Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - Comatose Woman's Parents Hope for Legal Help

- Tilted Politics (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/)

- - Comatose Woman's Parents Hope for Legal Help (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/31938-comatose-womans-parents-hope-legal-help.html)

'his opinion was based on seeing her eyes reflexively follow the light"

Pens do not emit light, family member are not light sources.

"I'm not sure how you can even say it was a professional opinion?"

Because he is an MD. And i don't see any evidence of him "using" her for political gain. He's a politician who stood up for something he believed - as a person, a physician, and incidentally a politician. How has he gained politically form this? There was no concrete evidence of what Terri's wishes were other than Michael Shiavo. Any particular reason other than your politics you chose to take his word as gospel.

I don't know what medical devices could be used to determine ones eyesight or lack thereof on someone in Terri's condition while still alive, but something seems a bit odd that this info required an autopsy. "Well this is what we think, let's kill her and find out if were right." Point being, their shouldn't be any groundbreaking findings at autopsy, and those who advocated for her death - should have had all the proof they needed prior to removing her tube. This seems to me to be the issue. Both sides acted on a "leap of faith" in some respect. This is where "erring on the side of life" comes from. It's not a political talking point. The implications would have gone no further than this case. It seems to me its the lefts fear of this simple phrase, that motivates their position in this case. Remind me again whose politically motived here. Michael Shiavo and her physicians should not be in a position where they are breathing a sigh of relief at her autopsy findings. But

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew330

I don't know what medical devices could be used to determine ones eyesight or lack thereof on someone in Terri's condition while still alive, but something seems a bit odd that this info required an autopsy. "Well this is what we think, let's kill her and find out if were right." Point being, their shouldn't be any groundbreaking findings at autopsy, and those who advocated for her death - should have had all the proof they needed prior to removing her tube. This seems to me to be the issue. Both sides acted on a "leap of faith" in some respect. This is where "erring on the side of life" comes from. It's not a political talking point. The implications would have gone no further than this case. It seems to me its the lefts fear of this simple phrase, that motivates their position in this case. Remind me again whose politically motived here. Michael Shiavo and her physicians should not be in a position where they are breathing a sigh of relief at her autopsy findings. But

Micheal Shiavo said she had severe brain damage, and would never wake up again. Every doctor that examined her (extensively!) agreed. Every court agreed. The autopsy agreed. The only people that disagreed were the parents, and they turned out to be wrong.

So there wasn't any groundbreaking findings, *unless* you believed (against all medical evidence) that she was still a-okay. "they" didn't kill her to find out if they were right; they *knew* they were right, and stopped her suffering.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaniFaye

I dont call it preaching to the choir, there was quite a debate going a few months ago....whats wrong with updating people on the end? No matter the outcome I would have posted it so it had nothing to do with "vindication".

Its sad that you thought it was BS, but that doesnt mean that everyone with an opinion on it thought that.

Dear lady, I know I want to submit to you, but I find that I can't. At the risk of further feeding and fertilizing the foolishness, this issue had absolutely no place in public discourse. It was adequately determined under Florida law, and, other than the understandable if misguided desparation of her parents, any opinions voiced to the contrary were mere political grandstanding to distract the center from the truely pressing issues of the day, and to solidify the rabid religious fringe in their support for the republican leadership.

While I find it inevitable that there would be an update, and I thank you for it, it is not a comment on Terri Schaivo, per se, but on the media circus she became the center of. When the sole dissenter thus far has the breathtaking perspicacity to point out that, of course the autopsy found she was brain dead, because autopsies are only performed on corpses, I think you can safely say that there is no further argument, merely spin.

"but on the media circus she became the center of.." One side cared about her, one side cared about the implication of what would become of "erring on the side of life. You have taken it upon yourselves to judge her parents as "misguided" because your politics force you to side with someone who threatened nurses (who spend far more time with patients than physicians) who attempted to give physical therapy to Terri. You have taken it upon yourselves to call doctors who disagreed with the few doctors Michael shiavo allowed to attend to her, the "worst doctors in the world." There is one side who felt political beliefs were enough to take a firm medical position in a case they know nothing about (read back - who here is making doctors of themselves).

"I think you can safely say that there is no further argument, merely spin." Convenient place to put your highness on, considering any further argument that may lead you to think differently would force you to accept your culpability in killing another human being. If it wasn't your politics that forced your opinion on the matter, it came down to "would i want to live like that." Your politics don't make you physicians, and there is no way you could possibly put yourself in Terri's situation and decide "what you would want." None of you know what she was going through - but all of you were comfortable pretending like you did, and taking a stance on Terri's fate.

As long as you can protect yourselves from accepting the possiblity that perhaps a life was unnecessarily taken by going back and forth from calling that life "brain dead" to "suffering (please explain to me how exactly)", and by putting those who believe as i do as "fringe lunatics", so be it.

Perhaps there will be a time when you won't view one's appreciation and reverence for life as "breathtaking perspicacity."

Frist is an MD who made a diagnosis - one contrary to the opinions of EVERY single physician to actually examine the patient - from virtually no evidence. And guess what? He was wrong, the attending physicians were somehow right. And his diagnosis just happened to advance his political argument.

Come on, we all know why he made his "diagnosis" that lacked any legitimate basis.

Also, I'm all for more extensive rules regarding the signing of DNR forms and reform of the system - the courts shouldn't have to make as many decisions regarding these things as they do. But Frist was clearly full of shit and you, matthew, who insist that those with opposing viewpoints are culpable for murder, accuse us of being politically motivated when we say so.

I'll take the empirical evidence of a nurses testimony who spends 8 hours a day with her then a neurologists opinion on the most complicated, least understood organ in the human body (edit: who generally spend 45mins to an hour with their patients once a month or on an as needed basis).

You insist Frist "diagnosed" her. I work in a hospital. I've spoken to doctors, most of whom disagree with you. Because they had an opinion - did they "diagnose" her? Do you know what a diagnosis is?

Let me ask you something guy44 - what was Terri Schiavo's diagnosis prior to death? Not her prognosis - her diagnosis. Should be an easy enough question for someone some firm in their belief that she should have died.

This thread got heated the first time around.

This will NOT happen again.

Be civil to each other as you disagree or else.

You've been warned.

It is sad we cannot leave this lady to rest in peace, both sides now have to point fingers and say see...... see what, I ask.

From the way news reports are coming out on her autoposy leads me to believe they are going to say her husband beat her and put her in that condition, in essence murdering her. To paraphrase what I heard, "She had brain damage caused by lack of blood and oxygen the cause yet undetermined." Yet during the media circus this was all due to an eating disorder she had trying to keep her husband.

Personally, I believe there was a motive by the GOP to turn this into a media circus, this was made political by the GOP and ended with the GOP blaming judges, yelling for their heads. Nice way to get control of the one branch you don't have.

Blame the husband, find a way you can say he put her in that position and "redeem" your stances. IMHO.

Lest we forget there was a soul involved and like any she needs to be just left to rest in peace.

Matthew, first of all, I don't want anyone to die. I do believe in the right to die, euthenasia. I'll take a neurologist's opinion, as well as the conclusive autopsy report, over the opinion of a nurse any day of the week. The fact is, and it is a fact, Terry was in a persistent vegitative state. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

I suspect that many are of the opinion that medical science is "only a theory" and much of it's body of knowledge, including the practice of pathology, "cannot be proven".

Many medical outcomes, seem to some to be beyond the realm of the expertise of practitioners, since they could not, left to themselves, achieve such a high level of proficiency just 6000 years after the lord created the heavens and the earth.

Face it, people, when you post autopsy results as vindication, you are preaching only to the choir. Ten effing pages of this B.S. thread, a distraction from all of the pressing problems related to our lives, and here I am, feeding it, too.
Sheesh!!

Trolling responses are not a way to promote civil discussion. If you're going to criticize the other side, criticize something they said, not something you inferred based on your own opinions and an assumption of their motives if they were to make a statement that they did not actually make.

CNN story

Gov. Jeb Bush asked a prosecutor Friday to investigate why Terri Schiavo collapsed 15 years ago, calling into question how long it took her husband to call 911 after he found her.

In a letter faxed to Pinellas-Pasco County State Attorney Bernie McCabe, Bush said Michael Schiavo testified in a 1992 medical malpractice trial that he found his wife collapsed at 5 a.m., and he said in a 2003 television interview that he found her about 4:30 a.m. He called 911 at 5:40 a.m.

"Between 40 and 70 minutes elapsed before the call was made, and I am aware of no explanation for the delay," Bush wrote. "In light of this new information, I urge you to take a fresh look at this case without any preconceptions as to the outcome."

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Friday from The Associated Press. In comments in The Miami Herald, he said Terri Schiavo would not have survived if her husband had not immediately called 911.

"It's absolutely preposterous," Felos said. "If he had waited 70 minutes she would have been dead."

Terri Schiavo died March 31 from dehydration after her feeding tube was disconnected at her husband's request, despite unsuccessful efforts by her parents, Bush and others to keep her alive.

An autopsy released Wednesday concluded that she had been in a persistent vegetative state and revealed no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused before she collapsed.

It left unanswered the question of why Terri Schiavo's heart stopped, cutting oxygen off from her brain. The autopsy showed she suffered irreversible brain damage and her brain had shrunk to half the normal size for her age.

This is a big mistake for Jeb Bush. To me he's clearly a political tool for the religious right, and nothing more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by meembo

This is a big mistake for Jeb Bush. To me he's clearly a political tool for the religious right, and nothing more.

I agree completely. The parents have a right to know? As if the autopsy doesn't spell it out. Inconsitencies between a TV interview and deposition of anywhere from 30-70 minutes from 15 years ago.

What a hack. He really bothered me during this fiasco, and now he's just clearly a puppet.

Hey maybe he just likes having hands up his ass. I doubt it, but maybe.

-bear

So Michael Shiavo has decided to bury Terry in Florida, away from her family. Put her date of death as 1990 on her tombstone, and "time she was at peace" as march 31'st. To top it all off he says "I kept my promise."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/20/schiavo.ap/index.html

Real standup guy. I have no doubt he "kept his promise". What promise you ask? I'm certain he never "promised" her that he would remove her feeding tube. Prior to this, how many of you have considered life/death situation seriously enough to "promise" what you would do without without putting it in writing? His callous attitude toward the family
This was clearly a last jab at the family of someone he "loved." He was an ass that didn't give an inch for the people that had no motivation for their actions other than love for their daughter, and it resulted in the death of Terri Schiavo.

Yup, that cocksucker kept his promise.

p.s. - as much as this story disturbs me, Terri Schiavo was never a "distraction" from the "more" pressing issues of the day, so please save it. Perhaps your ideology limits you to one thought at a time...mine doesn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew330

That guy is evil to the core. I'm just speechless about the death date on the tombstone. :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by samcol

That guy is evil to the core. I'm just speechless about the death date on the tombstone. :eek:

why? the body might have survived, but everything that made her who she was died that day. mourn the woman, not the shell.

"he body might have survived, but everything that made her who she was died that day."

Perhaps if Mr. Shiavo had allowed rehab like her parent's wanted.........who knows.

All you have to go on is Michael Shiavo's behavior since this incident. What do you know about him? He's a controlling dick, but you bought every word of his mouth hook, line and sinker. Like i said before, I don't think it was his persona that made him so convincing, it was your own politics. And you'll never see it, because you don't wanna admit how wrapped up in your own ideology you really are. That's it.

nice...the shell. Don't mourn too hard hannukah.

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew330

"he body might have survived, but everything that made her who she was died that day."

Perhaps if Mr. Shiavo had allowed rehab like her parent's wanted.........who knows.

do you pay attention to the news? have you actually bothered reading anything about this case? he did give her rehab. he took her to cali and had a brain stimulator (can't remember the actual name) put in her head in hopes that would help.

Quote:

All you have to go on is Michael Shiavo's behavior since this incident. What do you know about him? He's a controlling dick, but you bought every word of his mouth hook, line and sinker.

lets see... his wife enters a PVS. he gets her therapy and rehab and treatment for two years. then decides to follow through with what he says were her wishes. his behavior seems appropriate to me.

Quote:

Like i said before, I don't think it was his persona that made him so convincing, it was your own politics. And you'll never see it, because you don't wanna admit how wrapped up in your own ideology you really are. That's it.

hi kettle, nice to meet you.

you've ignored everything about this case except your own opinion. if i'm blind, then you seem to be blind, deaf and dumb. all of the facts of this case lead to the opposite conclusion, but it doesn't go along with your politics and ideology, your worldview, so you're ignoring them. just cause you don't like the facts doesn't mean they don't exist.

Quote:

nice...the shell. Don't mourn too hard hannukah.

i won't. i won't mourn at all. i see no need to mourn the dead that i don't know. that her body has finally been allowed to follow where her brain went, makes no impact on my life. so why should i waste my energy mourning her? i mourn the living, the ones who everytime they try to get a step up have society kick them back down. they are the ones who are worth expending the energy on. or do we no longer care about 'the tired, the sick, the huddled masses?' unless they're a young white woman...

I just saw this published through a google news link.

It is a thorough trouncing of Jeb Bush's request for the state's attorney to dig and find some reason to charge Michael Shiavo with a crime.

I note with great satisfaction the use of quotes around some of Bush's 'requests,' such as:

"new information"
"fresh look at the case"
"preconceptions as to the outcome."
"original injuries"

To be brief:

SCHOOLED!!!

Quote:

Result of the State Attorney's inquiry
Memorandum on Schiavo Case to State Attorney Bernie McCabe from Prosecutors Doug Crow and Bob Lewis
By Times Staff
Published July 8, 2005

To: BMc

From: Doug Crow/Bob Lewis

Re: Governor's Request on Schiavo case

Date: June 27, 2005

Based on what he refers to as "new information" contained in the Terri Schiavo autopsy report, Governor Bush has requested that our office take a "fresh look at the case" with no "preconceptions as to the outcome." Governor Bush's letter noted that the autopsy had not determined the cause of Mrs. Schiavo's "original injuries" in 1990 and had in fact cast doubt on the explanation that had been the basis of the 1992 malpractice verdict. He also noted that in 1992, 2003 and 2005 Michael Schiavo had given a time for his wife's collapse that was 40 to 70 minutes prior to the time that his 911 call was received by emergency services.

I believe it is unrealistic to expect, considering the past decade of increasingly venomous litigation and family members' disparate and irreconcilable beliefs as to to Terri's wishes, that our office has the ability to resolve or ameliorate this long standing dispute. This occurance has been the object of continuing litigation for the past twelve years. Most of the pertinent "facts" are in the public record and have been considered and reconsidered by lawyers, jurors, judges and a myriad of experts. Our office has twice been asked to consider accusations against Michael Schiavo - once in 2003 based upon contact from Mr. and Mrs. Schindler and again at the request of the Governor's staff earlier this year - and found insufficient evidence of any prosecutable offense to justify a criminal investigation.

Having reviewed the report and discussed the autopsy investigation with Dr. Thogmartin and his chief investigator Bill Pellan in detail and having also reviewed transcripts of the 1992 and 2002 court proceedings along with documents previously supplied to us by the Schindler family, it is obvious to us that there is no possibility of proving that anyone's criminal act was responsible for Mrs. Schiavo's collapse. Despite a thoroughly researched and extensive autopsy that included consultations with other expert pathologists and an exhaustive search for and review of all available medical records and other information concerning the events surrounding Terri's collapse, Dr. Thogmartin has been unable to determine why it occurred. He has convinced us that there are no remaining medical records in existence that would assist him in resolving what caused her 1990 cardiac arrest to a resonable degree of medical certainty.

Without proof of criminal agency, there can be no hope of prosecution. Nor is there justification to use our investigative powers to perpetuate suspicion where, despite extended litigation and a detailed autopsy, we have no proof to suggest that a crime has occurred. Although Dr. Thogmartin did not believe that the cause could be determined with resonable certainty, there are explanations far more likely and logical than any involving criminal wrongdoing.

Criminal verses Non-Criminal Causes of Terri's Collapse
Although the Governor suggests that the cause of Terri's "injuries" is more in doubt than ever, Dr. Thogmartin's extensive report makes clear that there is no evidence that she suffered any physical trauma. Despite repeated physical exams and radiographs, the hospital records contained no indication of traumatic injury. Dr. Thogmartin indicated the absence of such entries was significant since "contusions, abrasions, recent fractures and particularly healing fractures would have been visualized during the initial months of treatment" if they had been present. Similarly X-rays of her cervical spine that were taken within an hour of her admittance were negative and external signs of strangulation such as cutaneous or deep neck injury, blunt trauma or facial/conjunctive petechiae were not present.

The hypothesis that Terri's low potassium level was a factitious result of medication and fluid administered during her resuscitation is not new but first surfaced in the 1992 malpractice trial. The basis of the 1992 malpractice suit against Terri's gynecologist was that she had eating and nutritional disorders which he failed to detect and which allegedly led to her cardiac arrest causing profound and irreversible brain damage. Terri had sought this doctor's help in 1989 because of difficulty in getting pregnant and up until the time of her death was under treatment for amenorrhea (abnormally infrequent menstrual periods), a well documented result of eating disorders in young women. Terri had lost as much as 100 pounds since adolescence and had lost 20 pounds since her marriage. The suit alleged that her doctor failed to take a nutritional history and to diagnose and treat the eating disorders and nutritional deficiencies that were not only the cause of her menstrual problems but had ultimately led to her collapse.

Three physicians testifying on Terri's behalf concluded - based upon the medical records as well as interviews and statements of family members and co-workers - that Terri had an eating disorder or nutritional deficiency which had contributed to her cardiac arrest. The testimony suggested, without contradiction, this was the consensus opinion of all the doctors who had been involved in Terri's treatment.

The plaintiff did not attempt to specify the eating disorder but suggested that there was evidence to support bulimia and psychogenic polydipsia and that a combination of diet, excessive intake of fluids and compensatory purging behavior had caused both her amenorrhea and her extremely low level of potassium and that the latter condition led to her cardiac arrest. The defendant doctor had admitted that Terri's eating disorder was probably a factor in the amenorrhea for which he was treating her. He acknowledged that, while there are a number of other possible causes, eating and nutritional disorders are known to cause this condition. Additionally, the defense called a psychiatrist who specialized in the treatment of eating disorders; he testified that based upon reviewing the statements of family members, the medical records, the depositions of eleven physicians and the statements of four of her co-workers that Terri suffered from bulimia. This expert did not concede that the eating disorder was responsible for her cardiac arrest. He noted, as does Dr. Thogmartin, that the resuscitation efforts and administration of medication and fluids could explain her low serum potassium after the incident and that this reading did not necessarily reflect electrolyte levels at the time of her collapse. He suggested, however, that Terri's condition was sufficiently severe and at an early enough stage in the disease process that she would carefully concealed her behavior, would not have acknowledged the problem and was not yet amenable to treatment.

Dr. Thogmartin understandably concluded that currently available evidence was insufficient to either definitively rule out the existence of an eating or nutritional disorder or to conclude with reasonable certainty that it was the cause of her collapse. However, all experts in the 1992 proceedings - relying on all available contemporary records and witness recollections - opined that Terri suffered from an eating disorder and the jury unanimously agreed.

While Dr. Thogmartin's report indicated that non-traumatic asphyxia was not impossible, I do not believe that this can be constructed to mean that it represents a plausible explanation or one that is equally or more likely than the possible non-criminal explanations for Mrs. Schiavo's collapse. Asphyxiation occurs when the brain is deprived of oxygen and can be accomplished by cutting off the air to the lungs or the flow of oxygenated (arterial) blood to the brain. While not impossible, it would be exceedingly difficult to accomplish this without leaving evidence of a struggle in a surviving victim. (*See Footnote 1 below)

Cutting off the air supply through suffocation would have to continue for approximately four to five minutes before brain damage ensues. The victim will remain conscious for a significant portion of this time. Common sense suggests and experience has confirmed that victims struggle violently when unable to breath, flailing out at their attacker and whatever is preventing them from breathing and necessitating in turn that the assailant increase the amount of force against a moving, struggling victim. These factors make it virtually inevitable that observable injury will result. It is also possible to cause rapid unconsciousness with simultaneous bilateral compression of the carotid arteries. Based upon our experience, however, it would be virtually impossible for someone without considerable practice in using the technique to incapacitate a struggling victim, who is later resuscitated and survives, without causing visible injury.

Dr. Thogmartin's report also could not eliminate the possibility of subtle trauma in the form of "commotio cordis", a phenomenon that is most commonly seen in young athletes who are struck in the chest directly over the heart with an object such as a baseball. If the chest is sufficiently flexible and the impact occurs precisely during the 20 millisecond interval of the heart's cycle in which the ventricular muscles are repolarizing, ventricular fibrillation (rapid, unsynchronized contractions) can occur. Resuscitation efforts are rarely successful unless the person is defibrillated within two to three minutes. The timing of the impact as well as the hardness of the object, age of the subject and speed of impact are significant variables; it is unknown how often this type of blow to an unprotected chest can cause fibrillation without leaving any identifiable injury in a surviving adult victim. It seems very unlikely, however, that in the course of a domestic argument where one party is intentionally trying to harm the other, they will direct a single blow to the cardiac silhouette that is of sufficient force to cause ventricular fibrillation but not the intended injury.

Dr. Thogmartin also could not exclude the possibility of toxins or drugs being involved. Terri's described condition and the fact that paramedics were able to resuscitate her despite the twelve minute interval between her collapse and their arrival are not inconsistent with the possibility of an opiate overdose. The police officer who responded to the emergency did find a small number of medications in the residence, but did now feel that the drugs he found were relevant to Terri's collapse and did not record what they were. While there is some indication in the discovery materials from the malpractice suit that a prescription bottle of percocet may have been in the residence, Dr. Thogmartin indicated that the drug screen done at the ER would likely have detected the acetaminophen that is combined with oxycodone in that medication. There is of course no affirmative evidence that Terri ingested toxic amounts of any substance or medication and absolutely no basis to conclude they were forcibly or surreptitiously fed to her.

Time Discrepancies Concerning Terri's Collapse
Absent proof that a crime has occurred, neither Michael Schiavo's credibility nor the consistency of his statements would become a critical and material concern. Nonetheless, the discrepancy between his recollection of the time of the incident and the time that paramedics and police recorded receiving the call hardly constitutes new information. Schiavo testified in the 1992 malpractice deposition and trial that he heard a noise around five a.m. and found his wife collapsed near the bathroom door. In a 2003 interview on Larry King Live he indicated this occurred at 4:30 a.m., a time he repeated in a recent interview with medical examiner Jon Thogmartin. Schiavo has consistently said he called for emergency help immediately after finding his wife and that fire rescue arrived within a few minutes of the call. To our knowledge he was never asked about or confronted with the difference between his estimation of the time and the records indicating the fire rescue was called at 5:40 and began resuscitation efforts at 5:52.

Understandably, Michael Schiavo is not the only witness who has been inconsistent or had difficulty recalling the timing of events surrounding Terri's collapse and resuscitation. Shortly after finding Terri, Michael Schiavo called his in-laws and told them what happened. It is unclear whether he or the Schindlers called Bobby Schindler who lived in the same complex as Michael and Terri and who immediately went to their apartment and arrived before the paramedics. Although Terri's parents had been awakened in the middle of the night with extremely disturbing news and waited at their house for a subsequent phone call on their daughters condition, they have no clear idea what time they were called by Michael. They had previously provided our office a timeline indicating that they were called as early as 3-4 a.m. but recently told Thogmartin they could not recall the time. Similarly, Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, told Dr. Thogmartin he could not remember the time that he was called or initially arrived at the Schiavo residence except in relation to the arrival of the paramedics.

It is not contradicted that Michael Schiavo appeared frantic and extremely distraught throughout the incident. Under these extraordinary circumstances, where both Mr. Schiavo and his accusers have similar difficulty in reconstructing exact times, it cannot be credibly argued that this discrepancy is incriminating evidence. Nor, in light of his consistent and uncontradicted claims that he immediately called 911, can his error in estimating the time be considered an admission that he waited over an hour to get help for his wife. It does not appear that Schiavo's error was considered to be of probative value in either the civil suit or in the subsequent guardianship proceedings. Schiavo was not confronted by opposing lawyers (or by Dr. Thogmartin) with the potential inconsistency nor was he given the exact times recorded by paramedics as a point of reference. The most obvious explanation is also the most logical: under the extremely stressful circumstances his attention to and memory of the exact time were faulty - in the same way that the recollections of Mr. and Mrs. Schindler and Bobby are flawed.

Curiously, a delay such as this would further undermine the speculation that Michael Schiavo caused Terri's collapse by assaulting her. Neither the medical examiner nor our assistants were able to identify any plausible manner by which Schiavo - having physically overcome Terri without injuring her or being injured himself - could keep her incapacitated but sufficiently alive that she could still be resuscitated almost an hour later. Additionally, we could discern no rational motivation for attacking one's spouse allowing her to linger near death for forty minutes or more and then calling for help in sufficient time to save her life so she could potentially name her assailant.

Family members and others who disagreed with Mr. Schiavo's decision to seek court approval to have his wife's feeding tube removed have made repeated attacks on his credibility and accused him of mistreatment of his wife. At least some of these accusations have been shown to be baseless by the autopsy conclusions. We should note, however, that we have also received unsolicited comments praising his honesty, sincerity and devotion to his wife's care. Also, when asked about her son-in-law during the 1992 malpractice trial, Mary Schindler testified, "He's there every day. She (Terri) does not want for anything. He is loving, caring. I don't know of any young boy that would be as attentive. He is ... he's just unbelievable, and I know without him there is no way I would have survived this."

In the complete absence of any evidence that Terri's collapse was caused by anyone's criminal actions it has been unnecessary for us to attempt to resolve these conflicting portraits of Michael Schiavo's character. It appears, however, that opinions on his culpability derive from disagreement with the Court's decision to allow Terri's life to end and not from any objective consideration of the evidence. If the available facts are analyzed without preconceptions, it is clear that there is no basis for further investigation. While some questions may remain following the autopsy, the likelihood of finding evidence that criminal acts were responsible for her collapse is not one of them.

We strongly recommend that the inquiry be closed and no further action be taken.

Footnote 1:
Decomposition of the body can sometimes hide some of the more subtle signs of assault, including petechial hemorrhages. Also, the bruising process effectively ends when the heart ceases to pump blood. This would not be an issue where the victim is resuscitated and survives.

This whole fiasco will probably come back to haunt him and rightly so, afaic.

-bear

I was absolutely dead wrong about the Schiavo thing. I said her hubby was probably responsible. I was wrong

I said that there was a good probability that she had significant brain function left. I was wrong.

However, I'm still right on most of the other issues, so rub one out while you can ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NCB

one of the things I love about this place is that we learn to admit it instead of just letting it go be water under the bridge. :thumbsup: