March 25, 2005
Lawyers Kill Terri Schiavo
Why is it that the most authoritative voices on Constitutional meaning are lawyers? The very group least likely to know anything at all about the Constitution?
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
Looking around the blogosphere I am in awe at the utter ignorance lawyers have of the Federalist Papers and other historical documents written by those who had a hand in writing the Constitution.
Oh, and a close second place goes to political scientists.
I find it more than a tad bit convenient that lawyers and judges claim an absolute right in expounding what the law means.
Somewhere in Virginia, James Madison is rolling in his grave. He is soon to be joined by Terri Schiavo.
Posted by: Rusty at
11:30 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.
1
James Madison will be spinning in Montpelier, VA, about two hours south of DC. Hopefully, the spinning will not disturb the large phallic monument above his grave.
While lawyers and political scientists go on and on, its us forensic scientist types that know all the fun stuff!
Posted by: Wine-aholic at March 25, 2005 11:45 AM (Wsn+K)
2
Lawyers inundate our gov't. All through the senate are lawyers, and former Lawyers. Same in the individual States. All the laws are written by lawyers, and former lawyers on the state and federal level now. Laws written by lawyers for lawyers. It takes a lawyer to even begin to read a law written today. Lawyers are the beginning and the end of law. The Alpha and Omega..... Holy shiite Batman I am beginning to believe this stuff.................... In other words the shit that they come up with only can be translated by people with an equal ammount of shit in their heads. It takes a lawyer to translate any laws today.
Posted by: Chris at March 25, 2005 11:47 AM (JcF9r)
3
Justice Marshall, a madisonian, said, in Marbury v. Madison: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."
Posted by: actus at March 25, 2005 11:55 AM (Eg4/w)
4
The Federalist Papers are not law. Just saying.
And I don't know if you knew this, but there was a whole group of people in the early United States, contemperaneous with the writing of the Constitution, called "anti-Federalists"! Imagine that!
Posted by: Fargus at March 25, 2005 12:18 PM (ts0WI)
5
Thank God for the judges. I would rather them rule on laws than politicians any day. What the pols have done with TS is horrible. The rank hypocracy is disgusting and I hope they all have their lives and deaths held up to the circus that they have made of this subject.
Posted by: Max at March 25, 2005 12:34 PM (HFKAk)
6
It's how we pay off our degrees. If we write everything in an increasingly technical, non-sensical way, the masses will have to continue to pay us to figure it out! It's why they will never ever simplify the tax code, tax lawyers would go hungry. I'm so glad we worked out a way to keep our dominance in the food chain.
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at March 25, 2005 12:35 PM (4mnmQ)
7
Hey...... Witty sex kitten..... That MUST be the reason..... Thank you so much for your enlightenment. Tax code, what tax code???? You must mean DAVINCI code.
Posted by: Chris at March 25, 2005 12:49 PM (vNZrQ)
8
THANK GOD IT'S FRIDAY.
Posted by: Chris at March 25, 2005 12:51 PM (vNZrQ)
9
"THANK GOD IT'S FRIDAY."
No kidding.
A safe and happy Easter to all readers and posters (perhaps a few posers as well) of the Jawa....
"http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v340/cowcowmoomoo1/arguingOnTheInternet.jpg"
Posted by: bodybagger at March 25, 2005 01:08 PM (cjCfM)
10
Actus,
Please read your history. While a Federalist Marshal was a bitter opponent of James Madison. Madison, after all, was the "Madison" in Marbury vs. Madison.\
Further, no one is claiming Marshal was wrong. His thinking coincides exactly with Hamilton in Federalist #78.
However, what Marshal does not claim is that "It is the SOLE duty and province of the courts...."
That would be an absurdity. Of course, that is what law schools teach young lawyers to believe.
Fed #78:
"Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at March 25, 2005 01:14 PM (JQjhA)
11
"However, what Marshal does not claim is that 'It is the SOLE duty and province of the courts....'That would be an absurdity."
Nobody is saying that.
Posted by: actus at March 25, 2005 01:50 PM (Eg4/w)
12
We don't study the Federalist papers in law school. I guess it is assumed we studied them in college.
In fact, I have very little memory of my Constitutional law class. What I do remember is sitting there thinking: "What the hell is a penumbra and how did these guys find it? I must be dumb if I can't see one."
I was too harried by the pace of law school to go further than that.
Posted by: Sue Bob at March 25, 2005 02:16 PM (lCFvX)
13
I didn't know that Schiavo had previously divorced Terri! How can an ex husband have any legal say as to his wife's disposition?
Makes me shudder to think that any ex-spouses out there can make that decision.
Posted by: Laura at March 25, 2005 02:19 PM (L3PPO)
14
"I didn't know that Schiavo had previously divorced Terri!"
Can you cite any documents of the divorce?
"How can an ex husband have any legal say as to his wife's disposition?"
I don't think they can.
Great looking strawman you've got there, by the way.
"Makes me shudder to think that any ex-spouses out there can make that decision."
OH!!!!! OW!!!!!
Now she begins BEATING that poor strawman for *no* *reason* *what* *so* *ever*!
So savage, so strange.
Posted by: bodybagger at March 25, 2005 02:45 PM (cjCfM)
15
Terri was 25 years old when this terrible thing happened to her. No one realy knows the truth. Was it her husban who physically attacked her.
This man fabricated the story of "Terri chose death instead of keeping her alive by artificial feeding." Why did he not said it right away, or
a year later? Because it is not true. Nobody on
earth chooes death at the age of 25. That terrible
attack came unexpectedly, and Terri could not
speak after. It is her husban's own fabrication
toprotect himself and to keep Terri's money.
Naturally, the husband's family joins him in
the lies and false accusation. Who else, an
unbias person testified for hearing Terri's
wanting to die? This is the whole turning
point. Terri's husband should be accused for
contempt of court, instead of killing Terri.
It is hard to understand why that wise, smart
judge does not see this!!! Had he ever had a 25 years old daughter? Aren,t they all full of
life, plans for the future ? Thought of death
is not in their vocabulary at this young age.
No way! The husband's statement clearly is a
fabricated lie, suggested by his lawyer. It took
them seven years to figure out a cause like this
to kill Terri. One do not have to graduate from law school to realize these possibilities.
Reconsiderring the false accusatons, could turn the judgement over,and einstall the feeding tube without delay.
Please, do and say something to help Terri.
Thnks.
If Terri's parents want to take care of her,
why does the judge opposes it?
I would like to read your reaction.
Posted by: Trudy at March 25, 2005 04:57 PM (F099f)
16
Trudy I so agree with you, just read over all my posts about this issue on this blog section and others under Terri's name. If we allow the judicial system to murder Terri, sounds like dictatorship has finally arrived in America! Let's get rid of the handicapped, disabled, sickly, just like Auschwitz did!
Terri is NOT terminally ill, or on a respirator, yet they are treating her case as such. Thousands of people are on feeding tubes for nourishment and some are profoundly disabled. Is this going to set a presedent for those people too?
EMT's suspected something when Terri was brought into the ER with fractures to her skull. The family filed a police report alleging spouse abuse by Schiavo. Why isn't the judge considering this?
Schiavo ADMITTED he really didn't know WHAT Terri's wishes were and came up with this SEVEN YEARS into her disability! Plus, now I'm hearing he already divorced her...if this is the case, how has he managed to remain her legal guardian?? Doesn't he give up those rights upon the divorce? And if not divorced, when he decided to shack up with someone else and start his own family, wouldn't he relinquish his rights to any legal decision regarding Terri's care at that point?
Sadly, it may be too late, whatever further damage Terri is suffering at the hands of this Judge Greer may not be salvagable. It may be too late anyway.
I think the judge and anyone else who ruled for Terri's death should be impeached. We don't even elect these damned judges anyway. I hope to God this judge is never faced with such a tragic dilemma.
Meanwhile, OJ goes free, Scott Peterson is warm and cozy and getting three square's a day, Manson continues to ramble, and Mark David Chapman still thinks he's John Lennon.
Posted by: Laura at March 25, 2005 05:08 PM (L3PPO)
17
Where is Hamilton and his pistol when we need him?
On a very serious note - This is why Dr. Frist needs to get off the dime. If he lacks the guts to get the judges to a floor vote he should be relieved of his position.
Forget Aaron Burr we need some gung ho judge fighters now!
Posted by: Rod Stanton at March 25, 2005 05:37 PM (DWfzU)
18
Bodybager must have is blood folks.
To argue with him is to bounce a tennis ball against the wall.
May he and his kind live with it.
Knock back a drink asshole, after all it's Friday....Good Friday
Posted by: Brad at March 25, 2005 05:40 PM (+7VNs)
19
"Bodybager must have is blood folks."
Whatever that means.
"To argue with him is to bounce a tennis ball against the wall."
Yep. Irrelevant, poorly constructed arguments are met with a solid force.
"May he and his kind live with it."
Whatever that means.
"Knock back a drink asshole, after all it's Friday....Good Friday"
Notice the nice things people will say to you on such a blessed occasion.
The Christian Right is neither Christian, nor right.
Posted by: bodybagger at March 25, 2005 06:37 PM (cjCfM)
20
You bloggers are making me sick; there is no judge or anyone else for that matter who is killing Terri Shiavo. Don't you ever read any of my posts? Since I've been through it myself personally several times, what you hear is not always true, what you see is not always right. This time Rusty, you go back and look for my name and my comments, you might learn something.
NO ONE IS KILLING ANYONE - SHE'S ALREADY DEAD.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at March 25, 2005 08:41 PM (PEKrh)
21
When the constitution was written, this type of situation wasn't even considered. People just died. Due to medical science without realizing what hell they were going to cause people - ie medical miscience, there is a lot more hell going on. Now we have to protect ourselves with Living Wills and DNR's. As I've said before it you don't understand the situation, find some one who does - and I am one. I have to agree with Rambling's Journals - she was meant to go to heaven 15 years ago - it's time to let her (body) rest in peace. RJ's says " Let her go home. Jesus is waiting for her with open arms." and I truly believe that. PLUS as I've also said before, after 15 years, it is time for her family to let go and get on with their lives that they've put off for so long and go on with theirs.
AMEN.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at March 25, 2005 08:51 PM (PEKrh)
22
Chris it's called SATIRE. I suggest trying it sometime in a sentence. Usually it's done to acheive a humorous effect. For those who get it anyways. Geez when did everybody go and get so literal on this blog...for chrissakes I was making fun of myself!
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at March 25, 2005 09:52 PM (PXfrp)
23
"Geez when did everybody go and get so literal on this blog...for chrissakes I was making fun of myself!"
HSSSSS!!!
Cat scratch fever!
Rowr!
Posted by: bodybagger at March 25, 2005 11:02 PM (cjCfM)
24
Can't an appeal be made to feed Terri orally?
Posted by: sujata at March 26, 2005 05:46 AM (neuIv)
25
These are often the same bunch of lawyers who file endless appeals for some no good lowlife muderer or rapists then they treat mrs schiavo like so much dirt whats the world comming to?
Posted by: sandpiper at March 26, 2005 07:47 AM (Z5Jp+)
26
Isn't it funny that when the courts rule the way certain individuals feel are right then there is no criticism, but when they rule against their beliefs then all of a sudden it is "judicial tyranny". You can't have it both ways. Either respect the laws of the land or change the laws. This case has been played out in the courts for years and now at the last moment everyone thinks they can stick their two-cents into this tragedy. This should be a family matter and not for political, religious, or moral issues debate. How many of you would trade places with TS? If it weren't for all the medical technologies this poor woman would have died long ago.
Many of you say you are against the removal of the feeding tube, but what about your religious views? Don't you believe? Haven't we been told that "we are going to a better place after we die"? Which is it -- better to linger or to finally go in peace to meet your maker? It seems a little hypocritical IMHO.
Posted by: GC at March 26, 2005 09:51 AM (Wuoj2)
27
While this in no way reflects my personal views about Schiavo V Florida . . whatever . .
I do believe, that for two weeks of each year . . preferably before Spring (the mating season) an OPEN SEASON should be put on TORT Lawyers . . . No bag limit and in areas like Washington, DC, Florida, and perhaps California, Bounties might be proffered. Quite like Coyotes, just the ears and briefcase could be proof of kill, because, again like Coyotes, who would want to dress and skin one of the stinky bast--ds.
And at least once every other year there could be a special season for Lawyers in general, validations and Bag limit specific . . Just to "Thin 'em out" . .
And NO Lawyer, should be able to hold Legislative Office in any capacity, federal law, with Capital Punishment as the deterrent!
Posted by: large at March 26, 2005 12:57 PM (VRK2g)
28
As my attorney of many years has told me. There is no justice. Just who has the ability to put on the best show.
What do you call 1000 lawyers on a sinking boat in the middle of the Atlantic.
A good start!
Posted by: greyrooster at March 26, 2005 08:41 PM (CBNGy)
29
I thought Judge Grier had accepted sizeable "donations" from Schiavo's lawyers for his re-election fund... Heard that reported just now -- would be interesting to "look into" like everything else in this barbaric cicrus.
Posted by: RJ at March 26, 2005 11:00 PM (NVwh2)
30
There are a number of links to the before item about the donation to Greer. Here's one link which also extensively details atty. Filos being linked to the Hospice Board, and with Greer linked in efforts to lobby for state legislative changes that ultimately benefitted Filos's client.
See: www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1371538/posts
Posted by: RJ at March 27, 2005 01:15 AM (Eht7w)
31
Can anyone tell me on what basis Schiavo was grantedd the malpractice award in 92 or 93? And why did he refuse to let Terri receive Communion for Easter? Some loving husband, the bastard.
Why did he not say right away it was Terri's wishes not to be kept alive? Why did he wait to say it SEVEN YEARS into her dilemma, and then admit that he didn't know WHAT her wishes were? Why are the judges not willing to see the other side of this and take one man word's for it?
Why the sudden rush to kill her, she's been with us for over 15 years? Why have the judges ruled in the Shindlers' favor all these years and now they're refusing to help?
Why did Bush say we must err on the side of life, and not give his brother any power whatsoever to take custody of Terri, and if he couldn't, why hasn't he gone in himself to take Terri?
Why, why, why??
Posted by: Laura at March 27, 2005 10:15 AM (L3PPO)
32
Laura,
Part of is is simple CYA.
Kill her, cremate the body, no autopsy. Can't have Judge Greer,bodybager and Cindy shown to be wrong after all is said and done.
Watch what happens after death and then tell me I'm wrong.
Bagman, Live with it? It will come to you some day. There are rules and you jumped up and down and insisted we break a big one.
Cindy..your full of shit and you always have been.
Posted by: Brad at March 27, 2005 10:24 PM (6krEN)
33
What is most disturbing involves the group, of which attorney Filos worked in, which lobbied/advised the Florida legislature regarding amending laws related to "right to die" issues.
Supposedly, if the source is accurate, the phrase "medical treatment" of severely disabled people was soon changed in the law to include FOOD AND WATER. The latter would no longer be considered separate or considered as basic sustenance. Thus, certain patients could be deprived of, not just "medical treatment" or extraordinary measures, but FOOD AND WATER.
Terri not only has the feeding tube disconnected, but they will arrest anyone who tries to manually help her. Past nurses, of course, claim that she could swallow but Judge Grier has forbid any swallowing tests for the past 12 years.
I am stunned at the continuing horror and what seems like an ever expanding conspiracy.
Posted by: RJ at March 27, 2005 11:37 PM (7+PEq)
34
This "husband" will not allow her to receive Holy Communion because she can swallow a host and drink the blood of Christ. Tell me she is not Catholic you lying fucks and then tell me she would not want the Sacrements under the conditions she finds herself. You can't without lying.
Greer will not allow it. It would not support his muderous decisions.
The bagman says.. "notice the nice things people will say to you on such a blessed occasion"
I don't have a dead body on my side of the ledger you cold blooded bastard.
The left... support my right to kill or I'll call it hate speach!
All week..."PROTESTERS ARRESTED TRYING TO BRINGING WATER TO SCHEIVO"
Just trying to bring water to a woman the State is putting to death.
Now, why do Libertarians support the right of the State to kill?..
Posted by: Brad at March 28, 2005 12:05 AM (6krEN)
35
Brad: Are you getting a bit testy?
Greyrooster says if you must err. Err on the side of life.
I exclude those who deserve to die. Killers, Child molestors, Colon Babler, etc:
The question of what if keeps arising in this ladies case. As long as it does I'm with you.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 28, 2005 06:34 AM (CBNGy)
36
Hey witty sex kitten. My remark was not meant as anything other than a little joke as well. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. My posts of the serious nature are usually long and wordy. I was making fun in this case. I actually was glad it was FRIDAY. Now it is MONDAY and I am back at work slaving away. I had hoped at the time to join in your skullduggery. Sorry if I upset you on Easter weekend.
Chris
Posted by: Chris at March 28, 2005 06:54 AM (NeclT)
37
Question for Cindy: Does this have the possibility of HMO's pulling the plug prematurely on someones loved one? Believe me, if the courts back them it will happen. Money, money, money. Trust an HMO to do the right thing or the most profitable thing?
Posted by: greyrooster at March 28, 2005 07:32 AM (CBNGy)
38
Greyrooster,
I was/am pissed off but it's all over now. They win.
Have to stop posting after 5 drinks or I get too serious.I gave up drinking for lent and just started back up yesterday. Have to get my sea legs under me again.
Q: A surburban SUV drives off a cliff with 5 lawyers on board. What is wrong with this picture?
A: A suburban holds 8!
Posted by: Brad at March 28, 2005 06:15 PM (NzgK/)
39
Right to die. Terry's wishes. What does what Terry want have to do with anything?
Baby raping killers that wish to die are put on sucide watch and kept from killing themselves.
Why would anyone wish to save a child molesting killer and not Terry?
Why is it allright to let this person starve to death when we would force feed a Islamofacist head chopper to keep him alive?
One of my wife's grandmothers used to say "I wish I were dead". I guess I should have tied her to the bed and let her starve to death. What she really meant was no one was giving her enough attention.
Both sides of this fiasco are wrong.
Liberal pricks with cups of water disturbing other hospital patients. How childish. Conservatives and liberals making this a political statement.
Politicians paying pollsters to figure which stand will bring the most votes. "Will this help Jeb when he runs for president"? How many liberal votes can we get because of this right to life issue?
Garbage heads like the Clintons saying "let's stay out of this and hope it comes out bad for the republicans. Then when issue is over, we will say we supported the side with the most vote potential".
Greedy HMO executives using this issue as a test case to pull the plug on future patients.
Families using a girls life to get back at one another.
What a fucking mess.
Only bloggers seem to lay politics aside on this issue.
There's only one intelligent thing to do.
Go fishing. So bye.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 29, 2005 04:26 AM (CBNGy)
40
And I don't know if you knew this, but there was a whole group of people in the early United States, contemperaneous with the writing of the Constitution, called "anti-Federalists"! Imagine that!
George Mason, the only person who signed the Declaration of Independence and then went home and freed his slaves. Washington didn't. Jefferson didn't. Mason did.
As for Terri Schiavo I'm glad to see the blogosphere has decided to cut a middle course between the nuts. Shows savvy. The media, far from learning lessons from past mistakes, has become even lazier and more venal. Rather than reporting on Iranian pro-Democracy demonstrations or good news from Iraq or copping to the fact that the Republican "talking points memo" on the Schiavo incident was fake, they choose to report poseurs from the Schindler faction saying that Terri is "conversing" with her parents, or her brother saying she's "just handicapped." I'll say.
Terri is about as likely to be conversing with people as her bed is likely to stand up on two legs and dance the hornpipe. It's one thing to hear close relatives projecting their hopes and longings onto what remains of their daughter and sister, but let's stop giving these hangers-on airtime for heaven sake. They're just needlessly and erroneously inflaming people.
Terri doesn't care how this comes out, and to be honest it doesn't matter to me either. I'd rather spend my time discussing something that matters.
Posted by: Demosophist at March 29, 2005 09:43 AM (Dfdj0)
41
Holy Shit, Batman, just when I was saying "where is Jesse Jackson in all this?"....he appears! Apparently, Hannity's saying that Jesse's trying to convince at least 2 or 3 people that voted against Terri's staying alive to change their vote and within 24 hrs. Terri's tube would be reinserted.
Why does this fucker Schiavo deny Communion, then give the go ahead, deny an autopsy, then give his ok....wishy washy...why doesn't everyone else see that HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK HE IS TALKING ABOUT....GEE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TERRI WOULD HAVE WANTED...I CAN'T REMEMBER.
Scumbags would keep a prisoner alive and let an innocent woman starve for twelve days.
Hey, this just in...heard Johnnie Cochran just died!
Posted by: Laura at March 29, 2005 05:53 PM (L3PPO)
42
This issue has made some strange bedfellows:
Brad and Jessie Jackson? Would not have believed it last week.
Britney Spears and Lindsey Lohan? Dispite what my daughters say,I now think a friendship is possible.
Greyrooster ,Faggot Jim, and Collin Baber? NAAAAAAAAA, life and death is one thing, treason is another!
Posted by: Brad at March 29, 2005 11:03 PM (ywZa8)
43
True enough.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 30, 2005 04:26 AM (CBNGy)
44
um, weird i suppose.
Posted by: bob at May 26, 2005 12:32 AM (+D20o)
46kb generated in CPU 0.1477, elapsed 0.2717 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.2618 seconds, 293 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 0.2618 seconds, 293 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
