known that.

[Saundra Duffy]

I still can't believe they killed her.

[Diogenesis]

They did not simply kill her. They -- Greer, Florida, MShiavo, Felos..
conspired to brutally TORTURE her and then MURDER her.

---

'Thou shall not murder'

Exod 20:13

'Thou shall not murder'

Deut 5:17

[jdhljc169]

Snip from Dred Scott article

Even if the attorneys for the dying woman were totally incompetent and made all the wrong arguments as he seems to think, has Judge Birch never heard of judicial notice? Apparently. Like the chancery courts and judges of Lord Coke's day, Judge Birch and his peers have so lost themselves in their own labyrinth of procedures that they cannot find the light switch of basic justice and truth. So it has come to this. The procedures established by the federal judges themselves at their own whim are now deemed by them of greater magnitude and importance than the inalienable rights of persons that the 14th Amendment was ratified to protect! This is judicial arrogance in its worst form, because it is a blinding arrogance that takes the whole sight from the eyes and causes the blind to follow the blind right over the cliff. This is Dred Scott all over again. A twelve year old is better suited to be a federal judge that Mr. Birch. He should be one of the first to be impeached. The last half of Judge Birch's opinion was dedicated to showing why the Court did not have jurisdiction and that Congress's law violated the separation of powers. Earth to Judge Birch, get a clue, Congress was trying to create jurisdiction for you because they probably knew you could not think this through on your own. He spent half his time explaining that he did not have jurisdiction, the other half making a bogus and intellectually bankrupt argument about a violation of separation of powers, when jurisdiction was the very thing that had been conferred on him by Congress under their 14th Amendment legislative power. But this is way too deep for a mind like that of Judge Birch. It is too big to fit in his little toy judge intellect box.

WOW! That was an awesome read. Thanks for posting. Wonder if Judge Birch has read it? Maybe we should email it to him. I'm thinking I will email to my senators/representative.

[CyberAnt]

All of the federal courts based their rulings on "the process" of the trial and hearings .. not on "the facts", which is what Congress gave the federal courts permission to do. In effect what the courts did was thumb their noses at Congress .. by refusing to act upon their request.

Usually .. ruling on "the process" is what the Appeals courts do - it's a protection against improper law being applied (which it was - because they didn't apply the 14th), or making sure the lower court judge followed the law in the "process. But .. the President and Congress had requested that A DE NOVO hearing be held - meaning the courts should scrap everything and start over - after making sure Terri was being fed and was safe. The arrogant courts said NO.

[jdhljc169]

Save for later

[CyberAnt]

Exactly!! In Mark Levin's book, "Men in Black" he suggests 12 year terms. I agree - that is more than adequate.

[CyberAnt]

"pay close attention to those we elect at home"

Excellant point!! One issue which has always bugged me is that when some of these judges are in the lower courts they have to run for office. At some point - they no longer have to provide any type of bio - and we don't get to know what their party affiliation is. We need to know that - because it does reflect their beliefs.

Also .. I believe judges need to be denied the right to DONATE TO A POLITICAL PARTY OR TO ANY ORGANIZATION, other than tithing and giving offerings to their church.

[Saundra Duffy]

Tonight I saw the statement of the father of the little Lunsford girl who was perhaps "buried alive"?!!!! He was outraged and said he hoped Couey would BURN IN HELL!! Stuff like that. That's how I FEEL about greer, the HINO, felos and all of those monsters who participated in allowing Terri to be tortured, starved, and dehydrated to death.

[CyberAnt]

Okay .. I'm game .. why do you think it's "disconnected from reality" ..??

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[plsjr]

To: tutstar

This is excellent!!

[sinkspur] It's the dumbest thing that's been written on the Schiavo case so far, primarily because it is completely disconnected from reality.

OK. You've got my attention.
Please explain.

[Eastbound]

"It's the dumbest thing that's been written on the Schiavo case so far, primarily because it is completely disconnected from reality."

If you are referring to the Dred-Scott, Terri Schiavo PDF file he linked, I would agree that the disconnect is from the judiciary's reality. Overall, the pdf file is right on target, albeit a distant one, though very relevant and worth the read. All of these decisions relating to the Terri Schiavo case are a result of the continuing consequence of extremely bad judicial decisions from yesteryear.

[Earthdweller]

"BOYCOTT FLORIDA - THE STATE WHICH TORTURES THE INNOCENT TO DEATH"

You had me at hello..

No more yearly Disney bucks from me..nada Floriduh tourist funds of any form unless Greer is impeached.

I don't care if he was elected and it's not "practical".

39,000+ votes and counting.....Get er done.

[CyberAnt]

Not sure of the date - if you search for "DCF" you'll find the article which said the Greer had sealed the records.

[CyberAnt]

"This is NOT the first murder by this team"

Oh great! Please tell me more - or point me to the info please.

[CyberAnt]

Okay .. "turning over files" - I didn't hear that - I only heard Greer had ordered the files sealed.

Well .. if I worked at DCF - I would LOSE the files [Hillary got away with losing stuff for 2 years - surely that would be enough time to impeach Greer] - I might LOSE my job but the way they run things .. I don't think losing that job would be such a bad idea.

How the heck can we stop this guy from taking those files from DCF - or had he already done it ..??

[CyberAnt]

"a meaningless law that was obviously unconstitutional"

No it wasn't meaningless - OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL! It's the arrogance of the courts who refused to follow the law. Please don't muddy the waters by making such an erroneous statement.

With the legislation was a Public Law 109-3. That Public Law was supposed to REQUIRE the courts to reinsert Terri's feeding tube. What happened to following that law. It was legal .. and it was well within the rights of Congress to write it, and to write the legislation as well.