Posted on 05/02/2005 5:06:09 AM PDT by Quaker
NEW PORT RICHEY - Pinellas- Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer, who was thrust into the national spotlight and scrutinized by pro-life advocates during the Terri Schiavo case, was a consistent judge who followed the law, colleagues say.
His professionalism and integrity was punctuated by the way he handled the Schiavo case, said Alan Scott Miller, a New Port Richey lawyer and member of the West Pasco Bar Association.
As part of Law Week, which kicks off today, the association will award Greer, 63, its Special Justice Award.
``He's getting this award for all of his contributions on the bench, not just the Schiavo case,'' Miller said. ``It's like a lifetime achievement award for an actor.''
Greer will receive the award during a banquet Thursday at the Heritage Springs Golf and Country Club, 11345 Robert Trent Jones Parkway.
For years, Greer presided over the politically and emotionally charged Schiavo case, which ended when the 41- year-old woman died March 31, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed a third time on a court order.
Some doctors said Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state since suffering brain damage after her heart stopped in 1990.
Her husband, Michael, fought for years to have her feeding stopped, saying his wife didn't want to be kept alive by artificial means.
Her parents, hoping she would recover, fought him in court after court.
Eventually, Florida's governor and Legislature and then Congress took up the battle.
Supporters and detractors watched as Greer made rulings backing Terri Schiavo's purported wishes and received threats on his life.
``I don't think anyone could ever say his decisions were unlawful,'' said Joan Nelson Hook, president of the West Pasco Bar Association. ``They were very thoughtful. His decisions were meticulous.
``We admired his ability to sustain the pressure not to follow the law. ... I think that shows his character.''
Steve Doran, association president-elect, echoed Hook's thoughts on Greer's handling of the Schiavo case.
``His decisions in that unfortunate case withstood the test of every appellate court in the country,'' Doran said. ``Those who are criticizing him are not seeing the big picture.''
When the association voted this month on this year's recipient of the Special Justice Award, the result was almost unanimous for Greer.
``He's a man of integrity. He's followed the flow. He's done an excellent job on the bench,'' said Miller. ``That's why he's getting this award.''
In addition to Greer's award, the Law Week celebration offers events that allow the community to get a closer look at what the West Pasco Bar Association and the law profession are about, Hook said.
``It's an opportunity to interact with all levels of the community,'' she said.
``It's not just about battles; law is a way of life.''
Here are some events:
* Representatives of the association will be at Gulf View Square mall in Port Richey offering free legal advice from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Wednesday through Friday.
* All week, 22 lawyers will visit Pasco schools to discuss the law and this week's national theme, ``The American Jury: We the People in Action.''
* The 2nd District Court of Appeal will hold a special session at 10 a.m. Wednesday at the West Pasco Government Center, 7530 Little Road, in county commission chambers.
* Business suits, shoes and accessories will be collected at area law offices for Connections, a not-for-profit organization that helps people looking for jobs.
The following law offices are collecting men's and women's apparel:
The Law Offices of Attridge, Cohen & Lucas, 7136 Little Road, New Port Richey; The O'Conner Law Group, 9735 U.S. 19, Suite 2, Port Richey; Pejot Law, 11911 Pine Forest Drive, New Port Richey; and The Law Offices of Gay & Ehrhardt, 5318 Balsam St., New Port Richey.
Reporter Lisa A. Davis can be reached at (727) 815-1083.
He needs to be honored by dancing at the end of a rope.
Ok, you let them just keep on making laws that will kill your citizens and you just follow happily along - until it becomes you or your child.
You are very blind. Have a look at the end-of-life panel in your state and just what they are doing. They are playing the Florida citizens for fools. All they have to do is recommend a change to the law and it is law. Then your judges can order death with immunity and even awards.
Or, maybe you are one of the younger ones that sees nothing wrong with man deciding when others die. Again - you need to rethink it. It also means that men will decide when you die - not God.
And - do you think Christians care what they look like? We are not there to "look" appropriate to the ones that see nothing wrong with the state killing a non-dying woman in Florida.
Have you ever wondered what your side looks like? Nazism comes to mind with the changes going on in Florida.
Just in case you are not aware of the progression of end-of-life laws in Florida - note how the laws are changed and how more easily it becomes for Florida to "pull the plug" on those designated as expendable.
Posted by mercyme on earlier thread -
"In 1998, the florida legislature created the Florida Panel on End-of-Life Care for the purpose of revising the 765 statute for end-of-life issues. They were charged with coming up with the findings for changes in the law for the Florida legislature. Their findings were made law
Bill CB/CB/SB 2228, which revised the 765 as of October 1, 1999, also gave the authority to the End-to-Life panel to make findings for the legislature and that these findings were to made into law.
The legislature essentially gave them the authority to dictate to the legislature what changes to put in their bills. So the role of End-of-Life panel was not simply to make recommendations, but had the authority to determine what changes would be made into law.
The 765 law was revised in 1999 to include "end-stage condition" as a reason to withdraw life prolonging procedures along with persistant vegetative state and terminal illness. This was also put into law. Geldart also redefines terminal illness as not just conditions that cause death, but "irreversible" conditions or conditions "with no reasonable chance of recovery". Felos used this definition for the argument that Terri is terminal because she has a "irreversible" neurological condition with no "reasonable hope for recovery".
Geldart also details the change in law that permitted nutrition and hydration to be considered medical treatment and the changes to life-prolonging procedures in the absence of advanced directives. Project Grace member William Leonard then points out a common scenario in Florida in his article: an elderly couple moves from out of state to Florida and then one spouse dies within a year 's time. Leonard then expands the definition of family to a neighbor, friend or caregiver who is now in the position of articulating the wishes of the elderly person to withdraw medical treatment, rather than "some distant relative".
And indeed the 765 law was changed to allow an "friend" to say that the person wanted life-pronging procedures withdrawn without a written directive. This also effected the outcome of Terri's case. Authors of Project Grace advocate for terminal sedation (Basta), withdraw of nutrition and hydration (Basta), and the refusal of physician to provide "futile" treatment as unethical even with advanced directive asking for treatments (Doty).
They also state that advanced directives providing for treatment should not carry the same weight as directives withdrawing care, and advanced directives should not compel the physican to provide them, regardless if the patient needs them (Doty). Doty is part of the Florida Bioethics Network as well as Project Grace. One of the changes in the law in CB/CB/SB 2228 includes the Bioethics Network as part of the process of withdrawing care. "
Wait, I'm leafing through my Bible right now to find a verse supporting your suggestion.
Is this what we teach our children, that it's okay to murder the judges and government officials who have done something with which we disagree?
Bump
Yet after these, at best incredibly stupid, decisions, Judge Greer is honored. What a perversion.
The facts of this case are terribly sad, but they are not hard to understand. There's really nothing to be confused about, and as best I can tell, nothing's been overlooked by anyone. Terri's situation has arguably received more judicial attention, more medical attention, more executive attention, and more "due process," than any other guardianship case in history. Terri's family has had the benefit of excellent legal representation as well as the Governor's own top-notch attorneys, all of whom have scoured the case for ways to assist the effort to keep Terri's feeding tube in place.
My second thought concerns the nature of trials. As you probably know (or will learn if you read the material below), Judge Greer held a full trial in this case to determine how Terri would choose to exercise her privacy rights. Michael was on one side; Terri's parents were on the other. Both sides brought witnesses and experts. In the end, the judge ruled that Terri would not wish to continue receiving nurishment and hydration through a surgically implanted tube.
Trials like this, where someone's life may literally be on the line, are held every day in courtrooms across the state and around the country. Most involve crimes, but not all. In every case, lawyers marshal witnesses, present evidence, and make arguments to further their clients' interests. The decisions made by the judge or jury may affect whether someone lives or dies, whether someone spends his or her life in prison, or whether someone will have to pay another debilitating sums of money.
Whether as a party, a witness, or a juror, those who have the opportunity to participate in trials should take their roles seriously, offering their best efforts to further the search for truth. At the same time, the public should realize that once a trial is over, the decision is made, and it was made based on the evidence. Appeals are almost always available, but if the judgment is affirmed, only very rarely will there be an opportunity to get a new decision based on evidence not previously presented.
OVERVIEW
In updating this page recently, I decided to include a summary about the case's events. After some efforts, it occurred to me that I should simply reproduce an email and my response that I recently blogged. They seem to make for a good summary. Here's the email:
Hi Matt,
I stumbled across your site and quickly became immersed. I have been an avid follower of Terri Schiavo as I feel quite passionately about the case as explained in the letter I wrote to the Rocky Mountain News which was recently published (see below). So far, no amount of legal jargon has been able to quench my desperate desire to understand this case. I have been searching for answers for so very long, that I felt some sense of relief when finding your site. I would really love to hear your opinion as to whether or not there is any hope whatsoever to save Terri at this point, or is this it? Thank you so much in advance for your time and for listening. And also, for this site. Have a great day!
I left the reader's attached letter out. Here was my response:
Thanks for the kind words and the sincere thoughts.
This is a very tough situation for all involved -- and mind you I'm not at all involved. I just discuss the case as part of what seems to be my running commentary on Florida law.
I appreciate that you wish to understand more. Ultimately, Terri's case is understandable, though painfully so. If you take away the "evil" allegations that have been leveled against everyone, it's easy to see what you're left with.
You're left with a woman who suffered a heart attack 15 years ago, who essentially died but was resuscitated, though not entirely. Her brain had suffered enormous damage from the heart attack. As time passed, her brain further deteriorated -- to the point where much if not most of her cerebral cortex (the portion of the brain that controls conscious thought, among other things) was literally gone, replaced by spinal fluid. Doctors hired by Terri's husband say the deterioration of Terri's brain left her without thoughts or feelings, that the damage is irreversible, and that Terri's life-like appearance is merely the result of brain stem activity -- basically involuntary reflexes we all have. An independent doctor hired by the court reached the same conclusions. Doctors hired by Terri's parents did not dispute the physical damage done to Terri, but they claim there are new therapies that could improve her condition. In two separate trials, the trial court found such claims of potential improvement to be without merit. Terri's body continues to function without her cerebral cortex. She is sustained by a feeding tube surgically inserted into her stomach. She cannot eat through her mouth without a strong likelihood of choking to death.
You're left with a husband who lived with his in-laws following Terri's heart attack, who apparently provided care and therapy for years but who later came to believe Terri would never recover. He believes she would not have wanted to be kept alive in this brain-degenerated condition by a surgically implanted tube. He is apparently willing to continue his fight to achieve what he believes Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.
You're left with parents who were once allied with Terri's husband in an effort to care for Terri and restore her but, unlike Terri's husband, they never lost hope. They believe Terri reacts to them and has conscious thoughts. They believe Terri would not want, and does not want, her feeding tube removed, and that some cognitive function could be restored through new therapies. Terri's parents are willing to continue their fight to achieve what they believe Terri would want despite ridicule, hatred, expense, and threats.
You're left with judges who have been placed in the utterly thankless position of applying Florida law to this impassioned situation. Florida law calls for the trial court to determine what Terri would choose to do in this situation, and after a trial hard fought by Terri's husband and her family, where each side was given the opportunity to present its best case about what Terri would do, the court determined the evidence was clear and convincing that Terri would choose not to continue living by the affirmative intervention of modern medicine -- that she would choose to have her feeding tube disconnected. In a second trial, brought about by Terri's family's claims new therapies could restore her and that the existence of such a therapy would make her "change her mind," the trial court again heard evidence from all sides and determined that no new therapy presented any reasonable chance of restoring Terri's brain function. The propriety of these decisions -- from the sufficiency of the evidence to the appropriateness of the procedures used -- has been unanimously upheld on appeal each time.
You're left with a public that is much confused. Some see video clips of Terri moving, appearing to make eye contact, and making sounds, and they assume such are the product of conscious thought -- that Terri's "in there." Some believe Terri's husband has been motivated by money. Some believe that no heart attack occurred -- instead, Terri's husband beat her nearly to death and has been trying to end her life ever since. Some believe he is a bad person because he has taken up with another woman and has children with her. Some believe Florida's judiciary is corrupt or inept, to the point where death threats have been made against the trial judge. Some are sad that families would fight like this. Some believe that removing Terri's feeding tube would cause her pain and is inhumane (I'm no doctor, but the medical information I've seen on this subject uniformly says the opposite.) Some are disappointed that the law does not allow someone in Terri's condition to be kept alive perpetually if a family member is willing to care for him or her. Some believe no life should be permitted to reach an unnecessary end unless irrefutable proof, or at least written proof, shows the person wanted things that way.
All of these positions are understandable in some sense, though if you've read my posts over the years you know I am particularly sensitive to the judiciary's position of following the law correctly and yet being so horrifically misunderstood by many.
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/popschiavoposts.html
Why is it that it is ok and great for those supporting Terri to be mocked, lambasted, ridiculed and called wackos? But, if they do the same from their point of view, the pro-MS crowd is so terribly offended?
Also, why is it that none of the pro-MS crowd ever can even understand at all why the "do not kill Terri" crowd are so upset? It is almost like they are totally blind to the reasons for being upset about Terri.
So,
We do not like a panel deciding when man dies. We want God, family and advice of doctors to decide - not state, doctors, medical establishments, laws, and husbands with two families deciding.
We feel giving man the power of life and death over others, ensures a future where man abuses the rights of American citizens.
We feel Americans retain their citizenship even when disabled, deformed, sick, in bed. And, therefore, are entitled to life, liberty.
We feel it is wrong to willfully kill based on a suddenly remembered unwritten statement given by a husband who has another family, who has recently received a malpractice monetary award and against the wishes of her parents.
We also feel it is wrong to tear a son/daughter out of the arms of a mother and say you cannot have them, we have to kill them.
Now, close your eyes to all those statements and call us wacko. Because, I could care less what people who so desire to kill off the weak in society think about those that do not wish that right.
Oh, such a great idea!!
Great reply and pity....er....pithy.
You're right. It is a perversion. But it's Florida and it's the perfect venue for the managed care,long-term care insurance companies to get the rules changed. It's not about one or two individual death cultists, it's about saving billions of dollars for the insurance industry.
News Headline:
"Hitler and Stalin to be honored for their systematic attempts to lower the out of control world population!"
It wouldn't surprize me the way this world is going...sad really.
". . . We, as a society, the government and the people of the United States of America, have not managed, for whatever reasons, to permit a mother, deluded or not, to put water onto the lips of her dying child, brain dead or not. . . .
"We have wounded our national character. By our actions, or inactions, we have placed ourselves one notch less, above the Nazis. . . .
"We, as a people, have so shamed ourselves, that we cannot look Mary Schindler . . . in the eye, and give her one good reason why WE did not allow her to give water to her dying child."
I guess it was media insinuation too when the locals complained about the protestors that didn't respect their private property by parking all over it and locked up nearby businesses from providing a livelihood for their employees too huh? Not to mention the dozens of other families that couldn't get in to see their loved ones because people who had no business being there just had to be heard
Probably never occured to you that the people who were there were their because they treasure the sanctity of life just as our founders did, and weren't afraid to be thought of as fools to show it.
And it probably never occured to you that the same Framers were very specific on the definition of federalism. Please see Federalist #45, 78, and 81 on which courts the Constitution covers and just how far the rights of the specific states go. The Framers may not have been afraid to be fools for what they believed in, but they also respected the rule of law.
Incidentally, few people would call Catholics "evangeliwhackos." Yet they were the dominant and most vocal presence in vigil at the Hospice (and in the marketplace of ideas as well). Doubt that? Go watch my video.
I dislike the term 'evangeliwhackos', so let's just use the term whacko shall we? I mean I'm a Christian and I wouldn't be up in someone's personal business to the point of protesting like a certified loon. Anyone that ties themselves to a case so stringently that has nothing to do with them or their families, up to the point to post as some idiots have that they are still crying over a decision from a month ago, I consider a whacko. Anyone that stands out in front of a hospice blocking traffic, businesses from operating their normal schedules, families from seeing their loved ones, over a non-political personal issue that has nothing to do with them in the first place, I consider a whacko. And anyone that praises Randall Terry, as some have here, I definitely consider a whacko.
If Michael Schiavo, Judge Greer, or anyone else has done something that they should be judged for, they will be by a court not of this world. However, if they have accepted Christ, they will recieve the same grace as anyone else who has. If God can forgive them, why shouldn't others? I guess it's easier to call for them to be hung or tarred and feathered though...But I don't see they did anything wrong either. It was a tough decision but one that was made correctly
Just what do you suggest we do to stop the judicial tyranny?
Just what do we do to stop the ever increasing laws determining who lives and when they die (by the end-of-life panels who are not elected and not accountable to any)?
Are we to blindly follow the manipulation of the law by those in power to kill the weak among us? I would think we fully had the right to finally wake up and see just what is going on out of view. Or, is this the purview of the lawyers and judges (the new elite) and we are to just follow the law and honor those that seek to do away with many of us?
Sorry, not me. I will complain all I want. They are changing the America I know and I don't relish living under the "pure" decisions of the law - I am beginning to see those laws are not pure at all - they seek to kill and there is nothing pure about killing citizens.
Look, he's being honored by a lawyer's association. That says it all. If Greer had opened the record to scrutiny too many of their pinheads would have been lopped off.
"We have wounded our national character. By our actions, or inactions, we have placed ourselves one notch less, above the Nazis. . . .
Nice hyperbole. I wonder if Mr. Katz will determine the same thing when the final autopsy is released that shows Mrs. Schiavo no longer had the mental capacities that so many (at least around here) claim
Were you the juggler at the hospice during the protest?
The unicycler or the KISS look alike?
The girl wearing a bloody dress standing beside the road yelling at cars to honk...the megaphonist?
How about the crew doing a Samba dance around the grounds carrying a fake plastic bloodstained 5 foot cross.
Looked more like a Renaissance festival than a protest.
I know...were you the one dressed in some kind of German SS uniform?
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/popschiavoposts.html
I mostly agree with what you said. But let's not wrap these fringe pro-life elements in a Christian cloak. The vitriolic hatred they exhibit has nothing to do with Christianity. And as mentioned by Veronica up this thread, the entire fringe element does not claim to be Christian. I hope you're right about the effects of the backlash, but when most conservative pundits seem to speak for the pro-life fringe, I'm a bit wary to believe the GOP has learned its lesson. I can't vote to re-elect Greer, but I plan to show up at the polls to re-elect Jim King when his time comes. King is also despised by the pro-life fringe because of the Shiavo matter.
Greer did NOTHING remarkable in any legal sense. He and Felos were collegues and he gave the lawyer he know the benefit of the doubt.
If felos had been on the other side, Greer would have ruled on the other side.
This award is about cronnyism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.