Are you a lawyer? You are presuming to know better than the judge on matters of law.
Is the judge really "legally blind"? If so, how does this affect the outcome of this case? And when weighing matters like this, you either believe one side or the other, you can't take both sides. I guess you're right, he called all of those people on the Schindler's side liars. Have you examined them personally to determine that they are not? The judge probably did not either. He made a decision based on what he found was the most compelling evidence. The same way you are. Somehow, Sam, at some point this just comes down to a matter that someone with the authority to make decisions legally, made a legal decision, and that's about it. There's no conspiracy, no real activism, and this is not the earth-shattering case that everyone would like to believe it is. This is simply a matter of guardianship. One more thing to ponder- the predominately Supreme Court didn't find it worthy of their time, did they? - Matt Small -----Original Message----- From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 5:07 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: 2 Branches of Gov't Enough. Only one Judge decided she was PVS and that allowed him to order her death. The only thing the other judges decided on whether Michael Shiavo was legal guardian. When so many people claim she's responsive but the judge claims they must all be lying, isn't it his responsibility to visit her himself? Especially since he appointed himself guardian and as such declared she didn't need counsel. But since he's legally blind he never saw the videotapes and must have felt there was no point visiting her in person. On Apr 7, 2005 12:51 PM, Matthew Small wrote: > OK... > > Please still explain to me how this is an activist judge. Also, would not > this be the equivalent of a civil "double jeopardy"? If the Schindlers were > allowed to present these 33 doctors, do you think that it's possible that > Mike Schiavo be able to find 100 doctors that support him? This is like > leaving the schoolyard fight, bloodied and mad, and returning with a gun to > shoot the guy who beat you up using his fists. Is it possible that judge > may have felt this way? > > I know and understand that this is much more than that. However, I'm > absolutely certain that throughout the incredibly long process that this > whole drama contained, it was done lawfully and with thoughtful > consideration of a person's life by the many judges who sat in on this case. > Somehow I feel it escapes those who side with the Schindlers that these > judges are people who also have families and sick family members and must > make the most gut-wrenching decisions within the boundaries of the law. > > While I believe and know that there is an incredible amount of corruption in > this world, I find it difficult to believe that anybody would find the need > to put this woman away, a woman who was likely to never utter another > coherent word, and therefore engineer some sort of conspiracy to kill her, > or make a new point of law. > > What's more, second-guessing the judge and/or reversing that judge's > decision removes that judge's authority. Do that enough, and it leads to a > lawless place, which I am sure that nobody wants to live in. > > Anyway, Dana is right about one thing - what Tom Delay said sounded like a > threat, whether or not it was. I'm sure that his words are even now > spurring on action that put the judges' lives at stake. > > - Matt Small > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase Captivate from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=52 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:153117 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
