Go to Why can't I sue the whole country?
- Add a comment
- Go to SORRY CONSERVATIVES, BUT WE'RE NOT GONNA LET YOU REWRITE THE LEGAL SYSTEM
p.g. wodehouse
Bertie Wooster sees it through--pure nonsense
posted by
AnCatubh
on March 30, 2005 at 7:02 PM
| link to this | reply
amdg
But you never told me what you are reading.
How do I know we are not reading the same thing?
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 30, 2005 at 5:12 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka, my bro
we are always good. You rant, I rave. But we are children in Christ, part of the oneness of the Universe, evolved from the same slime, however you want to look it at. I don't hate or even dislike you. Wouldn't bother to read and comment if I did. Fun is a good thing and I could use a day off. Even I get sick of my own acerbic tongue.
Peace
posted by
AnCatubh
on March 30, 2005 at 4:58 PM
| link to this | reply
amdg
Really? How do you know? Are you stalking me?
I am reading Star Wars: Labyrinth of Evil. It goes into the events leading up to Episode 3. Been a good read so far.
What are you reading?
Just a reminder, this is a non-serious day for me. So I can't say anything serious. Hope that doesn't hurt your feelings. I really am not ignoring you or mocking you on this one.
So we still good? Well as good as we ever are...
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 30, 2005 at 4:14 PM
| link to this | reply
we are evidently reading different things
posted by
AnCatubh
on March 30, 2005 at 9:48 AM
| link to this | reply
amdg
Her family did not disupt his claim. They made it clear they had no clue as to what Terri would desire. They said so straight out. They even admitted to not caring what Terri would wish, but what they wish. To me that makes it clear they care not at all about Terri, but about themselves.
I understood that some of her co-workers, people who really had no connection to the husband testified that she would wish to die. Of course one point I can easily make here is that my wife has very much expressed that she would never wish to live in such a state and I could see her family disputing that in court, while my family and friends would say she has tols them such. I would know I was doing her deisres, but you would write me off as being greedy to get her out of the way, when it fact I would be trying for closer and to do what is right for her. I would not divorce her, even if I had found someone else to share my life until I was sure she was allowed to die, since I do care for her that much.
It is a very weak point you try to make. He really has little if anything to gian. I can not see him going after a wrongful death suit at this point.
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 29, 2005 at 11:42 AM
| link to this | reply
What Michael Schiavo has to gain:
Life insurance money and the ability to make a wrongful death suit. Reasons not to divorce her and get on with his life. I reviewed testimony in a number of the hearings in this case. The only witnesses who corraborated his story were his friends, family and one mutual friend. Her family and friends dispute his claim, a fact which should have, under Florida, rendered him as unfit to be her guardian.
posted by
AnCatubh
on March 28, 2005 at 11:32 PM
| link to this | reply
ukie
A body will always have a will to live, especially if it doe snot have a mind to say 'Let's just die'. Fighting for life is a purely reflexive thing for a body to do. Kind of like how a chicken's body can run around for a time after its head has been cut off or some insects' bodies can go on living for days without a head.
If that breath is given and taken by our maker, then we have no business trying to keep anyone alive. We should just leave it is God's hands if that is what your really believe. For with that idea no one can commit murder or take or save a life. All we can do is what God wills us to. If someone is to die, they will die. if someone is to live, then they will live. If it is God who decides, then we can not go against God's will and so anything we do is truly in vain, because in the end God's will will win out. Sorry, but you idea there is one I have already written about and showed just how much nonsense it is.
And even though you did ask nicely, I can not pray. I will not lie and pretend that something I do not believe in is out there. I have hope and I will express my ideas of just how we as a society can start to build for a better future, but I can not pray. I have to remain true to who I am. I have already written a post on that as well. Many of them in fact.
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 28, 2005 at 5:16 PM
| link to this | reply
amdg
I am sure the law is different from state to state, but you still end up defending my side of this with what you have said. If it were only Michael Schiavo who said Terri would wish to die, then you would have a great case. But there are others who have testified of this as well. Coworkers and others who really have nothing to gain from saying she said such things. Right there such testimony becomes the only source of eye witness accounts for this case and are not considered hearsay according to the law you just brought up. Or do you wish to try and say that each of them stands to gain from her death?
And what does her husband have to gain now? All of the money that was awarded to her is gone now. He can not be fighting for money. He really has nothing at all to gain from her death accept for a sense of closure.
Right there you are obviously the one who is short of thoughts. You really wish to point the finger purely at the husband as being cruel in this,. yet I can see no signs of such. All evidence pointing to him having done anything wrong is about as big of hearsay as it comes. Right now it would seem as though he would just like ti all over with and be able to move on with his life, both physically and spiritually.
I will admit that I was not familiar with the Florida law you brought up here when I wrote the post, which means there was a level of ignorance to it. I wrote the post based on my understanding of the laws. You however are over looking actual events in order to focus on just one aspect of it all. In the post I do talk about how there were multiple witnesses to testify about her desire ot not live in such a state, and you just focused fully on the fact the husband testified. A person is more of an 'arrogant ass' when they ignore facts above being ignorant of facts. I did not try to rewrite facts to fit my views, while you clearly are trying to do just such a thing.
However the general attitude of my post is still accurate. Your attitude to disregard all other testimony that does not agree with your view only helps to show this all the more.
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 28, 2005 at 5:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Check Florida law on what contitutes hearsay
You will discover that your understanding is wrong. Florida Statute 90.801 2. c) defines hearsay as such: " 'Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." Michael is making a statement that Terri made a statement. Terri is the declarant, Michael is not an eyewitness, as the law defines one. He's making a statement before the court about what someone else's statement was. Terri is not available to be cross examined. That makes (or should make) Michael's testimony inadmissible. There are exceptions to the hearsay rule, exceptions where the availabilty of the declarant matters and exceptions where the availability of the declarant is immaterial. Exceptions to the hearsay rule where availability of declarant is immaterial is perhaps the only place where a judge could allow Michael's testimony admissible, as it says(and I'm paraphrasing): that hearsay MAY be admissible where declarant has made his/her will known regarding medical diagnosis and treatment. This is the argument that Michael's attorneys have made. The problem lies in that this is trumped by other rules of evidence in the same chapter(90) of Florida statutes.The credibilty of a witness who has an interest is to be considered suspect , timely fashion in which witness makes declarant's wishes known to the court(7 years???), and the presence of contrary statement, particularly is the principle witness has an interest. Even under the husband/wife privilege the authority of a guardian to make such decisions for his/her spouse is only presumed IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTRARY EVIDENCE. All of these things make his testimony hearsay, noncredible and inadmissible. For family probate court to rule in Michael's favor and for subsequent courts to uphold that decision and to not allow review of "evidence to the contrary" was nothing more than a favoring of one statute to the exclusion of others and not a full appreciation of the law in toto. Some courts recognized this when her feeding tube was removed before and ordered it reinserted until a full review of all evidence had been conducted. Those decisions were struck down by courts who wanted to address the PVS question. Rank judicial activism.
Your posts are long on words and short on thought. By not informing yourself before you speak and casting aspersions on those with whom you disgree, you discredit your arguments and make yourself look like an arrogant ass.
posted by
AnCatubh
on March 28, 2005 at 2:54 PM
| link to this | reply
Teri must have...
a will to live, otherwise she woud have died shortly after they removed life support. I understand how painfulit is to see others suffer. Those lonely souls need love too, no matter how little time they have before they die. I
I've seen horrible deformed and disabled children in VietNam, who are just surviving without any nurturing. Even though, they have some hospice care...there just aren't enouigh hands and hearts to go around. It's amazing how far a smile, kind word or hug goes. Spending moments with these "trapped" children, is monumental to the well being of their souls. My point being, is these people have one miracle everyday. That miracle is life. Life is breath and that breath is given and taken by our maker.
No mater how much any of us try, none of us can play God, sucessfully that is!
We can Pray God...worship and honor Him. In America, we trust in God, right? Please take a moment, set aside your preconcieved notions and join us in prayer for Teri and may I add all those who suffer tragedy.
Intercessory prayers for Teri Schivo here:
I pray that the suspect, superstitious and fearful will be void, rendering the enemies efforts to whence they came: which is the pit of hell. Heavenly Father, we ask you to put your healing hand on Teri. Lord touch her and make her new. Please comfort her and relieve her from pain. Be her sustenance and strengthen her, not just physically, but emotional, mentally and spiritually. We thank you for the gift of life and praise Your holy name, the name above all names, Jesus Christ. Amen
posted by
QuailNest
on March 27, 2005 at 11:58 PM
| link to this | reply
SlyCy
Just read what the conservatives here have to say and you will see that the right movement right now is trying to do away with just about every thing that make us a democracy. They are ready to throw every aspect of freedom away in favor of their own personal religious ideas. They are not about rights and freedoms and liberty and justice and so on. They only wish to force their beliefs on all others. Bush is only helping to fuel this and make matters worse.
If we keep on the path Bush has taken us down we have very dark days ahead for our country.
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 27, 2005 at 6:28 PM
| link to this | reply
RSM
Sorry, but actions written in a piece of fiction can not be considered eyewitness accounts. Once more you are showing the legal system confuses you, maybe even scares you since it is about the rights of the people and not about doing what certain religious groups desire.
In the case of freedom and democracy man's law has to come before God's law because freedom and democracy can not go and follow any religion and still claim to be freedom and democracy.
posted by
kooka_lives
on March 27, 2005 at 6:23 PM
| link to this | reply
The Founding Fathers wished our country to be free of the dictates of any
religion, including Christianity. This country was going great before dubya and is not going as well since he got here. Why don't we stick to the tenets of the Founding Fathers none of whom claimed that Jesus told them what to do.
posted by
SlyCy
on March 27, 2005 at 3:51 AM
| link to this | reply
Eye-Witness Accounts?
You know, kooka, maybe you are onto something here. I agree with you because of the following statements of yours:
I have to thank the idiotic, poorly thought-out ideas of RedSatesMan. Due to him saying something so totally stupid and lacking in all common sense I was able to very clearly see just what it is the conservatives are really asking for in the Terri Schiavo case.
I have seen several others say the same thing though. They are claiming that the courts are basing their judgment that Terri would wish to not live in a vegetative state is all based on hearsay. Somehow all of a sudden eye-witness accounts are hearsay. If you see a crime being committed and testify in court of what you saw, that should be considered hearsay now according to this logic. In the Terri Schiavo case you have multiple witnesses saying that Terri told them on various occasions that she would never wish to live in such a state. That is eye-witness accoutsn of events. The only testimony that should be held more important than eye-witness accounts is the testimony of the person themselves.
...If we are to go and write off the testimony of eye-witness accounts, then we are writing off the whole legal system and saying that none of it matters. If you discredit this one time as being hearsay, then you are saying that someone can witness a killing and their testimony is hearsay because they were just witness to it.
Now this was the clincher for me. You are right about not writing off eye-witness accounts and that the only testimony that should be held more important than eye-witness accounts is the testimony of the person themselves. All of what you said is exactly 100% correct because it all reminded me of the following:
2 Peter 1:16
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
posted by
RedStatesMan
on March 26, 2005 at 9:02 PM
| link to this | reply