Log in

View Full Version : Shiavo circus in Florida



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 01:49 PM
The major point here is that the husband blocked testing from taking place, tore up her journals, and there are major testimonies from plenty of people who I trust. I don't trust him nor his cohorts. I don't trust the courts. I know what goes on. If you want to believe it, do so. But after seeing that guy and hearing the evidence I've heard and testimonies by good people, I will not believe otherwise.

I did read Ann's article. I think she is well-informed and reasonable, and obviously knows well the minds behind the decisions. Stupid? Not even in the slightest.

Testing was blocked because more testing is not needed. She has gone through plenty of tests that show her condition. Regarding the tearing up of the journals, please provide an unbiased source of that information.

Ann Coulter is a wacko. Here are some of her famous quotes:
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.
"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."
"The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. "

Here is a transcript of Ann getting pwned on Larry King:
http://users.rcn.com/skutsch/anticoulter/larryking98.html

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 01:53 PM
It's not new footage. It may be the first time footage was web-hosted but that means nothing. The experts involved in the case have reviewed all of the tapes. If the family had significant amounts of tape of Terri responding they'd show it. As desperate as they are right now they would be showing it all. That's all they posted because that's all that exists of her 'reactions'

I've seen more footage on tv. And I don't believe that is all. They claim she can watch tv and sing, on a regular basis. And they have the videotapes to prove it. You don't have to believe them. But I do. And I believe he is a sick fuck. I believe the evidence I have seen and heard from reliable people. You choose not to believe them, instead believing an obvious sociopathic lawyer and judge and a deadbeat husband. I have lived that life, I know they couldn't care less whether anyone lives or dies except for themselves and their cohorts. In fact, they will kill for any reason if they can get away with it and there is something in it for them. Which is the case here..... there is just too much evidence in place. If you don't believe it, honestly, I don't know what to tell ya'.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 01:58 PM
Testing was blocked because more testing is not needed. She has gone through plenty of tests that show her condition. Regarding the tearing up of the journals, please provide an unbiased source of that information.

Ann Coulter is a wacko. Here are some of her famous quotes:
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.
"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."
"The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. "

Here is a transcript of Ann getting pwned on Larry King:


You'll just have to watch FOX, and yes it is unbiased. Michael's lawyer has spoken as well as many others. And this is what I have determined after hearing all people speak. I'm not speaking of all of Ann's articles... I'm speaking of one, and it is well-informed and reasonable. Maybe you guys consider some of her other ideas whacky, but the ones about the case weren't. They were dead-on imo. I don't see anything stupid in that article either.

Pamela
03-24-2005, 01:59 PM
I try not to get involved with this because it's all over my news, and i work at a hospital. Even so when a person is on life support, meaning they need a breathing machine etc, to do it ALL, and the family allows for "pull the plug" alot of these people live for days and weeks and longer. They will starve too.

Now i don't know what she would have wanted, as she had no written will. Of course by law her husband does have ALL rights to what should be done with her. He has waited many many years for her take get better. She has not. If they make these laws, Government should not be allowed to step in...Period.

Bottom line doctors do not know what she feels, if anything. This could all be reflex responce. She can't swallow liquid, she will drown.

I do wish the parents where able to get her home and watch over her with more aggressive therapy, really. But the hubby should have first choice. It's all (sad to say) pecking order.

God bless her.

Pamela

Lurker
03-24-2005, 02:11 PM
My basic feeling on the case aligns completely with Pamela's.

PC, you seem to have a problem with the Supreme Court's actions in this matter and it may be a fair complaint but I'm neither well-versed in the specifics of it or too interested in the legal issues involved as they apply to the issue at hand (whether Terri should be kept alive or not).

ET, I don't know what to say. You seem to believe that several judges, court-appointed doctors, and court-appointed representatives of Terri are all in cahoots with her husband. I feel the same way in responding to your points that you obviously feel responding to the Sarge--if you just aren't willing to trust anything that anyone other than FOX News puts forth on the topic, I guess we have to agree to disagree.

Included in one of the reports I got from one of the links above (an official Guardian ad Litem (sp?) report to Governor Bush) was a mention that Michael had at one time made a formal offer to renounce the estate for Terri's health costs. I just don't see his motive for being the evil guy you all seem to think he is. It just doesn't pass the smell test that the guy lived with his in-laws for 2 years after the accident, took his wife for experimental therapy in California, and has basically invested 10 years of his time and energy for a payoff of a few hundred grand (less his legal costs).

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 02:18 PM
My basic feeling on the case aligns completely with Pamela's.

PC, you seem to have a problem with the Supreme Court's actions in this matter and it may be a fair complaint but I'm neither well-versed in the specifics of it or too interested in the legal issues involved as they apply to the issue at hand (whether Terri should be kept alive or not).

ET, I don't know what to say. You seem to believe that several judges, court-appointed doctors, and court-appointed representatives of Terri are all in cahoots with her husband. I feel the same way in responding to your points that you obviously feel responding to the Sarge--if you just aren't willing to trust anything that anyone other than FOX News puts forth on the topic, I guess we have to agree to disagree.

Included in one of the reports I got from one of the links above (an official Guardian ad Litem (sp?) report to Governor Bush) was a mention that Michael had at one time made a formal offer to renounce the estate for Terri's health costs. I just don't see his motive for being the evil guy you all seem to think he is. It just doesn't pass the smell test that the guy lived with his in-laws for 2 years after the accident, took his wife for experimental therapy in California, and has basically invested 10 years of his time and energy for a payoff of a few hundred grand (less his legal costs).

I believe RELIABLE evidence, doctors who have come forth in opposition to NO NOT court-appointed doctors, but doctors PAID by Michael. THEY WERE NOT COURT-APPOINTED. And I believe the nurses who have come forth. I don't just believe the news, I believe the people who are honest. I believe evidence, the evidence that the journals were torn up by Michael, that there was never a Pep scan or MRI, because he blocked it, that there was not therapy as the nurses testified, and that Michael wanted her dead for money reasons. You need to go back and read the previous posts. Obviously you haven't. It is several media resources and people that I have cited too, not just FOX, although I do believe they are giving a good representation of offering people from all sides to speak.

THE FACT THAT MICHAEL WOULD NOT ALLOW THE TESTING TO TAKE PLACE AND THE JOURNALS WERE DESTROYED SAYS IT ALL. The nurses were there, the others were not there.

And FYI, all sociopaths are in cahoots. They will do whatever to save one of their own from any prosecution, against anyone else.

Gynger
03-24-2005, 02:25 PM
I don't usually post in this forum for many reasons- I'm very opinionated and I'm bound to piss someone off... but.. I have been following this case- I have an interest in it because of a friend of mine who was on life support for many years before her family chose to pull the plug...

I don't believe that Terri is in a vegetative state, I believe that she is aware of what is taking place around her.. I find her husband a complete disgrace to society and her parents have already said that they would care for her.. so what's the deal? There really isn't any more money left.. its been eaten away at her care.. I find her husband just truthfully in my opinion wanting her dead and out of the way.

However, as devil's advocate.. this is why people should have a living will in place..... if you haven't done so already get one- get a power of attorney and a living will.. If anyone needs help I would be more than happy to help you with them... This is an area of law that I know well, and have done many estate plans, living wills and power of attorneys as well as last wills... By law, her husband has the rights to everything and her parents don't... they are at his mercy.... I believe, that he never divorced her if memory serves me correctly.. therefore, in the eyes of the law, it is his final determination as to what happens to her....

I find this story sad and I hope that they don't just kill her off, however, sadly, I think that is exactly what is going to happen.

polecat
03-24-2005, 02:30 PM
It's not new footage. It may be the first time footage was web-hosted but that means nothing. The experts involved in the case have reviewed all of the tapes.
We can get off the topic of the footage. You clearly stated your opinion- you feel from viewing them what you see is random/reflex response. If this is a fair portrayal of your opinion, we can just agree to disagree on this point.


Which law would that be? Would you care to cite it?
It's been coined "Schiavo's Law" and it's what caused President Bush to make an emergency trip from Texas to Washington to sign early Monday morning.

I'm not feeling too warm and fuzzy about this emergency session, but it did happen- and similar has happened in the past. A bill was constructed, pushed through congress (passed), then signed into law and dropped on the Supreme Court's lap.

The response that was expected was a simple ruling to investigate the constitutionality of this law, and if found unconstitutional- reverse it. The other result would be to simply follow/enforce said law, which would create the environment to empower the Supreme Court to order the re-insertion of her feeding tube pending a full pro-novo review of the entire case.

You can do a 'google' of "Schiavo Law" (not to be confused with "Terri's Law" which Gov Bush in FL passed prior) and pick your preferred source(s). Just about every media source has coverage of Monday morning's Bush + Congress action.

The original draft of the bill->law for public proliferation:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/schiavo/bill31905.html

And the timeline links you provided also *should* at least raise an eyebrow on Michael's motives. It shows a pretty clear pattern of barring any form of advanced diagnosis, therapy or admittance of evidence into the case:
Some examples:
------
*March 2, 2000 - The Schindlers file a petition with Judge Greer to allow “swallowing” tests to be performed on Terri Schiavo to determine if she can consume—or learn to consume—nutrients on her own.

*March 7, 2000 - Judge Greer denies the Schindlers’ petition to perform “swallowing” tests on Terri Schiavo.

*March 24, 2000 - Judge Greer grants Michael Schiavo’s petition to limit visitation to Terri Schiavo as well as to bar pictures

*April 26, 2001 - The Schindlers file an emergency motion with Judge Greer for relief from judgment based upon new evidence, which includes a claim that a former girlfriend of Michael Schiavo will testify that he lied about Terri Schiavo’s wishes; Judge Greer dismisses the motion as untimely. Also on this date, the Schindlers file a new civil suit that claims that Michael Schiavo perjured himself when he testified that Terri Schiavo had stated an aversion to remaining on life support.

*October 17, 2001 - The 2nd DCA rules that 5 doctors should examine Terri Schiavo to determine if she can improve with new medical treatment. The Schindlers and Michael Schiavo are to choose 2 doctors each, and the court is to appoint a doctor. (as if the opinion of any Florida doctor appointed by Greer would be in question...)

*December 14, 2001 - Michael Schiavo petitions the Florida Supreme Court to stay the October 17, 2001 ruling of the 2nd DCA.


*November 15, 2002 - The Schindlers contend that Michael Schiavo might have abused Terri Schiavo and this abuse led to her condition. They ask the court for more time to collect evidence, and to remove Michael Schiavo as guardian.

*October 31, 2003 - Judge Demers appoints Dr. Jay Wolfson as Terri Schiavo’s guardian ad litem. Dr. Wolfson holds both medical and legal degrees; he is also a public health professor at the University of South Florida.

*September 17, 2003 - Judge Greer orders the removal of the PEG tube to take place on October 15, 2003. He also rejects the Schindlers’ request that Terri Schiavo be given therapy to learn how to eat without the tube.

*December 1, 2003 - Jay Wolfson, guardian ad litem, concludes in his report that Terri Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state with no chance of improvement.

*March 29, 2004 - Judge Greer denies a motion filed by the Schindlers seeking to have Michael Schiavo defend himself in a hearing; they allege that he is violating a 1996 court order that requires him to share a sufficient amount of Terri Schiavo’s medical information. Michael Schiavo claims that he has shared an adequate amount of information through attorneys.


It's pretty obvious, as the record shows, that Michael has a clear record of being antagonistic towards any form of information interchange, attempts by the family to improve/rehabilitate her, or otherwise allow advanced medical treatment, therapies or release of information.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 02:46 PM
Yep. Why did he not want to allow the parents to visit, 5 doctors to examine her, or any pictures to be taken???? This is clearly NOT a person who was interested in her rehabilitation.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 02:51 PM
I understand that POV. However, he is placed in a dilema. He needed to move on but he disagreed with the way the family wants to deal with the situation. According to him (and several other witnesses) she would not want to be kept alive in this way. If he divorces her the parents will keep her alive indefinitely and this is not what she would have wanted.

Even if it ISN'T what she would have wanted she doesn't know anyway, right ??? She doesn't know what is going on, accordng to those who want her dead. So why not keep her alive ??? she isn't laying there thinking "this isn't what I wanted". Her parents would be happy, she doesn't know what the f*ck is going on, the only person upset is michael.
I truly, truly believe, and I am sure I'll get slammed for this by someone, but I believe he put her in this state and he doesn't want to get busted for it.
He's free to move on with his life. He has!

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 02:53 PM
As far as starvign people to death, why not starve death row inmates to death. Why not immediately start starving that creep who killed Jessica Lunsford ?? He's getting 3 hots and a cot and Ts is starving to death . Twisted !

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:02 PM
Even if it ISN'T what she would have wanted she doesn't know anyway, right ??? She doesn't know what is going on, accordng to those who want her dead. So why not keep her alive ??? she isn't laying there thinking "this isn't what I wanted". Her parents would be happy, she doesn't know what the f*ck is going on, the only person upset is michael.

It makes no difference that the is unaware of the surroundings and unable to suffer. It's what she wanted and that is all that matters. She shouldn't be forced to stay alive just to fill her parents' inability to accept that she is gone and will never come back. It is extremely selfish for the parents to keep her alive for her sake.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:05 PM
Do you think she "WANTED" her husband to fuck another woman , pop out some kids and put her parents through this mental torture all while she lay there in a dark room ? What she WANTED, is a divorce.
It's what he SAID she wanted. There is nothing to back that up. AS someone else said, he destroyed all of her journals. He has proven to be an abuser (per his ex girlfriends) .

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:08 PM
However, as devil's advocate.. this is why people should have a living will in place..... if you haven't done so already get one- get a power of attorney and a living will.. If anyone needs help I would be more than happy to help you with them... This is an area of law that I know well, and have done many estate plans, living wills and power of attorneys as well as last wills... By law, her husband has the rights to everything and her parents don't... they are at his mercy.... I believe, that he never divorced her if memory serves me correctly.. therefore, in the eyes of the law, it is his final determination as to what happens to her....

Sure, but even living wills can be contested. There is a similar case in Philly where a dispute is taking place. The patient has a living will that explicitly names a particular family member as power of attorney and also states that life support should not be administered. A second family member contests this and as a result, it's in the courts.

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:09 PM
Do you think she "WANTED" her husband to fuck another woman , pop out some kids and put her parents through this mental torture all while she lay there in a dark room ? What she WANTED, is a divorce.
It's what he SAID she wanted. There is nothing to back that up. AS someone else said, he destroyed all of her journals. He has proven to be an abuser (per his ex girlfriends) .

Yes he really is the devil. I've said it before, cite an unbiased source if you are going to make those claims.

Melonie
03-24-2005, 03:09 PM
At this point, other than Bill Fritz ordering Terri to be taken into protective custody as a congressional witness or Jeb Bush wilfully defying Florida court orders, the outcome of the Schaivo case appears to be a foregone conclusion. However, the matter of (re)balance of power among the executive, judicial and legislative branches is only beginning ! As I said earlier, this matter will undoubtedly continue to percolate at least through the 2006 election cycle.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:10 PM
from cnn.com , very sad , doesnt sound like to me she would have wanted to starve to death.

PINELLAS PARK, Florida (AP) -- Diane Meyer can recall only one time that her best friend, Terri Schiavo, really got angry with her. It was in 1981, and it haunts her still.

The recent high school graduates had just seen a television movie about Karen Ann Quinlan, who had been in a coma since collapsing six years earlier and was the subject of a bitter court battle over her parents' decision to take her off a respirator. Meyer says she told a cruel joke about Quinlan, and it set Terri off.

"She went down my throat about this joke, that it was inappropriate," Meyer says. She remembers Terri saying she wondered how the doctors and lawyers could possibly know what Quinlan was really feeling or what she would want.

"Where there's life," Meyer recalls her saying, "there's hope."

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:11 PM
Her friends, her family are biased , yet someone who wants to STARVE HIS WIFE TO DEATH is credible !?? Amazing !

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 03:11 PM
Even if it ISN'T what she would have wanted she doesn't know anyway, right ??? She doesn't know what is going on, accordng to those who want her dead. So why not keep her alive ??? she isn't laying there thinking "this isn't what I wanted". Her parents would be happy, she doesn't know what the f*ck is going on, the only person upset is michael.
I truly, truly believe, and I am sure I'll get slammed for this by someone, but I believe he put her in this state and he doesn't want to get busted for it.
He's free to move on with his life. He has!

I believe that too. His actions show it. He just had to prove that the bulimia killed her, enough to sue for malpractice. Then when the parents wanted bone scans to show she was abused, it was denied. Anything the parents tried to do to show his true motives was denied. That judge is obviously on Michael's side.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:12 PM
Here's a shirt for you Serg, I'm sure it'll be very fashionable with a pair of simple jeans
http://www.glennbeck.com/tshirtoffer.htm

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:14 PM
Then when the parents wanted bone scans to show she was abused, it was denied.
why is that serg ?? Why not a simple bone scan ?? Prove the bitch (as he called her) did this to herself and he'd come out smelling like roses ! Hmmm maybe because HE DID THIS TO HER ! Lightbulb !

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:16 PM
Yes he really is the devil. I've said it before, cite an unbiased source if you are going to make those claims.

don't have to site shit. it's common sense and logic. no woman would want her husband to start screwing another woman while she lies there in a hellhole and gets no rehab and certainly wouldn't want to put her parents/family through this mental torture. cut the legal CRAP and the technicality bullshit and use some COMMON SENSE !

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:16 PM
Anyways, I'm done with this. I discussed this issue with people a hell of a lot more informed on the issue for nearly 400 posts on another message board. There is a strong resistance by some (not all) in favor of keeping her alive to the citation of unbiased information and way too much baseless conspiracy theorists crap.

Keep going if you wish but here's something you conspiracy theorists might look into getting:
http://www.privateinvestigators.cc/images/Aluminum%20Foil%20Deflector%20Beanie.jpg

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:18 PM
Posting 400 times on a message board is a way to get reliable info yet the womans family and friends are unreliable ! Houston, we have a problem! ;D

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:20 PM
conspiracy theory, how laughable ! Since when is not wanting to watch a woman starve to death related to a conspiracy theory ??? You may wanna get those meds refilled or adjusted sarge !

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:22 PM
don't have to site shit. it's common sense and logic. no woman would want her husband to start screwing another woman while she lies there in a hellhole and gets no rehab and certainly wouldn't want to put her parents/family through this mental torture. cut the legal CRAP and the technicality bullshit and use some COMMON SENSE !

Common sense is neither common nor sensible.

Personally, I'd rather that my wife moved on with her life rather than waste her life at my side if I was in that situation.

With the way my family is I could totally see them not wanting to cut off life support. If it was necessary for her to remain married to keep custody of me until she can execute my last wish then so be it. The fact that she would do that for me would show her ultimate love for me.

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 03:24 PM
Posting 400 times on a message board is a way to get reliable info yet the womans family and friends are unreliable ! Houston, we have a problem! ;D

When a thread gets that long and people constantly link to unbiased sources, then yes, it is a way to get reliable information. It all has to do with the mental capacity of the posters.

Flame me all you want, it just shows that you don't have shit to stand on.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 03:32 PM
Yes he really is the devil. I've said it before, cite an unbiased source if you are going to make those claims.



Three people provided signed affidavits. They weren't given the chance to testify. Judge Greer is exactly as Ann described him. We have cited tons and tons more evidence than you have to support your decisions. YOU cite some unbiased evidence.

And yes, it is common sense to conclude that a person's actions tell all. There are enough people testifying that Michael was a dirtbag, he's done enough to lead to me believe he is trying to hide something, and it appears that the Judge is indeed on his side according to the link YOU yourself provided, the timeline which showed what was tried and denied by the parents to show Michael out for who he truly is, and Michael's attempt to hide it. PC provided that evidence earlier.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:34 PM
again, i'm not sure how people in different parts of the country posting on a message board are more credible than her friends and family but whatever you say jack!!! who are these people ?? do you know their last names, occupations ?? HOW ARE THEY CREDIBLE AND HER FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO HAVE KNOWN HER HER ENTIRE LIFE ARE NOT CREDIBLE ??? A simple explanation would do.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:35 PM
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/Terri_inquiry.htm

Three people provided signed affidavits. They weren't given the chance to testify.

he won't comment, guaranteed.
Besides, they don't post on message boards.
Their opinions don't count ;)

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:38 PM
Flame me all you want, it just shows that you don't have shit to stand on.

Now THAT statement shows a 'high mental capacity' . I'll bet you're a card carrying mensa member.

Madcap
03-24-2005, 03:48 PM
The only thing i'll add to this is that an implanted feeding tube has got to be the worst existance ever. They have them in a lot of retirement homes for advanced alzheimers patients. I'd rather be tied up and let ants eat me than be on a feeding tube.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 03:58 PM
i AGREE with you mad. I wouldn't want it either. What i regret about this is it seems to me as though the husband has killed his wife and gotten away with it , is/was an abusive partner yet people are still taking his word as the gospel truth, and most of all that her parents are going through this hell.

Sergent D
03-24-2005, 04:07 PM
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/Terri_inquiry.htm

This is the last I'll say about the subject. The timing of those claims is suspect. The nurse's claims date back BEFORE Mr Schiavo started the process to get her feeding tube taken out. Where was she then? Where were the abuse claims then? Sorry, but based on the timing it seems like a last ditch effort.

They also claimed she talked laughed, and joked with people. That cannot be true. People in a PVS are not capable of such interactions.

Additionally, there is incorrect information in the article:


But Schiavo began withholding nutrition and hydration shortly after winning $1.2 million on her behalf in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Since receiving the money, Schiavo has provided only subsistence care for his wife.

Treatment continued for several years until the legal process began.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 04:18 PM
Scenario: Michael abuses Terri. (His ex-girlfriends HAVE come forth to say he is abusive, and no, not just on FOX.) He abused her the day she "died". He did or didn't mean to kill her. He was afraid that because he abused her, he would be convicted for her assault. He lived with the parents for a couple of years and tried to act convincing that he really did care about her rehabilitation in order to hide the truth, but he was truly in fear of being found out. He does not want Terri to rehabilitate because she may tell the horrible truth. He was able through contacts to acquire a lawyer who knew Judge Greer, and they set it up for him to handle the case, since they knew he would be on their side. They also know 3 doctors who they will use to testify that she is unable to be rehabilitated. 3 doctors the Judge knows or the lawyer knows. Court- appointed, right? Even if court-appointed, they use doctors that will sway a certain way. They also know lawyers that they appoint as guardians. These people all know each other, and know how things work. It's called pulling strings. After playing good guy for a few years, he runs off and does his own thing. In the mean time, he must prove that the bulimia killed her in order to save his ass, so he sues for malpractice. With his setup in place, he wins. Then, he begins his process to kill her, which is detailed in the timeline. The parents try to prove he was abusive. They are denied. Everything they do to try and stop him is denied. He won't let the parents in for fear of being found out. He tears up the nurse's logs, bars pictures, or anything that can be used as evidence to keep her alive. Nurses and ex-girlfriends and doctors come forth to testify in her behalf, and to prove that things are all wrong, but they are denied the right to testify. They can do nothing to help her, there is never an MRI or pep scan performed, because he doesn't want any rehabilitation. She dies, he gets off scot free with murder. End of story.

I had similar happen to me in the court system, although it was over an abuse case. My ex knew a lawyer willing to do it for free, and they waited until a certain Judge was there, and I couldn't make it to court that day. I had to sit and wait on him for two different dates and he didn't show, but the day I couldn't make it, they went ahead with the trial. These people know how to do things in their favor if they have money or power in a town.

polecat
03-24-2005, 04:25 PM
I don't consider 'timing' a valid excuse for the admonishment of evidence, testimony and facts. Timing can invalidate things, such as when dates don't match or when presence/existence of witnesses isn't credible, but in this case - you have the husband directly preventing 33+ neurologists, friends, family, hospice workers, care givers, three nurses in direct care of her for over a year, the state of Florida protective agencies and many more from presenting any form of evidence.

You also have his direct banishing of visitation, observance, examinations and controlling the entire process by using the power of one (1) Judge, and two (2) PAID doctors.

I'm also quite a bit dissapointed that anyone would remove financial gains or motives from this case when there isn't any form of disclosure- just speculation. Gains, financial or otherwise, cannot be determined by ANYONE until there is full disclosure.

But most importantly, I'm dissapointed by the fact our Supreme Court was handed a bill passed into law, deemed it "constitutional" then proceeded to ignore every last letter of said law. This is an absolute tragedy. Their response was not a valid response of our congressional/judicial system. They have the option to reverse the law and debate it's constitutionality, but it's stated pretty clear within that law that it grants pro-novo review of the case, and upon review of merit for such case that food, fluids and medical treatment is to be administered during that process to sustain life of Terri Schiavo. By deeming it constitutional, they are currently in direct violation of that law... as we speak. It needs to be deemed unconstitutional/repealed in order for the tube to remain detached from Terri.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 04:27 PM
This is the last I'll say about the subject. The timing of those claims is suspect. The nurse's claims date back BEFORE Mr Schiavo started the process to get her feeding tube taken out. Where was she then? Where were the abuse claims then? Sorry, but based on the timing it seems like a last ditch effort.

They also claimed she talked laughed, and joked with people. That cannot be true. People in a PVS are not capable of such interactions.

Additionally, there is incorrect information in the article:



Treatment continued for several years until the legal process began.

Honestly, that one article pretty much does it. With this much evidence in place, and this many people willing to come forth, you would have to have some ulterior motive for arguing against it.

polecat
03-24-2005, 04:32 PM
At this point, other than Bill Fritz ordering Terri to be taken into protective custody as a congressional witness or Jeb Bush wilfully defying Florida court orders, the outcome of the Schaivo case appears to be a foregone conclusion.
I'm betting on the latter.

My money is on Jeb Bush willfully defying Judge Greer's rulings and issueing an emergency rush of Dept. of Children and Family protective services agents to take custody of Terri Shiavo. He has this right under Florida law to act in emergency in cases of adult abuse... provided they can't pull another appeal or similar 'proper' trick out of their hat soon.

While it would take 'juevos of steel' to pull such a manuever, it's in the track record of the family to take such 'cowboy' measures when their interests are at stake. But boy, would this action start a political furball... ugh.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 04:39 PM
This is the last I'll say about the subject. The timing of those claims is suspect. The nurse's claims date back BEFORE Mr Schiavo started the process to get her feeding tube taken out. Where was she then? Where were the abuse claims then? Sorry, but based on the timing it seems like a last ditch effort.



They also claimed she talked laughed, and joked with people. That cannot be true. People in a PVS are not capable of such interactions.

We actually don't know what she is capable of, except for the video. There were no MRI or pep scans performed at his request.

Additionally, there is incorrect information in the article:



Treatment continued for several years until the legal process began.

Wrong. This is correct, as shown in the timeline. Lack of treatment began shortly after he won the lawsuit. Hmmm, could it be because he had proof he didn't kill her, and now he could feel free to kill her. The article also supports my belief that Judge Greer is biased.

You seem to be able to create any slight thing you can find in order to support your hypothesis. I don't believe you can't reason enough to see the truth. I believe that you have a reason to disbelieve, that you are looking out for your best interests. You are a sociopath, plain and simple. And you know that. Tons of military are.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 04:51 PM
Testing was blocked because more testing is not needed. She has gone through plenty of tests that show her condition. Regarding the tearing up of the journals, please provide an unbiased source of that information.

Ann Coulter is a wacko. Here are some of her famous quotes:
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.
"A central component of liberal hate speech is to make paranoid accusations based on their own neurotic impulses, such as calling Republicans angry, hate-filled, and mean."
"The swing voters---I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don't have set philosophical principles. You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. "

Here is a transcript of Ann getting pwned on Larry King:


Honestly, I believe that in some countries we should kill their leaders and converting them to Christianity wouldn't be such a bad thing either. I don't see anything whacky about these statements. They are one person's opinion, a person who appears to be well-informed, even if I don't agree with her. And to call her stupid is just absurd. She is obviously above the pack on the intelligence scale. And I do think the president should be morally above the crowd. If that's whacky, then I must be in your book. But that's ok, because you are definitely a whack in mine. I tend to avoid military people because we usually don't see eye-to-eye on anything, especially the treatment of women.

Of course you are going to try to discredit the opposition, that's what sociopaths do.

polecat
03-24-2005, 05:09 PM
Another interesting point to add towards Mrs. Schiavo's condition.

A New York physician that had recovered bone-scan reports of Terri's back in 1991 shows she was the victim of trauma, which would be indicative of abuse.

The 'timeliness' of this evidence was due to the fact that family wasn't made aware of these medical records until 1998, so thus weren't allowed to enter this into evidence or use it against her husband.

Link (along with the bone scan report from 1991):
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200501%5 CNAT20050124b.html

Highlights:

The family's case is supported by Dr. Michael Baden, a well-known New York forensic pathologist. Baden, author of three books on forensic pathology, has served as chief pathologist for the city of New York and as director of the forensic sciences unit of the New York State Police.

"It's extremely rare for a 20-year-old to have a cardiac arrest from low potassium who has no other diseases," Baden said during a 2003 television interview.

Baden has formulated his opinion of what caused Terri's brain injury, based, in large part, on a 1991 bone-scan report (http://www.cnsnews.com/storyimages/2003/terrischiavobonescanreport.jpg) that only became available to the Schindler family in 1998.

"That bone scan describes her as having a head injury. That's why she's there. That's why she's getting a bone scan," Baden explained, "and a head injury can cause, lead to the 'vegetative state' that Mrs. Schiavo is [allegedly] in now."

The March 7, 1991, bone scan also listed apparent injuries to the ribs, thoracic vertebrae, both sacroiliac joints, both ankles and both knees.

"It does show evidence that there are other injuries, other bone fractures that are in a healing stage," Baden explained, adding that those apparent injuries were likely the result of "some kind of trauma.

"The trauma could be from an auto accident, the trauma could be from a fall or the trauma could be from some kind of beating that she obtained from somebody somewhere," Baden concluded.

Deogol
03-24-2005, 05:45 PM
We need to get into some facts on this Terri thing. I know I did before I can make any informed opinions.


Here is some rumor control.

The short is regarding "that bastard is trying to kill her and never did anything to help her" DID spend three years as well as above and beyond experimental therapy to try and get his wife back. That most of her brain is literally mush.

The short also is - if someone close to you falls victim to such an awful situation, the best thing to do is shake them off and wish them the best. To do otherwise means you will be paraded around the internet and TV as an attempted murderer. That you will be presented as cold and uncaring even though you spent 15 years trying to get her back. That your name will be dragged through the mud by the emotional ignorant people who believe anything based on little information.

The long is:



Q: What is a "persistent vegetative state" and how is it diagnosed? Is it unusual for doctors to disagree?

A: People in a persistent vegetative state have lost all higher brain function, including the ability to think, experience emotions and understand the world around them. However, they continue to sleep and wake; open their eyes; breathe on the their own; and even make noises and facial expressions.

This is because their brain stems - the portion of the brain that controls basic functions such as heartbeat and breathing - continue to function.

Those suffering from this condition do not track objects with their eyes, blink on command or respond consistently to cues in the environment. When a patient fails tests over a period of time, doctors consider the condition "persistent".

There is no single test, such as a brain scan, that can peer inside the brain and absolutely determine a person's level of mental function. But doctors can diagnose the condition by testing a patient's ability to interact with his or her environment.

Doctors who have been appointed by Terri Schiavo's husband and the courts have determined that she is in a persistent vegetative state with no chance of recovery. Her parents and their physicians do not agree, maintaining that she is not vegetative and can recover.

Doctors who examine the same patient can reach different conclusions, but time is the best arbiter of diverging views, said Dr. Michael Pulley, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Florida campus in Jacksonville.

"The way to resolve it is to see if there is any change (in the patient's ability to interact) over time," Pulley said, adding that improvements would be expected within the first weeks or months of the injury.

Terri Schiavo has been in this state for 15 years.

Q: Terri Schiavo appears to respond to her mother in a video released by the family. Her father said that she smiled Monday when he told her that her feeding tube soon could be re-inserted. Doesn't this show that she is not in a persistent vegetative state?

A: Terri Schiavo's parents say this is evidence that she is not in a vegetative state. But court-appointed physicians have not been able to document a consistent, predictable response from Terri that would indicate she is aware of her surroundings.

Q: Isn't there new technology that could provide more insight into Terri's condition?

A: There is a device called functional magnetic resonance imaging - or fMRI - that tracks blood flow to regions of the brain while a person is performing certain tasks. Doctors say this can be used to get more information about a person's brain function, but it is not a conclusive test.

Terri Schiavo has undergone a series of diagnostic tests in the past, including such procedures as CT scans and EEGs, which showed her brain's electrical function to be flat, court records show. The outcome of those tests supports the diagnosis of "persistent vegetative state." Brain scans show that the area of the brain responsible for higher thinking, the cerebral cortex, has suffered severe atrophy and has been replaced by liquid.

Q: Terri Schiavo's parents and a neurologist who examined her several years ago, Dr. William Hammesfahr, say the woman could get better with therapy. Would she be helped by rehabilitation?

A: Other doctors have concluded that she will not improve with rehabilitation, and previous attempts with therapy had no effect.

Terri underwent more than three years of rehabilitative therapy after her collapse in 1990, and her husband took her to a California center in late 1990 to have an experimental device implanted in her brain in hopes of stimulating activity.

According to a court-appointed guardian who reviewed the medical information for Terri's case in 2003, there is no reason to believe that she can recover.

Jay Wolfson, who reported to the court in December 2003, wrote: "In recent months, individuals have come forward indicating that therapies and treatments can literally regrow Theresa's brain tissue, restoring all or part of her functions. There is no scientifically valid, medically recognized evidence that this has been done or is possible, even in rats."

Q: Hammesfahr, the neurologist who examined Schiavo years ago at her parents' request, has said that Terri could eat and drink on her own if fed. Is this true?

A: Doctors performed "swallowing tests" on Terri in 1991, 1992 and 1993 and concluded that she "was not able to swallow without the risk of aspiration," which occurs when fluid or food is inhaled into the lungs.

Pulley from the University of Florida said that some patients in vegetative states can swallow, but this does not necessarily indicate higher thinking abilities because swallowing is a "reflexive" action.

Schiavo maintains the ability to swallow her own saliva, but the tests indicated she would be incapable of managing food and water. If patients regain that ability, it usually occurs within a short time of their initial injuries, Pulley said.

"If it does change, it's something that tends to occur early, rather than later," he said.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 05:51 PM
Another interesting point to add towards Mrs. Schiavo's condition.

A New York physician that had recovered bone-scan reports of Terri's back in 1991 shows she was the victim of trauma, which would be indicative of abuse.

The 'timeliness' of this evidence was due to the fact that family wasn't made aware of these medical records until 1998, so thus weren't allowed to enter this into evidence or use it against her husband.

Link (along with the bone scan report from 1991):


Highlights:


[/size][/font][/size][/font]

Yep, he killed her. Blow to the head.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 06:32 PM
Only sarg would call AC 'stupid' ! Isn't she like a harvard law grad or something like that ? LOL but BC he doesn't AGREE with her she's stupid ! :)
Erotic, sorry about your abuse. Very upsetting, and yes the system SUCKS.

Deogol
03-24-2005, 06:37 PM
Only sarg would call AC 'stupid' ! Isn't she like a harvard law grad or something like that ? LOL but BC he doesn't AGREE with her she's stupid ! :)
Erotic, sorry about your abuse. Very upsetting, and yes the system SUCKS.

Harvard Law School isn't anyplace to brag about these days. Even Harvard Business School is coming under more scrutiny by employers.

A little bit of pro and con on an ivy education:



You can find more on google.

erotictonic
03-24-2005, 07:06 PM
Harvard Law School isn't anyplace to brag about these days. Even Harvard Business School is coming under more scrutiny by employers.

A little bit of pro and con on an ivy education:



You can find more on google.

The point is, no one that goes to Harvard is stupid, not whether Harvard is all that and a bag of chips. You can't be a stupid moron and go there, unless you have an in somehow.

SthnrnGrl77
03-24-2005, 08:25 PM
The point is, no one that goes to Harvard is stupid, not whether Harvard is all that and a bag of chips. You can't be a stupid moron and go there, unless you have an in somehow.

exactly !
bottom line, whether or not you agree with her AC is not "stupid".
Extreme, maybe, but not stupid of all things !

Melonie
03-25-2005, 03:38 AM
Some judges in the past did everything they could to keep blacks out of college. Now we have some judges helping a slug of a husband possibly murder his wife. Judges at times have had too much power and they do in this instance.

At the least, Bush needs to step in and get her regulated. Michael Schiavo needs to be looked at closely. New and modern tests need to be run. If all that were done, I’d bet my life that a lot of things would come to light. Michael Schiavo has no proof of what he claims Terri wanted. It’s a joke to think she would explain to Michael Schiavo in great detail, but not her family. That’s not a topic that is commonly just discussed between a wife and her husband, but no one else close to her.

Unfortunately, in the civil rights activist days, it was state governors who were defying the new federal law and federal judges and troops who were upholding and enforcing that law. In Jeb Bush's case it is the other way around, with federal judges defying the new federal law and Jeb being forced to choose to use Florida state troopers to enforce it in specific violation of judicial restraining orders. This is a very different and potentially dangerous situation for Jeb, particularly in light of the fact that judges have already issued restraining orders at the request of Michael Schiavo's attorneys specifically directing Jeb and Florida state agencies to keep their hands off Terri.

Again, for all intents and purposes, it appears that everything is done but the Death Watch in terms of Terri Schaivo. I can only hope, however, that the issues of restraining judicial heavy-handedness in general and specific judges specifically ignoring the new federal law as well as existing federal laws (i.e. federal witness protection) in regard to Terri's litigation will not be over any time soon. I know that Senate Majority leader Bill Frist will not forget what the judiciary has done )or more to the point what they have NOT done) with the new law ....



... and neither will governor Jeb Bush or president GW Bush.

I sincerely believe that this issue may become the cornerstone of the 2006 elections, with Terri Schaivo's death serving as a glaring example of judicial heavy-handedness and judges ignoring laws at will (or reading content into existing laws which isn't actually there) to further a political agenda.

discretedancer
03-25-2005, 06:06 AM
I'm not sure there's actually any federal authority here to overrule the state's decision - partially due to the Constitution draftors not being able to conceive of such life-saving technology. It is not always a case of "federal trump state" like rock-paper-scissors...except in cases of truly constitutional issues that the SC decides to hear. Note, they refused to hear this case - my theory being there's no constitutional factor. That being said:

What we have here is a societal decision more than a medical one. IF Terrri is brain dead or just damaged almost becomes irrelevant. Her caregiver and the one holding Power of Attorney can decide not to use heroic measures - or any non-natural measures - to keep her alive. There is much a couple discuss that is not shared with the parents. Not saying I'm on his side, just being fair.

Now, the issue of her not receiving water or food naturally - that's a societal ethic we need to examine. If you drip water on someone's lips, tht will hydrate them with little or no swallor response needed. Soup and other liquid foods can be used also. Bottom line: she doesn't have to be starved to death IF we had law or policy stating such. Problem: medical science outstripped law, and that's what lawmakers should be working to fix.

Deogol
03-25-2005, 06:18 AM
Unfortunately, in the civil rights activist days, it was state governors who were defying the new federal law and federal judges and troops who were upholding and enforcing that law. In Jeb Bush's case it is the other way around, with federal judges defying the new federal law and Jeb being forced to choose to use Florida state troopers to enforce it in specific violation of judicial restraining orders. This is a very different and potentially dangerous situation for Jeb, particularly in light of the fact that judges have already issued restraining orders at the request of Michael Schiavo's attorneys specifically directing Jeb and Florida state agencies to keep their hands off Terri.

Again, for all intents and purposes, it appears that everything is done but the Death Watch in terms of Terri Schaivo. I can only hope, however, that the issues of restraining judicial heavy-handedness in general and specific judges specifically ignoring the new federal law as well as existing federal laws (i.e. federal witness protection) in regard to Terri's litigation will not be over any time soon. I know that Senate Majority leader Bill Frist will not forget what the judiciary has done )or more to the point what they have NOT done) with the new law ....



... and neither will governor Jeb Bush or president GW Bush.

I sincerely believe that this issue may become the cornerstone of the 2006 elections, with Terri Schaivo's death serving as a glaring example of judicial heavy-handedness and judges ignoring laws at will (or reading content into existing laws which isn't actually there) to further a political agenda.

If it does become a cornerstone of the next election, I sure hope go with the flow of the people - because polls have been showing 70% of the populace believes this is a family decision and the government should stay the heck out of it.