Posted on 03/31/2005 4:12:56 PM PST by Diva Betsy Ross
Do you want to make a change and see some justice? Congressman Tom DeLay said the House Judiciary Committee will be investigating Terri's case and making recommendations to the full house about any reforms that they believe are necessary in this debacle over Terri's life and death.
This thread is to brainstorm, and to report what contacts we have made and the results. Below is a link to the committee members.
Anyone who wants to help organize a ping list- SPEAK UP. We need someone to make a list of objectives and contacts.
This thread is for activism. If you are not interested in that - please move to a different thread. I am done with the flame wars.
This is for those who want action and want a change.
I will.
Ping- (we are over here). Please add your thoughts.
Florida doesn't recognize common law marriages.
No. I'm in favor of national consideration of deleting the following from our constitution:
Constitution for the United States; Article III:
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2.
Clause 1: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State; (See Note 10)--between Citizens of different States, --between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Clause 2: In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Clause 3: The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
Care to help shake up the Judiciary? See posts #14 and 24, above.
I have contacted my state senator and rep on this matter as well as the Lt. Gov. I will be contacting other in the state house of Illinois to make sure this does not happen in Illinois.
Have also contacted Hastert's office to see about an investigation between the Hemlock society and hospice organizations.
I would like a RICO investigation on the links between Geer, the hospice and Felos. The RICO act I believe has been broadly written to cover this situation. I don't think it would be too hard to prove both wire and mail fraud. (I am not a lawyer but I am well read and a heck of a researcher in many topics.)
I'm ready to rumble
Please add me to your ping list.
"Florida doesn't recognize common law marriages."
No, and they also don't "recognize" Adultery and Cohabitation, which unless I am mistaken, MS (thru his own admisstion) could be charged with and more than likely, found guilty--unless of course his "Death Attorney" (Felos) could manage to get a criminal case heard by a Probabte Judge (Greer,for example?) and surely, he would "skate!"
The 2004 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 798
ADULTERY; COHABITATION View Entire Chapter
798.01 Living in open adultery.--Whoever lives in an open state of adultery shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. Where either of the parties living in an open state of adultery is married, both parties so living shall be deemed to be guilty of the offense provided for in this section.
History.--s. 1, ch. 1986, 1874; RS 2595; GS 3518; RGS 5406; CGL 7549; s. 772, ch. 71-136.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0798/SEC01.HTM&Title=->2004->Ch0798->Section%2001#0798.01
The 2004 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 775
DEFINITIONS; GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS View Entire Chapter
775.082 Penalties; applicability of sentencing structures; mandatory minimum sentences for certain reoffenders previously released from prison.--
(b) For a misdemeanor of the second degree, by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 60 days.
The 2004 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 775
DEFINITIONS; GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS View Entire Chapter
775.083 Fines
(e) $500, when the conviction is of a misdemeanor of the second degree or a noncriminal violation.
Like I said...remove our right to a trial by a jury of our peers... Just great.
Ping
Add me to your ping list.
I'm mad, and I'm not going to take it anymore. I used to be proud to be an American, but not any more. If we allow the murder of the disabled, then we are no better than any other country.
What part of "unalienable right to life" do the courts not understand?
Let's do something for Terri and for all future Terri's.
I'm in Diva.
I'm sick and tired of the judges who make terrible decisions affecting all of our lives.
Judge Greer is #1 on the list.
The judge who is also in Florida who did not give the couple protection in the form of a restraining order that were killed is #2. (this is the one where the 5 year old daughter called 911 after finding her parents bleeding in their bedroom)
These judges names need to be known nationally not just locally and they MUST be held accountable for their actions. FR is the perfect place to do this IMHO.
No. First, eliminate the ENTIRE federal judiciary. Accordingly, there'd be no necessity of a trial by jury, since there'd be no trials. There'd be no authority for the government to do so.
Then, replace the failed system with citizen jurists, or juries empaneled much as grand juries are. Almost certainly something would be offered and evolve to replace that which has failed us, and the lessons of the removal of the preceeding failed system would serve as a check on an accumulation of judicial power beyond that intended by the constitutional fathers.
But the lifetime sinecure for federal judges has got to go.
ping to #1
In all my years dealing with constitutional law, I have always said no to judicial impeachment even when from time to time on various issues some conservative activists have argued for it in specific situations. I can generally provide people more arguments against impeachment than for it where judges are concerned. Sometimes I cannot provide argurments for impeachment at all, because all the valid arguments from my point of view mitigated against judicial impeachment in those situations.
The Schiavo matter is dramatically different. Not only am I convinced that judicial impeachment applies here, I am convinced that it applies to every federal judge in the chain from the district court judge who first received the case under the act signed by President Bush, through the appeals judges of the 11th Circuit, to all nine sitting members of the U.S. Supreme Court, with the exception of the one or two judges that bucked the system.
This is the first time in my several decades of dealing with constitutional law that such a situation exists. I never imagined that I would see this situation in my entire lifetime or in my professional career.
The key points are summarized here. They are based on two one-hour radio talkshow interviews I did locally this week which laid out the matter in some detail.
First, Article III uses the words "good behavior" as the term of art dealing with the impeachment of federal judges. The Constitution uses the words "high crimes and misdemeanors" as the standard of impeachment for the executive and legislative branches. "High crimes and misdemeanors" is a higher and more rigid standard than "good behavior" in Article III. In the Schiavo matter, the misconduct on the part of the federal judiciary violates both standards. It violates the "high crimes and misdemeanors" standard because by refusing to protect the substantive right to life of Ms. Schiavo under the 14th Amendment, and treating the matter as strictly procedural, the various judges made themselves accessories to murder. It violates the "good behavior" standard for the sorts of reasons explained by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England.
The federal courts obstinately refused in the Schiavo matter to employ a jurisprudence of constitutionally protected inalienable rights mandated by the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, the rights model of original American jurisprudence from the era of the Founders, and as extended to state misconduct by the 14th Amendment.
The federal courts refused to judicially notice that we prosecuted people for war crimes at Nuremberg for the very sorts of actions taken and required by the Florida state courts in clear violation of the original meaning of inalienable rights and due process of law.
Under our federal union, there has never been a power in any state to execute anyone not convicted of a crime and who has not been indicted and/or tried criminally. Under our federal union and under the constitutions and bills of rights of every individual state, the right to life is inalienable. At the state level, that right can only be lost by an individual person through an act of wrongdoing constituting a forfeiture and adjudicated as such through a criminal trial where due process would apply. Executing an innocent person through a civil process is ultra vires by definition and has been ultra vires for over two hundred years of American experience. Having occurred in the Schiavo matter, the question is not one of due process because there can be no such process, period. Where such occurs, as it has here, it is an act of state tyranny by definition, the ground upon which we fired the king of England.
When people say Ms. Schiavo received due process that is not true because the state is not permitted to have such a process, period. For any state to have a process that executes a person or citizen unconvicted of a crime is not a matter of due process because there can be no such process. The 14th Amendment mandates that the right to life be protected by the federal government if a state materially fails in its duty to secure the inalienable right to life. For any federal judge to fail in that 14th Amendment duty is "bad behavior" and criminal negligence. When the federal courts treated the matter pro forma as a procedural one rather than one of substantive rights, the courts materially breached their duty to a person who is also a citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment with both personhood and citizenship rights. In light of the fact that the federal judges' malfeasance has materially redefined (by inaction) something as fundamental to all persons and American citizens as the right to life, and demonstrated by precedent that the federal courts criminally disregard their duty to uphold the right to life, they have failed to maintain the standard of good conduct required of a federal judge and forfeited the respect and obedience of the American people.
For these and related reasons, every federal judge involved in the execution of Terri Schiavo has violated their office as judge and have committed the high crime of being an accessory to murder. Therefore every judge so tainted MUST be impeached by Congress and removed from the bench.
Sincerely,
Gary Amos
When you have walked in the shoes of one watching one die then you have the right to speak.
After 15 years, it is time to let go.
When we no longer possess the ability to think, communicate or create, we are no longer unique. We are just like other animals who are incapable of caring for themselves. We routinely kill horses and etc to end their pain and misery as an act of compassion and love. What is the difference with a person who no longer exists, just the flesh that represented the individual and other animals we kill because of love and compassion?
What young male or female is able to remain faithful to a spouse for 15 years when no hope exists of ever coming out of a coma?
Count me in
Ping-please add your thoughts and/or ping your lists.
Florida Circuit Judge Richard Graham, per report *here*.
IF you are not here to make a change- then move on.
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.