Posted on 03/21/2005 7:50:03 AM PST by Pendragon_6
Lets see, first Michael Schiavo beats and strangles his wife Terri, leaves her lying unconscious on the floor until her family arrives to get her to the hospital.
Then Michael Schiavo sues the hospital for $20 million because he needs the money to get his poor wife therapy.
Then Michael Schiavo pockets the money, denies his wife the care he said she needed and finally, claims she really wants to die.
Michael Schiavo killed his wife Terri's cat, melted down her wedding ring and then took up with his girlfriend and lives with her today with their children. Does this sound like a loving husband who really cares about his wife's wishes?
And what do we get on the tube every hour on the hour: “persistent vegetative state” as though any of the talking heads who ghoulishly proclaim Terri's life isn't worth that of a convicted serial killer sitting on death row (for 20 years, while due process goes on).
Michael Schiavo's supporters claim he loved his wife Terri enough to take a nursing degree so that he could take care of her. I think he got that nursing degree so he could inject her with insulin and hasten her death and his complete claim to all the money he won in litigation.
Just take a gander at the sworn testimony of an attending nurse: Carla Sauer Iyer (affidavit* below) but let me save you some time and report a quote of Michael Schiavo's after visiting his still living wife: "When is that bitch gonna die?"
Hmmm. Loving husband or man so afraid of not only not getting the money (what's left of the $20 million) but the prospect of facing a jury for his attempted murder, a charge which is possible as long as Terri lives. Sounds like motive to me.
Michael Schiavo says Terri said she never wanted to be kept alive on machines. Okay. Even if that was her statement (which there is absolutely no corroborating testimony and quite the unusual statement coming from a young, newly married woman still in her twenties and full of life); Terri is not being kept alive by machines!
Terri has a feeding tube from which she gets food and water. Had she had the care and therapy she was entitled to, there is every chance today Terri would be divorced from that louse and feeding herself just fine.
About that “loving husband” crapola: what husband do you know evinces his marital fidelity and love by living with another woman, having children with that woman and dumps his wife in a hospice while waiting for her to die? What loving husband kills his sick wife's pet? What loving husband denies his wife's family visitation?
I ask these questions because the media morons are still stuck with their new term: “persistent vegetative state” and are oblivious to the actual facts of this tragic case.
Continued
Thats what I have read, and was lead to understand.
You have a point about the "attempted murder", but the other two items are well-established. The two pets were put down by a vet, who has stated that it was MS who asked for it. Melting down the wedding ring was admitted by the husband himself on Larry King.
FACTS and PROOF please.
Read this, maybe it will help you.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1341036/posts
Read his insulting comment. Then if you decide your job is to defend such crap, we can include you in the diminutive group to which the agitprop belongs.
Reminds me of the Mafia don of the 50's who carried a rosary and wouldn't eat meat on Fridays!
Well that's odd. A broken neck would certainly get the attention of prosecutors. Why do you suppose they've ignored this so completely?
Yea, you'd think that an insurance company about to lose almost a million and a half bucks would have noticed this when it went to trial. But the first peep of it was in the year 2002. It was solely brought up to damage Michael's credibility. It's not different than a woman crying rape to get back at an ex-husband. It's despicable.
But you want to believe MS when he claims (after several Years) that his wife said she wanted to be starved to death?
Sorry, I disagree. Having kids is truly the most wonderful thing I've ever done and I don't fault Michael for wanting the same thing. I fail to see how you can claim it's not having Terri's best interests. Neither is him buying a car. Neither is him going on vacation.
The fact of the matter is Michael's children with another woman is simply none of Terri's concern. If she doesn't cognitively respond or react to anything done to her physically; why in the world will she care if Michael has kids with another?
Should he just impregnate Terri while she's just laying there?
What exactly is wrong with him having children?
Some points, beeline.
First, only two or three judges have been involved from the get-go. Greer himself has had this case for at least 10 years. So, there aren't that many judges agreeing with Mr. Schiavo.
Secondly, the videos are all they have. Mr. Schiavo has a court order forbidding video equipment or some such as this. When 10 secs is all you have and you want to save your daughter's life, that's what you use. **In fact, as of yesterday, her parents have again been banned from seeing her, as they have been on at least one other occasion during this situation.
Third, God does allow humans to act. The question is, are they acting appropriately?
Finally, dying is not natural. We were all created for life, not death. Sin brought death into the world. We were made in God's image and were made for life.
Thanks again for thinking of my kids.
Fact? You think we're working on fact anymore? The latest one I heard last night is Michael's mother or some relative worked for the sheriff of Pinellas County. Because of this the sheriff, as a favor, conspired with the judge to give Michael the out and allow him to 'kill' his wife. Apparently half the state of Florida is in collusion with him to get this done.
I did read it because it was in reply to my statement. I have seen worse on this forum. I will have you know that I am very actively involved with the Republican Party in my area. I sit on the Central Committee. I have worked for the Republican Party for years. I just do not agree with your position and apparently some here feel the same way. You are sounding like the liberals over at DU, shutting anybody down for disagreeing with them. Well, you can call me all the names you want. I think most people here would agree that I have the same right to voice the opposite view as long as I am respectful to others. God Bless You.
what a beautiful and much needed post. i agree with you completely. setting aside the constiutional crisis i think has been created, you make the moral point so well. no one wants to see hope diminish but these situations that people face every single day are complex and difficult and anguishing. the politics of this sickens me for terri.
i spoke to my brother last night and asked, why doesn't schiavo just forget all this and give her to her parents, i don't know if i could fight this much. and my brother said, what if it was me? and that was it. yes, i would fight for him forever, despite the circus of people thinking they know better. i would fight to let him go. (of course i have his living will and he has mine.)
this case has been heard, again and again and again. let her rest and stop toruring her.
"The only business the government should take in this matter is changing the law so a divorce can occur when there's an incapacitated spouse unable to sign forms or be capable of informed consent."
I have wondered about this. Does the law prevent a spouse from divorcing their wife/husband if the wife/husband is incapacitated?
Unfortunately, while I despise Michael, I have to go with that assesment of the ex girlfriend.
The way I see it, if I'm going to discount the hearsay of Michael claiming "Terri said" then I have to discount the phone call of ex gf.
Although, if Michael would have told ex gf he cared deeply for his wife, I probably would have discounted it, based on his actions over the last few years.
Agreed as to why Michael can't remarry. The law against bigamy still exists. Too bad he wasn't given the same suggestion King Henry got from Martin Luther to just take a second wife.
Disagree to the rest - but hey! You're free to believe whatever you want. Same here.
I am sorry for your loss and cannot begin to make right what was said to you by some bonehead, claiming to know it all. Until a person is in that situation, he or she should refrain from name calling and accusations.
The "panel of doctors" did not agree. Two agreed and two disagreed regarding her condition. The "tie-breaker" was a lawyer, not a doctor. As to the 19 judges, only one at the trial court level heard the evidence. The other 18 are appellate court judges who did not hear the evidence.
Cordially,
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.