[freedumb2003]

He was also an unfit guardian and unquestionably a perjuror. The law provides for him to be removed, and if the judge had been a judge instead of a death cult hck, that's what would have happened.

The law had a provision, perhaps. But in these cases the legal marriage would take precedence. Had the judge granted the change, it would have been overturned as a matter of law in minutes.

In today's world, catting around isn't considered to be bad character (perhaps that is sad, but it is true).

[Mr. Silverback]

In today's world, catting around isn't considered to be bad character (perhaps that is sad, but it is true).

I was not referring to adultery. It's true that he technically had a conflict of interest when he took up with another woman and was therefore technically an unfit guardian, but I'm not all that concerned with what he was doing with his schmacke. I'm concerned with what he was doing with his authority as guardian.

Still sure that removal of this guy as guardian would immediately be overturned? In minutes?

[supercat]

But in these cases the legal marriage would take precedence.

Spouses do not automatically have guardianship authority. Further, if Terri had an honest guardian, I don't think Michael would have remained her spouse very long. Guardians are allowed under Florida law to file for divorce on behalf of incapacitated clients. While I would not expect most divorce-court judges to grant such petitions absent some pretty clear malfeasance on the part of the non-incapacitated spouse, I find it hard to imagine that a divorce-court judge would not rule that Michael Schiavo's conduct constitutes a willful renunciation of his marriage.