Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schiavos Don't Know Where Terri's Ashes Are (Schindlers Don't Know Where Terri's Ashes Are)
AP ^ | 05-07-05

Posted on 05/07/2005 7:03:09 AM PDT by veronica

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 541-549 next last
To: Hildy

Then you probably don't know much about class - or love for a child for that matter.


81 posted on 05/07/2005 8:01:12 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: sawdust

She was not insane or she would not have been convicted. But there are countless examples of parents killing their kids. It happens all the time.


82 posted on 05/07/2005 8:02:21 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: stylecouncilor

What choices did Terri make that caused her to be murdered?


83 posted on 05/07/2005 8:02:56 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Wild Bill 10

Personal attacks violate posting guidelines.


84 posted on 05/07/2005 8:03:51 AM PDT by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: veronica
I don't care who it is standing on the stage, nor do I care what letter they have by their name. You steer away from the limitations on the national government found in the Constitution and the supporting Federalist papers arguing for passage of same said document, you are no longer a conservative but rather a partisan hack in love with big government

And yes, any person supporting any of FDR's policies or continuation thereof is a faux conservative

85 posted on 05/07/2005 8:04:45 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: unbalanced but fair
Could any one who is praising Mark Fuhrman tell me why, if he had all this information, he didn't come forward with it while Terri was alive?

This is my guess:

In the case of Martha Moxley, the local sheriff investigated but were rather afraid to go against the Skakel family. The Skakel's were not looked at that closely. Verified alibi's with only family members. His investigation forced an investigation to be reopened.

I assume that he is hoping for the same outcome, forcing a reinvestigation.

86 posted on 05/07/2005 8:05:15 AM PDT by CAluvdubya (Don't let them Bork Bolton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: sawdust

And the state of Florida made that decision, the Florida Supreme Court made that decision. Do I necessarily agree with it? Not sure, however it's not a power reserved for the national government.


88 posted on 05/07/2005 8:05:58 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: CAluvdubya

What does that have to do with where Terri's ashes are?


89 posted on 05/07/2005 8:06:00 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

"She was not insane or she would not have been convicted. But there are countless examples of parents killing their kids. It happens all the time."


Andrea Yates was nuttier than an outhouse mouse. Crazy people are convicted all the time because jury's hate the insanity defense, they see it as a cop out. Yates could have been in court dressed like Napoleon and cutting out paper dolls and she still would have been convicted. The fact the jury quickly rejected death in the penalty phase shows they knew she was not resonsible criminally for her actions.

Unstable parents kill young children, true. But when a beloved adult child falls into a state like TS did, the parents would never act out of nefarious intent, and I stand by that. A spouse with a babe on the side and insurance money to collect would certainly act nefariously.


90 posted on 05/07/2005 8:06:15 AM PDT by sawdust ("Justice Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it"--Pres. Andrew Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: unbalanced but fair
No, Hannity said that he called Furhman and brought it to his attention. Then, he did a one month investigation.

The lack of agreement on the facts of the case is one of the startling aspects of the story. The controvery had been raging for over 10 years, and one wonders why there weren't journalists in Tampa who were real experts on it. I did rad that the bishop ordered priests to stop preaching about it. Seems to me that there was a corrupt good ole boy aspect that would not serve the people of the city well. It is also surprising that Greer was reelected when $154,000 would have financed an opposing candidate in 2004.

This just shows the danger of having media focus on two or three stories while they ignore everything else. Are they still harassing the runaway bride in GA?

91 posted on 05/07/2005 8:06:28 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Wild Bill 10

Thanks for your understanding.


92 posted on 05/07/2005 8:07:06 AM PDT by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: veronica
It didn't take long for the Judge Greer/Michael Schiavo disciples to jump on this thread. Today was the first time I heard about Fuhrman's book. Will he have a chance to include this latest revolting act by Michael?
93 posted on 05/07/2005 8:07:37 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #94 Removed by Moderator

To: sawdust
useful in separating true-believing conservatives willing to fight with any means necessary for the right cause from "talk talk" conservative wannabees...

This is an example of the toxicity I referenced. In what way can it be "useful" to separate conservatives from each other, over an issue which will not be improved by such a separation?

You want to divide like minded people over a principle, when that principle will not be enhanced by the division.

AS for your apparent bravado, how did you "fight with any means necessary?" Did you go to Florida and try to force your way in on a rescue mission? You did not. You postured.

I thought what happened to Terri Schiavo was appalling but I think the divisiveness such as you applaud is appalling also.

95 posted on 05/07/2005 8:08:48 AM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

All you have to do when you see a post on a thread that you don't like is to scroll on past.


96 posted on 05/07/2005 8:09:50 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: unbalanced but fair

That's a quick release date. It may be pushed back. But I get your point


97 posted on 05/07/2005 8:10:47 AM PDT by dennisw (2ยข plain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: sawdust
The fact the jury quickly rejected death in the penalty phase shows they knew she was not resonsible criminally for her actions.

That makes no sense whatsoever. If the jury didn't think she was criminally responsible, they would have found her not guilty.

But I'm not interested in hijacking this thread even though it's already become an ugly rehash of the past.

Carry on.

98 posted on 05/07/2005 8:11:18 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

"Did you go to Florida and try to force your way in on a rescue mission? You did not. You postured."

I'm in no physical shape for that sort of thing. But there are plenty of young studs out there who fancy themselves conservative. The Schiavo case did not speak well for conservative manhood.


99 posted on 05/07/2005 8:11:22 AM PDT by sawdust ("Justice Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it"--Pres. Andrew Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: lula
And I think you guys are unbelievable. It's called "A difference of opinion." We just did our Living Will a few weeks ago. There is exactly what it states (I'm looking at it right now:)

"Optional: the statement I have signed below is to apply if I am suffering fom a terminal condition from which death is expected in a matter of months, or if I am suffering from an irreversible condition that renders me unable to make decisions for myself, and life-support treatments are needed to keep me alive.
A. I request that all treatments other than those needed to keep me comfortable be discontinued or withheld and my physicians(s) allows me to die as gentlhy as possible. I understand and authorize this statement as proved by my

signature ____________________
OR
B. I want my life to br prolonged as long as possible within the limits of generally accepted health care standards. I understand and authorize this statement as proved by my

signature _____________________"

I'd like to know the percentage of people who sign option B. I'm sure a very, very mininscule percentage. I'm going to see my lawyer this week. I'm going to ask him.

100 posted on 05/07/2005 8:12:17 AM PDT by Hildy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 541-549 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson