No one with a medical background, such as Iyer, would use this terminology to describe Terri. She was either lying or grossly mistaken in her assessment of Terri’s condition. We will never know, because Iyer was never cross examined about this or other portions of her affidavit. Can you now understand why courts give little to no credibility to affidavits when the affiant does not testify in open court and is subject cross exam. All these affidavits the Schindlers used at the end are basically legally worthless. I ask again, Why were the Schindlers so afraid of having their witnesses subject to cross examination. These affidavits relate to facts alleged to have occurred prior to the trials. Are you or any of your cohorts ever going to answer this threshold question?
BTW, if Iyer had testified at trial with the same argument you and twit have employed on this thread, her entire testimony would have been entirely discredited.
Question is, why did you want Terri dead? There is no other way to interrupt that from your remarks. That is the question that everyone wants answered. Think you can do that?
She wasn't permitted to testify. That's because Greer and Felos couldn't afford to let her tell her story. It was too damning to their client.
According to this Post, you are wrong. It never occurred to me, but a search on google will validate the poster. Something you want to add?