Schiavo Appeal Has Been Filed

Fox News

[sonsofliberty2000]

per Fox

[Petronski]

"When is that bitch gonna die?"

[atruelady]

I kmow, and I said that. But, this is the process, and I am just sick about it.

I worry so much for Terri.

"God, please let me suffer and not rest so Terri can. I would gladly carry her Cross. Please let me in Jesus' name".

[spokeshave]

"where the heck is the Dept. of Family Services?? Did they file that d@mn thingy that they were going to do an investigation and then say "that's all we will do?" They need to step in and protect her."

They can start with the fact that the feeding tube was remoived at the non-sterile Hospice.

That's grounds for starters.

No teeth cleaning for several years also.

Something SIMPLE that the sheeple can understand

[Military family member]

All of that is wrong I agree. What I was discussing—asking is more correct—is that isn't there certain legal protection or merits to the conversations between husband and wives?

[Tarantulas]

Well I didn't know anything about the quackwatch website itself, I just found the association of its name with one of the Schiavo's medical witnesses to be hilarious. Apparently the guy is a snake oil salesman.

[northernlightsII]

That doctor also stated that he saw some evidence of strangulation on her neck...The facts are getting so disgusting meanwhile the judges are piddling away the time.
Should Terri die, i think the judiciary will find they signed their own death warrant.

[ex 98C MI Dude]

Nearly EVERY ruling by Greer is disputed. Your faith in the legal system is admirable, but most of us no longer share your enthusiasm due to the sheer idiocy the judiciary has begun to display.

Again, many innocent people have had proper trials, due process followed, and been convicted because the initial findings were flawed. I maintain that this is the case here, where any evidence not supporting the husbands case was disallowed. These findings have only been reviewed for procedure, not for content, hence the de novo portion of the law passed 21 March.

[Diamond]

I told my Congressman Sunday morning that I think that some type of protective custody is the only thing that will save her. She has been subpoenaed as a Congressional witness, so what they ought to do is pull a Reno/Elian Gonzalez type stunt, hold her in contempt of Congress and confine her until she testifies. Heck, even the Congressional jail would be safer than where she's at right now. Sadly, though, I'm afraid it will not happen.

</dream>

Cordially,

[ContemptofCourt]

Which is why you have an appeal process...and the appellate court looked at the evidence and came to the same conclusion as the trial court.

A judge is not super-human, but was the finder of fact in this case. That is the law, and he did his duty.

Again, looking at the opinions, I find no fault with his interpretation of the facts.

[JonDavid]

How would anyone know? They document in the chart that they fed her. They charge her for the solution. They pour the solution down the drain. No evidence.


You could be right. If they did, may they burn in Hell!!

[MineralMan]

"Some things are more valuable and more important than obeying the laws of the state. Human life is one of them. If you are only looking at the this issue from the perspective of law, then you are not seeing the whole picture."

---

Either we have the concept of removing people from life support codified in the law, or we do not. Florida does have that in its laws.

The question, then, comes down to how that law is written and how it is applied.

Many here are opposed to any such laws, and I can respect that point of view, even though I disagree with it. The fact remains, however, that such laws are in place.

In the case of Terri Schiavo, the legal process has been long and has gone through many hearings and appeals. This case is about the law.

If enough people disagree with these laws, then they should devote their efforts to changing them. But...as long as laws permitting such removal from life support (which includes feeding and hydration in Florida) then the question becomes one of law.

I'm not there. I don't know any of the principals in the case. I have not read every court transcript. Because of that, I cannot make a judgment regarding this particular case. That's not my job.

As for myself, I executed a very precise living will in California, and re-executed it when I moved to Minnesota. My wife has done the same. It is a legal matter, based on my own desires, and will not be opposed, because I have made it absolutely clear under what circumstances I wish to have artificial life support (including feeding and hydration) ceased. Very clear.

I recommend that everyone execute such a document. If you wish for every means to be taken to prolong life, then you can put that in there, too, and it will be done. There is no excuse for leaving these things for family to decide, when you have to power to make such decisions for yourself.

Terri did not do that, but Florida law has options in such cases. The courts have ruled. Again, I do not know all of the details, so I must rely on those who do.

I've seen so much half-truth and supposition on this topic now for the past year or so. It has become impossible to tell exactly where the truth lies. So, I turn to the transcripts.

You may wish to do something else, and that's fine. You can protest the current state of affairs, and that's fine, too. However, without meeting the legal requirements for a challenge, you'll find that your efforts will not gain the result you want.

We are a nation of laws. If the laws are wrong, in your yes, change them by convincing others that they are wrong.

[UCANSEE2]

The rights of the married couple should not be thrown aside without ample reason, and aside from accusations, no sufficient reason has been found to do so in this case.

It's called CONFLICT OF INTEREST, and you can remain BLIND to it, if you want, but everyone else sees it.

Join the BLIND Judge, he can't SEE the truth either.

He can see how to use the law to enforce decisions he made BEFORE he heard the evidence was heard in the case.

[Jrabbit]

Soon.....she's fading fast.

[northernlightsII]

Yes!!!!!!

[Boardwalk]

In the whole freaking 15 years, did Greer ever once visit Terri? No. Case closed.

[Petronski]

It makes me want to cry again.

[gopheraj]

Well, CRAPOLA! I am out of state (96 YO mother in law is dying) and trying to keep up with this. Can NOT believe that they will let this murder happen!!!

[northernlightsII]

I agree with you mostly but not with the part that Michael has the right to deprive her of food and water based on his words alone. That is not the law, that is why people are fighting that is why Congress intervened. The courts that purported to make that ruling have erred in law.

[Military family member]

Quite eloquently put. I wish I had said it. I have been trying to track down all the legal citations in this case and have not had much success.

[UCANSEE2]

The facts of the case are reported in the judicial opinions....not the internet or TV.

Yes. The facts and only the facts. Well, only one side of the facts, we RULE NOT CREDIBLE any FACTS that don't fit the DECISION we made before we HEARD THE EVIDENCE. We have had COURT after COURT review the SAME SET OF BIASED, CONTROLLED FACTS and they come to the same conclusion EVERY TIME. (duh!)

WE GO BY THE WORD OF THE LAW, TO HELL WITH THE INTENT.

Would you say that pretty much sums up your side of this issue?

I do know the facts...do you?

Let's say it was your daughter, and she whispered "I don't wanna die" into your ear, every time you visited the hospice, yet a JUDGE kept telling you "I don't care what anyone else wants, I ordered her to die, and no one's gonna stop that."

WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE TO SAY THEN?