Posted on 10/25/2003 6:00:26 AM PDT by NYer
In a court of law, the burden of proof rests with the prosecution. They must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused actually did commit a crime.
In the court of public opinion, it is frequently the case that individuals who are accused of a crime are judged guilty regardless of the facts. Some call that bias; others label it as nothing more than ignorant.
In the case of a severely disabled woman whose starvation death was ordered by a Florida judge, the court of law has not determined her guilt or innocence, because she committed no crime. The court has preferred to arrogantly deem it compassionate to put her out of her alleged misery by sanctioning an act of murder.
Murder is defined as the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought. Such a definition applies in this case. However, no human court is going to find this particular judge guilty of a crime, and no human court is going to query this woman’s husband regarding why he thinks she should die. That has already been taken care of through an arduous five-year court battle that may yet end with this woman’s tragic death — a death resulting from court-approved removal of food and water.
As one attorney recently wrote, if a judge or a state governor were to order the execution of a serial killer on death row by means of withholding food and water, a variety of courts would intervene at once to block that order, which would amount to constitutionally-prohibited cruel and unusual punishment. But in the case of Terri Schiavo, who is not terminally ill, and was not near death until the starvation process began, it has been ruled that her life is not worthy to be lived. Thus others were willing to impose on her a slow, agonizing death by starvation. That is murder according to the natural law; but according to the Florida judicial system, it is an exercise in compassion. So much for human justice!
The Terri Schiavo case is currently receiving widespread media coverage. The callous disregard for her human dignity is being exposed in many venues – but only at the eleventh hour. Over the past five years, however, as this case has been unfolding, nary a word could be found describing the barbaric nature of what some were proposing should be done to her.
Perhaps the most appalling aspect of this woman’s plight is rarely noted. Terri Schiavo is a Catholic who, one would hope, would have been staunchly defended in every conceivable way by the Catholic hierarchy in her state. After all, she is vulnerable, she is totally dependent on others to speak for her, and she is a human being with the gift of human dignity that God bestows on each of us.
The sad reality is, however, that Florida’s Catholic bishops have been virtually silent. These bishops joined together in a public statement begging Gov. Jeb Bush to spare the life of convicted killer Paul Hill, a man who murdered two people. The prosecution in the Hill case did its job. Yet the bishops publicly pleaded that his life be spared. But two days after defending Hill’s life, these same bishops said the Church could not make a decision regarding whether Terri Schiavo should be starved to death. These bishops urged that more time be given prior to Terri’s imposed death by starvation so that “greater certainty as to her true condition” could be reached.
How much more certainty does one need that a living, breathing human being will die if he or she is denied access to food and water? The burden of proof in Terri’s case must ultimately be placed squarely on the shoulders of those who, for whatever reason, have chosen to cautiously stand aside and allow the courts to wield their power, even if the result will be the death of an innocent human being who never had the opportunity to defend herself. What crime did Terri Schiavo commit, I would ask the bishops that drove them into equivocating about whether or not she had a right to life?
Americans who care about this young woman have mounted campaigns to pressure Gov. Bush into doing all he can to save Terri’s life. Others have stepped to the forefront and applauded Florida state lawmakers who, after nearly six full days had passed in which Terri was denied nutrition, approved legislation to stop the starvation from continuing. Still others have offered legal opinions providing the governor with ammunition and exposing the reality of the situation: Terri Schiavo was being executed, pure and simple.
Yet nowhere in this flurry of last minute, desperate activity, do we find the Florida Catholic Conference. There has been a number prayer vigils held outside the hospice where Terri resides. To our knowledge, not one bishop has attended. There have been numerous public demonstrations of support for Terri’s parents, who are courageously doing all they can to defend their daughter’s right to life as her husband, her legal guardian, continues his quest to see that her food and water is denied. Not one bishop has offered Terri’s parents his public support. There is a courageous priest who has tried to provide Terri with Holy Communion. His efforts were thwarted by police officers who banned him from giving the Eucharist to Terri. As far as we can tell, not one bishop spoke out at such an outrage or applauded the commitment of this priest to be a true shepherd for Terri in what appeared to be her final days.
As the moments continued to pass, and the very life ebbed out of this lovely young woman at the center of this storm of controversy, one could only wonder what it really means to be innocent until proven guilty. To my mind, as I reflect on the burden of proof that never evolved prior to Terri’s death sentence, it occurs to me that some day, the most important Judge of all will have to deal with certain people who were aware of the travesty but chose to avoid a controversy because “difficult cases” are a bother. At that time, He will have amassed a burden of proof with regard to their culpability in the case of Terri Schiavo. In His court, justice will be done.
The hubby paid half the award to a scumbag lawyer who saw to it that hubby wouldn't have to blow the wad on his wife...just put her in the Hospice where she could receive minimal care and fade away. He hid the remaining money and presented himself as indigent to the state to receive government medical payments, with the lawyer's (and probably some insiders at the state offices..or their hands were tied) help. Complaints by the family were addressed by a judge who has a conflict of interest. Hubby stands to collect a large sum of insurance money upon Terri's death. She won't cooperate. He can't divorce her, and he can't relieve himself of custody--give her over to her parents--without losing his shot at megabucks.
The issue here is not right-to-die claptrap: it's an issue of criminal conduct under the rubric of "compassion".
Clearly, there is substantial evidence for this scenario. It must be investigated. Apparently, this scheme is is a regular feature sold by the hospice provider and this attorney, Falos, to "suffering families".
If the above is all BS, there is time to put it away; but the actions of the parties who stand to be indicted are telling me that there's fire under the smoke.
Terri has the right to live, her parents have the right, to care for her: some folks pay to freeze themselves hoping for a day where they can be re-animated. The allegorize, Terri is a "wanted child". There's also a price on her head.
If the husband were truly compassionate, he'd divest himself of interest, divorce Terri, and get on with his life. If, as it is stated, she is PVA, she's not suffering, and will not suffer. That's a load of crap.
If, as is countered by medical docs and testimony of folks who have worked with Terri, she is aware...this is an injustice most vile.
No, you're not weird. You're absolutely correct. Difference is, that if he did that, he would still be charged with murder, now wouldn't he? But if he can get "society" to go along with the termination of Terri's life, the precedent is set and murder becomes legitimate under certain circumstances, to be determined by, who else, judges. People, we have a problem!
There are many disabled who are outraged...I hear the whispers.
I met them some years later. Yes, she was disabled, but she could get around, even accompanying him to speaking engagements. There are a book and a movie about their story, both with the title "Twice Given". Check it out.
Further, as is typical of many who comment here on this matter, you have mostly decided to attribute statements and thoughts to me which I have not made nor had. To say nothing of your propensity to label and name call without basis.
I see you all as the opposite of the 'kind souls' that you apparently think that you are.
The pope is disabled.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.