Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Florida Court to Hold 'Emergency Hearing'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:43 PM
Original message
Florida Court to Hold 'Emergency Hearing'
Holding hearing at 5:30. No immediate word on what it is about.

I heard on CNN news that one of the lawyers claims that Terri Schiavo told him she wanted to live. Unbelievable what these people will stoop too.

http://www.cnn.com /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DODI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I can't keep with the courts they have gone to in the last 24 hours
anyone keeping count?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SillyGoose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. I'm starting to wonder where the money is coming from to pay the
legal fees for all this. I've heard the Right-to-Life movement is funding the Schindlers, but who, if anyone, is funding the husband?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. Nobody.
There is no money.
There is no life insurance.
There won't be while she is alive or after she is dead.
His attorney has been working pro-bono on this for the last three years.
I don't understand why people are questioning his motives--the only monetary gain is on the Schindler side. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swede Atlanta Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
66. Let's start a fund
I for one am shocked at all of this. According to reports any money Michael Schiavo received as a result of a tort claim against doctors, etc. is gone.

So let's start a fund for him. I just want his pain and the grevious injury to his wife and her person to come to an end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
35. Won 0 Lost 23
over the years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indypaul Donating Member (896 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
70. They do not yet understand
that God does indeed answer all prayers. However,
sometimes the answer is NO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. THey'll stoop lower, just wait and see.
If the judge decides that this lawyer is lying, I hope the attorney has another line of work to fall back on.

This lawyer better have a witness to what he heard, and then he better be able to answer why he never gave this information until now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
64. pretty desparate for Barbara Weller the lawyer to be making an issue
of this now in the appeal. But I have it on TV this week--it has circulated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. I would love to see him testify to that.
Under oath. Then Ms. Shiavo could be called to corroborate. If so, it could be a long day in court.

Although I suppose it would let them put the feeding tube back in, which might be the point of the ploy. Nothing would surprise me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. throw shit out and see what sticks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meganmonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. At what point is it too late?
I mean, obviously if she dies it is over. But she must be very dehydrated and near death, which is probably starting to cause her organs to be very stressed. If there is (god forbid) some sort of emergency decision to put her back on the tubes, will they do it as long as there is a breath in her? Or could a doctor deem it non-viable even if she is not technically dead?

Anyone know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. By the parents' reasoning, it is never too late.
The parents have supposedly testified that they would insist on a respirator, heart-lung machine, etc. The circus won't end until she dies, if they hold to this position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
67. If her body were to die today...
... I'm sure that her parents and the "Territarian" hordes would keep a vigil until at least Sunday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. Not to be cruel...
...but do you suppose he heard something like ahhhhhhhhhhhh ahhhhhhhhhh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. "Told him" Oh please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. article says its a court in clearwater
are they forum shopping to get another judge than greer? This is beginning to smell. They've got another judge teed up to order restoring the feeding tube. The State Supreme Court probably would reverse the decision, but then they'll claim that they finally "proved" their case and were frustrated by "activist" judges.

onenote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Clearwater is located in Pinellas County
So it's in the same county where Judge Greer is located, so unless they have some under the table guarantee, it's not going to make much of a difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaoar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Forum shopping?
You can't do that. One judge can not intervene to wrest jurisdiction from a presiding judge in a case. Greer would have to be removed from the case for cause by some entity such as the state Supreme Court. In some states, the chief judge in a county can do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. This is bordering
on sick. What good will come of this? I see none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. Maybe the judge can just drive over there and Terri can articulate
Edited on Fri Mar-25-05 03:54 PM by cry baby
what she wants to happen directly to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BloodPrssre Donating Member (11 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. MSNBC said the hearing is
about trying to get Judge Greer to recuse himself. What are the odds of hat happening?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. LOL, why? "damn activist judges!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BloodPrssre Donating Member (11 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Tha's what they said
but Judge Greer is a Republican and a conservative Christian
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #19
65. But the fundies are trying to have him IMPEACHED!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. Get a life, you right-wingers! Go do something that will actually help som
someone who's able to recieve help! Get a friggin' life! LIve up to your bullshit rhetoric and goet out there and volunteer for charities. Adopt a kid. Serve in a food pantry. Teach someone english. Give to the poor. Raise money for the poor. DO ONE BLESSED GOOD DEED FOR SOMEONE!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. GREER is hearing this
again for the umpteenth time..........hope he says enough is enough and hold them in contempt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. They are asking for his recusal, and to present evidence
that she told an attorney, "I want to live."

Ironically, a recusal motion comes before the judge in question. Greer is more patient than I.

What will happen is a denial, and then another immediate appeal on the issues.

They are shamelessly judge-shopping, and I hope Rule 11 gets invoked.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. What's Rule 11?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Frivolous lawsuits and motions. n/t
Edited on Fri Mar-25-05 04:15 PM by Blue_In_AK
A judge can order sanctions against someone if they're just blowing a lot of hot air and don't have a legitimate claim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
17. CNN seems to have gone over the edge on this issue except
earlier today, once, I heard the question "what about the sanctity of marriage"? It's the only sane thing I've heard on CNN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Yes, CNN has gone nuts.
They had a spokesman for the disabled (he claimed to be anyway) who said living wills and expressions of that sort don't really count, because you make them before you become brain damaged. But you might feel differently about things after being brain damaged, if you could only think about it. Something like that, it was convoluted. He also said that if there are no written instructions to the contrary, everyone should be kept alive by all means possible. Something like that, it was convoluted too.

I don't know if the interviewer even challenged the logic of these points, as I could only stand about 3 minutes of the program.

CNN is also going heavy on the heart rending photos of Ms. Shiavo before her accident, but only the ones where she is slim. They keep broadcasting these images, as if her pre brain damaged looks somehow had some bearing on the case now. It is clearly just manipulation.

Given the polls, I don't know who they are pandering to. Trying to steal away Fox viewers maybe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
61. AOL owns and runs CNN. This is right up their alley. (nt)
Edited on Fri Mar-25-05 05:38 PM by w4rma
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
20. Don't any of these courts ever give out sanctions
for filing frivolous motions, cases and appeals?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Rule 11. Seldom invoked, but boy, are they begging for it in
this case....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaoar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. OK. I'll ask it. What is Rule 11?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. See above
It's a rule that allows a judge to order sanctions if someone files a lawsuit or motion with no merit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chichiri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. I Googled a bit, and . . .
found this: http://www.usip.com/articles/sanction.htm

(begin quote)

Rule 11 sanctions cover any signed papers filed in federal district court. Sanctions may be awarded for filing three types of papers: factually frivolous (not "well grounded in fact"); legally frivolous (not "warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the exclusion, modification or reversal of existing law."); and papers "interposed for an improper purpose." Business Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Comm. Entr. Inc., 892 F.2d 809 (9th Cir. 1989). Reasonable expenses and fees may be awarded under this Rule, and both the attorney and party are vulnerable.

The Ninth Circuit has carved out an exception to this general rule. Filing a non-frivolous complaint is not sanctionable in the Ninth Circuit if the complaint is well supported by law and facts, even if it is filed for an improper purpose.

Subjective good faith is not a defense to a request for sanctions: Objective good faith is required. The test is one of "reasonableness under the circumstances." As the Seventh Circuit noted, "An empty head but a pure heart is no defense." Thornton v. Wahl, 787 F.2d 1151, 1154 (7th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 107 S.Ct. 181 (1986). Both parties and counsel are held to this standard. Business Guides, supra. Generally, the paper as a whole must be frivolous or harassing: A frivolous argument will not render an entire paper sanctionable.

How much legal and factual research is enough to avoid sanctions under Rule 11's "reasonable inquiry" requirement? There is no one test. But Ninth Circuit courts have considered the following to decide if the inquiries made were reasonable: (1) Did the attorney speak directly with the client or just rely on information supplied by forwarding counsel; (2) Did the attorney conduct personal interviews of the parties and witnesses; (3) Was it reasonable to rely on the client for information when there were alternate sources of information; and, (4) Is the attorney experienced in this type of matter?

(end quote)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. rule 11
WHAT REMEDY RULE 11 PROVIDES

Rule 11 prescribes sanctions for certain basic misdeeds: (1) the filing of a frivolous suit or document; (2) the filing of a document or lawsuit for an improper purpose; (3) actions that needlessly increase the cost or length of litigation.

Relevant parts of the rule are these:

The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate by the signer that the signer has read the pleading, motion, or other paper; that to the best of the signer's knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry it is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, and that it is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation... If a pleading, motion, or other paper is signed in violation of this rule, the court, upon motion or upon its own initiative, shall impose upon the person who signed it, a represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay the other party or parties the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable attorney's fee (emphasis added).

Sanctions may apply against an attorney, the client, or both; therefore, we have adopted the collective convention, attorney/client.



http://www.aepronet.org/pn/vol6-no2.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. rule 11 applies to federal courts
and this latest effort is in state court. However, I would imagine that the Florida state courts have rules against frivolous motions and appeals as well.

onenote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Rule 11 in fed, yes, but it's lawyerly shorthand for
general chicanery. 6.1 in Florida, I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #25
33. Rule 11
Rule 11 is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. Basically, you file frivilous crap, you pay. See subsection b. The Florida equivalent is rule 6.1. You misrepresent to the court, you pay.

Rule 11. Signing of Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions
SNIP

(b) Representations to Court.
By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,--

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation;

(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law;

(3) the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

(4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Peanut Donating Member (85 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
32. Ringers will milk this case for all it's worth
And when Terri dies, they'll blame it on the Dems.

Anyone know anything more about the memo ABC uncovered?

...Bush, Frist, and DeLay claim that they're acting out of concern for Ms. Schiavo. But a memo intended only for Republican Senatorsuncovered by ABC Newsreveals Republicans' true concern: "The pro-life base will be excited...this is a great political issue...this is a tough issue for Democrats." ... This story also takes the heat off Tom DeLay, who is facing a number of serious ethics charges and legal scandals.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Schiavo/story?id=600937
"GOP Talking Points on Terri Schiavo"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glaucon Donating Member (116 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
36. Attorney Barbara Weller
Edited on Fri Mar-25-05 04:47 PM by glaucon
No link yet, but Fox is reporting that one of Schindler's attorneys, Barbara Weller, is testifying before Judge Greer that she personally heard Terri Schiavo say she wanted to live, when the feeding tube was removed.

What's the penalty for an officer of the court if they perjure themselves?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Some penalties

Perjury charges, jail time, monetary fine, and disbarment.

So if this attorney is making this statement, why haven't any of the medical staff who removed the feeding tube come forward. Or did the attorney take the feeding tube out, while the medical staff watched.

If this is true, then someone has promised this woman that she will never get charged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. There were probably several staff people there.
This whole thing is getting silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. Exactly
This has gone beyond silly. We are now into the surreal!!!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bariztr Donating Member (84 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Really?
If she is testifying under oath that "she personally heard" Teri speak she is risking her bar card and a perjury charge. And if this is so they should go after and make sure she never practices again. It's tough enough being a lawyer with scum like this being allowed to practice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. why is this lawyer only saying this a week later?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. talking of this on msnbc NOW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. sounds like the lawyer was egging her on. Lawyer said the phase first
Then heard mumbling--Teri did NOT finish last words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. This was done on march 18
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #42
48. Terri makes random, involuntary noises all the time...
but cannot talk.

This lawyer needs to be locked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glaucon Donating Member (116 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. link

With Terri Schiavo Nearing Death, Parents Press on With Court Appeals
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBKW32ZQ6E.html

{...}
Another legal maneuver included a late afternoon filing asking Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer to order the reinsertion of the tube, claiming Terri Schiavo tried to say "I want to live" when her tube was removed.

Doctors who have examined her for the court case have said her previous utterances weren't speech, but were involuntary moans consistent with someone in a vegetative state. Greer, who had ordered the tube removed, planned a hearing later in the day.

Barbara Weller, an attorney for the Schindlers, called the motion "our final shot." An attorney for her husband Michael Schiavo had just received the motion and was not available for comment.
<...>


doesn't mention that Weller was the one testifying, but Fox is reporting she is...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. Fl. judge will not remove self from case--will rule by tomorrow--tag line
on msnbc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Greer must be under pressure to remove himself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. he won't. there's no reason to except "i don't like him"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. the appeal opens--"This is about mercy killing"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. That won't fly at all - it's not a mercy killing
it's simply removing artificial life support by the wishes of the vegetable. The courts have upheld this 20+ times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. does not matter-the family is doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. It matters to the law! They will lose...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #58
63. any one know if others in room heard any of this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #43
68. this is what I wrote to the AP about this story
In the story

With Terri Schiavo Nearing Death, Parents Press on With Court Appeals

on:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBKW32ZQ6E.html

it says:

Terri Schiavo suffered brain damage in 1990 when her heart stopped briefly from a chemical imbalance believed to have been brought on by an eating disorder. She left no living will.

Terri Schiavo GAL has stated that Terri was without a beating heart for 11 minutes. I think it is reasonable to state that when speaking of being without oxygen 11 minutes is acute, therefore the term brief does not accurately reflect the circumstances.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
50. BTW, Terri told me that her parents were nut jobs!!!
Better get me in on the case too!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #50
53. lawyer argues that Terri tried to speak to her "I want ..garbled
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glaucon Donating Member (116 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #53
56. ...to die

I suppose there is an equally good chance that she meant "I want...to die. Now get the hell out of here and leave me the fuck alone..."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #53
57. "I want"?
Maybe Terri meant to say..."I want you to shut the fuck up"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #53
60. Maybe she said "I want to die"
As someone pointed out earlier.

These involuntary noises hardly constitute legal testimony. If she was actually coherent, a series of questions with a yes/no answer would be possible, like in the old Star Trek episode with Captain Pike. Notice they never offer to test her this way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Technowitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
55. The parents and attorneys have already proven they'll lie
about absolutely anything. They have zero credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proReality Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
59. More likely, had she actually spoken, her words would have been
I won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #59
62. well, it is scary to think that this Lawyer would use hearsay--which I
think it is. The lawyer is saying what she said (and not wll either for that matter). Must have been others in the room. anyone know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
71. Terri told him she wanted to live?
A hat made of tin foil will block Terri's voice from entering your head, dude, as well as all the other voices.

:tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chomskysright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-25-05 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. ITS ALIVE!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-26-05 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
73. locking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 05:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC