Yes, I think so.
This case is the end of a long process, which began around the time I entered medical school in 1972.
I have been posting on this case on & off, but I'm just pissing off a lot of good and distraught FReepers.
The short version is that this is the right battle but the wrong case.
Other than that, I'm going to keep my mouth shut until after the funeral.
You don't think jurors would find it odd that Michael never said anything about his wife's "wishes" until after he was engaged to another woman? And that his brother/sister-in-law never said anything about those wishes until Michael's testimony on the subject was challenged as self-serving and flimsy?
You don't think jurors would find it curious that Michael has spent so much of Terri's trust fund on efforts to have her killed, and so little on care or rehab?
Personally, I believe that if Terri's case were tried before a jury, it would be necessary to put up one of those glass walls that would normally protect a jury from the defendant, to protect Michael from the jurors who would otherwise rip him limb from limb.