Posted on 04/15/2005 1:05:20 PM PDT by phenn
"and has spent most of the money on lawyers"
"Geez, I wonder why?"
The money from the insurance company was SUPPOSED to be used for Therapy, as MS had promised them he would do, not to have her murdered. Here's another cut paste you like so much from his testimony to the insurance company, before the Shindler's knew what a monster that guy is/was.
Back when he SOUNDED like the loving husband.
"November 1992
Q. Why did you want to learn to be a nurse?
MS. Because I enjoy it and I want to learn more how to take care of Terri.
Q. You're a young man. Your life is ahead of you. When you look up the road, what do you see for yourself?
MS. I see myself hopefully finishing school and taking care of my wife.
Q. Where do you want to take care of your wife?
MS. I want to bring her home.
Q. If you had the resources available to you, if you had the equipment and the people, would you do that?
MS. Yes, I would, in a heartbeat.
Q. How do you feel about being married to Terri now.
MS. I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't trade her for the world. I believe in my marriage vows.
I originally said that they had a falling out because the Schindlers wanted half of Michael's loss of consortium award. Your post merely reinforces my statement.
How could you say it says nothing when in fact it says very clearly that it was ONLY Michaels PERSPECTIVE that the falling out was about the loss of consortium money. It goes on to say that the Shindlers had a different PERSPECTIVE on what the falling out was about and that was that Michael failed to honor his commitment to spend the money on Terri as he promised he would. How is it that Michaels perspective becomes fact for you, Judge Greer and the St Pete Times?
Are you just refusing to see what is clearly placed in front of your eyes or are you that dense.
Why don't you reference the court document that actually says something?
"On February 14, 1993, this amicable relationship between the parties was severed. While the testimony differs on what may or may not have been promised to whom and by whom, it is clear to this court that such severance was predicated upon money and the fact that Mr. Schiavo was unwilling to equally divide his loss of consortium award with Mr. and Mrs. Schindler."
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/trialctorder02-00.pdf
What type of therapy should he have continued and why?
She failed swallow tests in 1991, 1992, and 1993.
No difference.
"Significantly, in the Browning case, the Florida Supreme Court found that the right attaches, so long as "the patient has expressed his or her desires in a 'living will,' through oral declarations, or by the written designation of a proxy to make all health care decisions in these circumstances."
You are f$%^ing unbelievable! I give you cites and court documents to back up my statements and your only response is "Those people are lying"?
Well, if you refuse to acknowledge the facts and insist that everyone is lying, I'm done with you on this thread. What's the point?
The feeling is mutual - only it is you have have chosen to ignore the data that I presented to you. The courts looked at the same data and ignored what was presented. You are just continuing down the same path. So it is pointless to continue as you are too blind to see that which does not fit your holy view the Judge the almighty do not wrong Greer.
"She failed swallow tests in 1991, 1992, and 1993."
According to the neurologists and nurses, she could swallow but they were ORDERED not to feed her by her "loving husband" PB. Isn't that strange? Geez depends on who gave those swallow tests, doesn't it?
Well I guess the good old Florida Supreme court decided it was time to legislate from the bench. I noticed that the petitioner on this case was non other than George Felos. Man he is a busy man working so hard to get the laws changed in Florida so we can all part take of his grand euthanasia plan.
That's just a plain old garden variety out and out lie. Thankfully only .01% of the FReepers here are promoting it.
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.