Michael Schiavo joins the fray

"meaningful and appropriate words"...you certainly do keep raising the bar now don't you?"

Yes, words as opposed to "noises" that are "interpreted" by the staff (ie., "payyyyyy" = "pain")

"You have to dismiss quite a few people as lunatic idiots "

Lunatic idiots?...you certainly do keep raising the bar now don't you?

The words lunatic and idiots are yours, not mine. Those people, and you, see what you want to see, and believe what you want to believe, to support your claims. You cling to that .001% of a chance that somebody, anybody, might be wrong, saying, "We can never be 100% certain" -- as though certainty is a requirement.

Your statements are loaded with "could ofs" and "might ofs". Worse, they contain irrelevant and ugly gossip and innuendo as though they actually matter (Judge Greer's vision, for example).

You cite link after link, as though the sheer weight would influence me or others. Even when you posted an extract from those links, it was incomplete and totally out of context.

"Again...why would anyone give naproxen to a person who cannot feel pain? Terri was given this pain reliever "as needed"....how did they know how much she "needed"? Why did she "need" it at all?"

Whoa! Terri was given this pain reliever?? I thought the doctor's order was, "Monitor symptoms of pain/discomfort. If noted, medicate with Naproxen rectal suppository 375 mg. Q8 prn."

Was Terri ever given Naproxen (Aleve)? By who and what were these "symptoms"?

Terri had no cerebral cortex. Terri could not feel pain. Terri was not conscious (even when she was "awake").

Stop it with your insinuations. I'll ask again. Are you saying that YOU believe Terri could talk meaningful and appropriate words (not guttural noises)? That YOU believe she could voluntarily swallow?

"Yes, words as opposed to "noises" that are "interpreted" by the staff (ie., "payyyyyy" = "pain")"

Anytime anyone makes noises to anyone they are "interpreted"
Not just "payyy" - but also mommy, help me.

"Lunatic idiots?...you certainly do keep raising the bar now don't you?"

When you equate nurse's observations with ufo sighting I assume you must consider them lunatic idiots...yes

"Those people, and you, see what you want to see, and believe what you want to believe, to support your claims. "

According to you. I simply think people who signed affidavits under possible penalty of perjury could be telling the truth.
It appears to me that you see what you want and believe what you want. Pot calling the kettle black.

"You cling to that .001% of a chance that somebody, anybody, might be wrong, saying, "We can never be 100% certain" -- as though certainty is a requirement."

So now you're a statistician?
Yes - certainty should absolutely be a requirement in matters of life and death.

"Your statements are loaded with "could ofs" and "might ofs". Worse, they contain irrelevant and ugly gossip and innuendo as though they actually matter (Judge Greer's vision, for example)."

You don't like "could" or "might"...but you see...those are terms used by neurologists, therapists, and other experts on brain damage. If you read the links you will see that. If you are uncomfortable with uncertainty then don't read articles written by experts - because uncertainty is exactly what they describe.

As for your accusations of innuendo and gossip concerning Greer...his vision is a matter of public record that was reported in the mainstream news.

"You cite link after link, as though the sheer weight would influence me or others"

You asked for them and you got them. Now you are upset?
So sorry - I'll refrain from offering you what you ask for again.

"Even when you posted an extract from those links, it was incomplete and totally out of context."

It was not "completely and totally our of context" at all.
You offered another section for clarification and I responded to that....an examiner cannot "interpet" recorded behaviors when the records are thrown away in the trash.
That was the point.

"Whoa! Terri was given this pain reliever??"

Terri was given pain reliever for menstruation (according to staff affidavits and even an affidavit from one of Michael's ex-girlfriends)
She also received a bone scan after she expressed discomfort during a rehab session - and the bone scan confirmed she had injuries.

"Terri had no cerebral cortex. Terri could not feel pain. Terri was not conscious (even when she was "awake")."

Terri's brain was atrophied. You cannot possibly know if she felt pain. You cannot possibly know if was conscious or not.

"Not just "payyy" - but also mommy, help me."

Terri said, "Mommy, help me"? This is getting to be a little much, even from you.

"According to you. I simply think people who signed affidavits under possible penalty of perjury could be telling the truth."

Could? For the third time, are you saying that YOU believe Terri could talk meaningful and appropriate words (not guttural noises)? That YOU believe she could voluntarily swallow?

Why can't you answer these simple questions?

"Yes - certainty should absolutely be a requirement in matters of life and death."

Well, there goes our whole judicial system. Too late for Tookie, however -- he'd be a free man by your standards. As would everyone on death row, and in prison, and in jail.

Beyond a reasonable doubt? No more. You must be 100% certain.

I've never read such garbage.

"...his vision is a matter of public record that was reported in the mainstream news."

And what, pray tell, is the relevance?

"Terri was given pain reliever for menstruation"

Why? Did she request it?

"according to staff affidavits and even an affidavit from one of Michael's ex-girlfriends"

I missed the link to those staff affidavits and the link to the affidavit from the girlfriend. Please re-post it.

"You cannot possibly know if she felt pain. You cannot possibly know if was conscious or not."

Are you saying that YOU believe Terri felt pain? That YOU believe she was conscious?

" " This is getting to be a little much, even from you. " Not from me...from staff that worked with her and, of course, her family. AFFIDAVIT _________ STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. My name is Carla Sauer Iyer. I am over the age of eighteen and make this statement of my own personal knowledge. 2. I am a registered nurse in the State of Florida, having been licensed continuously in Florida from 1997 to the present. Prior to that I was a Licensed Practical Nurse for about four years. 3. I was employed at Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Florida from April 1995 to July 1996, while Terri Schiavo was a patient there. 4. It was clear to me at Palm Gardens that all decisions regarding Terri Schiavo were made by Michael Schiavo, with no allowance made for any discussion, debate or normal professional judgment. My initial training there consisted solely of the instruction "Do what Michael Schiavo tells you or you will be terminated." This struck me as extremely odd. -1- 5. I was very disturbed by the decision making protocol, as no allowance whatsoever was made for professional responsibility. The atmosphere throughout the facility was dominated by Mr. Schiavo's intimidation. Everyone there, with the exception of several people who seemed to be close to Michael, was intimidated by him. Michael Schiavo always had an overbearing attitude, yelling numerous times such things as "This is my order and you're going to follow it." He is very large and uses menacing body language, such as standing too close to you, getting right in your face and practically shouting. 6. To the best of my recollection, rehabilitation had been ordered for Terri, but I never saw any being done or had any reason at all to believe that there was ever any rehab of Terri done at Palm Gardens while I was there. I became concerned because Michael wanted nothing done for Terri at all, no antibiotics, no tests, no range of motion therapy, no stimulation, no nothing. Michael said again and again that Terri should NOT get any rehab, that there should be no range of motion whatsoever, or anything else. I and a CNA named Roxy would give Terri range of motion anyway. One time I put a wash cloth in Terri's hand to keep her fingers from curling together, -2- and Michael saw it and made me take it out, saying that was therapy. 7. Terri's medical condition was systematically distorted and misrepresented by Michael. When I worked with her, she was alert and oriented. Terri spoke on a regular basis while in my presence, saying such things as "mommy," and "help me." "Help me" was, in fact, one of her most frequent utterances. I heard her say it hundreds of times. Terri would try to say the word "pain" when she was in discomfort, but it came out more like "pay." She didn't say the "n" sound very well. During her menses she would indicate her discomfort by saying "pay" and moving her arms toward her lower abdominal area. Other ways that she would indicate that she was in pain included pursing her lips, grimacing, thrashing in bed, curling her toes or moving her legs around. She would let you know when she had a bowel movement by flipping up the covers and pulling on her diaper and scooted in bed on her bottom. 8. When I came into her room and said "Hi, Terri", she would always recognize my voice and her name, and would turn her head all the way toward me, saying "Haaaiiiii" sort of, as she did. I recognized this as a "hi", which is very close to what it sounded like, the whole sound -3- being only a second or two long. When I told her humrous stories about my life or something I read in the paper, Terri would chuckle, sometimes more a giggle or laugh. She would move her whole body, upper and lower. Her legs would sometimes be off the bed, and need to be repositioned. I made numerous entries into the nursing notes in her chart, stating verbatim what she said and her various behaviors, but by my next on-duty shift, the notes would be deleted from her chart. Every time I made a positive entry about any responsiveness of Terri's, someone would remove it after my shift ended. Michael always demanded to see her chart as soon as he arrived, and would take it in her room with him. I documented Terri's rehab potential well, writing whole pages about Terri's responsiveness, but they would always be deleted by the next time I saw her chart. The reason I wrote so much was that everybody else seemed to be afraid to make positive entries for fear of their jobs, but I felt very strongly that a nurses job was to accurately record everything we see and hear that bears on a patients condition and their family. I upheld the Nurses Practice Act, and if it cost me my job, I was willing to accept that. 9. Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused -4- on Terri's death. Michael would say "When is she going to die?," "Has she died yet?" and "When is that bitch gonna die?" These statements were common knowledge at Palm Gardens, as he would make them casually in passing, without regard even for who he was talking to, as long as it was a staff member. Other statements which I recall him making include "Can't anything be done to accelerate her death - won't she ever die?" When she wouldn't die, Michael would be furious. Michael was also adamant that the family should not be given information. He made numerous statements such as "Make sure the parents aren't contacted." I recorded Michael's statements word for word in Terri's chart, but these entries were also deleted after the end of my shift. Standing orders were that the family wasn't to be contacted, in fact, there was a large sign in the front of her chart that said under no circumstances was her family to be called, call Michael immediately, but I would call them, anyway, because I thought they should know about their daughter. 10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI or fluid buildup in her lungs, colds, or pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled even, hoping that she would die. He would say something like, -5- "Hallelujah! You've made my day!" He would call me, as I was the nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out "I'm going to be rich!" and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died, which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among other things. 11. When Michael visited Terri, he always came alone and always had the door closed and locked while he was with Terri. He would typically be there about twenty minutes or so. When he left Terri would be trembling, crying hysterically, and would be very pale and have cold sweats. It looked to me like Terri was having a hypoglycemic reaction, so I'd check her blood sugar. The glucometer reading would be so low it was below the range where it would register an actual number reading. I would put dextrose in Terri's mouth to counteract it. This happened about five times on my shift, as I recall. Normally Terri's blood sugar levels were very stable due to the uniformity of her diet through tube feeding. It is medically possible that Michael injected Terri with Regular insulin, which is very fast acting, but I don't have -6- any way of knowing for sure. 12. The longer I was employed at Palm Gardens the more concerned I became about patient care, both relating to Terri Schiavo, for the reasons I've said, and other patients, too. There was an LPN named Carolyn Adams, known as "Andy" Adams who was a particular concern. An unusual number of patients seemed to die on her shift, but she was completely unconcerned, making statements such as "They are old - let them die." I couldn't believe her attitude or the fact that it didn't seem to attract any attention. She made many comments about Terri being a waste of money, that she should die. She said it was costing Michael a lot of money to keep her alive, and that he complained about it constantly (I heard him complain about it all the time, too.) Both Michael and Adams said that she would be worth more to him if she were dead. I ultimately called the police relative to this situation, and was terminated the next day. Other reasons were cited, but I was convinced it was because of my "rocking the boat." 13. Ms. Adams was one of the people who did not seem to be intimidated by Michael. In fact, they seemed to be very close, and Adams would do whatever Michael told her. Michael sometimes called Adams at -7- night and spoke at length. I was not able to hear the content of these phone calls, but I knew it was him talking to her because she would tell me afterward and relay orders from him. 14. I have contacted the Schindler family because I just couldn't stand by and let Terri die without the truth being known. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 29 day of August, 2003, by CARLA SAUER IYER, R.N., who produced her Florida's driver's license as identification, and who did take an oath. Notary Public My commission expires

AFFIDAVIT _________ STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared HEIDI LAW who being first duly sworn deposes and says: 1. My name is Heidi Law, I am over the age of 18 years, and make this statement on personal information. 2. I worked as a Certified Nursing Assistant at the Palm Gardens nursing home from March, 1997 to mid-summer of 1997. While I was employed at Palm Gardens, occasionally I took care of Theresa Schiavo. Generally, I worked the 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. shift, but occasionally also would work a double shift, until 7 a.m. the following morning. 3. At Palm Gardens, most of the patient care was provided by the CNAs, so I was in a good position to judge Terri's condition and observe her reactions. Terri was noticeable, because she was the youngest patient at Palm Gardens. 4. I know that Terri did not receive routine physical therapy or any other kind of therapy. I was personally aware of orders for rehabilitation that were not being carried out. Even though they were ordered, Michael would stop them. Michael ordered that Terri receive no rehabilitation or range of motion therapy. I and Olga would give Terri range of motion anyway, but we knew we were endangering our jobs by doing so. We usually did this behind closed doors, we -1- were so fearful of being caught. Our hearts would race and we were always looking out for Michael, because we knew that, not only would Michael take his anger out on us, but he would take it out more on Terri. We spoke of this many times. 5. Terri had very definite likes and dislikes. Olga and I used to call Terri "Fancy Pants," because she was so particular about certain things. She just adored her baths, and was so happy afterward when she was all clean, smelling sweet from the lotion her mother provided, and wearing the soft nightgowns her mother laundered for her. Terri definitely did not like the taste of the teeth-cleaning swabs or the mouthwash we used. She liked to have her hair combed. She did not like being tucked in, and especially hated it if her legs were tightly tucked. You would always tell when Terri had a bowel movement, as she seem agitated and would sort of "scoot" to get away from it. 6. Every day, Terri was gotten up after lunch and sat in a chair all afternoon. When Terri was in bed, she very much preferred to lie on her right side and look out the window. We always said that she was watching for her mother. It was very obvious that her mother was her favorite person in the whole world. 7. I worked side-by-side with another CNA named Olga and could tell that she and Terri were especially close. Olga took a definite personal interest in Terri, and Terri responded to her. I could tell that Terri was very satisfied and happy with Olga's attentions to her. 8. When Olga was talking with Terri, Terri would follow Olga with her eyes. I have -2- no doubt in my mind that Terri understood what Olga was saying to her. I could tell a definite difference between the way Terri responded to Olga and the way she reacted to me, until she got used to my taking care of her. Initially, she "clammed up" with me, the way she would with anyone she did not know or was not familiar or comfortable with. It took about the fourth or fifth time taking care of her alone, without Olga, that Terri became relaxed and cooperative and non- resistant with me. 9. Terri reacted very well to seeing a picture of her mother, which was in her room. Many times when I came on duty it would be lying face down where she could not see it. 10. At least three times during any shift where I took care of Terri, I made sure to give Terri a wet washcloth filled with ice chips, to keep her mouth moistened. I personally saw her swallow the ice water and never saw her gag. Olga and I frequently put orange juice or apple juice in her washcloth to give her something nice to taste, which made her happy. On three or four occasions I personally fed Terri small mouthfuls of Jello, which she was able to swallow and enjoyed immensely. I did not do it more often only because I was so afraid of being caught by Michael. 11. On one occasion Michael Schiavo arrived with his girlfriend, and they entered Terri's room together. I heard Michael tell his girlfriend that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state and was dying. After they left, Olga told me that Terri was extremely agitated and upset, and wouldn't react to anyone. When she was -3- upset, which was usually the case after Michael was there, she would withdraw for hours. We were convinced that he was abusing her, and probably saying cruel, terrible things to her because she would be so upset when he left. 12. In the past, I have taken care of comatose patients, including those in a persistent vegetative state. While it is true that those patients will flinch or make sounds occasionally, they don't do it as a reaction to someone on a constant basis who is taking care of them, the way I saw Terri do. 13. I witnessed a priest visiting Terri a couple of times. Terri would become quiet when he prayed with her. She couldn't bow her head because of her stiff neck, but she would still try. During the prayer, she would keep her eyes closed, opening them afterward. She laughed at jokes he told her. I definitely know that Terri "is in there." 14. The Palm Gardens staff, myself included, were just amazed that a "Do Not Resuscitate" order had been put on Terri's chart, considering her age and her obvious cognitive awareness of her surroundings. 15. During the time I cared for Terri, she formed words. I have heard her say "mommy" from time to time, and "momma," and she also said "help me" a number of times. She would frequently make noises like she was trying to talk. Other staff members talked about her verbalizations. 16. Several times when Michael visited Terri during my shift, he went into her room alone and closed the door. This worried me because I didn't trust Michael. When he left, Terri was very agitated, was extremely tense with tightened fists and some -4- times had a cold sweat. She was much less responsive than usual and would just stare out the window, her eyes kind of glassy. It would take much more time and effort than usual to work her hands open to clean her palms. 17. I was told by supervisory staff that Michael was Terri's legal guardian, and that it didn't matter what the parents or the doctors or nurses wanted, just do what Michael told you to do or you will lose your job. Michael would override the orders of the doctors and nurses to make sure Terri got no treatment. Among the things that Terri was deprived of by Michael's orders were any kind of testing, dental care or stimulation. I was ordered by my supervisors to limit my time with Terri. I recall telling my supervisor that Terri seemed abnormally warm to the touch. I was told to pull her covers down, rather than to take her temperature. As far as I know, Terri never left her room. The only stimulation she had was looking out the window and watching things, and the radio, which Michael insisted be left on one particular station. She had a television, and there was a sign below it saying not to change the channel. This was because of Michael's orders. 18. As a CNA, I wanted every piece of information I could get about my patients. I never had access to medical records as a CNA, but it was part of my job duties to write my observations down on sheets of paper, which I turned over to the nurse at the nurses station for inclusion in the patients charts. In the case of Terri Schiavo, I felt that my notes were thrown out without even being read. There were trash cans at the nurses stations that we were supposed to empty each shift, -5- and I often saw the notes in them. I made extensive notes and listed all of Terri's behaviors, but there was never any apparent follow up consistent with her responsiveness. 19. I discussed this situation with other personnel at Palm Gardens, particularly with Olga, and another CNA, an older black man named Ewan Morris. We all discussed the fact that we could be fired for reporting that Terri was responsive, and especially for giving her treatment. The advice among the staff was "don't do nothin', don't see nothin' and don't say nothin'." It was particularly distressing that we always had to be afraid that if Michael got upset, he would take his anger out on Terri. 20. I recall an incident when Olga became very upset because Terri started to get a sore spot, because it might lead to a bedsore. Michael was told about it but didn't seem to care. he didn't complain about it at all, in fact, saying "she doesn't know the difference." When Terri would get a UTI or was sick, Michael's mood would improve. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. Heidi Law, Affiant -6- STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS Sworn to and subscribed before me this 30th day of August, 2003, by HEIDI LAW, who produced a Florida Driver's License as identification. Notary Public My Commission expires:

STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PINELLAS AFFIDAVIT _________ BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CAROLYN JOHNSON who being first duly sworn deposes and says: 1. My name is Carolyn Johnson, I am over the age of 18 years and make this statement on personal information. 2. I used to work at Sabal Palms nursing home in Largo, for a period of about two years. I actually was employed by a nursing agency and was placed at Sabal Palms as a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). I believe the events related here occurred in about 1993. 3. During this assignment I took care of Terri Schiavo several times. The first time I saw her my duties were being explained to me by the nurse on duty. Terri Schiavo was lying in bed. Another patient, also a young woman about the same age and in the same condition, was sitting up in a chair, with a drink cup and straw in front of her. 4. I asked why Terri was not up in a chair, too. I learned, as part of my training, that there was a family dispute and that the husband, as guardian, wanted no rehabilitation for Terri. This surprised me, as I Page 1 of 3 did not think a guardian could go against a doctor's orders like that, but I was assured that a guardian could and that this guardian had gone against Terri's doctor's orders. 5. No one was allowed to just go in and see Terri. Michael had a visitors list. We all knew that we would lose our jobs if we did not do exactly what Michael said to do. 6. I remember seeing Michael Schiavo only once the entire time I worked at Sabal Palms, but we were all aware that Terri was not to be given any kind of rehabilitative help, per his instructions. Once, I wanted to put a cloth in Terri's hand to keep her hand from closing in on itself, but I was not permitted to do this, as Michael Schiavo considered that to be a form of rehabilitation. 7. This entire experience made me look hard at nursing homes. After about two years, I quit this job, because I was so disillusioned with the way Terri was treated. Someone somewhere along the way should have reported this. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. Page 2 of 3 Carolyn Johnson, Affiant Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of August, 2003, by Carolyn Johnson who produced a Florida drivers license as identification. Notary Public My commission expires -------- Found here 76 posted on 10/23/2003 7:51:26 PM PDT by Aliska [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Hillarys Gate Cult; Admin Moderator Yeah, I should have blanked that one out. It's public knowledge however. Admin guy, please delete the post above with Carla Sauers address. Thanks. 77 posted on 10/23/2003 7:55:24 PM PDT by jwalsh07 [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies | Report Abuse ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: FatherOfLiberty; jwalsh07 Affidavit (transcribed from the online PDF file) of then (about 1993) nursing assistant Carolyn Johnson: AFFIDAVIT _________ STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF PINELLAS ) BEFORE ME the undersigned authority personally appeared CAROLYN JOHNSON, who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. My name is Carolyn Johnson. I am over the age of 18 years and make this statement of my own personal information. 2. I used to work at Sabal Palms nursing home in Largo, for a period of about two years. I actually was employed by a nursing agency and was placed at Sabal Palms as a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). I believe the events related here occurred in about 1993. 3. During this assignment I took care of Terri Schiavo several times. The first time I saw her, my duties were being explained to me by the nurse on duty. Terri Schiavo was lying in bed. Another patient, also a young woman about the same age and in the same condition, was sitting up in a chair, with a drink cup and straw in front of her. 4. I asked why Terri was not up in a chair, too. I learned, as part of my training, that there was a family dispute and that the husband, as guardian, wanted no rehabilitation for Terri. This surprised me, as I. - Page 1 of 3 - did not think a guardian could go against a doctor's orders like that, but I was assured that a guardian could and that this guardian had gone against Terri's doctor's orders. 5. No one was allowed to just go in and see Terri. Michael had a visitors list. We all knew that we would lose our jobs if we did not do exactly what Michael said to do, 6. I remember seeing Michael Schiavo only once the entire time I worked at Sabal Palms, but we were all aware that Terri was not to be given any kind of rehabilitative help, per his instructions. Once, I wanted to put a cloth in Terri's hand to keep her hand from closing in on itself, but I was not permitted to do this, as Michael Schiavo considered that to be a form of rehabilitation. 7. This entire experience made me look hard at nursing homes. After about two years, I quit this job, because I was so disillusioned with the way Terri was treated. Someone somewhere along the way should have reported this. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. - Page 2 of 3 - Carolyn Johnson, Affiant Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of August, 2003, by Carolyn Johnson who produced a Florida drivers license as identification. Notary Public My commission expires - Page 3 of 3 -

"Could? For the third time, are you saying that YOU believe Terri could talk meaningful and appropriate words (not guttural noises)? That YOU believe she could voluntarily swallow?"

Why does it matter to you what I think?
It doesn't matter what I think - or what you think.
What matters is what is true and what is not true.

What is true is that there is a CHANCE she could speak - because staff and family members claim they heard her speak.
A court appointed guardian felt she might have benefitted from a swallowing test - and this request was ignored.
Voluntary swallowing could have come after receiving therapy - something which Terri was denied.

So the truth is that we'll never know important answers to important questions - questions that should have been looked at very carefully prior to starving and dehydrating someone.
It doesn't matter if noises were "gutteral" (although the affidavits claim they were not) - if they were intentional then she should have been considered responsive.
People with brain injury often make gutteral noises and these noises can be intentional.
"Yes - certainty should absolutely be a requirement in matters of life and death."

Well, there goes our whole judicial system. Too late for Tookie, however -- he'd be a free man by your standards. As would everyone on death row, and in prison, and in jail.

Beyond a reasonable doubt? No more. You must be 100% certain.

I've never read such garbage."

The cases of death-row criminals get reviewed over and over.
When new evidence or new witnesses come forward the cases get reviewed again from the beginning.

It happens all the time. It did not happen in Terri's case.
If this is "garbage" then so be it."

"And what, pray tell, is the relevance? "

Did you or did you not accuse me of innuendo and gossip?
This was reported in the mainstream news- clearly you missed it.
It would have been nice if a person with sight had bothered to pay Terri a visit - to view videotape - to be able to review countless documents without having to have them read to him (can one man really retain all these documents in his memory?)
That's the relevance.

"Why? Did she request it? "

The staff members believed she did...yes.
Again...why would anyone give pain reliever to a person who supposedly cannot feel anything?
When Terri was dying of dehydration the staff administered two morphine suppositories.

"I missed the link to those staff affidavits and the link to the affidavit from the girlfriend. Please re-post it."

You want a link? Are you kidding?
The affidavits have been reposted from an earlier Freeper thread.
The ex-girlfriend is Trudy Capone, I am sure you are capable of finding her with google.

"Are you saying that YOU believe Terri felt pain? That YOU believe she was conscious?"

It doesn't matter what I think.
No one ever proved that Terri could not feel pain - that she was not conscious.
No one ever proved she wanted to be starved and dehydrated to death if she becamed brain-injured.
No one even bothered giving her up-to-date neuroimaging.

I think this case shows why written directives should be absolutely required -and hearsay evidence be disallowed.
Starving and dehydrating patients who have not been proven to be unaware is cruel.

As far as I can tell all you've brought to the table here is alot of attitude -for which you receive high marks, but I do not see where you have proven Terri was unaware or that her vague statement (conveniently remembered after the malpractice suit) had anything to do with food and water.

"Why does it matter to you what I think?"

Well, you pointed me to a link that made the statement, " However, interpretations made by observers may well be biased and the assessor should make her or his own interpretation."

You've posted three depositions which list observations made by three different people. I'm simply asking for your interpretation of these observations.

Terri appeared to be able to talk and voluntarily swallow, according to one deposition. I'm asking you for the fourth time, do you interpret the observation that way -- could Terri talk and voluntarily swallow?

Why are you so reluctant to answer this? Either you believe the deposition or you don't. If you believe the deposition, then you believe Terri could talk and voluntarily swallow.

If you don't believe the deposition, then a) why did you post it and b) we agree after all.

"A court appointed guardian felt she might have benefitted from a swallowing test - and this request was ignored. Voluntary swallowing could have come after receiving therapy - something which Terri was denied."

Might have? Could have? Oh, please.

Maybe it's might NOT have and could NOT have. We can play that game forever. You got nothing.

"If this is "garbage" then so be it."

Then so be it. You're asking for 100% certainty, a standard we do not use on anyone, anywhere, any time in our judicial system. But you want that standard for Terri and, not getting it, cry fowl. That's bull$hit.

"Did you or did you not accuse me of innuendo and gossip?"

You bet I did. Wear it with pride.

"This was reported in the mainstream news- clearly you missed it."

The fact was reported, and I did indeed read it. I have yet to see the relevance.

"It would have been nice if a person with sight had bothered to pay Terri a visit - to view videotape - to be able to review countless documents without having to have them read to him (can one man really retain all these documents in his memory?)"

Oh, wouldn't you have had a field day with that one!! A judge having the audacity to play doctor and come to some medical conclusion on his own. You are something else.

As to his supposed problem with reading and comprehension, do you have any proof that this WAS a problem? Or are you just guessing?

"Again...why would anyone give pain reliever to a person who supposedly cannot feel anything?"

Because THEY thought she was in "payyyyy". I'm asking if you believe Terri was in pain. That you believe she felt pain.

No one ever proved that Terri could not feel pain - that she was not conscious."

That was the conclusion reached by the neurologists, and that constitutes proof in the legal system, not your standard of 100% certainty.

"No one ever proved she wanted to be starved and dehydrated to death if she becamed brain-injured."

The conclusion reached by an impartial judge was that Terri did not want to live that way. Starving and dehydration are the natural result of removing a surgically implanted feeding tube.

"I think this case shows why written directives should be absolutely required -and hearsay evidence be disallowed."

First, it wasn't "hearsay" evidence. That's something different. Second, take it up with the citizens of Florida who want verbal wishes to receive the same weight as written ones.

"Starving and dehydrating patients who have not been proven to be unaware is cruel."

Are you saying that you believe Terri was aware and could feel pain? Or are you just making a generalized statement?

"As far as I can tell all you've brought to the table here is alot of attitude"

And facts. Don't forget those. As far as I can tell all you've brought to the table here is alot of speculation. What if, might of, could of ... blah, blah, blah. Boring.

You have no idea if these ladies are whack jobs or not.
It is not true no one else observed these things...they confirm each other - and they confirm Terri's family's observations. You don't know if no one else saw these things.
At one time Michael also described Terri as responsive -back when it was useful for her to be responsive (during the malpractice trial)

"I'm simply asking for your interpretation of these observations."

They confirm each other. They describe an atmosphere of intimidation - destruction of observation notes.
It is difficult for anyone to interpret anything when critical material is thrown away.
If what these ladies describe is true - not only has a terrrible mistake been made - but crimes have been committed by those who would slter/destroy medical records.

"Terri appeared to be able to talk and voluntarily swallow, according to one deposition. I'm asking you for the fourth time, do you interpret the observation that way -- could Terri talk and voluntarily swallow?"

If Terri appeared to be able to talk and voluntarily swallow as described by staff, family, and even her own husband (prior to winning the malpractice suit) then yes...I would tend to believe she was capable of these things.
If she was not capable of these things - at the very least Terri should have received up to date neuro-imaging and a swallowing test.
There are some basic things that could have been done to help clear up controversy.
If Michael was truly seeking the truth of his wife's condition he would not have objected to up to date MRI, PET scan, and updated brain wave test that measures more than the previous EEG. He would not have objected to a swallowing test.
Why would anyone object to tests that could clarify someone's condition?

"Why are you so reluctant to answer this? Either you believe the deposition or you don't. If you believe the deposition, then you believe Terri could talk and voluntarily swallow"

Unlike you I am not willing to simply write off people I disagree with as "whack jobs".
Unlike you - I don't pretend to know what I don't know.
Whether or not I believe Terri could or could not talk has no bearing on the truth of whether Terri actually could or could not talk.
My position on the matter is this....since it looks like there are witnesses (who would know better than I) who observed this behavior with Terri - then Terri should have received updated diagnostic tests.
Terri did not received updated diagnostic tests -so no one will ever really know what she was capable of.

"Might have? Could have? Oh, please.

Maybe it's might NOT have and could NOT have. We can play that game forever. You got nothing."

Here we go again with the attitude.
Yes...MIGHT have. This comes from the court appointed guardian.
Why would the court appoint a guardian, just to ignore that same guardian's recommedations?
You clearly don't like words like "might" "may" and so on....
You seem to think this is all cut and dry - black and white.
It isn't.
Many questions remained about her condition. The guardian attempted to clear up some questions with a test.
Why is it so hard to see a simple test could have answered an important question?

"Then so be it. You're asking for 100% certainty, a standard we do not use on anyone, anywhere, any time in our judicial system. But you want that standard for Terri and, not getting it, cry fowl. That's bull$hit."

How many men on death row do you think are innocent?
I would guess not many.
I would guess that those who actually make it to the death chamber have exhausted the process of review and re-review.
When new witnesses and new evidence surface in their cases - their cases get looked at again from the very beginning.
This is the standard Terri should have received...but did not.
Swearing on your part doesn't change that.

"You bet I did. Wear it with pride"

I'll bet you are...despite the fact your accusation was false.
Judge Greer IS legally blind.

"Oh, wouldn't you have had a field day with that one!! A judge having the audacity to play doctor and come to some medical conclusion on his own. You are something else."

Judges are supposed to review as much evidence as possible in their attempts to arrive at the correct decision.
This judge did have audacity. He fired his own guardian that he appointed when he didn't like the guardian's recommendations. He then broke Florida law by appointing himself Terri's guardian (judges cannot appoint themselves guardian-at-litum in cases they preside over).
After this, he STILL did not visit Terri. Of course...he couldn't see her even if he did.

"As to his supposed problem with reading and comprehension, do you have any proof that this WAS a problem? Or are you just guessing?"

Look it up...you will see he has to have documents read to him. He admitted to mistakes.
I am not guessing - I've simply done more reading than you have.

"Because THEY thought she was in "payyyyy". I'm asking if you believe Terri was in pain. That you believe she felt pain."

I believe that when a patient is given pain reliever it is because they think the patient is in pain.
I think that when a rehabilition specialist orders a bone scan because he believes he has detected pain in his patient - it is because she is in pain.
I believe that when a bone scan confirms the presence of serious painful injuries...it confirms the patient's expression of pain.

I believe that when a patient is given morphine...it is because the staff thinks she is pain.

She was not treated likes someone who could not feel anything.

"That was the conclusion reached by the neurologists, and that constitutes proof in the legal system, not your standard of 100% certainty."

We went over this already. Three out of five neurologists reached this conclusion. Critical diagnostic tools were denied.
If this is the standard for our legal system - then the standard needs to be changed.

"First, it wasn't "hearsay" evidence. That's something different. Second, take it up with the citizens of Florida who want verbal wishes to receive the same weight as written ones."

Yes..it indeed does qualify as "hearsay".
Anytime someone testifies to what they heard someone else say, it falls under the legal definition of "hearsay".
Second....hopefully the rest of the nation will refrain from looking to Florida as a trendsetter here.
Allowing hearsay as evidence offers many opportunities for abuse, misrepresentation, and misinterpretation.
Written directives should be the only evidence allowed.

"Are you saying that you believe Terri was aware and could feel pain? Or are you just making a generalized statement?"

Throughout Terri's entire ordeal she received pain medicine. If the staff truly thought this was a person who could not feel pain - why give it to her?
Yes...because THEY obviously thought she was in pain, it is reasonable to conclude she was capable of feeling pain.

"And facts. Don't forget those. As far as I can tell all you've brought to the table here is alot of speculation. What if, might of, could of ... blah, blah, blah. Boring"

Very funny coming from the guy who gets upset when links are supplied for him to read - and then refuses to read them.
I find your bluster boring as well.

Merry Christmas.

"If Terri appeared to be able to talk and voluntarily swallow as described by staff, family, and even her own husband (prior to winning the malpractice suit) then yes...I would tend to believe she was capable of these things."

I see. You believe the unbiased family, but refuse to even consider the testimony of those lying doctors.

"Why would anyone object to tests that could clarify someone's condition?"

Because they'd show nothing and were merely a time-delay tactic. If Terri couldn't pass the swallow tests in 1990, 1991, and 1992, why would you expect a test in 2005 to show a different result? Did ANY of Terri conditions improve over the 15 years?

"He then broke Florida law by appointing himself Terri's guardian"

Proof?

"Look it up...you will see he has to have documents read to him."

I'll ask again. Did that affect the case?

"He admitted to mistakes."

Mistakes? Plural? I know he admitted to one, and that had NOTHING to do with his vision. What are the other mistakes?

"Anytime someone testifies to what they heard someone else say, it falls under the legal definition of "hearsay"."

Baloney. The testimony regarding Terri's statements were not hearsay, since they were offered to prove she said those words, not to prove that what she said was true. Hearsay is an out of court assertion offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

"Jack told me he knew who the killer was" is not hearsay. "Jack told me the killer was Bill" is hearsay in Bill's murder trial.

"Yes...because THEY obviously thought she was in pain, it is reasonable to conclude she was capable of feeling pain."

And if the neurologists concluded she was NOT in pain, then what? You're pretty selective as to who you believe.

"I see. You believe the unbiased family, but refuse to even consider the testimony of those lying doctors."

I see, you believe the family are liars, that Michael is unbiased, and that 2 of the 5 doctors are liars as well.
You refuse to consider the testimony of her own family,good friends, hospital staff, and doctors who disagreed.You refuse to consider the possibility that her family just may have been right about her, and Judge Greer just may have gotten it wrong.

"Because they'd show nothing and were merely a time-delay tactic."

According to Judge Greer. In that case he should never have bothered appointing a guardian at-litum as he never intended to act on the guardian's recommendations anyways.

" Did ANY of Terri conditions improve over the 15 years? "

Probably not considering she did not receive any of the therapy her unbiased husband fought so hard for.
If there were any notes describing any responsiveness from Terri they found their way to the circular files. Oh THAT'S RIGHT - those ladies are whack jobs....proof?

""He then broke Florida law by appointing himself Terri's guardian""

Your lack of research is not my burden.
It is a matter of public record.
Look it up.
Besides, you get cranky when I post links.

"Baloney."

Nope. Your distinctions don't hold water.
Michael's testimonoy...hearsay.
Michael's brother and sister-in-law...hearsay.
Terri's best friend who testified Terri disapproved of the parents' decision in the Quinlan case...hearsay
Michael's ex-girlfriend's affidavit...hearsay.

Again...no one ever claimed to know what Terri would have wanted in this situation. The statement Michael offered was vague and had nothing to do with brain injury, denial of therapy, dehydration or starvation.

And if the neurologists concluded she was NOT in pain, then what? You're pretty selective as to who you believe.

Did you just use the word IF???
I thought you didn't like words like that.

Terri was never treated like a person who could not feel pain.
Throughout her ordeal she was treated with pain medicine.
When she expressed pain during therapy a bone scan was ordered confirming the cause of her pain.

"And if the neurologists concluded she was NOT in pain, then what? You're pretty selective as to who you believe.

Did you just use the word IF???"

Sorry, your style is contagious. SINCE the neurologists concluded she was not in pain, now what? You're pretty selective as to who you believe.

"I see, you believe the family are liars, that Michael is unbiased, and that 2 of the 5 doctors are liars as well."

I believe the family was biased, and saw what they wanted to see. I ask you, did Terri's eyes really follow the balloon (as shown on the video), or did her mother move the balloon to match Terri's eye movements? Since Terri was as blind as a bat, what her mother did was a lie, now wasn't it? And her mother lied on the stand, and later retracted her statement, didn't she? So yeah, her family were liars.

Michael was biased how? He took Terri's case to the courts and asked the judge to make a decision. It was out of Michael's hands.

As to your two "doctors", one carefully couched his opinion and the other embarrassed himself by a) providing no documentation and b) stating that he's waiting for his UN Man-of-the-Year award, or somesuch. Another psycho whackjob. You like these people, huh?

Oh, not that you, personally, believe them. Heaven forbid I should suggest THAT! You're merely presenting their side for consideration. Lord, save us.

"You refuse to consider the testimony of her own family,good friends, hospital staff, and doctors who disagreed."

Not at all. I did consider the testimony. I found it not credible, that's all.

"... and Judge Greer just may have gotten it wrong."

Where were all of Terri's "family, good friends, hospital staff, and doctors who disagreed" during the 2000 hearing to decide Terri's fate? Where were they, Scotswife"? Why didn't they take the stand and tell what they knew under oath? Where was their support WHEN IT COUNTED?

No, afterwords, here they are in public, making statements, signing depositions, swearing to affidavits, getting in front of cameras, doing interviews, yada, yada.

What a bunch of bull. But I'm supposed to believe them? I'm supposed to give credence to their utterances? No ... way.

"Probably not considering she did not receive any of the therapy her unbiased husband fought so hard for."

No "probably" about it. She couldn't swallow in 1990, 1991, and 1992. She couldn't in 2005. Stop it with your suppositions when you have nothing to back it up. You're wasting my time.

"those ladies are whack jobs....proof?"

Michael injected Terri with insulin in an attempt to murder her? Nuff said.

"Besides, you get cranky when I post links."

1,000 lnks, yeah. One link, no. Of course, you don't have that link becausae it doesn't exist. And we both know that.

"Michael's testimonoy...hearsay."

WTF? I just gave you the legal definition of hearsay, which Michael's testimony (and others) was not, and you sit there like petulant child and re-type your exact same statement? That's supposed to convince me? Don't you want to, maybe, also put it in bold caps? For emphasis?

"When she expressed pain during therapy a bone scan was ordered confirming the cause of her pain."

And I dance in a circle in my backyard every morning to keep the elephants away. It works. No elephants around here.

The word "coincidence" ever occur to you? Given all this "testimony" as to people witnessing Terri in pain, the fact that a so-called "expression of pain" coincided once with a positive bone scan is not indicative of anything.

Not that you, personally, believe that yourself.

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.