Skip to comments.Fuhrman: Grand Jury should probe Terri Schiavo case (if Fla. won't, then US DOJ should, he says)
Posted on 07/03/2005 3:58:50 PM PDT by churchillbuff
Famed detective Mark Fuhrman is calling for a grand jury probe of the Terri Schiavo case, saying there's no other way to get to the bottom of the unexplained 1990 collapse of the then-26-year-old woman.
"I want a grand jury investigation," he told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity on Tuesday, adding that Schiavo's parents also favor the move.
Fuhrman, whose book "Silent Witness" hit bookstores this week, said that if Florida prosecutors decline to convene a grand jury probe, the Justice Department should step in.
He asked, "Were Terri's civil rights violated? When I looked at this case, she never got the due process of a death row inmate."
A similar investigative book by Fuhrman, "Murder in Greenwich," is credited with forcing Connecticut prosecutors to re-examine the 1975 murder of Martha Moxley, resulting in the conviction of Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel.
In the Terri Schiavo case, Fuhrman said most of the questions revolve around her husband, Michael, and the conflicting stories he's told over the years.
"Michael Schiavo can't seem to remember anything consistently," he told Hannity, citing discrepancies in Michael's account of his reaction to his wife's collapse and the time he called paramedics.
"We have to have Michael Schiavo sit in front of a grand jury," the famed detective urged, noting that Schiavo has refused over the years to be questioned under oath in a deposition. "[A grand jury] is the only way to investigate this case."
Asked if he'd ever seen a case with so many unanswered questions, Fuhrman told Hannity: "Yeah, it's called Martha Moxley."
Mr. Fuhrman did fine with the Martha Moxley Murder. Skakel sits in Prison today. Fuhrman turned out to be correct on the O.J. Murders too! I for one, will ignore your comments henceforth.
What do you think of Schiavo's lawyer? You like defending that freak show? You think Fuhrman is less credible?
I read it a few days ago. Good book, lots of information I hadn't read anywhere else, and I've read plenty on Schiavo.
Wish he'd waited a few weeks though, for the autopsy report. Not having done so, he's going to have to rewrite some portion of the first edition, not just add a chapter somewhere.
Still, I'd recommend it. He tries to be fair but from a cop's pov, Michael Schiavo reeks of deceit at the very least.
Worst flaw in book: Bobby's impossible sketch of the Schiavo apt. floor plan. Should have left that on the cutting room floor, so to speak.
Unofrtunately, we have been losing the PR battle on Schiavo, and it cost Terri her life. Her husband's behavior, and his lawyer's demeanor, have been world-class creepy. The fact that it takes Fuhrman to tell the truth is unfortunate.
Don't forget Felos who took $500,000 of Terri's Rehabilatation Funds for his "Legal Fees" to bring about her horrible death.
Do you think the Sergeant might not like Mark Fuhrman because Mark is such a Great Detective???
Your visceral jealousy is right out there for all to see. Mark is a great Detective and what are you talking about with accusations of perjury?
Mark Fuhrman is a fascinating speaker (along with liberal Jeff Feiger) and an excellent investigator. It is because of him that a Kennedy was convicted
Strange how life turns out to be. The OJ trial was the best thing that happened to Fuhrman and now has several popular books.
Amazing how people here get in a frenzy of bashing Fuhrman, and reveal merely their own bitterness.
There is no doubt in my mind that Michael is the reason that Terri is dead now. It hurts me to the core that so many people for their own personal reasons let that bully get away with everything. It says a lot about them and maybe how they tried to push death on an innocent woman. I would not let them babysit my alligator.
Sadly, I may be preaching to the choir here, but here goes....
Regardless of where anyone stands on the issue of Terri's death, anyone who wants Terri to be at peace should support an investigation. Death with dignity means more than just how one dies.
If, and I mean IF, there is any chance of foul play, she derserves the respect, the dignity, the right to rest in peace with no questions unanswered.
My personal opnion is that an investigation is warranted. I have read court records and have listened to Michael Schiavo and found the contradictions disturbing.
If Schiavo is innocent---we will owe him an apology and I will be first in line.
But we cannot allow what may or may not have happened so many years ago to remain intertwined with the issue of how she died in 2005. They are 2 separate animals.
Thats your privilege, You dont mind if I continue to comment do you?
You see many times in court that perjured testimony leads to convictions, Police officers who will perjure themselves to get a guilty verdict are a danger to the Justice system. Now why did Furhman perjure himself? Was it to protect his honor or to lend credibility to his testimony . Obviously it was to lend credibility to his testimony. Mark Furman pleaded no contest to a perjury charge and was given 3 years probation,. As he could no longer be a police officer he quit and received his pension. The man you so vigourously defend was called a bad cop by Marcia Clarke and had to defend himself multiple times of using excessive force. Now because he defends your views on the Terri Schiavvo affair and because he has placed himself in the public eye by jumping into other very public cases he is your idea of a Super cop and my comments are not worth reading, Thats fine, dont read them.
I would suggest you use Google to find out about Furhmans perjury charge.
You sure are obsessed and in a frenzy about Mark Fuhrman. Or perhaps you just are bored with your life and want to start arguments.
Here is another Michael after Mark Fuhrman wrote a book.
You mean like accusing Michael Schiavo of murder?
Wasn't Jeb recently attempting to cover up for his lack of action when it really counted?
It was a traumatic event. It occurred 15 years ago. What good is a grand jury investigation going to do? And what would be the result?
"Destroying the Evidence"