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

Skip to comments.

Governor to close Schiavo inquiry [State attorney to Jeb: Michael S did not cause wife's collapse.]
St Petersburg Times ^ | July 8, 2005 | DAVID KARP and CHRIS TISCHDAVID KARP and CHRIS TISCH

Posted on 07/08/2005 2:59:50 PM PDT by summer

LARGO - In what could be a final chapter in the legal saga of Terri Schiavo, Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney Bernie McCabe says he could find no evidence that Michael Schiavo caused his wife's collapse 15 years ago.

In a June 30 letter to Gov. Jeb Bush, McCabe suggested ending the state's inquiry into the case.

Bush responded Thursday in a two-sentence letter to McCabe: "Based on your conclusions, I will follow your recommendation that the inquiry by the state be closed."

Bush asked McCabe last month to investigate Schiavo's collapse on the morning of Feb. 25, 1990. He cited questions left unanswered by an autopsy and inconsistent statements from Michael Schiavo about the time he found his wife on the floor of their apartment.

McCabe appointed two of his most seasoned prosecutors to review the evidence. They found nothing to indicate Michael Schiavo hurt his wife....

(Excerpt) Read more at sptimes.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: cultureofdisrespect; fl; hysterria; jeb; letthegirlrest; terri; terrischiavo; wifekiller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-272 next last
I really wish there had been a different outcome to this matter, because no one knows what her wishes would have been at this point in time, since she left nothing in writing.

I have discussed with case with others, and they are people I do not necessarily agree with on most political matters. And here is what do we agree on in this case:

Michale S should have removed removed as her legal guardian. Neither Gov Bush nor anyone else could "cancel" Terri's marriage to her husband, despite the fact Terri's wishes were unknown, her parents were alive and wanted to care for her, and Michael S had started a new family with another woman.

In light of all this, we wish a new law could be created to enable the parents of an adult married child to file for divorce when that adult child spouse can not file for divorce.

There was nothing Gov Bush could do to cancel this marriage and remove Michael S from being her legal guardian, but I honestly think that a new law should allow parents to care for their adult children when the adult child spouse is unable to express their wishes.


To me, and others, such a new law would just be common sense, and prevent this kind of tragedy, pain and suffering from happening again in the future.
1 posted on 07/08/2005 2:59:53 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

I meant to type: Michale S should have been removed...


2 posted on 07/08/2005 3:00:48 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

----State attorney to Jeb: Michael S did not cause wife's collapse.----

Like hell.

-Dan

3 posted on 07/08/2005 3:08:04 PM PDT by Flux Capacitor (Trust me. I know what I'm doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

Everyone should realize that nothing of substance regarding the murder of Terri rested on the hypothesis that Michael caused her injury 15 years ago. He murdered her, with assistance of the legal profession, last March. How Terri had gotten in her state is just as irrelevant as what precisely that state was medically.


4 posted on 07/08/2005 3:08:40 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex

It is irrelevant, to a certain extent, but I think it didn't hurt to remind people that there were lots of unexamined issues in this case. The courts essentially skipped over numerous conflicts of interest (partly because the Court itself seemed to have some conflicts) and took testimony that was tainted at the start. The outcome had been decided long before by Felos and his cronies, a number of them active in the St. Pete's law enforcement and judicial world.


5 posted on 07/08/2005 3:12:20 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Flux Capacitor; annalex

Re my post #1 - I would also add that the people who agree with me on what would have been a better outcome in this matter feel this way because they, too, are loving parents to their own children, and their sympathies rested with the parents in this case. Michael S, who is now a father, might want to think about this, too.


6 posted on 07/08/2005 3:12:49 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: livius

And, it was simply not fair that only one spouse - Michael S - could file for divorce, while the other spouse, Terri S, in her condition, did not have the same legal right. What kind of contract is that when only one party can break it?


7 posted on 07/08/2005 3:13:56 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: summer

No justice for Terri--bad news all the way around.


8 posted on 07/08/2005 3:16:11 PM PDT by krunkygirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: krunkygirl

That's right -- there was not even a CHANCE for justice for Terri S. But the next Terri S deserves a better chance, jsut as Terri S did. The medical world knows people wake up from comas and brain damage and all sorts of conditions after years of not being able to do so, and medical science can not explain why. If parents want to wait for a possible miracle for their child, that is their right, and should be their right, when no other directions have been specificed by that adult child in writing and no divorce can be obtained by that spouse under current law.


9 posted on 07/08/2005 3:18:28 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: summer

Regarding the proposed law, -- I agree that when one spouse abuses the marriage, for example, through adultery, grounds for divorce exist, and may be explored by other members of the immediate family on behalf of the incapacitated abused spouse. Certainly, Micheal's guardianship should have been declared null and void as soon as his adultery became known.

But I think you should make it clear that when no fault is found with the spouse, the marriage remains insolvable.


10 posted on 07/08/2005 3:19:42 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: summer

And Lyndon Baynes Johnson avoided a prison term because Chief Justice Earl Warren, John McCoy, Sr, and the rest of the members of the Warren Commission decided that that guy shot himself 12 times in the back of the head with a shotgun.

So help me law.


11 posted on 07/08/2005 3:20:48 PM PDT by combat_boots (Dug in and not budging an inch. NOT to be schiavoed, greered, or felosed as a patient)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

Let me add that since our present divorce law is completely bonkers, the chances of your proposal are unfortunately nil. Since the courts don't recognize fault in divorce any more, they will invalidate any law that hinges on spousal fault.


12 posted on 07/08/2005 3:22:28 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: annalex
But I think you should make it clear that when no fault is found with the spouse, the marriage remains insolvable.

No, I think the new law would have to say abuse is NOT a necessary factor; the conflicting wishes of the OTHER spouse verses the parents of the spouse (with no written directive existing) is all that should be required. Because, you see, it's not always an issue of past abuse. It's an issue of WHO SHOULD BE THE GUARDIAN RIGHT NOW - when ONE spouse can NOT seek a divorce. That's when a law should ALLOW parents to step in and BECOME the guardian, if the parents want to care for an adult child - but the other spouse wants to "move on" with their life and NOT care for that spouse.

Such a new law would NOT apply in cases where one spouse remains devoted to that other spouse and TO NO OTHER. There are couples who care for each other no matter what. But Michael S was not in that group, because no one knew for certain what Terri S wanted at this point. Terri S might have wanted to divorce her husband and have her parents care for her at this point in time, if she could have said so. That's why a new law should exist. But it should NOT require evidence of "abuse" -- it's unnecessary to prove that. One spouse can not speak nor seek the same right to divorce as the other spouise-- that's the basis for the law, to restore equal rights to both spouses in the marriage contract. Terri S did not have equal rights with her husband. She could not divorce him. That was the whole key to legal guardianship here.
13 posted on 07/08/2005 3:24:54 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: summer

Never mind, it is just Jeb pulling our chain again.


14 posted on 07/08/2005 3:25:11 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots
So help me law.

I hear ya. But, there's no doubt in my mind there will someday be another Terri S.
15 posted on 07/08/2005 3:26:15 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA

Re your post #14 - ???


16 posted on 07/08/2005 3:26:37 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: summer

The thread's added eadline in brackets is a lie. The officals only found that they would be unable to determine whether Micheal did or did not act to cause his wife's injuries. They did NOT determine that he did not cause them. I have reported the headline as abuse.


17 posted on 07/08/2005 3:32:06 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: summer

If I went into a coma, I would not want my parent to have the right to get me a divorce.

In my religion, only adultery is an accepted excuse for divorce, not murder.

It's till death do we part, even if my husband kills me.


18 posted on 07/08/2005 3:32:27 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: summer

The whole thing was wrong and corrupt from the start. I think this is the point Jeb is trying to make. Of course, since the entire liberal press corps combined with the loony libertarians on the talk radio circuit are against him, I don't think he has much chance of getting the message out.


19 posted on 07/08/2005 3:32:45 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: summer

You misunderstood me. Adultery is aready abuse.

Again:

Marriage is not solvable absent fault. It is not solvable when one spouse is sick absent fault. It is not solvable when one spouse is so sick, s/he cannot communicate absent fault.

Faults are: adultery, abandonment, physical abuse.

When there is fault, the abused (in the broad sense of being victim of the above-enumerated fault) spouse can file for divorce. When s/he cannot file because of incapacity, a parent may do so.


20 posted on 07/08/2005 3:39:40 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: summer
Re your post #14 - ???

The investigation was a joke. Whatever evidence there may have been had been destroyed at cremation, and the whole issue is moot. The only reason Jeb launched the effort was to divert the negative feelings engendered by the release of the autopsy results. The time to have investigated Michael Shivo was years ago; Jeb as usual is a dollar short and a day late.
21 posted on 07/08/2005 3:40:08 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth

since Michael S fathered children with another woman, I'd call that adultery, wouldn't you?


22 posted on 07/08/2005 3:42:58 PM PDT by Awestruck (Here we go again!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA
"The time to have investigated Michael Shivo was years ago..."

As Mark Fuhrman emphasizes in Silent Witness, there is no statute of limitations for murder. You are of course, correct in that the time to collect any physical evidence is long since past.

23 posted on 07/08/2005 3:46:43 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

Yes, but I would forgive my husband if I were in a coma and he started another family.

For better or for worse is part of the deal, and forgive our debts as we forgive our debtors.

Of course, if he committed adultery while I was still able to pull a trigger, he'd be in trouble.


24 posted on 07/08/2005 3:47:47 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: summer

Who is Governor Jeb Bush? Isn't he the former governor of Florida? Wasn't he succeeded by the new Governor, George W. Greer?

Yeah, that's the one.

Nice job Jeb. Now GTFO.


25 posted on 07/08/2005 3:48:31 PM PDT by Mad Mammoth (Q - Why won't you ever find a liberal with a 'scratch & sniff' tag? A - Who wants to smell sh*t?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack
You are of course, correct in that the time to collect any physical evidence is long since past.

Not to mention, it is way too late to save Terry.
26 posted on 07/08/2005 3:49:15 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bvw
The thread's added eadline in brackets is a lie. The officals only found that they would be unable to determine whether Micheal did or did not act to cause his wife's injuries. They did NOT determine that he did not cause them. I have reported the headline as abuse.

LOL...uh, I don't know if you realize this but - I DID try to FIT that VERY LONG headline in as it was written, but there is a LIMIT on how many words can be posted in a headline. So, I had to shorten it, to make it FIT the LIMIT. Otherwise I could not post the article.
27 posted on 07/08/2005 3:51:10 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
It's till death do we part, even if my husband kills me.

Well, I would just say to that: your parents, if alive, would probably prefer to take care of you than see your husband kill you! (However, I respect your religious beliefs -- yet, I find it very hard to believe any religion would advocate what you are advocating here.)
28 posted on 07/08/2005 3:53:20 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: livius
The whole thing was wrong and corrupt from the start. I think this is the point Jeb is trying to make. Of course, since the entire liberal press corps combined with the loony libertarians on the talk radio circuit are against him, I don't think he has much chance of getting the message out.

I think you are right. But, I also think there is still hope in considering the idea I proposed in my post # 1. I hope he, too, might read this thread and consider it. I don't know if he will. But, I hope he does. I do believe he did everything -- and more -- that he could possibly do, under current laws.
29 posted on 07/08/2005 3:55:32 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA
"Not to mention, it is way too late to save Terry."

Not sure if you've read Fuhrman's book yet, or if you even have the inclination to do so, but he makes the point that hade Terri succumbed in the days following her collapse the case would have been treated as a homocide until and unless it was determined to be otherwise.

30 posted on 07/08/2005 3:56:37 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: annalex
It is not solvable when one spouse is sick absent fault.

I think it should be solvable when one spouse is sick -- and there is no written directive from that spouse on what to do, in terms of maintaining or ending life, and the remaining spouse and parents, if there are any, disagree. That is an enormous conflict, as we have all seen with Terri S.
31 posted on 07/08/2005 3:57:26 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: summer

I would not want my mother (my only remaining parent) interfering in my husband's decisions, even if he chose the worse (not the better) and decided to let me die.

For this reason shall a man leave his parents and cleave only to his wife.

What God hath put together let no man put asunder.

I would not want the bond between my husband and myself broken by a parent, even if I believed my husband was making a bad, even a sinful, decision.

Divorce, never. Turning over custody might be an option, but only with my husband's consent.

Just my view from the peanut gallery.


32 posted on 07/08/2005 4:00:07 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA
The time to have investigated Michael Shivo was years ago; Jeb as usual is a dollar short and a day late.

Well, since this matter took "years" to wind through the court system, maybe you are being somewhat harsh in your assessment of Gov Bush here. I really thought it possible a court would have found reason to declare this marriage null and void, but without any such law allowing a court to make that finding, I see now why it did not happen.
33 posted on 07/08/2005 4:00:44 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Turning over custody might be an option, but only with my husband's consent.

OK; you have made clear in writing your wishes; however, Terri S never did.
34 posted on 07/08/2005 4:02:17 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: summer

No. Divorce without false is not a possibility. Divorce because of sickness? You're kidding? It's in the marital vows, for Christ's sake.


35 posted on 07/08/2005 4:02:45 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck
since Michael S fathered children with another woman, I'd call that adultery, wouldn't you?

Yes, in technical legal terms, I would. And, I thought the court would. Also, the media was very silent on this point about Michael S' "other" life.
36 posted on 07/08/2005 4:04:04 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: summer
I really thought it possible a court would have found reason to declare this marriage null and void

Since when does a criminal investigation pend on the resolution of a civil dispute?
37 posted on 07/08/2005 4:04:47 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Divorce because of sickness? You're kidding? It's in the marital vows, for Christ's sake.

Not because of "sickness" -- because of end of life issues. Not every "sickness" qualifies as an end of life issue. If you get a cold, no, your parents should not be able to file for divorce for you. But, if you are incapacitated, and the outcome may be death, and your parents and spouse disagree, well, then I think - yes, the parents should be allowed to file for divorce in order to become the legal guardian, if no written directive exists from that spouse.
38 posted on 07/08/2005 4:06:28 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA

Re your post #37 - I was referring to the civil court lawsuits iinvolved in this matter.


39 posted on 07/08/2005 4:07:12 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ARCADIA

Re your post #37 - I was referring to the civil court lawsuits involved in this matter.


40 posted on 07/08/2005 4:07:26 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; ARCADIA
the time to collect any physical evidence is long since past.

it sounds like you are saying the local police botched this case a long time ago. Maybe they did. I don't know.
41 posted on 07/08/2005 4:09:07 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: summer

Yes, this is a good object lesson for everyone.

Get those wills and living wills written and filed and give copies to your attorney and put a copy in safe deposit.

However, I don't want a law made that a parent can dissolve a marriage if their child is in a coma. For better or for worse, God has established that spouses decide for their spouses if their will isn't written down otherwise, as God has established marriage as a higher and more inviolable bond that parent-child.

If new laws are needed, they are needed to insure a thorough investigation of circumstances at the time any person becomes unable to communicate, to be sure they weren't put in that state by foul play.


42 posted on 07/08/2005 4:09:09 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: summer

No, marriage is not solvable through sickness no matter severity of the sickness.

"In sickness and in health, till death do us part".


43 posted on 07/08/2005 4:10:15 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mad Mammoth
Isn't he the former governor of Florida?

No, he's the current governor - and the only GOP governor ever re-elected in the history of this state.

The fact he could not "cancel" a marriage contract or correct a possible botched police investigation years ago does not void his many history-making accomplishments as governor. At least not to a person who is judging his record fairly.
44 posted on 07/08/2005 4:12:18 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: annalex
"In sickness and in health, till death do us part".

Then, it seems to me - you are perfectly happy with the outcome of this matter because you do not accept divorce under any circumstances whatsoever. I would just say that others disagree with you, and do understand why some people divorce.

You must be happy with the outcome of this matter. But others are not, because her wishes were not known in writing.
45 posted on 07/08/2005 4:14:16 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Get those wills and living wills written and filed and give copies to your attorney and put a copy in safe deposit.

However, I don't want a law made that a parent can dissolve a marriage if their child is in a coma..


If you have a different wish, in writing, no law and no parent would be able to alter your wish. That was not the situation in this case. There was nothing in writing.
46 posted on 07/08/2005 4:16:51 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: summer
The headline as you edited it is a lie.

The officials found only that they would be unable to find anything if they looked. That is itself a questionable finding -- speaks more to political turpitude or laziness -- but it is what it is.

Your headline is a lie.

47 posted on 07/08/2005 4:18:57 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
God has established marriage as a higher and more inviolable bond that parent-child.

I don't know that others agree with you -- others I have talked to believe the parent-child bond is the bond that should have been honored in this matter. Not the husband-wife bond, since he eventually had another family.
48 posted on 07/08/2005 4:19:06 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: summer
At least not to a person who is judging his record fairly.

Are we discussing his record or this pretend inquiry?
49 posted on 07/08/2005 4:19:08 PM PDT by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Re your post #47 - I guess you did not see my post #27.


50 posted on 07/08/2005 4:19:39 PM PDT by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-272 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