[Trust but Verify]

I thik the post speaks for itself. He files an affadavit as to her condition he examines her? Isn't that just as bad as the experts who claim she is PVS after spending only a short time examining her? He claimed she's NOT PVS, but hadn't examined her yet.

[AaronInCarolina]

He files an affadavit as to her condition he examines her? Isn't that just as bad as the experts who claim she is PVS after spending only a short time examining her? He claimed she's NOT PVS, but hadn't examined her yet.

I presume the "he" you refer to is Dr. Hammesfahr. It is my recollection from reading Judge Greer's opinion that he WAS one of the 5 doctors who examined Terri as part of the trial.

[agrace]

He stated on Fox last night that he spent a total of about 10 hours with Terri.

[supercat]

Isn't that just as bad as the experts who claim she is PVS after spending only a short time examining her? He claimed she's NOT PVS, but hadn't examined her yet.

Suppose an art dealer claims he has a Rembrandt painting of a landscape. Who would be a more credible witness of its veracity:

1. An art "expert" who took a 30-second glance and said "yup, it's real", or
2. A layperson who looks at a photograph and says "Power lines in a Rembrandt landscape are preposterous!"

A photograph is never good enough to authenticate a painting, but may well be good enough to prove it fake (subect to the caveat that the photo actually depict the painting in question). Likewise, video is not good enough to show PVS, but is good enough to prove non-PVS.