 |
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Let us assume that is true. If that is the case, doesn't that blow out of the water the whole contention that Michael is doing this for money? Especially when he was offered $1 million for giving up custody like 5 years back? What would be left, $100k? And I'm sure that's already been spent in 10 years.
So then, Ned, if it isn't money, then what is the motivation? |
Well, he apparently started the action soon after he formed his relationship with the woman he now calls his "fiancee" and with who he has two kids. At that time, it appears, there was still over $700,000 in the bank which he would inherit if he terminated Terri rather than divorce her.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Guynemer
|
|
Drake, she has zero cortical activity on EEG.
She is gone. There is no Terri anymore.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GePap
It will do a great job of exposing the true extent of her brain damage in order to show those *****ing that she was certainly in a PVS, plus it will be used against the trully despicable, like Terry randall, or Ned, who claim she was abused. |
On the abuse situation: It appears now that the Schindlers first learned of the bone scan 3 years ago. The scan was taken 50 weeks after the event. Michael says the broken bones: ribs, pelvis, femur; were broken during her care. I am sure he will be able to produce some nurse or doctor to support this contention if true.
On the Hannity show tonight, a forensic doctor said that the depositions in the malpractice case may provide insight into the bone scans, as the lawyers defending the accused doctors would have tried to show that Terri's condition was the result of foul play.
He also said that he reviewed part of the records regarding her admission at the time of the event. The part he reviewed spoke of abraisions, buises and lacerations. There was no mention of broken bones, which he said would have been noticed had they been there at the time.
Still, the doctor did not see the entire report. What is contained in the missing pages is still not known.
Finally, can anyone explain why Michael Schiavo would not tell the Schindlers that their daughter had a catastophic accident while under care? And, since he seemed fond for suing for malpractice, why didn't he sue for such injuries as well?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
quote: Drake, since you seem to agree and support what I have said in my posts concerning the facts, in what way do you contend I have been swallowing propaganda? |
While I somewhat agree with your position, I think you have been too accepting of stories coming from the parent's side, ie. Terri trying to say "I want to live" and the like. I think both sides in this dispute are lying to make their side look better, so I take most of the statements coming from the parent's side with a grain of salt unless I can find confirmation of them. |
Well almost everything I report her is taken directly from the people who were eyewitness to the events. Tonight, the attorney who got Terri to say "Ahhh" "Waa" appeared on the Hannity show and gave a dramatic first hand account of what occurred. As reported elsewhere, there were witnesses to this event that have no connection the Shindlers, including a cop. But the judge never held a hearing to take the testimony regarding what happened, as he ruled that it was "too late" and that it did change the fact that Terri still could not recover.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Guynemer
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Killing her based on such evidence may be legal, but it definitely brings up moral questions... |
On that, you and I have common ground.
But I also think that Congress is hardly the ideal body to address moral questions.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Guynemer
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
But, even accepting the fact that she her higher level brian functions no longer exist, are you making a statement here that such people no longer have any right to live? |
Of course not. What I am saying is that
1) all these stories of her asking to live, responding to people, etc., and just bullshit and/or wishful thinking.
2) whether or not she would want to live in such a state is ultimately up to her caregivers.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sava
Ned you're grasping at straws here... the points you're harping on are really quite irrelevant. I'm actually embarassed for you. Please stop and avoid further embarassment. 
Anyways, Terri's body will die soon. All this will be moot.
And the issue will be settled, for those of us with the ability to reason. A full autopsy will be performed and Terri's brain will be looked at. The autopsy will confirm the facts in this case, but the fundies will never accept it. |
And what facts are you suggesting that I am ignoring, Sava. You can read the Judge's opinion for yourself. That is what I rely on when I say that there is not agreement among the experts about whether Terri's cerebral cortex is entirely gone or only partially gone. Whatever is the case, though, there I agree that there is no hope for a recovery without some dramatic breakthru in medicine, such as from stem cell research, which would enable someone to regrow brain tissue.
Now the evidence concerning broken bones is not fantasy, Sava. It is discussed in a written opinion by the judge. http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/t...11-02-scan.pdf.
The witnesses (3) to Michael Schiavo's prior inconsistent statements were not "discredited" as contended by some here. The simply were not allowed to testify at all because that would have required a new trial on the issue of Terri's intent. http://www.2dca.org/opinion/October...1/2d01-3626.pdf
Much of what has been said here by supporters of Michael Schiavo is complete and utter bull. There is a great deal of propaganda being set forth. I agree with that. But most of it appears to be coming from the Michael Schiavo camp.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
Shawn, the knock on Greer is that he is said to be conservative judge who follows the law and not his heart. |
Isn't that good? That's what I want from a judge. They are there, after all, to interpret the laws based on what they view the legislature intended, not read into it their own biases.
And how does that jive with the judicial activism rap he has been getting?
(yes I know this was from days ago)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
"Just once, we need an elected official to stand up to a clearly incorrect ruling by a court. Any incorrect ruling will do, but my vote is for a state court that has ordered a disabled woman to be starved to death at the request of her adulterous husband.
http://www.anncoulter.com/ |
Ann Coulter really does not have a grasp on this three branches balance of power thing, does she.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
How is it a balance of power if the other two branches never attempt to check the judiciary? |
The legislatures have the ability to pass laws directing the courts. In this specific case they tried and failed. Don't blame the judiciary for Congress' lack of political will/cohesion.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000 time: 07:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
"Just once, we need an elected official to stand up to a clearly incorrect ruling by a court. Any incorrect ruling will do, but my vote is for a state court that has ordered a disabled woman to be starved to death at the request of her adulterous husband.
...
President Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said of a Supreme Court ruling he opposed: "Well, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it." The court's ruling was ignored. And yet, somehow, the republic survived.
http://www.anncoulter.com/ |
So let me get this straight: in one breathtaking article, Ann Coulter piously expresses the need to save Terri's life AND her approval for the Trail of Tears, an action that would fit most modern definitions of genocide.
And Ned is quoting her on it approvingly.
Yeah, that all seems about right. Carry on.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ned
Just now on Hardball, a Congressman said that he is going to try to make one more attempt to pass legislation protecting Terri, or if it is too late for that, for future Terries. |
Which is the way this should be done. Why be angry with the judge for working in the framework given to him by the florida legislature.
The legislature passes laws, the judiciary interprets them and pushes the language to limits and beyond and the legislature responds by passing altered statutes. that's how this whole thing is supposed to function.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28. Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|