"Darklady" <darklady@darklady.com> wrote in message
news:1ipfb1p3asdm7ie889lv7l0etuudnr45en@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:06:41 GMT, "White Peacock" <nospam@nonet.net>
wrote:

"Darklady" <darklady@darklady.com> wrote in message brother Bob had sworn
to kill

That's because she was, as I mentioned above, all hooked up to
a life support system and her brain shinking to the size of a small
loaf of banana bread.

It must be a sign for me to stay off this thread as everything is marked
as
read, and it wasn't earlier today. There are a couple of loose ends I
wanted to respond to on other threads, and then no more posting until I
get
some AC going. Finally it's getting warm where I am.

What's that about "all hooked up to a life support system"? Everything I
read, and I read a lot from all sides, indicated that she was only on a
feeding tube. Is that what you meant? Nowhere did I understand that she
was on a ventilator, heart-lung machine, etc.

My slip. I think of the tube as a form of lift support. Sloppy
phrasing on my part. Mea culpa.
Nonetheless, she was in no condition to be having any personal
opinions, let alone communicating them to anyone.

BTW according to the St. Petersburg Times her remains buried Monday. My
computer says that's today. A little time warp there. She is interred in
the Sylvan Abbey Memorial Park, Clearwater, near Tampa.

I'd read that.

"A pond and fountain also mark the woman's grave site, which was festooned
with flowers Monday evening. The flat bronze marker lists Terri Schiavo's
birthdate, Dec. 3, 1963 and says she "departed this earth" on Feb. 25,
1990,
and was "at peace" on March 31, 2005.
"Inscribed at the bottom is, 'I kept my promise.'"

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FL_SCHIAVO_INTERMENT_FLOL-?SITE=FLPET&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=state.shtml&CTIME=2005-06-20-17-48-42

Wow. Thanks for passing that on. As strange as that may seem
to some, I find that exceptionally touching and romantic.

Now you want to marry him?

"Darklady" <darklady@darklady.com> wrote in message
news:1ipfb1p3asdm7ie889lv7l0etuudnr45en@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 02:06:41 GMT, "White Peacock" <nospam@nonet.net>
wrote:

"Darklady" <darklady@darklady.com> wrote in message brother Bob had sworn
to kill

That's because she was, as I mentioned above, all hooked up to
a life support system and her brain shinking to the size of a small
loaf of banana bread.

It must be a sign for me to stay off this thread as everything is marked
as
read, and it wasn't earlier today. There are a couple of loose ends I
wanted to respond to on other threads, and then no more posting until I
get
some AC going. Finally it's getting warm where I am.

What's that about "all hooked up to a life support system"? Everything I
read, and I read a lot from all sides, indicated that she was only on a
feeding tube. Is that what you meant? Nowhere did I understand that she
was on a ventilator, heart-lung machine, etc.

My slip. I think of the tube as a form of lift support. Sloppy
phrasing on my part. Mea culpa.
Nonetheless, she was in no condition to be having any personal
opinions, let alone communicating them to anyone.

BTW according to the St. Petersburg Times her remains buried Monday. My
computer says that's today. A little time warp there. She is interred in
the Sylvan Abbey Memorial Park, Clearwater, near Tampa.

I'd read that.

"A pond and fountain also mark the woman's grave site, which was festooned
with flowers Monday evening. The flat bronze marker lists Terri Schiavo's
birthdate, Dec. 3, 1963 and says she "departed this earth" on Feb. 25,
1990,
and was "at peace" on March 31, 2005.
"Inscribed at the bottom is, 'I kept my promise.'"

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FL_SCHIAVO_INTERMENT_FLOL-?SITE=FLPET&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=state.shtml&CTIME=2005-06-20-17-48-42

Wow. Thanks for passing that on. As strange as that may seem
to some, I find that exceptionally touching and romantic.

Now you want to marry him?

"Darklady" <darklady@darklady.com> wrote in message
news:1ipfb1p3asdm7ie889lv7l0etuudnr45en@4ax.com...

What's that about "all hooked up to a life support system"? Everything I
read, and I read a lot from all sides, indicated that she was only on a
feeding tube. Is that what you meant? Nowhere did I understand that she
was on a ventilator, heart-lung machine, etc.

My slip. I think of the tube as a form of lift support. Sloppy
phrasing on my part. Mea culpa.

Appreciate the honesty.

Nonetheless, she was in no condition to be having any personal
opinions, let alone communicating them to anyone.

Under the circumstances without intensive therapy training her to use some
kind of code which I highly doubt she could have managed, I agree with you.

BTW according to the St. Petersburg Times her remains buried Monday. My
computer says that's today. A little time warp there. She is interred in
the Sylvan Abbey Memorial Park, Clearwater, near Tampa.

I'd read that.

"A pond and fountain also mark the woman's grave site, which was festooned
with flowers Monday evening. The flat bronze marker lists Terri Schiavo's
birthdate, Dec. 3, 1963 and says she "departed this earth" on Feb. 25,
1990,
and was "at peace" on March 31, 2005.
"Inscribed at the bottom is, 'I kept my promise.'"

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FL_SCHIAVO_INTERMENT_FLOL-?SITE=FLPET&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=state.shtml&CTIME=2005-06-20-17-48-42

Wow. Thanks for passing that on. As strange as that may seem
to some, I find that exceptionally touching and romantic.

I'm going to let that pass. He reminds me too much of my ex-husband who
once tried to strangle me. Just before I passed out, he let go. So I
confess to a little projection there. Not that I presume to know what
happened. I do not. I wish I could share your opinion on that. I'm not
sure what got buried there, if anything. That's the cynic in me.

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 19:34:35 -0400, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:

I just do not consider her as having wanted to die later.
You know the saying about that was then, this is now?

Tell me, when have you spoken to her to know so much about what she
would decide?

What makes you know more about her than her husband or close friends?

"Lars Eighner" <

In our last episode,
<64u9b1t9mcsbacq13gduj6pu0e5b2r3m2l@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented Darklady
broadcast on alt.atheism:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 19:31:18 GMT, "The other Donald"
<the_donald_13@yahooX.com> wrote:

<needham@syix.com> wrote in message
news:78_se.4498$Pa5.333@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...

I'll just consider you too f--king ignorant to understand the fallacy
of
your below non-argument....

He is dead on target. You just are man enough to realize you're as fucked
up
as a football bat, as is evidenced by your inability to point the
"fallacy"
you claim exists.

I *think* what Johnny keeps missing is that whether or not
something is considered hearsay has nothing to do with whether or not
it is true.
I can tell you that my mom confessed to being a vampire but it
doesn't mean she IS one. My testimony can be false and still be
legally admissable AS testimony.

I think the confusion comes from trying to take "hearsay" apart
and deduce its meaning from "hear" plus "say." That leads
people to think if you hear something and then say it in court,
it is "hearsay." Of course there is not much excuse for not
looking it up in the dictionary once you are told that you are
wrong.

It is perfect nonsense that you if you testify to what you heard
that it is heresay. For example, consider this hypothetical
witness to a bank robbery:

Prosecutor: Tell us what happened.

Teller: The defendant walked up to the counter with his
hand in his pocket. He said "I have a gun in my pocket
and will blow your head off if you don't give me all the
bills in your drawer."

Moron: Objection, Your Honor. Hearsay.

The Court: You have to be kidding.


Yes, you have to be kidding. How much law would be left if
people could never testify about what someone said to them or
said in their presence?

Husband: He said he would sent the photographs to my wife if I
didn't give him $5,000.

Moron: Objection, Your Honor. Hearsay.

Whoops! There goes blackmail. Pretty much all crimes of
extortion and conspiracy would be out the window.

Now exactly the same testimony can be hearsay in regard to one
thing, but not hearsay in regard to another.

Victim: Richard told me that his brother Bob had sworn to kill
my son if I did not give him - Richard - $20,000.

That is direct evidence that Richard was extorting the victim.
It is hearsay as to whether Bob had anything to do with the
crime.

Now if Michael testifies: "Terri told me that she wanted never
to live as a vegetable," that is direct evidence of what Terri
told Michael, not hearsay.

That is not direct evidence.

How is the court able to determine those words were actually spoken by
Terri?

You could attack in on several grounds. Maybe Michael isn't
telling the truth and Terri never said that, maybe Terri did
say that, but there was some reason to think she did not mean
it, and so forth. But you can't exclude it on the grounds that
it is hearsay, because it isn't.

Why is it NOT hearsay?

There are also situations in which hearsay is admissible - and
in general the rules of evidence are not quite so strict in civil
procedings. This, however, was not a situation in which the
court decided to admit hearsay. Michael's testimony about what
his wife said to him was never hearsay to begin with.

He didn't hear her say it?

He did hear her say it?

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 22:44:32 -0400, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:

<snip>

I really am not concerned about that.
We have legal procedures here to dictate what is to be done, and hearsay
is
NOT admissible in a court of law.

Let me rephrase my last statement to you. Twenty courts
concluded that a man being told directly by his wife that she wouldn't
want to be hooked up to a machine is NOT hearsay. No court in the
world would consider that hearsay, in fact.
You don't know the legal definition of hearsay yet, like so
many other things you know nothing about, you sure feel comfortable
blatting your opinion.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 22:44:32 -0400, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:

"Newk Indofman" <nkom@new.kindofman.org> wrote in message
news:oFose.62215$887.11204@tornado.socal.rr.com...

"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:Rjcse.102325$8S5.34942@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

Terri was killed, starved to death.

Not according to the autopsy. Read before you speak.

They said much about what didn't cause her death.
I do not recall them saying anything about what did cause her death.

Then maybe you should focus more on reading and less on being
hysterical.
She died from dehydration brought about by removal of her
feeding tube.

I mean, if it was good enough for Mrs. Schiavo, surely they should
have done at least that much for JP 2, right?

They woulda because he had already expressed his wishes and made a
statement about human life before he passed away.

According to Mr. Shiavo, so did Terri. I choose to believe her
husband --
sanctity of marriage and all, y'know.

I really am not concerned about that.
We have legal procedures here to dictate what is to be done, and hearsay
is
NOT admissible in a court of law.

Just in the 20 courts that heard the case, apparently.

-- Darklady
http://www.darklady.com
http://www.masturbate-a-thon.org

Johnny wrote:

"Bonnie B." <456eerts@emas.org> wrote in message
news:bdv1b1l1ef8mmqnb01qe7cnr7r1n7urclp@4ax.com...

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:14:17 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

{Teri Schiavo} was dead for fifteen years.
Dead.
Dead.
Dead.

Ya know -- that resurrects an interesting query I had on my mind a
while back.

If keeping some anonymous, one-of-the-sheeple Catholics on life
support for 15 years was such a fuckin' heroic thing, why didn't they
do that for Pope John Paul II?

He died.

He stopped breathing.

He gave up the ghost.

What else do you need to know?

Terri was killed, starved to death.

Terri's mind died years before
She could not reason
She was blind
She could not register memories.
She had simple spinal reflexes that do not require higher cortical function...

You fundies amaze me, though you shouldn't. An autopsy proves you all wrong
definitively and scientifically and you still refuse to accept it.

I mean, if it was good enough for Mrs. Schiavo, surely they should
have done at least that much for JP 2, right?

They woulda because he had already expressed his wishes and made a statement
about human life before he passed away.

Why are you people who are Pro-Death of other persons so stupid?

Bonnie B. wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:14:17 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

{Teri Schiavo} was dead for fifteen years.
Dead.
Dead.
Dead.

Ya know -- that resurrects an interesting query I had on my mind a
while back.

If keeping some anonymous, one-of-the-sheeple Catholics on life
support for 15 years was such a fuckin' heroic thing, why didn't they
do that for Pope John Paul II?

Why didn't they do it for Sun Hudson, a six-month old Black baby in Texas?

Sun Hudson, a six-month old Texas baby died last week when health care
providers at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, Texas removed his
life support system over the objections of his mother. The action was
authorized under the 1999 Futile Care Law which was signed into law by
then-Gov. George W. Bush.

Under the Texas Futile Care Law, health care workers are allowed to
remove expensive life support for terminally ill patients if the patient
or family is unable to pay the medical bills.

http://tinyurl.com/a5h3y

I mean, if it was good enough for Mrs. Schiavo, surely they should
have done at least that much for JP 2, right?

Ein Prosit der GemŸtlichkeit --

Bonnie *****

needham@syix.com wrote:

You must be talking about Teri's right to die which she didn't express
through mikey until 7-years later after she was supposedly brain dead.

That's right mikey was able to recant, as his co-conspirator did,
that Teri once saw a movie and made a passing comment that she
wouldn't want to live as such....

LN


"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1a958257bb5b04989724@news.readfreenews.net...

In article <md5se.102227$8S5.96269@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,
wxpprofessional@msn.com says...

"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1a7b79aeec5317989721@news.readfreenews.net...

Now that the autopsy vindicates what Michael Schiavo was saying all
along he should make a long list of people to sue who
defamed/libeled him, starting with Fox News, the Repug National
Committee, Randall Terry
and Operation Rescue, Bill First, Tom DeLay, Jeb Bush, George Bush,
Bill
O'Reilly, Sean Insanity, Michael "Weiner boy" Savage, the
Schindlers and
many more. Specifically, malpractice charges also need to be filed
against First for his incompetent and unethical attempt to diagnose
Terry Schiavo by watching heavily edited home video footage. If
Schiavo and Felos cast a wide enough net and sues enough of them
then maybe some
of them will even settle out of court and it will give them
millions to establish some kind of foundation to defend the rights
and privacy of americans from attack by all the christo-fascist
zombie assholes out there. That would be so fucking sweet.

Nothing was said that would show me anything that preserved Terri
Schiavo's
right to life.

Let me break this down so even you can understand. With respect to
rights, the right to free speech includes the right not to speak
also, because otherwise you would be compelled to speak nonstop 24
hours per day. Similarly, if you have a right to life then you have
a right not to exercise it and to die. Over twenty separate court
decisions affirmed that Terri Schiavo had expressed the desire not
to have her body kept alive indefinitely if there was no hope of
recovery. It is her *right* to choose that and the courts held that
Michael was legally empowered to act on her behalf, since she was
incapacitated and unable to act on her own. Now the fact is that
Terry Schiavo was brain dead from a scientific and legal perspective
before she made it to the hospital to be treated, but they held out
hope for many years that something could be done to rehabilitate
her. After quite a bit of expensive treatment and therapy it was
determined that she continued to get worse rather than better. Her
CAT scans showed precisely what the autopsy showed. Massive parts
of her brain were completely dead and were never coming back. If it
hadn't been for her clinically neurotic parents inability to cope
and the interference of politicians trying to hijack her tragedy for
votes then the issue would have been settled many years ago. So why
don't you stop being an idiot and stop pretending that you have
anything meaningful to contribute. --
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins