Posted on 06/15/2005 12:27:19 PM PDT by veronica
According to the M.E. report today, she could not swallow. And you must admit, she was not given the chance to swallow food or water. If I am wrong, please show me where Judge Greer allowed her to do so.
Well said, though I disagree with you about there being no harm in letting the Schindlers get custody...that sets a bad precedent of disregarding a person's wishes "because she never would have known," and stomps all over the fact that Mrs. Schiavo was married to Mr. Schiavo and I don't want the government intervening in marriages. If Mr. Schiavo were convicted of some wrongdoing, perhaps, but not with innuendo and malicious guesses.
The other judges didn't want to risk offending George (Greer), they even said so in a local interview here in Florida. Offending a judge should not enter into the equation, this was about justice not about offending your good friend George. A little known fact, except locally, all of these judges are very close friends.
Could you please post some independent verification of this? There is absolutely nothing that comes up on google that would reflect negatively on Thogmartin.
If he has been sued, there should be media accounts. I can't seem to find them.
I think you read my last post. I'll state my position once again in case it was unclear to anyone. The ME doesn't matter. His report doesn't matter. The size, shape, or condition of her brain, doesn't matter. This is a moral issue. It is MORALLY WRONG - then, now and 500 years from now - to dehydrate and starve to death a woman, regardless of what her physical or mental state appears to be outwardly, because her estranged husband with a common law wife and children, wants it. That is morally WRONG. PERIOD. There are plenty of "facts" or "evidence" that people can discuss till hell freezes over and it's all irrelevant because it boils down to that one simple statement of morality. I'm not going to continue to argue these factoids with you folks. You can go read Empire Journal.com for a ton of information that they have put together. There are other sites as well but that is one of the best and comprehensive. YOu can do your own research if you care to. But I am still going to shout from the rooftops that it was MORALLY WRONG to dehydrate and starve Terri Schiavo. And that's the end of the discussion for me.
Please post the interview, or a link to it.
Yes and he convinced one young woman that her father died of natural causes only to later be determined that her father was actually murdered by being shot behind the ear. He settled out of court, and this is not the only case where his work was sloppy.
That sounds like a long time ago. How did she swallow her saliva?
Links? There is nothing that comes up in goggle that would verify what you're saying.
Or maybe he thought it was compassion. After years of rehabilitation and finally accepting that she would never get better, he knew she wouldn't have wanted to live that way and it was the last thing he could do for her. Now, I'm not saying you have to agree with that, or even understand it, but it's just as valid of an explanation as "just plain meanness."
Plus, this article has untruths in it. Michael was NOT awarded 2million dollars. He was awarded $700,000. The rest was in a trust for Terri. He used that to fulfill her wishes (I'm just stating what he has said.) He said whatever was left would go to charity. So to say HE was awarded 2 million dollars is just a lie. He couldn't use that money for personal reasons even if he wanted to.
POST HOC!
It is morally wrong to deny OR DELAY a woman the right to die. Let's turn the clock back to before the obstructionism.
But you're right...it was morally wrong to make dehydration the only way for Mrs. Schiavo to be at peace.
Many people have expressed feelings similar to that explanation.
But, you have no problem with the government stomping all over the rights of parents wishing to keep a daughter that the government wants to kill.
You have no problem with the state killing a non-dying woman. Veeerrrrrry interesting..........
Frankly, I have a real problem with the state killing a non-dying person period. I have a problem with the state redefining the laws of end-of-life situations at their whim. Seems I would get to say when man can kill me you would think.
I have a problem with you telling me I am crazy because I do not wish the government someday telling me a daughter has to die because her husband said so.
I think it had to do with her neck angle. IANAP, but you can do some searching and find it, I'm sure. Even Hammesfahr admitted it.
Where are her the ashes Hildy?
That's exactly what he has said, the few times he has spoken.
They're with Michael. He hasn't decided where he is going to bury them yet. He says that when he does, he will tell the Parents as he is court ordered to do.
Hopefully hidden away from her wacky parents...after the nasty accusations against her husband, I would guess he's being very careful.
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.