Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Victor
"...Good. Does that mean when they affirm the trial judge, Freepers will come to grips with this story?...." What do you mean?

I will say this once....Freepers have very active imaginations. This is good in some cases, but utterly ridiculous in others.

The Schivo matter has been in the courts for how many years? It has been in front of how many judges? The purpose of judicial review is to uncover the facts. But when a judge does not rule the way a freeper thinks he should, then the conspiracies get started.

One judge making a bad decision is one thing...but when you have five separate courts reach the same conclusion, then the conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

31 posted on 03/22/2005 6:26:07 AM PST by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: ContemptofCourt

bump to what you said - and to yor willingness to bear the flames for those that are convinced this is all a right to die plot and the husband tried to kill his wife and the court system is trying to help him cover up the evidence crowd.


48 posted on 03/22/2005 6:29:47 AM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting johnathangaltfilms.com and jihadwatch.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

The problem is Judge Greer is the only person to issue findings of facts. Judge Greer has conflicts of interests that should have led to his recusal. All of the other judges were appeal courts and as such did not take testimony or assess credibility of witnesses.


65 posted on 03/22/2005 6:31:28 AM PST by tort_feasor (FreeRepublic.com - Tommorrow's News, Today)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
I agree with your basic premise.

This is an extraordinary matter, however. Even lead to intervention by Congress, the Guv, and POTUS.

Yes, even though so many courts came to the same conclusion, and "followed the law" in so doing, this whole situation has something that perhaps the "law" cannot address, at least on the surface: a moral component.

Legislating morality has not been a successful venture in US history.

66 posted on 03/22/2005 6:31:31 AM PST by Victor (If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
The purpose of judicial review is to uncover the facts.

The way I have heard it explained regarding the multiple reviews at higher levels is that if Judge Greer stacked the deck against the Schindlers by refusing to allow into the case evidence from the Schindlers, then the only thing that the higher courts can review is ONLY the evidence that Greer DID allow in, which in my view was absolutely one-sided. Since Greer only allowed evidence that was beneficial to Michael Schiavo's argument, given that evidence was the only evidence that the higher courts could review, then it was a slam dunk that higher courts would uphold the lower court ruling. It was explained that the "hearing of the facts" was ONLY done by Greer. Reviews at higher levels DO NOT re-hear all of the facts presented as evidence, only the facts allowed as evidence by the Judge in the lower court. That is what tha FOX News expert explained this morning.
101 posted on 03/22/2005 6:38:29 AM PST by AaronInCarolina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

This is a discussion topic so if you do not want to be involved in it then go away. I for one am proud of freepers who choose not to roll over and pee on themselves by saying 'well, thats that'.


103 posted on 03/22/2005 6:38:43 AM PST by Mrs. Shawnlaw (Sheep drool, Goats rule!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Only one judge has determined the 'facts' of this case, and that is Judge Greer in Clearwater. The rest only look to see whether the law was followed. No other court has looked at the 'facts'. NONE!


107 posted on 03/22/2005 6:40:14 AM PST by Ohioan from Florida (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

I'm glad people like you are speaking out. It gives me a better idea who to avoid on Free Republic.


113 posted on 03/22/2005 6:40:59 AM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Terri is currently in the process of being starved to death. No... no one's out to get her. But you can't argue with the fact that she is about to die at the hands of 'no one'.


128 posted on 03/22/2005 6:44:39 AM PST by Frapster (Don't mind me - I'm distracted by the pretty lights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Only one court hears the facts of the case. The rest hear on process. I point out that we have now have had dozens people freed from death row when the facts of the case are re-heard... and found that the original findings were flawed. Whittmore had the opportunity to do a de novo review of the case, but it seems he didn't avail himself of it. So only Greer has heard the facts so far. No conspiracy needed.


162 posted on 03/22/2005 6:50:46 AM PST by ex 98C MI Dude (Proud Member of the Reagan Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
One judge making a bad decision is one thing...but when you have five separate courts reach the same conclusion, then the conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

I don't understand your reasoning. Alot of judges looked at the Dred Scott case and Plessy v. Ferguson and the Koramatsu v. U.S., but that didn't make the decisions in those cases less abmominable than they were. More recently, multiple courts looked at the case of Gerald Amirault and repeatedly abrogated their duty to due justice in that case. So don't tell me that just because you get a bunch of lawyers in black robes looking at something, that they can't end up making a horrible mistake. Being a lawyer, you more than anyone else would should understand that and, as a result, you should have more of an open mind about the facts in this case.

231 posted on 03/22/2005 7:08:36 AM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
One judge making a bad decision is one thing...but when you have five separate courts reach the same conclusion, then the conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

It's easy to get caught up in the legalistic minutiae of this case. But the facts remain: An innocent disabled woman is being starved to death by court order. This is neither right nor moral no matter how many judges tell you it is.

The fact that so many judges have failed to stand up and say "We do not starve people to death in this country" is a commentary on the extent of the moral rot in our judicial system. Don't forget, the Democrat party in this country thinks that being a devout, pro-life Catholic disqualifies you from serving in the judiciary.

My greatest fear is that if the legislative and executive branches of government don't stand up to this judicial tyranny...and soon...there will be bloodshed.
256 posted on 03/22/2005 7:14:35 AM PST by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

Well, I don't buy into conspiracy, but I sure would appreciate someone explaining in laymans terms how this is 1) legally, being permitted, considering the public information that is out there includes no living will on Terri's behalf, and 2) morally being tolerated by a medical profession sworn to the hippocratic oath.

If the judges are making the legally correct decision, explain it to us. It certainly does not appear to be the RIGHT decision.

282 posted on 03/22/2005 7:20:16 AM PST by Magnum44 (Terrorism is a disease, precise application of superior force is the ONLY cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
The Schivo matter has been in the courts for how many years? It has been in front of how many judges? The purpose of judicial review is to uncover the facts. But when a judge does not rule the way a freeper thinks he should, then the conspiracies get started. One judge making a bad decision is one thing...but when you have five separate courts reach the same conclusion, then the conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

There was a discussion of this on Fox yesterday. Fred Barnes noted that while the case has been "seen" by 19 judges as is repeated over and over by the MSM, one judge (Greer) has made all the decisions. The other judges/ courts all ruled on the law that was put before them, not the essence of the case. Big difference!

351 posted on 03/22/2005 7:32:38 AM PST by luv2ski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Now be very careful ContemptofCourt ~ this is an emotional case/thread and we don't need anyone being realistic ~ the conspiracy theory fantasy lander's are on a roll and will not listen to anything that resembles the truth. *sigh*


418 posted on 03/22/2005 7:51:15 AM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

what's the last line of your profile?........."live and let live........."


421 posted on 03/22/2005 7:52:22 AM PST by muddypaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
One judge making a bad decision is one thing...but when you have five separate courts reach the same conclusion, then the conspiracies need to be laid to rest.

In other words, legislative and executive branches be damned. Judiciary rules! Is that right? Otherwise I don't understand your point.

587 posted on 03/22/2005 8:45:05 AM PST by Coop (In memory of a true hero - Pat Tillman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Only one judge reviewed the facts: Green. The other ones only reviewed the PROCEDURE.


877 posted on 03/22/2005 10:24:41 AM PST by angelanddevil2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
The Schivo matter has been in the courts for how many years? It has been in front of how many judges?

I guess you have never heard of an inmate on death row being found innocent after years of judges and courts making the "correct" decisions... It must be nice to have your own infallible court system... /s

898 posted on 03/22/2005 10:29:44 AM PST by Libertina (Hey temporary Governor Christine Gregoire - don't get too comfortable in that mansion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt
You make a compelling argument. It can be summed up in one sentence:

"Vee ver only vollowing orders!"

910 posted on 03/22/2005 10:33:49 AM PST by Rutles4Ever (Warning: may eat own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: ContemptofCourt

Where have you been living? Judge Greer was not making his decisions on the facts of the case. He was making his decisions on what Michael Schiavo told him were the facts. If you had been following the facts being revealed by nurses and people who knew Terri, you would understand. Michael should never have been named guardian in the first place. Terri's parents, her brother and her sister are her family, not Michael. He undermined any attempt to rehibilitate Terri. He wouldn't even allow her to be taught how to swallow. And, we know she could swallow because she could swallow her siliva. If she could have learned to eat again by mouth there would have been no need for a feeding tube and Judge Greer couldn't have called her in a vegatative state. But then Michael wouldn't get any money to spend. Learn the facts buddy!


1,072 posted on 03/22/2005 11:26:42 AM PST by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson