so, do you think it's a good sign that we haven't heard anything from the court yet? I'd like to think that the judge is actually listening to the arguments, but the pessimist in me thinks he's dragging his feet hoping Terri will die before he has to issue a ruling.
I am a little more hopeful because this motion is being argued by lawyers for DCF,Destro for example.
But they are facing the big guns of the ACLU. I should have known they were in on it. Now I feel a little more sympathy for Gibbs. He was overpowered.
"but the pessimist in me thinks he's dragging his feet hoping Terri will die before he has to issue a ruling."
I have got to say, this is the feeling I've been having now for seven days, from all the judges involved.
The politicians seem to have been slightly better. GW is the best but his job was the easiest (waking up at 1 a.m in his pj's to sign a bill).
But seriously, all through the court levels, I mean at any point, if any judge thought they would rule in Terri's favor they could have put at least an IV hydration tube in her.
They never did, so... that was always a bad sign. And this court is the same one that first heard the appeal this week (please someone correct me if I'm wrong) so I am not hopeful. :(