Science > Abortion > Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"kathryn" |
| Date: |
23 Mar 2005 07:40:55 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
<mdzrrtrdz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111517365.022131.33670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What a barbaric evil thing, making someone starve to death. That's
exactly what leftists in Florida are doing to Terri Schaivo. They are
forcing her against her will to starve until she dies. What a cruel,
sick, evil thing. And she's innocent too, she is not guilty of any
crime. The state of Florida has sentenced an innocent woman to death,
and the form of execution is a slow death by torture. The judges and
state representatives that are murdering Terry Schiavo need to pay...
and I can only hope that the people that bomb abortion clinics or the
guy that murdered Judge Leftkow's family will hunt these sickos down.
and the funny thing is you don't even see the irony in your statement
.
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 07:44:49 AM |
|
|
"kathryn" <bob@bobbybobbobthebobster.com> wrote in message
news:d1rrl6$nrr$1@titan.btinternet.com...
<mdzrrtrdz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111517365.022131.33670@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What a barbaric evil thing, making someone starve to death. That's
exactly what leftists in Florida are doing to Terri Schaivo. They are
forcing her against her will to starve until she dies. What a cruel,
sick, evil thing. And she's innocent too, she is not guilty of any
crime. The state of Florida has sentenced an innocent woman to death,
and the form of execution is a slow death by torture. The judges and
state representatives that are murdering Terry Schiavo need to pay...
and I can only hope that the people that bomb abortion clinics or the
guy that murdered Judge Leftkow's family will hunt these sickos down.
and the funny thing is you don't even see the irony in your statement
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 09:59:23 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:44:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
So, you support physician-assisted suicide?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 02:29:39 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ji4341du9kn1npojp3riulrih07pdf8pgc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:44:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has
done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
So, you support physician-assisted suicide?
Do I personally? No, but it is up to the individual. I believe suicide to
be a sin, but then again I am not in any position to judge someone else
since I do not have a terminal disease.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 04:55:07 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:29:39 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ji4341du9kn1npojp3riulrih07pdf8pgc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:44:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has
done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
So, you support physician-assisted suicide?
Do I personally? No, but it is up to the individual. I believe suicide to
be a sin, but then again I am not in any position to judge someone else
since I do not have a terminal disease.
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pookie" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 05:57:28 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:29:39 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ji4341du9kn1npojp3riulrih07pdf8pgc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:44:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has
done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
So, you support physician-assisted suicide?
Do I personally? No, but it is up to the individual. I believe suicide
to
be a sin, but then again I am not in any position to judge someone else
since I do not have a terminal disease.
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
A neurologist from the Mayo Clinic just examined her & disagreed...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
23 Mar 2005 07:04:34 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:29:39 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ji4341du9kn1npojp3riulrih07pdf8pgc@4ax.com...
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:44:49 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Regardless, what this person is saying about Terri is true. Terri has
done
nothing to anyone, and yet she is sentenced to die a cruel and barbaric
death. We put animals and criminals to death more humanely.
So, you support physician-assisted suicide?
Do I personally? No, but it is up to the individual. I believe suicide
to
be a sin, but then again I am not in any position to judge someone else
since I do not have a terminal disease.
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it was.
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no value on
life.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of unborn
children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because starving
her to death is killing her.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support keeping
criminals alive.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 08:31:07 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:04:34 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it was.
Direct testimony in open court is hearsay? Not when it comes from
five different people.
The courts also judged on the medical evidence. In every case they
found that there is no hope of recovery, and that her brain damage is
so severe that there is no "Terri" left.
Mull that over.. Florida courts are not known for being hotbeds of
liberal activisim, and not *one* hearing has ordered the feeding to be
resumed. That took Jeb Bush pushing a law through, one that was later
ruled unconsitutional!
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
And where did I say that? I'm hoping that this ends so her entire
family can get on with life. Terri died fifteen years ago.
Everything she was is gone.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no value on
life.
As a former soldier and cancer survivor, I saw bollocks. I treasure
life.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of unborn
children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because starving
her to death is killing her.
I'm personally against abortion.. I'd like to see education and easy
access to contraception reduce the need for abortions to near zero.
However, it is not my decision to make. I'm pro-choice, not
pro-abortion.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support keeping
criminals alive.
Ever hear of Hurricane Carter? There was a great movie about him a
few years ago. Wrongly convicted of murder, he spent years in prison
before being exonerated. With DNA testing, we are finding dozens of
such wrongful convictions every year. You cannot undo an execution.
Unless the criminal freely confesses in open court, I don't support
the death peanlty. Besides, spending decades locked behind bars is to
me a much better punishment.
I support assited suicide for terminally ill patients who desire to
end their suffering. Look at the Oregon law for a good idea of how
this works. You need two doctors to confrim the diagnosis, and a
psychological evaluation before being given the overdose meds. I had
to face these quality of life issues myself, and have a Living Will
and DNR order.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 12:21:59 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:04:34 -0500, "Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it was.
Direct testimony in open court is hearsay? Not when it comes from
five different people.
The courts also judged on the medical evidence. In every case they
found that there is no hope of recovery, and that her brain damage is
so severe that there is no "Terri" left.
Mull that over.. Florida courts are not known for being hotbeds of
liberal activisim, and not *one* hearing has ordered the feeding to be
resumed. That took Jeb Bush pushing a law through, one that was later
ruled unconsitutional!
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
And where did I say that? I'm hoping that this ends so her entire
family can get on with life. Terri died fifteen years ago.
Everything she was is gone.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no value on
life.
As a former soldier and cancer survivor, I saw bollocks. I treasure
life.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of unborn
children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because starving
her to death is killing her.
I'm personally against abortion.. I'd like to see education and easy
access to contraception reduce the need for abortions to near zero.
However, it is not my decision to make. I'm pro-choice, not
pro-abortion.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support keeping
criminals alive.
Ever hear of Hurricane Carter? There was a great movie about him a
few years ago. Wrongly convicted of murder, he spent years in prison
before being exonerated. With DNA testing, we are finding dozens of
such wrongful convictions every year. You cannot undo an execution.
Unless the criminal freely confesses in open court, I don't support
the death peanlty. Besides, spending decades locked behind bars is to
me a much better punishment.
These people seem to think that miraculously, although a percentage of
people for whom DNA evidence becomes available are innocent, this is not
the case for any of those for whome DNA evidence has not become available.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 05:05:48 AM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it was.
None of those people testified?
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and has
no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no value on
life.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of unborn
children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because starving
her to death is killing her.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support keeping
criminals alive.
The people campaigning to keep her alive do not care about her. To them
she is just a tool a symbol that man must give over all control of life
and death except for executing criminals to God
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 12:48:09 PM |
|
|
Ash wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it
was.
None of those people testified?
The writwer probably does not know the difference between hearsay and the
testimony of expert witnesses.
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and
has no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no
value on life.
That's a rather stupid statement. We have nothing to look forward. We value
life, it was not the atheist who killed hetetics.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of
unborn children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because
starving her to death is killing her.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support
keeping criminals alive.
Sad that you can't tell the difference between living the life of a carrot
and being alive.
The people campaigning to keep her alive do not care about her. To
them she is just a tool a symbol that man must give over all control
of life and death except for executing criminals to God
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 02:15:32 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:JXD0e.1336$FN4.248@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
Ash wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it
was.
None of those people testified?
The writwer probably does not know the difference between hearsay and the
testimony of expert witnesses.
Rule 801 (c) of the Federal Rules of Evidence defines hearsay as follows:
"Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while
testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth
of the matter asserted." The declarant is the person who made the
statement. That statement is offered into evidence by some other person,
usually one to whom the declarant made the statement or who overheard (or
observed) the statement.
Now, do you have any more smart ***** comments to make?
Unless you can show us where Terri (the declarant) made the statement in
court, I stand by what I said. They decided to go on hearsay.
These same judges heard medical testimony from the doctors treating
Terri, and found that she is in a persitant vegitative state, and
has no hope of recovery.
So you are looking forward to her death, that doesn't surprise me.
Answer this.
I have noticed that for the most part atheist have little to no
value on life.
That's a rather stupid statement.
It's a true statement I believe due to my observations.
We have nothing to look forward. We value
life, it was not the atheist who killed hetetics.
Why is it that I have noticed most atheist support the killing of
unborn children and the killing of innocent people like Terri? Because
starving her to death is killing her.
Yet, a lot of atheist will rush to save animals and will support
keeping criminals alive.
Sad that you can't tell the difference between living the life of a carrot
and being alive.
Sad you didn't know what hearsay meant.
The people campaigning to keep her alive do not care about her. To
them she is just a tool a symbol that man must give over all control
of life and death except for executing criminals to God
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 01:21:35 PM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
Ash wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it
was.
None of those people testified?
The writwer probably does not know the difference between hearsay and the
testimony of expert witnesses.
I thought that was probably the case, but it could also be that the
other 5 people haven't been called in to testify and we only have her
Husband's word for it that they told him that is what she wanted. Seems
a little unlikely that they would not be called, however
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 02:16:03 PM |
|
|
"Ash" <ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d1v3vu$rk2$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
Mike Painter wrote:
Ash wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it
was.
None of those people testified?
The writwer probably does not know the difference between hearsay and the
testimony of expert witnesses.
I thought that was probably the case, but it could also be that the other
5 people haven't been called in to testify and we only have her Husband's
word for it that they told him that is what she wanted. Seems a little
unlikely that they would not be called, however
Rule 801 (c) of the Federal Rules of Evidence defines hearsay as follows:
"Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while
testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth
of the matter asserted." The declarant is the person who made the
statement. That statement is offered into evidence by some other person,
usually one to whom the declarant made the statement or who overheard (or
observed) the statement.
Prepared to show us where Terri ever testified?
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 09:26:19 AM |
|
|
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 10:05:48 AM |
|
|
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111764379.345848.264940@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
Yea, and it's still hearsay. I don't care how you try to twist it.
The only difference is, it is admissable hearsay.
It means that the courts believe her husband on what he SAID..not what she
said.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 03:47:47 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:G_ydndyVU4lEq9nfRVn-
3w@comcast.com:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111764379.345848.264940@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
Yea, and it's still hearsay.
But the claims of Juanita Brodderick are
etched in stone. Right.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 04:38:19 PM |
|
|
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9624A0DC89422ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:G_ydndyVU4lEq9nfRVn-
3w@comcast.com:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111764379.345848.264940@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
Yea, and it's still hearsay.
But the claims of Juanita Brodderick are
etched in stone. Right.
Getting back to the "issue", it's hearsay.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 05:21:44 PM |
|
|
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:KOednRB9er0RD9nfRVn-
1w@comcast.com:
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9624A0DC89422ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:G_ydndyVU4lEq9nfRVn-
3w@comcast.com:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111764379.345848.264940@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay
is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
Yea, and it's still hearsay.
But the claims of Juanita Brodderick are
etched in stone. Right.
Getting back to the "issue", it's hearsay.
It's reliable enough for every court
that ruled on the case.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 06:45:58 PM |
|
|
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9624B0CA24150ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:KOednRB9er0RD9nfRVn-
1w@comcast.com:
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9624A0DC89422ta2eene2@216.196.97.131...
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in news:G_ydndyVU4lEq9nfRVn-
3w@comcast.com:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111764379.345848.264940@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You need to read further down. Included in the exceptions to hearsay
is
declarant unavailability.
As per section 804(a): "Unavailability as a witness" includes
situations in which the declarant...(4) is unable to be present or to
testify at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or
mental illness or infirmity
I'd say that covers Terri.
Yea, and it's still hearsay.
But the claims of Juanita Brodderick are
etched in stone. Right.
Getting back to the "issue", it's hearsay.
It's reliable enough for every court
that ruled on the case.
It is considered "Competent Evidence", which is a catch-all term that
includes relevant, reliable evidence that is not otherwise rendered
inadmissable. Relevant, reliable evidence may be incompetant for any of
several reasons.
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually saw or heard
is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about what another person
said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY" unreliable.
It is important to understand the definitions. The testimony is considered
"Competent"...and as I stated..that is a catch-all term.
Resource
Gardner, T. & Anderson, T. (2004). Criminal Evidence: Principles and cases
(5th ed). Belmont, CA. Thomson Wadsworth
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 09:04:32 PM |
|
|
..
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually saw or
heard
is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about what another
person
said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY" unreliable.
So in this case the testimony of the people who said they had a
conversation with Terri and she said she wouldn't want to be kept alive
would be generally reliable since they are adults and it is what they
heard.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 09:28:56 PM |
|
|
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111805697.401666.296950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
.
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually saw or
heard
is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about what another
person
said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY" unreliable.
So in this case the testimony of the people who said they had a
conversation with Terri and she said she wouldn't want to be kept alive
would be generally reliable since they are adults and it is what they
heard.
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have heard her
say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as they are reviewing
the evidence now.
But they better hurry, because she is in her last hours. When it's too
late...it's too late.
And those who wanted to see her die, should just remain quiet and move on
because people aren't going to want to see a bunch of phoney people say how
sorry they are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 09:59:27 PM |
|
|
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her
say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as they are
reviewing
the evidence now.
Okay I'm going to admit that I'm no longer certain I know what your
original point was. You pointed out that all testimony about Terri's
wishes was hearsay - which is technically correct.
However you seemed to me to be implying that because it is hearsay it
should be ignored or discounted.
If that was not your argument than I apologize and would appreciate it
if you'd explain what your point was.
And according to the news reports I read what the witnesses say they
heard was "aaaaaa waaaaaaaa" which they interpreted to mean "I want to
live."
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 11:10:34 PM |
|
|
John wrote:
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her
say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as they are
reviewing
the evidence now.
Okay I'm going to admit that I'm no longer certain I know what your
original point was. You pointed out that all testimony about Terri's
wishes was hearsay - which is technically correct.
However you seemed to me to be implying that because it is hearsay it
should be ignored or discounted.
You are reading my post wrong then. Let me clarify.
Just because something is hearsay, does not mean it should be
discounted. All I am saying is, it is hearsay. We don't know what
Terri's wishes are. One side is saying she didn't want to live like
this, the other side is now saying she wants to live.
What I am saying is, no one side is any more or less reliable than the
other. The court does have to make a decision. The court could make
the right or the wrong decision, based on hearsay. We have to trust
that the courts do the right thing. And that's all we can do, is trust
the court's decision. We will never truly know what Terri's wishes
are.
I hope that clears up what I am saying.
If that was not your argument than I apologize and would appreciate
it
if you'd explain what your point was.
And according to the news reports I read what the witnesses say they
heard was "aaaaaa waaaaaaaa" which they interpreted to mean "I want
to
live."
I don't know what she meant, no one knows. It could be wishful
thinking on the parent's part, she may have been trying to communicate.
My biggest concern is the matter in which they are allowing her to die.
I think it's wrong, it is barbaric, it is hurting the family greatly.
I would be angry and hurt too if that were my child and I wash watching
someone allow her to just starve to death. Imagine how it feels to be
helpless. You want to save your child, but you can't. It must be an
absolute horror.
We can only go on what we feel is right. There is no absolute way of
knowing what the right answer is in this case.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
26 Mar 2005 07:21:18 AM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
John wrote:
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her
say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as they are
reviewing
the evidence now.
Okay I'm going to admit that I'm no longer certain I know what your
original point was. You pointed out that all testimony about
Terri's
wishes was hearsay - which is technically correct.
However you seemed to me to be implying that because it is hearsay
it
should be ignored or discounted.
You are reading my post wrong then. Let me clarify.
Just because something is hearsay, does not mean it should be
discounted. All I am saying is, it is hearsay. We don't know what
Terri's wishes are. One side is saying she didn't want to live like
this, the other side is now saying she wants to live.
What I am saying is, no one side is any more or less reliable than
the
other. The court does have to make a decision. The court could make
the right or the wrong decision, based on hearsay. We have to trust
that the courts do the right thing. And that's all we can do, is
trust
the court's decision. We will never truly know what Terri's wishes
are.
I hope that clears up what I am saying.
Thank you, that does help. And I do think one side is more reliable
than the other. Not through any malice or deception, but simply as a
result of the source of the information. Michael and others testified
they had conversations with Terri. Her parents testified what they
believed she would have wanted.
I don't want to say that should be totally discounted, but it is
farther removed from the source.
It's also more subject to interpretation and her parents have testified
even if she'd told them she would want to have life support removed
they wouldn't do it.
The decision the court faced isn't what would terri want, it was are
there legal reasons Michael should be removed as her guardian.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sid9" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 09:56:55 PM |
|
|
Osprey wrote:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111805697.401666.296950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
.
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually saw
or heard is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about
what another person said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY" unreliable.
So in this case the testimony of the people who said they had a
conversation with Terri and she said she wouldn't want to be kept
alive would be generally reliable since they are adults and it is
what they heard.
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as
they are reviewing the evidence now.
But they better hurry, because she is in her last hours. When it's
too late...it's too late.
And those who wanted to see her die, should just remain quiet and
move on because people aren't going to want to see a bunch of phoney
people say how sorry they are.
They claim they heard "I wan...."
Maybe she meant, "I want to die"
Actually, they hear what they want to
hear because they refuse to face
the reality of her death 15 years ago
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 10:15:14 PM |
|
|
"Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9251e.90077$%Y4.73248@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Osprey wrote:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111805697.401666.296950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
.
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually saw
or heard is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about
what another person said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY" unreliable.
So in this case the testimony of the people who said they had a
conversation with Terri and she said she wouldn't want to be kept
alive would be generally reliable since they are adults and it is
what they heard.
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as
they are reviewing the evidence now.
But they better hurry, because she is in her last hours. When it's
too late...it's too late.
And those who wanted to see her die, should just remain quiet and
move on because people aren't going to want to see a bunch of phoney
people say how sorry they are.
They claim they heard "I wan...."
Maybe she meant, "I want to die"
Exactly what I was thinking.
--
---------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
26 Mar 2005 12:19:09 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:56:55 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
They claim they heard "I wan...."
Maybe she meant, "I want to die"
I want my MTV
I want to go to Bermuda
I want Cubs' season tickets.
The possibilities are endless.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 11:11:33 PM |
|
|
Sid9 wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"John" <jonesj2205@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1111805697.401666.296950@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
.
Reliable evidence is evidence that possesses a sufficient degree
of
believability - that is, a likelihood that the evidence is true
and
accurate. An adult witness's testimony about what he actually
saw
or heard is generally reliable. A statement by a witness about
what another person said she saw or heard is "GENERALLY"
unreliable.
So in this case the testimony of the people who said they had a
conversation with Terri and she said she wouldn't want to be kept
alive would be generally reliable since they are adults and it is
what they heard.
How are they to be any more reliable than those who claim to have
heard her say she wants to live? There are witnesses to this, as
they are reviewing the evidence now.
But they better hurry, because she is in her last hours. When it's
too late...it's too late.
And those who wanted to see her die, should just remain quiet and
move on because people aren't going to want to see a bunch of
phoney
people say how sorry they are.
They claim they heard "I wan...."
Maybe she meant, "I want to die"
Actually, they hear what they want to
hear because they refuse to face
the reality of her death 15 years ago
Or maybe you hear what you want to hear. Or does that only apply to
others and not you?
We don't know what Terri wants or is trying to say.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
25 Mar 2005 11:24:53 AM |
|
|
I think a more accurate characterization would be the court did not
believe Terri's parents proved that Michael was acting against Terri's
expressed wishes.
The burden of proof is on them.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam" |
|
| Title: Re: Anyone that supports Terry Schaivo's death should be killed |
24 Mar 2005 02:06:45 PM |
|
|
Ash wrote:
Mike Painter wrote:
Ash wrote:
Osprey wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:nqs341l94902c5mbuupcksm4rtkddum3bp@4ax.com...
Fine then. 15 judges, looking at the evidence, have found the Terri
Schaivo told at least five people that she didn't want to be kept
alive by artificial means. That's fifteen judges, in at least seven
different courts.
So they decided to go on hearsay, because that is exactly what it
was.
None of those people testified?
The writwer probably does not know the difference between hearsay and
the testimony of expert witnesses.
I thought that was probably the case, but it could also be that the
other 5 people haven't been called in to testify and we only have her
Husband's word for it that they told him that is what she wanted. Seems
a little unlikely that they would not be called, however
you know how lazy judges are
--
Sam
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
