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

Skip to comments.

Schindler Family Lawyer Responds to College Columnist
The Triangle (Drexel University Student Newspaper) ^ | May 6, 2005 | Pat Anderson

Posted on 05/06/2005 10:21:34 PM PDT by Maverick32984

I read Vivek Thuppil's column concerning the Terri Schiavo case ("Republicans use Schiavo case for political advancement," The Triangle, April 29, p. 15). It makes for compelling reading, assuming it is fact-based.

However, as the Schindler family attorney for a number of years, I can tell you Mr. Thuppil's fact-assumptions are not accurate.

Consider these assumptions, for which there is factual support: Terri collapsed in February, 1990 of unknown reasons. She did not have a heart attack. Her tox screen was negative. No doctor ever diagnosed her with bulimia. She collapsed in the early morning hours on a Sunday morning, alone with Michael. They had a big argument on Saturday afternoon before he went to work, because she had spent $80 at the hairdresser.

In March, 1991, just 53 weeks after her collapse -- slightly more than a year -- a total-body bone scan revealed numerous traumatic injuries to her skeleton, including a fractured lumbar vertebra and an unusual injury to her right thigh bone. The radiologist who read the scan concluded all of her skeletal injuries were presumably of traumatic origin.

Under oath, he said the right thigh injury could only have been caused by a sharp blow or kick. He also testified that these types of injuries were visible on a bone scan for 12 to 18 months. That is, on March 5, 1991, the date the bone scan was done, her injuries would have been sustained sometime in the period from September, 1989 to February, 1990.

During his testimony to a medical malpractice jury in November, 1992, Michael testified that he intended to honor his wedding vows (he did not tell the jury he was dating at least two other women at the time) and intended to take care of Terri the rest of his life. He presented an expert who testified that, in fact, Terri would have a normal life span. Michael did not tell that jury that Terri would rather be dead than disabled, curiously enough. Incidentally, contrary to Mr. Thuppil's assumption, traumatic brain injury is not a terminal disease. She had no terminal disease. Terri was simply brain-damaged.

About three months after that testimony, Michael got the money from the medical malpractice case and stopped speaking to the Schindlers or allowing them any information about their daughter. From time to time, he even cut off their right to visit their daughter.

About seven months after that testimony, in June or July, 1993, Terri developed an infection, and Michael ordered her caregivers to withhold antibiotics from her. Later that year, in November, 1993, he gave a sworn deposition in which he said he had done so at a doctor's suggestion and he expected her to die of the infection. This testimony was just one year after he had told that malpractice jury he intended to care for Terri the rest of his life, so we can conclude from this that Michael is capable of lying under oath.

In that same November, 1993 deposition, Michael said he could withhold antibiotics for an infection, but in speaking of removing her feeding tube, he "could not do that to Terri."

In about 1995, Michael began living with Jodi Centonze. He had other girlfriends, but this romance was serious. They had two children together, even though he was married to Terri.

Assume if you will that everything I have written above is taken from the records of the case (of which it is) and apply your own common sense in analyzing the following question: Did Michael and his two relatives fabricate Terri's wish to be dead, because he wanted to "get on with his life" as you call it and she just would not die on her own?

Pat Anderson was the Schindler family attorney, parents of Terri Schiavo, from April 2001 to September 2004.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: drexeluniversity; euthanasia; schiavo; schindler; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: HiTech RedNeck

God help him if he transforms into a DemonRAT.


21 posted on 05/07/2005 1:49:14 AM PDT by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Maverick32984

Hi I was wondering if you can pass me the link to the Lawyers statment or better yet his e-mail address. I am doing a report on terry and I seem to be doing something wrong, because I cant find more than opinion articles, or timelines and articles that are printed, but there mostly Pro murdering Terry and I am writing in absolute protest. (Of Course) Any thing wil be fine though, I hope that you can check my article posted in SmokeyBackroom FReeper Forum. I am the Daughter to MPeach looking for links or verifiable statments on terry.


22 posted on 05/07/2005 2:03:24 AM PDT by hispanicrepublican24 (Freepers love to know news not Donkey views)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maverick32984

No he should not! Had he requested the Schindlers request, to let Terri go home to them to be taken care of and loved it would be a different story. Now he is a murderer and no murderers should be free. What would have been wrong with letting Terri get on with HER life?


23 posted on 05/07/2005 4:50:44 AM PDT by trustandobey (Delay 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Minuteman23

Me too and I spend my time letting those involved know I am.


24 posted on 05/07/2005 4:53:21 AM PDT by trustandobey (Delay 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hispanicrepublican24

http://www.thetriangle.org/media/paper689/news/2005/05/06/EdOp/Schindler.Family.Attorney.Responds.To.Columnist-948239.shtml

There you go. I'm not privy to the lawyer's e-mail. You can try e-mailing ed-op@thetriangle.org and reqeust the e-mail.


25 posted on 05/07/2005 12:01:17 PM PDT by Maverick32984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: This Just In
Yes, you'd have to be brain damaged if you believe Mike's innocent.

Yeah, in other words you might have to be in worse shape than his deceased "wife" was.

26 posted on 05/09/2005 7:26:07 AM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Maverick32984
"Despite being painted as a villain and adulterer in the media, I commend and admire the bravery of Michael Schiavo for doing what his wife wanted. Yes, he is living with another woman right now, but what was he expected to do? Should he not be allowed to move on with his life?" --Vivek Thuppil

Vivek is an irrational, imbecilic idiot.

27 posted on 05/09/2005 7:27:55 AM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheSpottedOwl
I'm mad, but I'm also concerned about how HMO'S are going to take advantage of this. Medicare? Social Security? The old and disabled are going to be screwed....

You got that right! The short term result is anger, the long term one is that all our lives are in danger.

28 posted on 05/09/2005 7:29:35 AM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: trustandobey
Me too and I spend my time letting those involved know I am.

BTTT!

29 posted on 05/09/2005 7:34:16 AM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46
"get on with his life"

I agree with your assessment of Michael Shiavo as a murderer.

For all those who hope he could get on with his life, I'd suggest the golden rule here: He didn't let Terri get on with her life, so we shouldn't let him get on with his.

30 posted on 05/09/2005 7:37:17 AM PDT by slowhandluke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: This Just In

Why didn't they prosecute him?


31 posted on 05/09/2005 7:42:29 AM PDT by kx9088
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kx9088

That's a very good questions. Why did Judge Greer order the starvation/dehydration of Terri Schiavo in light of the evidence?

One word: OLIGARCHY.

If you are sincerely interested in truth, read Judge Roy Moore's book, "So Help Me God." I'm interested in hearing your opinion.


32 posted on 05/09/2005 10:21:07 AM PDT by This Just In ((In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: This Just In

I'll add that one to my list of three "must reads" if I ever get a chance to read a book again. =D



This is where I'm confused. If Mike S. did all these terrible things to her and there is all kinds of proof, then why did they go after him? Whose decision is it to investigate? Does someone have to press charges first? If so, why haven't her parents?


33 posted on 05/09/2005 10:59:31 AM PDT by kx9088
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: kx9088
This is where I'm confused. If Mike S. did all these terrible things to her and there is all kinds of proof, then why did they go after him? Whose decision is it to investigate? Does someone have to press charges first? If so, why haven't her parents?

The problem is that by the time the parents were aware of the bone scan results, an assault charge or even attempted murder charge for Michael's actions in 1990 would have been impossible due to the statute of limitations. In fact, since Terri was still alive, there wasn't anything Michael could have been charged with in connection with that assault; consequently, the government had no interest in trying to collect and preserve any evidence related to it. If the autopsy concludes that Terri died as a consequence of something that happened in 1990, then it might be appropriate to open murder charges except that by now most of the evidence that would be necessary has been destroyed.

I would suggest that the statute of limitation rules need to be rewritten for cases like this, so that the 'clock' on an assault charge wouldn't run out unless or until it became clear whether or not an assault was fatal. Otherwise a very awkward situation arises where evidence exists of malevolent action which will not represent a chargeable crime unless some future event occurs (e.g. the death of a victim). It's not possible to legally seize and hold evidence indefinitely without even an allegation of a chargeable crime, even in cases where the evidence may be necessary to prosecute what may become Murder.

34 posted on 05/09/2005 6:26:39 PM PDT by supercat (Sorry--this tag line is out of order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TheSpottedOwl

Thanks for the ping.

We are so busy on the olive farm doing a LOT of physical work that at night I am jsut literrlay falling into bed. We are cutting down BIG oak trees that are putting to much shade on our olive trees. My husband and some really kind neighbors are doing the cutting and I am doing a lot of burning. I have to drag the cut branches from where they fall and drag them to the safe burn area, it is a lot of walking and it is hot by the fire so at night I am tired.

I so much appreciate being thought of but if I am not responding timely do not be offended. The thig about farmningg is that ther are period of intense activity followed by times of not a whole lot to do. Right now and for probably about 2 weeks we are in a period of intense activity. Afterwards I will be twiddling my thumbs taking life slowly but at the moment I am working my tail off.

No complaints I LOVEthe olive farm....


35 posted on 05/10/2005 1:27:58 PM PDT by ExPatInFrance (Terri's Starfish- 1 Mrs. Ora Mae Magouirk, 2 Clara Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 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.

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