Comments Posted By judgemc
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 26 Comments
DANGEROUS CRIMINAL IN CUSTODY!
No I would not! I would tell the parents to take their child home. I don't let my child watch the news because it's too violent, I prescreen anything she watches. I even get to know her friends and their parents before I let her go play at their houses. I would not under any circumstances put her in a position of danger or in a position where she could possibly be exposed to ideas that she is not ready yet. AND I most certainly would not let her anywhere near those vultures circling around the hospice looking for a news camera to wave a sign at.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 29.03.2005 @ 18:29
Why is he even there? Shouldn't he be out playing wiht the other kids. What kind of parents does he have to let him do something they know he was going to get arrested for? Why didn't the parents go themselves? Could it be because they have to work to support the family and couldn't afford to get arrested? I question the motives of anyone who sends a child into adults situations. That has to be child abuse.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 27.03.2005 @ 18:53
Judge Greer appointed three separate Guardian Ad Litems for Terri Schiavo, one of whom has both a medical and a legal degree, all three reached the same conclusions that it would have been Terri's wish to not live the way she is. Micheal Schivo was not the only person who testified that Terri told them she would not like to live life as a vegetable. Had only Micheal testified to that Judge Greer plainly states in his opinions (almost all of them) that he would not have ruled in Micheal schaivo's favor. How much extra due process does one person get? How many courts does this same issue have to be adjudicated in until this issue is over with? Really think about this: The parents and special interest groups will keep on going no matter what Terri Schiavo's wishes were. They have said that over and over again. They will keep going until she's dead or they get a ruling they like. That is not justice, that is blackmail.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 24.03.2005 @ 20:34
HAVING THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS
Ther are so many things wrong with The CAptains statement that I don't know where to begin. First off Terri is by far not the first Euthanasia case to come before the courts. Not even remotly close to being the first. Go th Find-law, West law, Lexis-Nexis, or Med line and sheperdise the case for youself. This case is NOT setting precedent.. infact the judges are relying on decages of case law to back thier decisions up. And it's a damn good thing that the courts ignored what Congress did because Congress had no business getting involved in what is esentially a states rights case. The courts should not be a puppet of congress. The courst should rely on the law to render thier judgements.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 23.03.2005 @ 13:16
JUDGE WASHES HIS HANDS OF TERRI'S CASE
Why did the parents say Micheal was the greatest son-in-law in the world during the malpractice suit? In Mr. schindler's own words Micheal was they best husband Terri could have ever had, taking care of her, sticking by her side, and getting her the best medical care possible.
Micheal, who took care of Terri on a daily basis, was and still is in the best position to decide what is best for her. He has through out this ordeal said the same thing: This is what Terri would want. He has even turned down large amounts of money to continue doing what he believes his WIFE wanted. He has tried to keep her privacy intact, shunned the spotlight, suffered through hate mail and death threats, had his whole life thrown into the public arena by overzealous parents, and had his home and the hospice picketed by people who think they know more about his life than they do. (There is nothing like having your child harassed by right to lifers; especially when they are mad that you exist.)
Her parents have: told the courts that Terri's wishes didn't matter they wanted to keep her alive, defied court orders, snuck in a video camera and released the tape to sway popular opinion in their favor, agreed to the release of their donors list for Conservative fund raising purposes, repeatedly filed frivolous claims in order to put of the inevitable, and tried to emotionally blackmail politicians for their own personal gain.
Now Terri's video is being used for Religious Right fund raising that has nothing to do with her and her case.Who exactly is exploiting who?
Comment Posted By judgemc On 29.03.2005 @ 23:30
Pontious Pilate went against his personal convictions and caved in to the masses. That is not what any of the judges in this case have done.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 24.03.2005 @ 00:03
A judge who applies the law despite fierce outside pressure and death threats. Imagine that! You know tort reform would have prevented her parents from repeatedly filing "frivolous" lawsuits.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 22.03.2005 @ 21:22
HEY MOONBATS! HERE'S SOME MORE PEOPLE YOU CAN KILL!
Sorry, I left part of my post off while typing it. I'm recovering from pnumonia and am still having a hard time consentrating while trying to breath. Of course that's also why I have time to have such a livley debate with you. I retrieved Ademson's information from her book and from Medline. As you can imagine her recovery spurred many, many medical papers by doctors either directly invovled in her case or researching in the neurological field. Much of the information posted was released before HIPPA. Anderson herself has said that her injuries were not the same as Mrs. Schiavo's in several interviews on different networks. That is why doctor's work on a case by case basis. It is very bad to generlize about injuries, especially when they involve the brain. I have a personal intrest in the Schiavo case, so believe me when I say I do not make any "assertions" lightly. I have followed this case since the very beginning. I have read all the trial transcripts, hunted down ancillory documents, researched obscure medical logs, went to school for both a medical and a legal degree because of this case. (still working on both of them. Had to take time off for baby.) I don't read a website and take that as the gospel truth. (and I am glad that you didn't just believe what I said but instead asked for verification.) I hunted down the actual documents and requested copies(freedom of information act) of ones not available online through a reputable database. I guess I do have an edge on the average person in that I have access through work and school to information not immediatly available to the layperson, but don't blindly follow what I say either. Look these things up yourself. And Thank you for asking.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 23.03.2005 @ 19:41
Lexis-Nexis. Shindler V. Schiavo, Bush v. Schiavo. Read the actual case not the crap that is posted on the web. If you cannot access Lexis-Nexis then go to Find-law. From there you can read the actual testimony given in court plus the judges reasoning. You can also access the COMPLETE Guardian ad Litem report made to the court as well as the one given to Jeb Bush. Instead of relying on others to do the work for you, because they will always color any information with their own opinion, do it yourself.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 22.03.2005 @ 21:53
By the way my information comes form the actual case. Not the edited versions you see on most web sites.
Comment Posted By judgemc On 22.03.2005 @ 19:51
