Posted on 11/21/2007 3:48:52 PM PST by jy22077
There can be no doubt that Thompson’s flip-flops on the right to life and the Terri Schiavo case, as examined in several of my columns, have been extremely detrimental to his candidacy. He is registering at only four percent in New Hampshire, even behind Ron Paul.
The latest installment of this seemingly never-ending saga was Thompson’s November 18 interview with George Stephanopoulos, in which the former Senator said “I didn’t know that,” but concurred when told by Stephanopoulos that Terri Schiavo, who was starved to death in 2005 by her estranged husband, was “brain dead” and that autopsies had proven that. The implication was that she didn’t deserve to live.
Thompson’s exact comments were “I didn’t know that, you know, at the time that was all kicking around and everybody was asking my opinion based on what was in the newspaper.”
Perhaps this is a big part of the problem. Thompson gives opinions based on what’s in the newspaper, without doing adequate research or checking out the facts for himself. Making matters worse, he seemed to take Stephanopoulos’s word for it that Schiavo was brain dead.
The truth is that Schiavo was brain damaged not brain dead and the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation has asked Stephanopoulos to correct the record. Considering the lack of standards in the major media these days, it’s doubtful that ABC News will issue a correction. But Thompson, if he wants to have any credibility left on the pro-life issue, should quickly do so.
Terri’s brother Bobby says the “brain dead” comment is not only patently false but offensive.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalledger.com ...
Well, this does it. I’m voting for Hillary now.
Here are the video clips of Terri Schiavo.
1. http://www.sacramentolifechain.org/terri-big_eyes.ram
This is probably one the best video clips that shows that Terri was aware and cognitive and some small level. The video starts out with Terri’s eyes closed. Dr. Hammesfahr (the voice) asks her to open her eyes. You can see Terri struggle to carry out Dr. Hammesfahr’s directive or command for several seconds as she attempts to open her eyes. After several attempts, Terri opens her eyes. As Dr. Hammersfahr praises Terri, you can clearly see she is aware of him and understands what Dr. Hammerfahr has asked her to do. She moves her head or body towards Dr. Hammesfahr. As Dr. Hammesfahr praises her more, Terri is very eager to please and open her eyes really wide and even wrinkles her eyebrows. I find it hard to believe that someone could write that off as reflex action. Terri clearly opened her eyes on command and reciporcated Dr. Hammesfahr’s praises by opening them wider and wrinkling her eyebrows. There was clearly some level of awareness or consciousness at work there.
2. http://www.sacramentolifechain.org/ConversationWithTerri.ram
In the start of the video, Terri is silent but her head is turned and she is staring at Bob Schindler. Bob Schindler begins to talk directly to her. He talks about a funny memory in Terri’s childhood about her lazy eye. Terri responds almost right on key to Bob Schindler inquieries. It clearly shows that Terri is aware of Bob Schindler talking to her and is responding in an appropriate manner almost right on key.
3. http://www.sacramentolifechain.org/terri-music.ram
In this video, Terri responds by a short laugh after several seconds of the music playing. Brain injured patients take a long time process information. It is unknown on whether this is reflex response to Mary’s inquiry (pro-death doctors say it is.), but it seems that Terri was aware of the music. However, this video does reveal something interesting. If you watch Terri’s hands and fingers and see them move ever so slightly. The video is cut off at the fingers to determine if Terri is making some attempt at keeping up with the tempo with her fingers. However, I did see her fingers and hand move, but it is very very slight.
4. http://www.sacramentolifechain.org/terrimum.ram
In this video, Terri does give slight smile when her Mary touches her. The interesting point in this video is when Mary tilts Terri’s head back. It’s difficult to tell if Terri is actually helping her mom in this movement (tilting her head back.)
5. http://www.sacramentolifechain.org/terri-hows_that_cold.ram
This video is quite interesting and you can see that Terri is clearly aware of her mother’s presence. The really interesting part in this video is when Mom first approaches her and says “Hi”. You have watch really close, but Terri is aware of Mary Schindler. If you watch her eyebrow, you will see Terri raise it when Mary first says “hi” to her. I find this hard to believe the raising eyebrow would be a reflex. As Mary talks to her, Terri give low moan and seems to be responding to Mary’s inquires. Mary is not touching Terri.
In these videos, you really have to pay close attention to Terri, especially her eyes. These videos demonstrate that Terri was aware of the people were around her.
Please bear in mind the florida statute for PVS:
The definition of PVS in Florida Statute765.101:Persistent vegetative state means a permanentand irreversible condition of unconsciousness inwhich there is:(a) The absence of voluntary action or cognitivebehavior of ANY kind.(b) An inability to communicate or interactpurposefully with the environment.
6. http://www.raven1.net/terriballoon.rm
In this video Terri is clearly following the baloon (Cranford testfied to it.). Not only are Terri eyes tracking it but it important to watch Terri’s eyebrows as she eyes track the balloon. Terri also moves her head from side to side. Terri was apparently aware of the balloon and was trying to follow it. Many have said that you can’t tell if Terri is following the balloon. However, she must be based on Dr. Cranford’s comments and what he further testfied to in court.
7. http://www.blogsforterri.com/video/terri-swab.rmm
In this video Terri looks half a sleep. The swab is applied and Terri clearly does not like it. Not only does Terri respond with a grimace, but she moves her arms and even her whole body to get away from the swab. The video ends, showing a very agitated look on Terri’s face.
Here is narrative from the 2002 trial which is extended version of the Open Your Eyes Video. Terri follows more commands:
22 mother. Can you look at your mother now? Say
23 something so she knows where you are.”
24 “Terry, it’s mommy. Over here, Honey. Mommy.
25 Can you look over here at mommy. I’m over here.
101
1 I’m over here. Can you look over here at mommy.
2 Over here. Now, look at me. Terry, look at me.
3 Good.”
4 Now, Terry I’m going to tap you with a sharp
5 piece of wood. This is a hammer with a sharp piece
6 of wood. If you feel it, I want to you look at
7 your mother, not at me. Look at your mother if you
8 feel it. Good. Now, look at me. I’m going to
9 hold your eyes open for a second. Can you look at
10 me? Can you look directly at me?”
11 “Look at me. Now look at your mom. Good.
12 Excellent. Terry, look at me. Right over here.
13 Terry, open your eyes up. Open your eyes. Terry,
14 open your eyes. Very good. Good. Good job. Good
15 job young lady. Good job. Now, what I need you to
16 do is close your eyes. Close your eyes real tight.
17 Close your eyes. Close them closed tight. Keep
18 them closed. Okay. Now keep them real closed.
19 Now I want to you open your eyes real wide. Open
20 them real wide. Good job. Very good. Good job.
21 Very good.”
22 “Now I want to you open your eyes real wide,
23 real wide. Open them real wide for me. Real wide.
24 Yeah, I saw that. Good job. Now open your eyes
25 real wide. Give me a real big stare. A real big
102
1 stare. Can you open them real wide for me. Terry,
2 open them real wide for me. Real wide keep them
3 moving. Okay. Give me a real wide stare. Can you
4 do that?”
Terri had severe brain damage and couldn’t respond to every cammand the Dr. Hammesfahr put to her. I doubt these responses were reflexes.
But what about the the Missing Schiavo Video???
I have always wondered what happen to the 20 minute Terri Schiavo video that was shown at the Mal Practice trial in 1992. It is interesting that that video was never mentioned again and was never used in the 2000 or 2002 trial as video evidence. The video is never mentioned again in any future affidavit or motion that I could find.
I did read that exhibits for the 1992 Mal Trial were destroyed in 1997.
The video was very important for several reasons. Based on the testimony by Michael Schiavo, it showed that Terri was alert, aware, could feel pain, and could swallow.
In it the video shows Terri swallowing at times. It shows Terri reacting to pain. And it shows Terri has feelings and is alert and aware. This all based on Michael’s testimony. Observe:
1992 Testimony
A. Right here, basically, you can see she’s dressed,
11 she’s already had her shower and everything. We would get
12 her dressed, put her shoes and socks on. I’m trying out her
13 hands there. You have to keep the inside of the hands,
14 since she’s contracted, you have to keep them dry because
15 infection can set in, and I usually do a little bit of range
16 of motion with her.
17 Q. And while you’re doing that, do you talk to her?
18 A. Yes, I am talking to her right now telling her
19 it’s okay.
20 Q. She doesn’t like that very much?
21 A. No, she doesn’t. She does feel pain.
Q. (BY MR. WOODWORTH:) Does she like that kind of
5 treatment very much?
6 A. No, she does not. Here I’m trying to bend her
7 leg.
Q. I notice, Michael, you’re holding her head back.
25 why are you doing that?
___
19
1 A. Because she’ll fall forward, and if she falls fast
2 she gets excited. It’s — I was told by a doctor she was
3 getting the feeling she’s falling.
Q. You hoping he can get her to the point where she
15 swallows?
16 A. Yes. You see here rubbing the bottom of her
17 throat, that’s, I don’t know what the word is, gets them to
18 swallow when you rub the bottom of their throat. She just
19 swallowed that time.
Q. Does she express discomfort when some of these
9 things are happening to her?
10 A. Yes. Yes, she does.
11 Q. How does she do that?
12 A. She’ll moan and groan.
I like to get her outside for fresh air.
This is a video that was never released but shown at the Mal Trial. It showed 4 things about Terri that seem to refute PVS based on Michael’s testimony.
1. It shows Terri reacting to pain.
2. It shows Terri has feelings.
3. It shows Terri alert and aware.
4. It shows Terri can swallow to some degree.
Addition, if Terri condition progressed over the years, one can assume that was because of Michael’s neglect to get Terri further therapy and rehabilitation.
Michael sarcasticly writes in his book that Schindlers went looking for doctor after doctor until they could find someone that would give Terri a chance.
Finally, Michael remarks that he would bring Terri outside for fresh air. By the time Terri arrived at hospice, Terri was pretty much jailed in her room for the last 4 to 5 years of her life.
Michael threatened to arrest anyone who attempted to bring her outside or have her attend any social function.
Of course Michael claims he was protecting Terri’s right to privacy but I don’t buy it. Michael hired a private security guard to protect Terri. Michael could have taken her anywhere and her body guard could have been there to protect Terri’s privacy.
Yes, the video definitely show that Terri is cognitive at very small level. You have watch very closely the clips or you will miss her responses. Watching her eyebrows move is one thing that shows she is aware. Her body movement of head, hands, and whole suggest cognitiveness as well.
Dozens of doctors looked at these very same clips that I posted and came to one of two conclusions: Terri was MCS rather than PVS (The response were inconstitent with PVS) or more clinical testing was needed.
Some of the Doctors were experts in neurology and the MCS state. Some of the doctors included:
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/alexGimonAffidavit082503.htm
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/drhopper.PDF
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/Huntoon.pdf
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/zabeiga.PDF
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/Affidavit%20from%20Speech%20Pathologist.doc
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/Dr%20%20Laurie%20Barclay.pdf
The conclusions by these doctors were reenforced by doctors who actually examined or observed Terri in person:
Dr. Hammesfahr
Dr. Maxfield
Dr. Cheshire
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/Dr%20%20Jay%20Carpenter.pdf
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/Avery%20Affidavit%20-%20Swallowing.pdf
http://www.terrisfight.org/userfiles/File/young.PDF
You also have the reenforcement of numerous witnesses accounts from lawyers, the Schindlers, caregivers and priests who actually saw Terri.
The autopsy did not prove Terri was PVS.
Dr. Nelson, the neuropathologist conceded that Terri could have been MCS but there was no way to be sure since pathological conclusions on the MCS were limited. Dr. Nelson therefore conceded to the known PVS diagnosis indicating that his findings were constistent with PVS pathological readings.
Dr. Nelson, addition to conceding that Terri could been MCS also conceded that it was possible that Terri was aware and could hear and recognize her family members.
However, Dr. Nelson was very quick to defend his PVS POV.
CNN Press Conference Transcript Piece:
The question is first asked:
QUESTION: Dr. Thogmartin, what abilities did Terri have? You said she was blind. In those — near the end of her life, what would she have been able to do, feel, whatever?
Dr. Nelson is quick to defend his PVS POV.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The — again, it’s important to remember this is — persistent vegetative state is a clinical diagnosis. It’s not a pathologic diagnosis. The findings of Terri Schiavo are very consistent with persistent vegetative state.
Dr. Nelson is pressed:
QUESTION: Doctor, her family had said repeatedly that she believed that — they believed that she interacted with them. Are you saying that’s impossible?
Dr. Nelson concedes but is quick to defend it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We’re certainly not saying that’s impossible. But we’re saying based on what we know, and what is in the literature with regard to persistent vegetative state, again, that is a clinical diagnosis. It’s not a pathologic diagnosis that has precision associated with it.
In other words, the ME could only say that Terri had severe brain damage.
They couldn’t make any conclusions on Terri’s abilities from a dead body, but they are conceding that is not impossible for Terri to be cognitive and aware.
Many have argued, the courts as well as other parties viewed all 4.5 hours of video tapes and found Terri to be PVS.
This matter was addressed very carefully and throughly in the courts:
http://judgegeorgegreer.com/docs/021403appealofdeathorder.doc
http://www.notdeadyet.org/docs/schaivobrief.html
http://www.internationaltaskforce.org/pdf/schiavo.pdf
Was Terri serverely brain damaged?
Absolutely!
Was Terri going to recover to a meaning life?
Most unlikley!
Was Terri going to get up and walk around?
Probably not!
Could Terri display primitive emotional responses to family and friends and display recognition to them?
Absolutely!
Terri was severely brain damaged but she did have the capacity to recognize her family and to response to them in very small way.
The final conclusion in my opinion was that Terri was in fact MCS and as matter of law was not PVS.
Thank God Giuliani is solid on this issue. /s
I watched that interview. The insertion by George that Shiavo was proved “brain dead” by autopsy was clearly news to Fred as was evidenced by his expression. That’s because it was not true. Fred was guilty of nothing more than not calling George a liar and he moved on to state his position without wrapping it within any particular personal case. Fred made it clear that when there is a question, he thinks the decision should come down on the side of life.
ping
ping
Pretty funny to see a mad dog like stephawhatthefk, who would have killed Terry without a qualm, trying to put anyone else down about it.
I like Fred, but apparently the voters don’t want someone who doesn’t run a three-ring-circus campaign of wild claims, impossible promises, PT Barnum schmoozing and claims of being a 2nd Amendment supporter and a pro-lifer in spite of a solid history of gun grabbing and baby killing. If the polls are to be believed even the pubbies want a two-faced candidate.
Thompson just gives very sincere answers.
Ping. You want threads, not posts. Here’s one for you.
Very nicely put!
(steely)
Kincaid can kiss my royal irish arse
“he insertion by George that Shiavo was proved “brain dead” by autopsy was clearly news to Fred as was evidenced by his expression.” “Fred was guilty of nothing more than not calling George a liar”
Possibly he didn’t call Steph a liar because he didn’t know.
If as you stated it was news to Fred, why was it news? Fred had to know this question was coming having already been asked a similar question in FL a month or so ago. Seems like he would have armed himself a bit better, and had a response worked out.
Can someone tell me since I have not seen any ...
has anyone asked Romney...Guiliani...Huck...Hunter
these same questions?
What are their responses?
“Can someone tell me since I have not seen any ...
has anyone asked Romney...Guiliani...Huck...Hunter
these same questions?”
I don’t know if they’ve been asked these questions or not, but Fred was the one on Stephs show this past Sunday. He should have been prepared for this question, he had to know it was coming.
I would assume anyone being autopsied is brain dead.
“I would assume anyone being autopsied is brain dead.”
HAHAHAHA Excellent point, but I believe the question meant being brain dead prior to the unplugging of tubes and the eventual autopsy.
hmmmmmmm...they all have been interviewed. He was prepared. I watched that interview. That Steffie inserted an untrue twist is on the interviewer I would think.
This begs the question at least for me ..when did this become a Fred Thompson only question. Its the reason Steffie brought it up. Why isnt is being brought up with the others? Why isnt everyone equally interested in what the other candidates have to say about this very thing. I would like to see their answers and reactions.
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.