How Do They Know?

No, Billy; Sorry, Can’t do that.

Look, even exclusive of right to die arguments, (Which I think you’ll recall, I’ve pointed up as being valid) how do the cops know they’re not dealing with outright murder? (Which, I think we’re dealing with in this case.)

And don’t tell me about her supposed husband having he final say in the matter without such a document; I think we both can come up with spousal abuse/spusal death cases which under that scenario, which wouldn’t be treated as murder.  Lacy Peterson, anyone?

Ace of Spades says to the ruling released this morning:

She’ll be dead soon. They got their coonskin.

I thought a law authorizing de novo (from the start, i.e., all-new) review of the facts in a state court case would at least merit an injunction while the judge read the record, but apparently not.

It seems to me there was only one sort of law which could have saved Terri. Any law leaving any discretion in a judge’s hands would result in her death.

But what can you expect, I suppose, from a judiciary that holds the law higher than an innocent life? (Note the distinction of ‘innocent life’, those of you who think you’ll build this into an anti-death pentalty argument)

Terri, I’m afraid, will end up serving the American public by exposing how irrelevant the American Judiciary is to protecting Joe and Jane Everyman.

I picked this up over at Limbaugh’s site today.
I’d heard of this nurse, but hadn’t heard the story. No shock, since the press has been hiding her under anything they can. Ier’s testimony is attached at the end of this post.

If the charges she makes are verified by the police record, or for that matter, anything else, what’s being Committed in Florida is nothing short of murder.  Like I said earlier today; Once the facts of this case come out, the public will understand why action was needed.

END TRANSCRIPT

Here’s Nurse Iyer’s testimony

Spread this link.

Donald Sensing this morning asks if Peggy Noonan led the Republicans wrong in her impassioned plea for them to act in the case of Terry Shiavo’s life.

He cites polling numbers which suggest that a larger number… about the percentage breaks that re-elected President Bush, disapprove of Congress’s actions in the case, and wonders if Peggy got it wrong.

Well, I don’t think so, even from a purely political repercussions standpoint.  To assume that the polling numbers answer Sensing’s question, also assumes that the reverse would be true; that these same people would have approved, had congress elected not to act to save the life of Shaivo.  One, however, does not equal the other, particularly given that polls measure such things in short terms and short samples and resentment involving life and death choices are often longer term. The long term repercussions to the Republicans (Or, for that matter, any party in power, and thereby in a position to take such action) would have been far greater than they would seem at the moment. Resentment is like mold; it takes a while to grow, and is often ignored until it’s a genuine problem, at which point it’s not easy to quell. I expect that would be the problem Congressional Republicans would face.

More, I suspect that most people in that poll, felt as Sensiing does here:

I don’t know enough about Terry’s condition to evaluate whether she is beyond hope of recovery, but presumably her doctors and the courts have weighed all the information

But that’s’ exactly the point; Robert Johansen, in his recent write-up to this point says:

But that isn’t the case. What you find when you examine the medical data and listen to the experiences of those who have spent the most time with Terry over the last decade is that a great deal of evidence belies the contention that Terry is in a PVS. Terry?s parents, brother, sister, and numerous other family members and friends who visit her regularly do not believe for a moment that Terry is unaware of her environment or unresponsive. At a press conference organized by the Schindlers on October 24, Terry?s mother, father, and eight others all gave accounts of how they see Terry consistently respond to people: She smiles, frowns, or acts sullenly depending on who the person is and what he or she does or says. She reacts quite markedly to music, particularly piano music, which she always especially enjoyed. A certified speech therapist asserted that Terry does attempt to verbalize and has been heard saying ?yes,? ?no,? ?Mommy,? and possibly even ?Help me.?

Even more powerful is the testimony of the numerous doctors who emphatically deny that Terry is in a PVS. The most convincing medical testimony comes from Dr. William Hammesfahr, a neurologist specializing in the treatment of brain injuries, who has spent approximately twelve hours examining Terry. At the October 24 press conference, Hammesfahr explained that Terry is able to respond to commands: She can raise and lower her limbs, although her range of motion is limited by severe muscular contractures from a lack of physical therapy for more than a decade. Doctors testifying for Michael Schiavo have dismissed such responses as reflexes. But what is most telling is Hammesfahr?s description of Terry?s response to a standard strength test: In this test he asked Terry to lift up her leg while he pressed down on it with his hand. He instructed her to keep lifting it in spite of his pressure. Hammesfahr explained how he could feel Terry pressing up against his hand with the same degree of force with which he was pressing down, so as to keep her leg in the same relative position. Such a response, Hammesfahr explained, is simply not reducible to a ?reflex.?

Hammesfahr has even observed her move her head and limbs into positions that clearly cause her discomfort and maintain them in order to carry out instructions he gave her. Such behavior, Hammesfahr said, cannot be reflexive: ?Reflexes are designed to avoid injury. They are there to prevent pain.? One has to overcome reflexes in order to perform a task in spite of discomfort or pain.

I think that had they not acted, the long term resentment would have boiled up against the Republicans once these points become more common undertanding, and that would be true however the case fell out in the courts… and regardless of her living or dying.

In fairness, I should say that I share Don’s discomfort with the Congressional action. It is not something to be imposed lightly. Yet, I think the cause,in this case, sufficient. And the diference in the perceptions I think, centers on Don’s assumptions that the courts have considered fairly all the available data. as I say, I think those taking the poll were making the same assumptions.

Michelle Malkin: JUDGE SAYS NO FEEDING TUBE FOR TERRI

(sigh)

And thus does her husband get an answer to the question he repeatedly asked:” When does this bitch DIE?”

THe man has committed murder, and got the support of the courts.
I could very easily be convicted of contempt of court today.

The Family is doing what it can, aparently appealing to the 11th Circut in Atlanta. Inital reaction I heard on WSB this morning on my way into work was that the 11th wouldn’t hear the case… yet. I gather that the 11th is insisting review at a lower level is appropriate at this point. All this is unconfirmed given WSB was fading at the time I was on my way in… noisy.

Shades of Dan Rather and the TANG documents.

There’s some very interesting questions at the CodeBlueBlog

Dunno what’s up, but Blogger seems to have sorted out it’s issues of hte last few weeks.

Of course now having said that, I’ve jinxed it, perhaps.

Excellent notes on the Shaivo case fromRandom Observations

…. or more corectly, the lack of it, have been posted at Mark Treadwell’s blog

The New Bit’s Bit is up. A little late, I know. But you’ll see why.

There are times when I’m glad I’m not getting paid to write.  This is one of them.

I spent a couple hours yesterday, and a couple more this morning, attempting to explore in my weekly column, my thoughts about the Schiavo case, but I found I couldn’t do it. Not in the usual terms, at least. I tossed this together Monday morning, and I know it’s going to be a little jagged… it needs some work on the flow. Sorry, I can’t deal with it.

Look, I’ll be honest; I’ve got enough going in my life right now, including a relative in the hospital, living off a feeding tube… (You will recall, my mother in-law had a stroke at age 81 just recently, requiring me to, among other things drive her dog to a new home in New Jersey a few weeks ago….) that makes keeping up with all that’s happening outside my life, nearly impossible. I’m not suggesting any special insights on the issue because of these problems, I merely report this by way of explaining that my time is more limited of late.

In brief, I should say that my thoughts are not emotional. Nor are they based in what the far left likes to cast as a trumped up culture war.  Look, I think Jack Kevorkian a horse’s butt… A fool. Yet, as a general rule, where the wishes of the person in question is fully known, he government should in fact stay out of it.  But not only are the wishes of the person in question…. Terry… Not confirmed, the convictions her husband says she has are countered by her own words and her own actions.

Nor is her ‘Husband’ untainted, here… Money is involved, and some statements from him which have been entered into the public record which do not paint him as someone acting out of love; rather they show clearly someone acting out of malice.

When it’s all added up, it comes to this: The Florida courts screwed up, bigtime, allowing themselves to be bullied by the Euthanasia crowd and their high priced lawyers.

For those who suggest that the Husband’s say shouldn’t be questioned about the life of the wife, I submit that Lacy Anne Peterson might have something to say. Lack of malice cannot be assumed in the Shaivo case, given the number of obvious conflicts of interest.

interesting that it’s the Florida courts again, isn’t it? Well, that’s a connection I’ll have to explore when I’m a little less harried by my personal life, I guess…. But don’t blame the Congress-critters of all political stripes for taking action; Rather, hail them for doing what they saw… Correctly… As needed to protect the rights of Terry Shaivo.

Look, gang, This is not a political struggle, much as the Democrats who are frantically searching for some cause to attach themselves to will claim.. Despite the position of their fellow democrats who voted with the majority. The democrats seeking to make this a political struggle are doing more to turn off the majority of America than they managed to turn off during their most recent losses at the polls.

Neither is this an ideological struggle, unless you consider it ideology that we do not make out unsupportable assumptions the basis for ending someone’s life, as a matter of law.

In the end, this is about Terry Shaivo and her defenders, not getting the same due process and level of defense that convicted killers get.

Terry’s only crime; she was an inconvenience to her husband. And for that, the courts condemned her to a death more painful than any convicted killer today gets, at least in this country. I know; I’ve seen such a death; up front and personal in the extreme.

Sound like justice to you?

So, you’ll forgive me if I’m less than verbose today.  I just know what needs to be done… And the Congress has done it’s job toward that end. They have my support in this. Yes, it’s an unusual step, but this is an unusual situation. 

Let’s hope the courts do what needs to be done, as well. Because I fear for this country both in the short and long terms, if they do not, should Terry burn while the judiciary fiddles.

and read this.

Now.

GOP Bloggers remonds us of what Democrats Used to Say on Filibusters:

“‘If we don’t like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her down. But don’t hold them in this anonymous unconscionable limbo, because in doing that, the minority of Senators really shame all Senators.'” …-Pat Leahy – 6/18/98

Funny, how that changed.

Volokh today:

Mark Kleiman’s post, which has persuaded me to change my views on the advisability of deliberately painful executions also has an excellent discussion of retribution as a goal of punishment. Mark points out that many recent blog posts have argued that retribution — as opposed to just deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation — is simply not a legitimate goal of punishment.

Gene… here it is: deliberately painful executions, ARE in fact deterrence. HAsn’t anyone noticed thta as you punishments get more “humane”, our criminals get bolder?

Power Line points out signs of an inability among Democrats to accept reality