Bush Agrees to End Schiavo Inquiry
Gov. Jeb Bush Agreed to Close an Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Collapse of Terri Schiavo after a State Prosecutor Said There Is No Evidence of Any Crime.

By Gary Fineout
Miami Herald
July 8, 2005

TALLAHASSEE - The final chapter in the life, and death, of Terri Schiavo may have finally closed Thursday when Gov. Jeb Bush agreed to drop any further investigation into why Schiavo collapsed 15 years ago.

Bush made his decision after a state prosecutor in St. Petersburg concluded there was no evidence to suggest that a crime caused Schiavo's heart to stop beating Feb. 25, 1990 or that there was enough evidence to suggest that her husband, Michael Schiavo, delayed calling for emergency help.

''Based on your conclusions, I will follow your recommendations that the inquiry by the state be closed,'' Bush wrote in a letter sent to State Attorney Bernie McCabe on Thursday.

Terri Schiavo died from dehydration March 31, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed. She had been at the center of a bitter and lengthy legal battle between her husband, who said his wife had told him she did not wish to be kept alive artificially, and her parents, the Schindlers, who disputed their daughter made any such statements.

Bush and the Republican-led Legislature intervened in the case in late 2003, passing a law that allowed the governor to have her feeding tube reinserted. But that law was eventually declared unconstitutional and during the 2005 Florida legislative session, the Senate refused to intervene in the case a second time.

In June, Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin released a detailed autopsy that tried to lay to rest much of the controversy surrounding Terri Schiavo and what led to her collapse. Thogmartin concluded there was no evidence of trauma that caused Schiavo's injuries, but he also said he was not sure that an eating disorder led to Schiavo's initial collapse as had been suggested during a 1992 medical malpractice trial in which Michael Schiavo sued his wife's doctor.

Thogmartin also noted that Michael Schiavo had given different times as to when his wife collapsed.

A day later Bush used that discrepancy to call for a ''fresh look'' into whether Michael Schiavo waited anywhere from 40 to 70 minutes following the time he heard his wife collapse until he called 911.

On June 30, McCabe sent a detailed report to the governor, saying he had his two top prosecutors -- Doug Crow and Bob Lewis -- review all information related to the case and there was simply no evidence to suggest that any crime had occurred.

''While there have been discrepancies that have existed over what time Mrs. Schiavo collapsed relative to what time paramedics were called, all available records indicate that it has been Mr. Schiavo's consistent position that he called 911 immediately after her collapse,'' McCabe wrote.

``This consistency . . . leads me to the conclusion that such discrepancies are not indicative of criminal activity and thus not material to any potential investigation.''

Included with McCabe's letter to Bush was a lengthy report by Crow and Lewis, in which the prosecutors wrote that this was not the first time McCabe's office had been asked to consider accusations agains Michael Schiavo. But each time, they wrote, they had ``found insufficient evidence of any prosecutable offense to justify a criminal investigation.''

The prosecutors stated that the 'past decade of increasingly venomous litigation and the family members' disparate and irreconcilable beliefs as to Terri's wishes'' made it ''unrealistic to expect'' that their office could resolve the dispute.

They added that ''despite extended litigation and a detailed autopsy, we have no proof to suggest that a crime has occurred.'' They also noted that Michael Schiavo was not the only witness who has given conflicting testimony as to when events occurred the night Terri Schiavo collapsed.

TAMPA, Fla. - The cremated remains of Terri Schiavo, the severely brain-damaged woman who died after her feeding tube was removed in March, were buried Monday in a Clearwater cemetery.

The burial failed, however, to bring a close to the Schiavo saga. Instead, acrimony flared anew, with her parents complaining that they were not notified beforehand about the service.

Michael Schiavo, who said he promised his wife he would not keep her alive artificially and waged a long legal battle to remove her feeding tube, had the words "I kept my promise'' inscribed on her bronze grave marker.

The marker also lists Feb. 25, 1990 - the day she collapsed and fell into what most doctors said was an irreversible vegetative state - as the date Schiavo "Departed this Earth.''

Schiavo actually died March 31, nearly two weeks after her feeding tube was removed by court order. The marker lists that date as when Schiavo was "at peace.''

David Gibbs, an attorney for the woman's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, decried the words on the marker.

"Obviously, that's a real shot and another unkind act toward a grieving mom and dad,'' Gibbs said.

Two days after Terri Schiavo's death, the 41-year-old was cremated and her husband, Michael Schiavo, was given possession of her remains.

The husband had said her ashes would be buried at a family plot in Pennsylvania. But on Monday his attorney, George Felos, said in a statement that the service and interment had taken place at Sylvan Abbey Memorial Park in Clearwater.

The statement did not explain why Michael Schiavo, who lives near Clearwater, decided to keep his wife's remains in Florida. He did not return a phone call seeking additional information.

Schiavo's parents had opposed her cremation and hoped to bury her in their adopted state of Florida. Services for Schiavo already had been conducted in nearby Gulfport, where her parents live, and in Pennsylvania, where she grew up.

The Schindlers' attorney said the family was notified by fax only after Monday's service, when the family had already started getting calls from reporters.

A pond and fountain also mark the woman's grave, where the flat bronze marker was festooned with flowers Monday evening.

Terri Schiavo collapsed in 1990 after a chemical imbalance caused her heart to stop. She left no written instructions in the event she became disabled, and her husband said she never would have wanted to be kept alive in what court-appointed doctors called a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

Her parents, however, doubted she had any such end-of-life wishes. They maintained she would benefit from rehabilitation, despite most doctors saying her condition was irreversible.

The seven-year battle engulfed the courts, Congress, the White House and divided the country.

Probe Sought in Terri Schiavo 911 Call
Florida Governor Questions Husband's Response to Collapse

By Jackie Hallifax
Associated Press
June 17, 2005

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Gov. Jeb Bush said Friday that a prosecutor has agreed to investigate why Terri Schiavo collapsed 15 years ago, citing an alleged time gap between when her husband found her and when he called 911.

Bush said his request for the probe was not meant to suggest wrongdoing by Michael Schiavo.

''It's a significant question that during this ordeal was never brought up,'' Bush told reporters.

In a letter faxed to Pinellas-Pasco County State Attorney Bernie McCabe, the governor said Michael Schiavo testified in a 1992 medical malpractice trial that he found his wife collapsed at 5 a.m. on Feb. 25, 1990, 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.''

McCabe was out of state Friday and couldn't immediately be reached for comment, but Bush said McCabe has agreed to his request.

Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment from The Associated Press. But on Wednesday he said his client didn't wait to call for help and has conceded that he confuses dates and times.

Felos has said that if Michael Schiavo had not called 911 immediately, as Bush and others allege,

''There is no hour gap or other gap to the point Michael heard Terri fall and called 911,'' Felos said. ''We've seen the baseless allegations in this case fall by the wayside one by one ... That's what I would call it, a baseless claim to perpetuate a controversy that in fact doesn't exist.''

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

The governor's request followed the release Wednesday of an autopsy concluding that Terri Schiavo 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.

Bobby Schindler, Schiavo's brother, said Friday his family believes more questions were raised than answered by the autopsy report and that a new legal review is appropriate.

''Anything that can shed some light on the cause of Terri's collapse is going to be welcomed by our family,'' he said from Bloomington, Minn., where the family is speaking at an anti-abortion convention.

''Enough is enough,'' said Democratic Sen. Ron Klein. ''I don't want to see it on TV any more, I don't want to hear politicians talk about it. Let her be at peace.''

''I understand that these events took place many years ago, and that you may not be able to collect all the relevant records and physical evidence. However, Mrs. Schiavo's family deserves to know anything that can be done to determine the cause and circumstances of her collapse 15 years ago,'' Bush wrote. ''The unanswered questions may be unanswerable, but the attempt should be made.''

LARGO, Fla. (June 15) - An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.

But what caused her collapse 15 years remained a mystery. The autopsy and post-mortem investigation found no proof that she had an eating disorder, as was suspected at the time, Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin said.

Autopsy results on the 41-year-old brain-damaged woman were made public Wednesday, more than two months after Schiavo's death March 31 ended an internationally watched right-to-die battle between her husband and parents that engulfed the courts, Congress and the White House and divided the country.

Thogmartin also said she did not appear to have suffered a heart attack and there was no evidence that she was given harmful drugs or other substances prior to her death.

He said she would not have been able to eat or drink if she had been given food by mouth as her parents' requested.

''Removal of her feeding tube would have resulted in her death whether she was fed or hydrated by mouth or not,'' Thogmartin told reporters.

He also said she was blind, because the ''vision centers of her brain were dead.''

Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had fought their son-in-law, Michael Schiavo, in court for seven years over her fate.

Thogmartin said that Schiavo's brain was about half of its expected size when she died 13 days after her feeding tube was removed.

''The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain,'' he said. ''This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons.''

He said a review of hospital records of her 1990 showed she had a diminished potassium level in her blood. But he said that did not prove she had an eating disorder, because the emergency treatment she received at the time could have affected the potassium level.

The cause of her collapse has never been definitely proven, but testimony in a 1992 civil trial indicated that she probably was suffering from an eating disorder that led to a severe chemical imbalance.

The Schindlers, though, don't believe she had an eating disorder and have accused Michael Schiavo of abusing his wife, a charge he vehemently denied.

Speaking before the report was issued, Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, said the Schindlers continue to engage in a ''smear campaign against Michael to deflect the real issues in the case, which were Terri's wishes and her medical condition.''

Bill Pellan, chief investigator for the medical examiner's office, said Tuesday that Thogmartin reviewed police reports, medical records and other documents in trying to determine the cause of her brain damage.

During the long legal battle, numerous abuse complaints made to state social workers were ruled unfounded.

Michael Schiavo convinced the courts his wife would not want to be kept alive artificially with no hope of recovery, contending that she made statements to that effect before her collapse.

Her parents doubt she had any such end-of-life wishes and also disputed that she was in a persistent vegetative state. They believed she could get better with therapy.

By Jacob Goldstein
The Miami Herald
June 15, 2005

The collapse 15 years ago that left Terri Schiavo profoundly brain damaged may not have been caused by an eating disorder, according to Dr. Jon Thogmartin, the medical examiner who today announced the results of Schiavo's autopsy.

ST. PETERSBURG - In the last year, he has been maligned as a murderer, had his face plastered on posters wearing a Hitler mustache and still gets threats upon his life.

But among his colleagues, Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer has become an icon. About 200 judges and lawyers gave him rousing applause and whistles of respect Friday, after he won the St. Petersburg Bar Association's judicial appreciation award for an unprecedented second year in a row.

Greer, 63, who oversaw the end-of-life drama of Terri Schiavo, made the legal community "proud to be lawyers," said attorney John Biesinger III, who presented the award. His "grace and professionalism was inspiring."

Also Friday, the Bar association presented their Liberty Bell award for community service to Andrew Barnes, who retired last year as chairman and chief executive officer of the St. Petersburg Times.

Over past years, the Bar's judicial award has been sprinkled around the judiciary, with nominating and selection committees often splitting votes nearly equally among candidates, Biesinger said. This year's vote, "wasn't even close."

It was Greer's ruling five years ago that eventually led to the removal of a feeding tube for Schiavo and her subsequent death in March at age 41. Greer found there was clear and convincing evidence that the brain-injured woman was in a persistent vegetative state and would not have wanted to be kept alive artificially.

Opposing him at various times were Schiavo's family of birth, right-to-life groups, the Florida Legislature, the U.S. Congress and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, whose push to keep her alive nearly resulted in a last-minute constitutional showdown between the judiciary and executive branches of government.

The Schiavo case and the national outcry it engendered "has been an incredible journey," Greer said. "The one constant has been the support, spoken and unspoken, of my associates. I appreciate this award more than you will ever know."

Barnes, 65, came to the Times as metro editor in 1973 after graduating from Harvard College and working as a reporter and editor at the Providence Journal and Washington Post. During his 21-

year tenure, the Times won five Pulitzer Prizes, grew into Florida's largest daily paper and maintained its independent status by fighting off a corporate takeover battle from Texas investors.

It also supported numerous civic causes and awarded hundreds of scholarships to budding journalists.

Barnes "exemplifies the highest respect for individuals, integrity, ethics and compassion toward mankind in all walks of life," said Circuit Judge Thomas McGrady, presenting the award at a luncheon at the Mirror Lake Lyceum.

In a typically diffident manner, Barnes quickly thanked the Bar and said the award was really a recognition for the newspaper and its support of the law.

Last week, he received an honorary doctor of humane letters degree from Indiana University, which has strong ties to the Times dating to long-time family owners, the Poynters. Barnes still serves as chairman of the Poynter Institute for Media Studies in St. Petersburg, the non-profit journalism school that holds Times stock.

He recently stepped down as chairman of the board that awards Pulitzer Prizes and said he looks forward to more free time to write.

Medicare plays a key financial role in the case of Terri Schindler-Schiavo and maybe for other disabled and incapacitated adults in the United States today in providing hospice care in such facilities as Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, Florida, operated by the Hospice of Florida Suncoast where Terri died on March 31 of starvation and dehydration.

Although Terri was the recipient of a jury award of $750,000 earmarked for her rehabilitation and therapy, her husband, Michael Schiavo, refused to allow her to have therapy and instead used the money to hire an attorney to get him a court order sanctioning her death.

Michael Schiavo has told the court that virtually all the money from the jury award has been spent and in July, 2002, asked Pinellas County probate court judge George W. Greer to enroll his wife in the Medicaid program which would fund her stay at the hospice along with Medicare.

In a Spring, 2001, newsletter issued by Dr. James Avery, then medical director at the Hospice of Florida Suncoast, he announced that Medicare had begun paying physicians for supervision of the care of a patient in hospice.

Avery, who had given a sworn affidavit in February, 2000, to probate court judge Greer, attesting to Terri’s cognitive behavior, saying that she was alert and capable of swallowing, left his private practice in 2000 and became medical director of the Hospice of Florida Suncoast, a post he held until 2003.

In his Spring, 2003 Hospice newsletter, Avery explained the provisions of the Medicare Hospice Benefit. However, in order to qualify for the Medicare Hospice Benefit, the patient must be certified as terminally ill—prognosis of death within six months-- by written certification of two physicians.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is currently seeking to recover $14.8 million from Hospice of Florida Suncoast paid to them as a result of fraudulent claims made for Medicare reimbursement for patients not terminally ill----such as Terri Schindler-Schiavo---and therefore not eligible for hospice care.

In the case of Terri Schindler-Schiavo, not only was she not terminally ill, but the proper certification was never filed as only one doctor, her personal physician, Dr. Victor Gambone, signed the certificate. She was secretively moved from Palm Gardens Nursing Home to Woodside Hospice in April, 2000, by her husband and his attorney, George Felos, who was a member of the hospice board of directors at the time and former chairman of the board although he failed to make any disclosure of his position with the hospice.

Terri remained at the hospice for five years, from April, 2000 until her death March 31.

The Associated Press
May 6, 2005

MIAMI -- Terri Schiavo's parents and siblings said Friday they still have not been told where the brain-damaged woman's remains will be laid to rest.

Appearing on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes" on Friday night, Bob and Mary Schindler, their son Bobby and daughter Suzanne Vitadamo claimed that Terri Schiavo's husband is keeping her remains from them.

"They were supposed to tell us, and we still have not heard from ... Michael Schiavo where Terri's been laid," Bobby Schindler said. "Our family expected this. Michael has disobeyed court orders throughout the ordeal and continues to do so today."

The Schindlers have held four memorial services for their daughter.

Michael Schiavo is under court order to notify the Schindlers of his plans for a memorial service. He had his wife cremated, and said her ashes would be buried at a family plot in Pennsylvania.

George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney, did not immediately return a call Friday night.

Terri Schiavo, 41, died March 31 in a Pinellas Park hospice, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed by court order. She suffered brain damage in 1990 after a chemical imbalance caused her heart to stop.

She left no written instructions in the event she became disabled, and her husband said he never would have wanted to be kept alive in what court-appointed doctors called a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.

The Schindlers, however, doubted she had any such end-of-life wishes. They maintained she would benefit from rehabilitation, despite most doctors saying her condition was irreversible.

Federal and state courts repeatedly rejected attempts by Florida lawmakers, Gov. Jeb Bush, Congress and President Bush to intervene on behalf of her parents.

Bob Schindler, Terri's father, said he was angry that lawmakers did not do more to help his daughter.

"I'm disappointed in Gov. Bush," he said. "My goodness, the system is just atrocious."

During a seven-year legal battle, the Schindlers sought independent investigation of their daughter's condition and what caused it. Abuse complaints to state social workers were ruled unfounded.

About 40 judges in six courts were involved in the case at one point or another. Six times, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene.

As Schiavo faded, Congress rushed through a bill to allow the federal courts to take up the case, and President Bush signed it March 21. But the federal courts refused to step in.

Her autopsy results are pending.

Associated Press
Tampa Tribune
May 06, 2005

NEW PORT RICHEY, Fla. - Protesters greeted the judge who presided over the Terri Schiavo case at a bar association ceremony honoring him with an award and a standing ovation.

Circuit Judge George Greer told members of the West Pasco Bar Association that he will treasure the group's Special Justice Award honoring him for his 13 years on the bench.

"These past several years have been a bit trying," Greer told the audience Thursday night. "You see my friends out there at the gate. I thank you for not inviting them in."

On his way in, about 15 pickets carried signs criticizing Greer for issuing a court order withdrawing a feeding tube from the 41-year-old brain-damaged woman. Schiavo died 13 days after the tube was removed in March to end a bitter seven-year legal fight between her husband and her parents.

"What Judge Greer did and what judges in general do is they look to the law, they look for guidance in the law, and they come up with the best answers they can within the law," 2nd District Court of Appeal Judge Morris Silberman said at the ceremony.

Demonstrator Mary Kimball couldn't disagree more with Greer's judgment. She was accompanied by her husband and seven children.

"The injustice goes on," Kimball said. "They're spitting on Terri's grave. That's what this is."

Federal and state courts repeatedly rejected extraordinary attempts at intervention by Florida lawmakers, Gov. Jeb Bush, Congress and President Bush on behalf of Schiavo's parents.

Her autopsy results are pending. Doctors say she was in a persistent vegetative state after her heart stopped in 1990. Her parents maintained she would benefit from rehabilitation.

Ignoring the Law: Terri Schiavo and Activist Judges

On March 31, 2005, Terri Schiavo died after thirteen days without food or water. Terri’s tragic death —— which can only accurately be described as murder —— brought into focus one of the most disturbing trends today: activist judges. The term "activist judges" has been used frequently as of late and has been invoked by both conservatives and liberals. Liberals refer to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as an activist judge because he has the audacity to suggest that Roe v. Wade is bad law. Conservatives referred to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy as an activist judge when he based his decision to outlaw the death penalty for minors on standards of international law. So what is an "activist judge?"

At its most basic, an activist judge is a judge with an agenda not just individual opinions, but an agenda and his accomplishment of his agenda regardless of the law. Activist judges are judges without any regard for the law.

Terri’s death was precipitated by such judges. So determined were these judges to see Terri die that they ignored not only common sense, but the laws of both the United States and the State of Florida. Circuit Court Judge George Greer of Florida is an activist judge. In the days leading up to the removal of Terri’s feeding tube, Judge Greer made four lawless findings. First, he denied a request by the Schindler family for relief based on an earlier mistake he made. At an earlier hearing, Judge Greer allowed the self-serving hearsay statement of Terri’s "husband" Michael to qualify as evidence that Terri did not want to live in a persistent vegetative state. Hearsay is a legal term for a statement that is told through another individual. Because of the inherent untrustworthiness of such statements, Florida law forbids the admission of hearsay statements as proof in situations like Terri’s. Judge Greer ignored that law.

Second, Judge Greer denied the Schindler family’s request for more medical tests. Because the removal of Terri’’s feeding tube was based upon a finding that she was in a persistent vegetative state ("PVS"), that diagnosis had to be accurate. The Schindler family contested the PVS diagnosis. Florida law requires medical tests demonstrating that the PVS finding be "determined and diagnosed as permanent prior to the withdrawal of life-prolonging means." The permanence of Terri’’s PVS state was called into question, but Judge Greer ignored the common sense questions and the law.

Third, in an astounding decision, Judge Greer denied the Schindler family’s request of oral reintroduction of food and water after the removal of the feeding tube. Several nurses who had previously cared for Terri stated under oath that she was capable of drinking and eating soft solids on her own thereby making the feeding tube unnecessary. Since the feeding tube was the sole issue of contention with Michael, an easy solution would be to feed and hydrate Terri orally. But Judge Greer refused to allow this and, in fact, made the oral introduction to food and water to Terri a crime.

Fourth, Judge Greer denied the Florida Department of Children and Families ["DCF"] request to intervene as guardian on behalf of Terri. DCF submitted several claims of abuse by Michael to Judge Greer. DCF argued that because Michael was the sole suspect of Terri’s abuse, he could no longer act as her legal guardian. Judge Greer ignored DCF’s claims and all of the testimony submitted and ruled that DCF’s intervention was "not appropriate."

Judge Greer’s disregard for common sense and the law does not end with his disregard for state law. On March 17, 2005 the Senate Health Committee and the House Government Reform Committee issued congressional subpoenas requiring Terri and several of Terri’s doctors to appear before Congress for a March 28th hearing. Federal law protects witnesses called before an official congressional committee and makes it a crime for anyone to obstruct the witness from appearing. Judge Greer, in finding that there was no reason for Congress in intervene, simply ignored the subpoenas and ordered that Terri’s feeding tube be removed. [Note: Judge Greer could have, and should have, been found in contempt of Congress.]

Terri’s judicially ordered death sentence was not signed off by Judge Greer alone. In an unusual unifying act, Congress passed a bill that transferred Terri’’s case out of the state courts [and the death grip of Judge Greer] and into the federal courts. This action, which is used frequently by convicted criminals, allows a federal court to hear the case de novo. ""De novo"" simply means that the court must consider the case anew, as if they were starting from scratch. Surely Terri deserved the same right commonly granted to convicted criminals!

Terri’s case was transferred to the care of U.S. District Court Judge James D. Whittemore. However, despite the constitutionally passed law requiring Judge Whittemore to consider Terri’s case de novo, he allowed each side a mere 45 minutes of oral argument. 45 minutes! Terri’’s legal battles had been on-going for 15 years, there was no way to fit 15 years into 45 minutes! And in less than 24 hours, Judge Whittemore ruled that the removal of Terri’s feeding tube was correct. The following day, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed Judge Whittemore’s decision. And the U.S. Supreme Court twice denied the Schindler family’s request for intervention.

Terri’s court-ordered murder is the kind of atrocity we in this country like to believe only happens in other, less-enlightened places. And while people talk about living wills and other social ""solutions"" to situations like Terri’s, the real issue people should be talking about is the ramifications of the activist judges that made sure an innocent woman was starved to death. Judges must be held accountable for their blatant disregard for law. We must make sure that happens.

Meredith Cavallo is an attorney licensed in New Jersey and the District of Columbia.

WASHINGTON - National Democratic boss Howard Dean, who has accused congressional Republicans of "grandstanding" in the Terri Schiavo case, said his party will use it against the GOP in coming elections.

"This is going to be an issue in 2006, and its going to be an issue in 2008 because we're going to have an ad with a picture of [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay saying, 'Do you want this guy to decide whether you die or not? Or is that going to be up to your loved ones?'" Dean said in West Hollywood, Calif.

Dean went on to say, "The issue is: Are we going to live in a theocracy where the highest powers tell us what to do? Or are we going to be allowed to consult our own high powers when we make very difficult decisions?'"

Schiavo, 41, died March 31 at a Florida hospice, almost two weeks after her feeding tube was removed by court order - ending a bitter legal battle between her husband and her parents. Congress drew out the fight by passing a special law for federal courts to review the case.

The agency investigated 89 complaints dating back to 2001, when Schiavo's feeding tube was removed for the first time and the legal battle surrounding her right-to-die case intensified.

The calls alleged that the brain-damaged woman was being mistreated by her husband and her parents for financial gain. One complaint alleged that Schiavo's parents were selling videos of her through a Web site; another said Schiavo's husband wasn't spending money intended for her rehabilitation.

But investigators said they found no evidence that either her husband or parents were exploiting her, and often noted in their records that they found Schiavo well cared for on their visits to her Pinellas Park hospice.

Schiavo, 41, died last month after her feeding tube was removed for the third time, ending a bitter court battle between her husband, Michael Schiavo, and parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, over whether she would have wanted to live in a vegetative state.

The repeated allegations of abuse were based partly on bone scans showing Terri Schiavo suffered fractures and statements she made to family and friends that she was unhappy in her marriage.

Schiavo's husband has denied harming his wife. His lawyer said the fractures resulted from osteoporosis caused by the woman's years of immobility and complications of her medication.

Robert Schindler declined to comment there on the release of the DCF documents. An attorney for Michael Schiavo did not immediately return calls.

By Sheryl Gay Stolberg
The New York Times
April 14, 2005

WASHINGTON, April 13 - Deflecting all questions about his ethical conduct and political future, Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, on Wednesday stepped up his crusade against judges, announcing that he had instructed the Judiciary Committee to investigate federal court decisions in the Terri Schiavo case and to recommend possible legislation.

At a crowded news conference, Mr. DeLay said he would not entertain questions about his political activities. It was his first question-and-answer session with reporters since one fellow Republican, Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut, called for him to resign his leadership post and another, Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House, said he should explain himself to the American people.

He has asserted that Democrats and the "liberal media" are orchestrating a campaign to discredit him by raising questions about possible ethics violations, including overseas travel financed by outside groups.

But the questions persisted. Mr. Gingrich, who in a television interview Tuesday said Mr. DeLay seemed to be blaming a left-wing conspiracy, told a meeting of the American Society of Newspaper Editors on Wednesday that the majority leader must ultimately "brief the country in a public way."

"He and his lawyers have to decide when that is," Mr. Gingrich said. "But he at some point has got to convince people that what he has done was reasonable and authentic and legitimate."

Mr. DeLay was also a topic at the White House press briefing, where Scott McClellan, President Bush's spokesman, said the president supported what Mr. DeLay and other Congressional leaders were doing "to move forward on the agenda that the American people want us to enact."

But Mr. McClellan suggested that the relationship between Mr. Bush and Mr. DeLay, a fellow Texan, was more business than social.

"Sure," Mr. McClellan said, when asked if the president considered Mr. DeLay a friend. He went on, "I think there are different levels of friendship with anybody."

Mr. DeLay, the No. 2 House Republican, , has been embroiled in ethics controversies for months, ever since a grand jury in Texas indicted some of his top operatives. But the spotlight has intensified in recent weeks since he led Congress to intervene in the case of Ms. Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman who died after her feeding tube was withdrawn by court order.

Despite the unusual Congressional legislation, several federal courts refused to reopen the Schiavo case, enraging Mr. DeLay and other Republicans.

Mr. DeLay's subsequent criticisms of the courts - at one point he suggested that the judges responsible could be impeached and at another point said that they would be held responsible - have brought ridicule from Democrats. They have also prompted some prominent Republicans, including Mr. Bush and Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, to distance themselves from him.

Asked last week about Mr. DeLay's attacks on judges, Mr. Bush would only say that he believed in an independent judiciary, in a system of checks and balances, in judges who strictly interpreted the Constitution.

On Wednesday, Mr. DeLay seemed to adopt the president's language: "Of course I believe in an independent judiciary," he said. He also apologized for the impeachment comment, even as he insisted it was well within the purview of Congress to rein in the courts.

"Sometimes I get a little more passionate," Mr. DeLay said, "particularly during the moment and the day that Terri Schiavo was starved to death. Emotions were flowing."

"I said something in an inartful way," he added, "and I shouldn't have said it that way, and I apologize. I apologize for saying it that way. It was taken wrong, and I didn't explain or clarify my remarks as I'm clarifying them here."

Mr. DeLay was not specific about what legislative changes, if any, he would like to see emerge from the Judiciary Committee's review. But in announcing that he had asked Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., a Wisconsin Republican and the committee chairman, to examine the actions of federal judges in the Schiavo case, Mr. DeLay said the House had previously passed legislation limiting the jurisdiction of the courts and breaking up the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a bill that died in the Senate.

"We set the jurisdiction of the courts," Mr. DeLay said. "We set up the courts. We can unset the courts."

As to the ethics questions, Mr. DeLay repeated that he was "more than happy" to have the House ethics committee review those issues. But it cannot do so because the committee is embroiled in a fight over rules changes that critics say will discourage ethics inquiries. Democrats, upset that Republicans adopted the changes without their cooperation, are refusing to constitute the committee this session. The panel met Wednesday to try to resolve the impasse, but was unsuccessful.

"We're trying to find some common ground," said the chairman, Representative Doc Hastings, Republican of Washington. "We have been talking. As long as we can talk, I tend to be an optimist."

Democrats, meanwhile, sharply criticized the ethics rule changes on Wednesday at a news conference that featured Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, and the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. Ms. Pelosi warned that House Republicans, who rode to power in 1994 by portraying Democrats as arrogant, had become arrogant. "I have said for a long time their greed will be their downfall," she said.

At least one Republican, Mr. Shays, seemed to agree on Wednesday. "I'm no fan of Nancy Pelosi," he said. But, he added, "we said we would be different and we were when we started out. We are quickly becoming like they were when they were in the majority."

By Tony Mauro
Legal Times
New York Lawyer
April 13, 2005

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, speaking before a House of Representatives subcommittee on Tuesday, defended the independence of the federal judiciary even as he also said that criticism of the courts was "very healthy."

Kennedy's comments marked the first time a justice has addressed Congress since the recent spate of criticism of the federal courts generated by the death of Terry Schiavo.

After federal judges declined to order Schiavo's feeding tube restored last month, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said that the judges responsible should have to "answer for their behavior."

Kennedy and Justice Clarence Thomas appeared before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations for an otherwise routine hearing on the Court's $66 million budget request for the next fiscal year.

The anger toward federal courts brewing among mainly conservative members of Congress critics surfaced when subcommittee member Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., expressed his concern about Roper v. Simmons. That March 1 ruling written by Kennedy struck down the death penalty for juveniles and cited, among other things, international consensus on the issue.

Invoking international law went "beyond the rule of law," Tiahrt said. Tiahrt's comments were not presented as a question, and Kennedy did not respond directly on the international law issue, but he did say debate about the role of the courts was "tremendously energizing" and was a "democratic dialogue that makes democracy work."

At a later point, when Rep. Steven Rothman, D-N.J., asked how justices interpret the Constitution in light of changing circumstances, Kennedy made a more impassioned defense of the American judicial system as "the envy of the world." A key element of the system, he added, was the neutrality and independence of the judiciary. Without mentioning the recent criticism, Kennedy said that disparaging the judiciary's neutrality while the rest of the world yearns for it "would be a tragedy."

For his part, Thomas also suggested that criticism came with the job of being a federal judge."We have lifetime appointments because we are supposed to be criticized." A longtime sports fan, Thomas added that, in his experience, when a game is over, "the referees get out of there fast. They don't stand around high-fiving people."

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said harsh political rhetoric could spur violence against the nation's judges, offering a veiled response last night to some national figures who in the past week have blasted the courts for failing to intervene in the case of a severely brain-damaged Florida woman.

Speaking before a crowded auditorium at Goucher College in Towson, O'Connor said she never anticipated her work as a judge would be accompanied by violent threats and said "thoughtful citizens" should demand an end to fiery extremism on either end of the political spectrum.

"It didn't occur to me that there would be as many threats, and I do receive them," O'Connor said. "I don't think the harsh rhetoric helps. I think it energizes people who are a little off base to take actions that maybe they wouldn't otherwise take."

O'Connor's comments came at the opening of a new ethics and leadership center at Goucher, created with a $2 million gift to the school from the family of the late Roxana Cannon Arsht.

A Goucher graduate, Arsht became the first woman judge in Delaware. She and O'Connor became friends in the 1970s and remained close until Arsht's death in 2003, with Arsht giving O'Connor the ruffled white collar that the justice often wears with her robe on the bench.

In a 30-minute question-and-answer session with Goucher President Sanford J. Ungar, O'Connor recounted her appointment as the first female justice on the Supreme Court and - without commenting on the possibility of future vacancies - said it is nearly impossible to know how any future nominees will vote on the many issues that come before the high court.

"I frankly do not know how anyone going on the court would be able to predict the thousands of issues that come before the court," said O'Connor, 75, who was nominated in 1981 by President Reagan. "I myself couldn't have told President Reagan what I would do on all these issues, because I hadn't faced them."

Of the court's nine justices, O'Connor is widely viewed as the most influential. A moderate conservative, she has been a critical swing vote in many of the court's most high-profile cases in recent years - allowing terror suspects at the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to challenge their confinement, for instance, and upholding a race-influenced admissions policy at the University of Michigan's law school.

Her pendulum role on the court was on display last week, as she wrote the majority opinion in a closely watched case expanding the protections of a landmark gender equity law and - a day later - the dissent in a high-profile age-discrimination case.

O'Connor did not discuss specific cases last night. Her comments on violence against judges came in response to a question from Ungar about the heated rhetoric from political leaders that followed the case of Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman who died a week ago after the feeding tube that has sustained her for 15 years was removed at a state court's orders.

Political leaders, most prominently House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, said the nation's courts would have to answer for Schiavo's death.

O'Connor said tensions have historically existed between Congress and the courts, but she added: "It isn't any more pleasant today. ... And I hope that we will see an end to this, but it won't happen right away, and it will take the work of thoughtful citizens who say, `We don't want to have this from either extreme, so let's move on.'"

Schiavo Case Reverberates on Capitol Hill
Some Republicans Sharply Critical of Judges' Rulings

WASHINGTON - Congress returned from a two-week Easter recess both emboldened and chagrined by its role in the Terri Schiavo case and the unexpected reaction from the public to it.

While a few lawmakers sought to punish the federal judges who rebuffed their hastily passed law aimed at getting Schiavo's feeding tube reinserted, most tried to put some distance between their action in March and what's on their plate this month.

"I think we ought to let the rhetoric cool off," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said Tuesday.

Nonetheless, Congress returned this week bubbling with the emotional issues and public policy debates raised by Schiavo's plight. A Senate committee looking at whether the treatment of disabled people such as Schiavo should be better defined was warned by the father of a retarded Kansas man to tread carefully.

"Those debates frighten me, and they should alarm you, too," Rud Turnbull of Lawrence, Kan., the father of 37-year-old Jay Turnbull, said in remarks prepared for a Senate Health Committee hearing Wednesday. "The slippery slope is slick and awaits us all."

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, is writing legislation that would let federal courts review cases like Schiavo's - when there is no advance directive and there's a dispute over the person's wishes.

"Although Terri Schiavo very dramatically brought these issues to the attention of the nation, their importance did not fade or diminish with her loss," said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., chairman of the committee holding Wednesday's hearing.

The bitter feud between Schiavo's parents and her husband rippled to Capitol Hill last month. On March 20, lawmakers interrupted their Easter break to pass a bill directing federal courts to review whether her civil rights had been violated by the decision to remove her feeding tube.

Schiavo, 41, died last Thursday at a Florida hospice, almost two weeks after the removal of the feeding tube that had kept her alive since 1990, when she suffered brain damage that court-

As Schiavo faded, federal judges all the way to the Supreme Court turned back her parents' efforts to get her feeding resumed.

Her death sparked intense rhetoric among lawmakers. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas suggested an impeachment case could be made against judges who rebuffed Congress' will.

"That to me should be of concern to Democrats and Republicans regardless of how you feel about the issue," said Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.

However, other Republicans, chastened by polls showing that a large majority of Americans disapproved of Congress inserting itself into the Schiavo case, said both parties should back off from any efforts to take further action.

"I don't think there's a groundswell up here to take this issue and federalize it," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Added Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore.: "I'm not for things that go after judges. They're an independent branch of government. We need to respect that."

WASHINGTON - For all the attention her case has brought to the difficult issues of life and the end of life, the first legacy of Terri Schiavo may arise in the U.S. Capitol, by providing new momentum for Republican attempts to push the federal judiciary to the right.

Conservative activists and members of Congress believe that state and federal courts essentially ignored the law Congress passed on her behalf last month.

The case has brought national attention to the favorite conservative cause of reining in the judiciary, as well as to the Republican push in the Senate to overcome Democratic opposition and install more conservatives on the federal bench.

"I think the Schiavo case dramatized the need to do something to restrain the judiciary," said Richard Lessner, executive director of the American Conservative Union in Washington.

"So when we get to the coming battles over judicial nominees in the Senate, perhaps the public will be somewhat more engaged, in realizing what's at stake. In this case, literally life and death."

Schiavo's death Thursday came as senators prepared to address the most contentious issue brewing on Capitol Hill: whether Republican leaders will change a long-standing Senate rule that requires 60 votes to confirm a presidential nominee to the federal courts.

Republicans are threatening to change the rules so that judges could be confirmed with a simple majority, or 51 votes. Republicans hold 55 of the Senate's 100 seats.

Those who support the change call it the "constitutional option," because they contend that filibustering Democrats have overstepped the Senate's constitutional duty to "advise and consent" on judicial nominees.

Democrats call it the "nuclear option," because it would break the long-standing Senate tradition, unlike in the House, of allowing the minority to retain some measure of control.

Both sides acknowledge the Schiavo case has inflamed passions, because state and federal courts did not make the rulings anticipated by lawmakers who wrote the bill allowing federal review of her case.

"The lasting dispute isn't going to be between Terri's parents and her estranged husband. It's going to be between the branches of government," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.

"The courts are at the very center of this, and I think that's going to increase the public pressure on the part of their elected representatives to take action. ... Just because someone dressed in black makes a decision, that is not the final word."

Congress returns this week after a two-week break. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who is expected to discuss the issue with his Democratic counterpart, Harry Reid of Nevada, recently issued a letter outlining his desire to reach a compromise rather than change the rule.

"But any compromise must include an up or down vote" on the president's nominees, Frist spokeswoman Amy Call said.

Americans can expect the same sort of campaigning that has marked the battle over changing Social Security, as Democratic-leaning groups, including organized labor, seek to marshal a coordinated defense. Last week, the People for the American Way, a liberal group, launched a $5-million ad campaign that urges against changing the rules.

The Family Research Council is running ads in favor of it, and a coalition of conservative groups is expected to urge Frist to implement the change. They want the Senate to act before there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court, to ensure confirmation of the president's nominee.

"The end goal of accountable judges is what we want. And I can't imagine this judicial fiasco with the Schiavo case will lessen the urgency for something to happen here," said Carrie Gordon Earll, a senior policy analyst at Focus on the Family, an evangelical public policy group.

Schiavo, she said, "may be putting a face on the whole discussion of judicial activism for many people in the country who before didn't really know what we were talking about."

The president brought the fight over the judiciary to the forefront earlier this year by renominating seven of the 10 appellate court nominees the Democrats rejected during his first term.

Schiavo's death raised the heat of the rhetoric, with some lawmakers and conservative leaders now calling for Congress to wrest more control from the courts.

"This loss happened because our legal system did not protect the people who need protection most, and that will change," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said the day Schiavo died. "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today."

In denying to hear the Schiavo case last week, Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr. of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals said Congress and the president had overstepped their constitutional boundaries.

"We must conscientiously guard the independence of our judiciary, even in the face of the unfathomable human tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo," Birch wrote.

Birch also dismissed complaints about judicial activism, writing that, "Were the courts to change the law, as (Schiavo's parents) and Congress invite us to do, an "activist judge' criticism would be valid."

Mike Allen, an expert in constitutional law and civil procedure at the Stetson University College of Law in Gulfport, agreed that Schiavo "is going to be used as a poster child for this argument of judicial activism."

But as a matter of law, he said, her case was a lousy example. Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge George Greer, who ordered that her tube be removed, followed state law in allowing Schiavo's husband to make decisions for her. And the law Congress passed didn't require the federal courts to reinsert Schiavo's feeding tube; it just allowed them to.

Conservatives' anger toward the judiciary has grown over the past two years with several court rulings, especially the approval of same-sex marriage by the Massachusetts high court; a lower-

court ruling against the federal ban on late-term abortion; and the U.S. Supreme Court case, Lawrence vs. Texas , that overturned a Texas law outlawing sodomy. The case involved a gay couple.

Several conservative lawmakers have advocated laws that would restrict the power of the lower federal courts to rule on specific matters, including public display of the Ten Commandments. Those ideas haven't gained much traction on Capitol Hill. But Perkins of the Family Research Council said the Schiavo case provides ammunition for advocates of a more strident approach.

"If necessary, and it shouldn't be often, the legislative and the executive branch should refuse to acknowledge a judicial decision, just as the judiciary sometimes ignores the legislature," Perkins said.

"The message that we've seen to date is that the judicial system is suffering from a persistent state of arrogance. And that's going to have an impact on the debate over the judiciary."

But Allen and others said Republicans fuming in Congress should consider this, too: Political persuasion doesn't guarantee popular decisions, nor should it.

Greer is a conservative Christian and elected Republican. And among the federal courts that reviewed the Schiavo law, Republican appointees, including Birch, were just as likely to say no as Democrats

Schiavo Case Spurring Statehouse Debate, Unusual Coalition

Robert Tanner
Associated Press
Miami Herald
April 3, 2005

The arguments surrounding Terri Schiavo will live on in statehouse debate and new laws if an emerging coalition of disability rights activists and right-to-lifers succeed in turning the national agony over her case into a re-examination of when and how our lives come to an end.

So far, only a few legislators in a handful of states have sought significant changes to their laws, which define the fundamental elements at stake - how a person can set limits on their medical care, who gets to decide what their wishes are, what evidence is needed to prove it.

None have yet become law and the chances for most, if not all, are slim this year, with some legislatures finished and many far along in their work for this session. But both Republicans and Democrats say the arguments aren't going away.

The debate is an effort to strike a new balance between one stance that argues that medical care and morality mean life must be pursued in nearly all cases, and another stance, crafted over decades of changing views about death, that some may choose to end drastically damaged lives that depend on artificial means.

"I really wanted to make sure we gave a default for life and not for death," said Kansas state Rep. Mary Pilcher-Cook, a Republican who helped revive a measure that would give courts a greater chance to review decisions to end life-sustaining care, lessening the role of guardians or doctors. "Our most vulnerable citizens are in fact in the most danger of losing their life without any recourse."

She was joined in her effort by disability activists, many aligned with liberal causes, and Democrats in the state House. The measure stalled in the Kansas Senate, however, as the session ended for the year last Friday.

"We don't want to get into the politics of the right or the left or whomever," said Michael Donnelly at the Disability Rights Center of Kansas. "This isn't about politics, this is about how we value or don't value the lives people with disabilities have."

His group had been working for years to revisit the issue, and came together with several conservative legislators to move the bill forward. Elsewhere, the National Right to Life Committee has produced model legislation and is working with legislators in several states.

Legislation has also been introduced in Alabama, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota and South Dakota. The Louisiana bill is called the "Human Dignity Act"; Alabama's is the "Starvation and Dehydration Prevention Act."

Many measures predate recent weeks of attention to Schiavo, though some drew their inspiration directly from the agonized public debate over the 41-year-old woman's death - like one in Missouri introduced last Thursday, the day Schiavo died.

"I was gripped by what I was watching and couldn't believe the state of Florida would let this woman die in this manner," said GOP state Rep. Cynthia Davis. Her bill would bar anyone from directing that artificial food and water be withheld or withdrawn without a specific written directive from the patient.

There's also a slew of legislation around living wills and other end-of-life issues that wouldn't further the aims of this emerging group - like a Nevada measure that would let a guardian end life-sustaining measures even if it's against a patient's known wishes, as long as it's in their best interests.

Florida lawmakers, unable to reach a consensus on these issues while Schiavo was alive, are now considering a bill that would require Department of Motor Vehicles offices to offer customers a sample living will form. It would also allow them to indicate on their driver's license whether they have an advance directive.

But several lawmakers are contemplating future measures that would disqualify adulterers from controlling their spouse's care. Other bills could require nutrition or hydration without an advance directive, or require a guardian be appointed by the courts before an incapacitated patient is allowed to die.

"There's a lot of raw emotion still," said Gov. Jeb Bush. "And it may be appropriate to wait and to thoughtfully go about this."

The views of medical care and ending life have shifted over the past 30 years as the country grappled with brain-damaged or coma-bound patients whose families said they shouldn't be forced to live a life they wouldn't want, starting with Karen Ann Quinlan in 1975, then to Nancy Cruzan in 1990 and now to Schiavo.

Critics say the medical community and society have gone too far. "When original advance directives were created, nobody contemplated that hospitals would refuse to treat ... It was usually just the opposite, doctors refusing to pull the feeding tube," said Burke Balch, director of the National Right to Life Committee's medical ethics center.

Now, he says, the presumption in the hospitals, the courts and in too much state legislation, is to go ahead and pull life-sustaining treatment when there is not enough evidence that the patient wanted it.

Doctors and bioethicists say that overwhelmingly, safeguards exist in hospitals and in courts to ensure that patients' and families' wishes and best interests are protected.

"Are they going to go out and undo all the hard work that people have done to make sure they can die without having to go to court?" said Dr. Jean Teno, associate director at Brown University's Gerontology and Health Care Research Center.

By the Associated Press
New York Times
April 3, 2005

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) -- Terri Schiavo's body was cremated Saturday as disagreements continued between her husband and her parents, who were unable to have their own independent expert observe her autopsy.

The cremation was carried out according to a court order issued Tuesday establishing that Michael Schiavo had the right to make such decisions, said his lawyer, George Felos. He said plans for burying her ashes in Pennsylvania, where she grew up, had not yet been completed.

Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, had wanted to bury their daughter in Pinellas County so they could visit her grave.

Terri Schiavo, 41, died Thursday after the removal of the feeding tube that had kept her alive since 1990, when she suffered brain damage that court-appointed doctors determined had placed her in a persistent vegetative state. Her parents had fought in court to keep her alive, disputing the doctors' opinions and saying there was hope of improvement.

Michael Schiavo has not spoken publicly since his wife's death, but Felos said Saturday: ``He's holding up. It's very difficult for him.''

Michael Schiavo is required to tell his wife's parents of any memorial services he plans for Terri Schiavo and where her ashes are interred.

The Schindlers plan to have their own memorial service Tuesday at Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church in Gulfport.

The Schindlers had sought to have independent medical experts observe their daughter's autopsy at the Pinellas County Medical Examiner's office, but the agency refused their request, family attorneys David Gibbs III and Barbara Weller said Saturday.

The autopsy was completed Friday, the day after Terri Schiavo died, and results are not expected for several weeks.

Representatives of the medical examiner's office did not return a call seeking comment Saturday. The examiner's office has said it would conduct routine examinations and look for any evidence of what might have caused her 1990 collapse.

The Schindlers have accused Michael Schiavo of abusing his wife, a charge he vehemently denies.

Over the years, the couple have sought independent investigation of their daughter's condition and what caused it. Abuse complaints to state social workers were ruled unfounded -- although one investigation remains open -- and the Pinellas state attorney's office did not turn up evidence of abuse in one brief probe of the case.

Gibbs said the medical examiner's videotape, pictures and tissue samples from the autopsy could be reviewed by other experts if the family asks. While the autopsy report will be a public document, images will not be made public under a 2001 law passed after the death of race car driver Dale Earnhardt.

Delay Wants Panel to Review Role of Courts
Democrats Criticize His Attack on Judges

Carl Hulse and David D. Kirkpatrick
The New York Times
April 1, 2005

WASHINGTON, March 31 - The political battle over Terri Schiavo erupted anew on Thursday as conservatives portrayed her death as the result of an unaccountable judiciary and Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, threatened retribution against the judges who refused to intercede in the case.

"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today," said Mr. DeLay, who was instrumental in pushing emergency legislation that gave the federal courts jurisdiction over Ms. Schiavo's care, only to see them decline to order her feeding tube restored. Saying that the courts "thumbed their nose at Congress and the president," Mr. DeLay, of Texas, suggested Congress was exploring responses and declined to rule out the possibility of Congressional impeachment of the judges involved.

Democrats, who had for the most part stayed on the political sidelines as Republicans pushed the Schiavo cause, immediately seized on Mr. DeLay's remarks.

"Mr. DeLay's comments today were irresponsible and reprehensible," said Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, who said he was uncertain what Mr. DeLay's intent was. "But at a time when emotions are running high, Mr. DeLay needs to make clear that he is not advocating violence against anyone. People in this case have already had their lives threatened."

As the vigil in Florida ended for Ms. Schiavo, who was severely brain-damaged, conservatives said the refusal of the federal courts to step in underscored the need for Senate Republicans to end the ability of the Democratic minority to filibuster President Bush's judicial nominees.

Dr. James C. Dobson, the founder of the evangelical group Focus on the Family, said the judges who would not stop the removal of Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube were "guilty not only of judicial malfeasance - but of the cold-blooded, cold-hearted extermination of an innocent human life."

Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, said: "It is a tragic, unfortunate but avoidable event that should awaken Americans to the problem of the courts. It is no longer theoretical. It is life or death."

While Mr. DeLay and others renewed the combative tone they had used to advance the Schiavo legislation, others couched their responses. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin and a chief advocate for the legislation, pointed out that the measure had passed in a "bipartisan fashion." Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader and another central figure in the Congressional action, directed his comments to Ms. Schiavo's family "and all those involved in this regrettable loss of life."

In Florida, Gov. Jeb Bush appeared to seek a respite from the political battles over Ms. Schiavo.

"There's a lot of raw emotion still, and it may be appropriate to wait" before passing laws to address similar cases, Governor Bush said. "The answer to this is that we don't count on government to be the arbiter, or count on the courts to do that. This is the responsibility of the people we love, to talk to about this way in advance of it happening."

Democrats and other critics of the Republicans, bolstered by polls that consistently showed overwhelming public opposition to the Congressional role, argued that the willingness of the Republican-led Congress to intervene in one family's court battle would rally the opposition.

Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who has worked for abortion rights groups, said some Americans had been skeptical that Republicans could succeed in overturning court precedents about abortion rights.

"Now it is like, oh yeah, the guys can step in from the highest level," Ms. Lake said. "It makes the threat seem a lot more viable."

Robert Borosage, the president of the liberal Institute for America's Future, said, "There is no question it exposed the conservative leadership of the Congress at its worst."

But, many social conservatives dismissed the polls as biased, saying most questions presupposed that Ms. Schiavo could never recover - the diagnosis of some of her doctors that her parents have disputed.

"The way they are worded, I would have been put down as being against some of the things I am for," said Dr. Richard Land, president of the ethics and religious liberty commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Dr. Land painted Democratic critics of Congress's efforts as supporters of Ms. Schiavo's husband, Michael Schiavo, who said that she would have wanted to die.

"If they want to be vigorous defenders of Michael Schiavo and his right to have his wife killed by starving and dehydration, my words to them are 'Go ahead, be Michael's defenders' - and I wish on each of them a son-in-law like Michael Schiavo," Dr. Land said.

Strategists, party leaders and pollsters doubted the issue would carry over into the next election. "I don't see it as any transformative moment for voters here," said G. Terry Madonna, an independent pollster and a professor of public policy at Franklin and Marshall College in Pennsylvania, which has a larger percentage of Catholic voters than most states.

Andrew Kohut, the director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, said the underlying political lesson might be that Americans are deeply conflicted about such intensely personal issues as when to terminate medical care.

"Public attitudes on life are a lot more complex than the ideologues would have you believe," Mr. Kohut said. He also said that his polling suggested some dissatisfaction among Democratic voters with their party's leadership for not mounting stronger resistance to the Schiavo legislation.

Congressional Democrats who opposed the action were largely quiet on Thursday. Representatives Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Jim Davis of Florida, two who led the opposition on the House floor to Congressional intervention, declined to talk about the politics of the issue, saying it was a day of mourning.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said in a statement that she believed "very strongly that the federal government should not be imposing its will in situations better left to individuals, families and the states."

Burke Balch, an official of the Right to Life Committee, said he did not think the case had much to do with larger arguments about abortion, judicial nominations or partisan overreaching. The striking aspect of the debate, Mr. Balch said, was the cooperation of disabled groups, abortion rights groups, Democrats and Republicans who disagree on those broader matters but shared a concern for incapacitated patients.

"The reality is that there may be a possibility of greater cooperation on these treatment-related issues," he said.

By Jennifer Loven
Associated Press Writer
New York Post
March 31, 2005

WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on Thursday blamed Terri Schiavo's death on what he contended was a failed legal system and he raised the possibility of trying to impeach some of the federal judges in the case.

"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," said DeLay, R-Texas.

But a leading Democratic senator said DeLay's comments were "irresponsible and reprehensible." Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said DeLay should make sure that people know he is not advocating violence against judges.

DeLay, the second-ranking House GOP lawmaker, helped lead congressional efforts 10 days ago to enact legislation designed to prod the federal courts into ordering the reinsertion of Schiavo's feeding tube. He said the courts' refusal to do just that was a "perfect example of an out of control judiciary."

Asked about the possibility of the House's bringing impeachment charges against judges in the Schiavo case, DeLay said, "There's plenty of time to look into that."

"I urge all those who honor Terri Schiavo to continue to work to build a culture of life where all Americans are welcomed and valued and protected, especially those who live at the mercy of others," he said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan refused to join DeLay in criticizing the courts. "We would have preferred a different decision from the courts ... but ultimately we have to follow our laws and abide by the courts," McClellan said.

Joining DeLay in taking issue with the judiciary was Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who said, "The actions on the part of the Florida court and the U.S. Supreme Court are unconscionable." Also, GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina said the case "saw a state judge completely ignore a congressional committees subpoena and insult its intent" and "a federal court not only reject, but deride the very law that Congress passed."

DeLay said he would make sure that the GOP-controlled House "will look at an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the president."

But Kennedy said DeLay should watch his words, especially in light of the recent murder of a Georgia judge and the killing of a federal judge's husband and mother in Chicago. Kennedy noted that judges in the Schiavo case and their families have received threats.

"This case has been heartbreaking and tragic enough," Kennedy said. "It is time for mourning and healing, not for more inflammatory rhetoric, and responsible national leaders should understand that and stop this exploitation."

The legislation passed in an emergency session of Congress and immediately signed by Bush ordered the federal courts to review the decision by a Florida judge to allow the removal of the feeding tube that kept Schiavo alive.

U.S. District Judge James Whittemore refused. His ruling was twice upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Later, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene.

As a House member, DeLay has no constitutional role in deciding who becomes a federal judge or whether a judge should be disciplined. The president selects the judges; senators confirm them. The federal court regulates those judges.

But the GOP-controlled House can initiate impeachment proceedings on federal judges, just as they impeached President Clinton, only to have the Senate acquit him.

"Congress for many years has shirked its responsibility to hold the judiciary accountable. No longer," DeLay said.

The House has impeached 11 federal judges, including former Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, but the Senate has only convicted and removed seven.

Chase was not convicted. The last federal judge to be removed was Alcee Hastings, in 1989; he is now a Democratic congressman from Florida.

Congress does have the authority under the Constitution to limit what kind of cases the federal courts can hear. Republicans have complained for some time about what they see as an out of control federal judiciary.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said Congress should pass the broad legislation that House Republicans favored in the Schiavo case but which was narrowed to cover only the Florida woman after a compromise with the White House.

"Terri's will to live should serve as an inspiration and impetus for action," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis.

The House bill, giving jurisdiction of the Schiavo case to the federal courts, would have applied to any case in which there were questions about withholding food or medical treatment from an incapacitated person.

DUNEDIN, Fla. -- Death does not scare George Felos, nor does it make him uncomfortable. It doesn't even bother him to be called a "death attorney."

As a hospice volunteer, he has sat with people as they took their last breaths. The attorney for Michael Schiavo, Felos also has guided dozens of families through the painful and confusing decision of honoring their loved one's last wishes. He acknowledges a fascination with death.

The Terri Schiavo case has propelled Felos, who runs a one-man legal practice in the picturesque gulfside hamlet of Dunedin, to the forefront of the international debate over life and death. Felos, whose cool courtroom demeanor belies an inner spiritual intensity, has become a target of harsh criticism and threats.

"The most challenging aspect of this case, from a spiritual point of view, has been dealing with these forces of such hatred and negativity," Felos said in a July 2004 interview with The Associated Press.

"I can't imagine what would motivate somebody to call up and say, 'We have put your name on a death warrant and if Terri Schiavo dies, you are next.'"

Felos has represented Michael Schiavo since 1997 in the dramatic legal battle to carry out what he said were his wife's wishes not to be kept alive artificially. Terri Schiavo suffered catastrophic brain damage in 1990 after collapsing from a chemical imbalance.

Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, say their daughter could be rehabilitated and never had such end-of-life wishes. Terri Schiavo left no written directive.

Felos has emerged as one of the case's more complex personalities. At 53, he is the divorced father of a teenage son, a devoted practitioner of yoga and meditation, and a classical pianist.

Last summer, Felos spoke about his views, his legal practice and the Schiavo case. He declined recent requests for a follow-up interview, citing time constraints.

"This case has a lot more to do with the fear of death than the sanctity of life," he said of the Schiavo case.

Three years ago, Felos published the book "Litigation as Spiritual Practice," but it has done little to win over conservative Christians who support Terri Schiavo's parents in their quest to keep her alive.

Felos is known for his claim of having been able to communicate with the soul of Estelle Browning, whose case made Felos one of the nation's leading attorneys in the emerging field of right-to-die law.

Browning had suffered a stroke and could not speak, but Felos said he was able to sense that her soul was in agony.

"As she screamed, I heard her say in confusion, 'Why am I still here?'" Felos wrote in his book. "My soul touched hers and in some way I communicated that she was still locked to her body, I promised I would do everything in my power to gain the release her soul cried for."

Browning left a written directive that she did not want to be kept alive artificially, but the nursing home would not honor it. Felos was the attorney for Browning's guardian, who sought to disconnect the tube keeping her alive.

The 1990 case led to a Florida Supreme Court ruling that said the state's right to privacy empowered individuals to refuse unwanted medical treatment. The court also said people who can no longer communicate need only to have told friends or family of their end-of-life wishes.

Earlier that year, 26-year-old Terri Schiavo had collapsed in her St. Petersburg apartment.

Unlike Browning, who died of natural causes before her tube could be removed, the March 18 removal of Schiavo's tube after a seven-year legal battle set off a firestorm of debate. Late Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene in the case for the sixth time.

Catholic University law professor Robert Destro said Felos' background as a death attorney makes him a bad fit for a case where Terri Schiavo's life is at stake.

"Doesn't that prejudge the issue?" Destro said. "In effect, he (Felos) has already confined her to the grave a long time ago."

But Randall Marshall, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, said Felos is a purist when it comes to the law. Marshall said he became aware of Felos' spirituality only after working with him for some time.

Raised Greek Orthodox and educated at Boston University, Felos joined his father, James G. Felos, in civil practice after deciding he wasn't confrontational enough to take a job at the local prosecutor's office. The elder Felos died in 1995.

In March 1997, Michael Schiavo walked through Felos' door after giving up hope that his wife would recover from her brain injuries.

While Felos said he can appreciate the emotions the Schindlers are feeling, he said he has found it harder to accept the manner in which political and religious forces have sought to influence the case.

Still, as a parent, Felos said he does not know how he would behave faced with a similar situation.

Jesse Jackson Lobbies for Schiavo's Parents

By Cara Buckley, Phil Long and Martin Merzer
Miami Herald
March 29, 2005

PINELLAS PARK - The Rev. Jesse Jackson lent his support to the parents of Terri Schiavo today, calling the removal of her feeding tube -- and her imminent death -- immoral and inhumane.

Schiavo, 41, began her 12th day without food or water. Experts said the brain-damaged woman was likely to die by the
The Rev. Jesse Jackson, left, speaks to the media, end of the week.
while Mary and Bob Schindler, Terri Schiavo's
parents, stand by Tuesday morning outside the      Standing outside the hospice where    Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park.                       Schiavo has received care, flanked by
CHRIS O'MEARA/AP                                        members of her parents' family, Jackson
                                                                               asked for ``God's intervention.''

''Without food or water for 12 days, there are vital signs she is being starved to death,'' Jackson said. ``She is being dehydrated to death and that is inhumane. It is immoral and unnecessary. There is no rational reason for this to happen.''

Her husband, Michael Schiavo, has been fighting for what he says is her right to die after a 15-year ordeal. Her parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, have been fighting to keep her alive and sustained by the feeding tube.

''She looks pretty darn good under the circumstances,'' he said after visiting his daughter. ``We still have her here, so it's not too late to save her.''

During Jackson's brief press conference, Dow Pursley, 56, of Scranton, Pa., sprinted the length of the hospice driveway in an attempt to bring two water bottles to Schiavo. Two policemen tackled him and blasted him twice with a Taser.

Purlsey, a Christian counselor, was charged with attempted burglary and resisting arrest without violence, the 47th arrest at the hospice since Schiavo's feeding tube was removed March 18.

Jackson said he entered the controversy at the request of the Schindlers, who were hoping to gain broader support for their effort to have their daughter's tube reconnected.

''My interest is not in the politics and finger pointing going on,'' Jackson said. ``This is one of the profound moral and ethical issues of our time. We should not stand by and let her die while we have the means for her to live.''

Jackson said he has been on the phone to members of the Florida Senate, asking them ``to be creative and craft some emergency legislation . . . to stop the starving, stop the dehydration.''

He said he also has called the office of Gov. Jeb Bush. ''He needs to get back to us,'' Jackson said.

The governor said he worked as hard as he could on behalf of Schiavo's parents and has exhausted his legal options to intervene.

Michael Schiavo Agrees to Autopsy
Husband Says He Wants Rumors
of Terri's Condition Put to Rest

Felos said this afternoon Michael Schiavo believes the autopsy by the Pinellas County chief medical examiner "will show the public the full and massive extent of damage to her brain through her cardiac arrest in 1990."

Critics also point to a bone scan that appears to show fractures occurring some time after she entered a hospital in 1990.

Felos replied, laughing: "You're watching too much CSI. I don't know what procedures they use for their autopsies."

Describing the mood, he said, "There is no despair; no one is talking about defeat. Everyone is still pursuing every avenue to save her."

By Charles Krauthammer
Opinion
Miami Herald
March 27, 2005

If I were in Terri Schiavo's condition, I would not want a feeding tube. But Schiavo does not have the means to make her intentions known. We do not know what she would have wanted. We have nothing to go on. No living will, no advance directives, no durable power of attorney.

What do you do when you have nothing to go on? You try to intuit her will, using loved ones as surrogates.

In this case, the loved ones disagree. The husband wants Terri to die; the parents do not. The Florida court gave the surrogacy to her husband, under the generally useful rule that your spouse is the most reliable diviner of your wishes: You pick your spouse and not your parents, and you have spent most of your recent years with your spouse and not your parents.

The problem is that although your spouse likely knows you best, there is no guarantee he will not confuse his wishes with yours. Terri's spouse presents complications. He has a girlfriend and two kids with her. He clearly wants to marry again. And a living Terri stands in the way.

Now, all of this may be irrelevant in his mind. He may actually be acting entirely based on his understanding of his wife's wishes. And as she left nothing behind, the courts have been forced to conclude based on his testimony that she would prefer to be dead.

That is why this is a terrible case. The general rule of spousal supremacy leads you here to a thoroughly repulsive conclusion.

Repulsive because in a case where there is no consensus among the loved ones, one's natural human sympathies suggest giving custody to the party committed to her staying alive and pledging to carry the burden themselves.

Let's be clear about her condition. She is not dead. If she were brain-dead, we would be talking about harvesting her organs. She is a living, breathing human being. Some people have called her a vegetable. Apart from the term being disgusting, how do they know? How can we be sure of the complete absence of any consciousness, any awareness, any anything ''inside'' this person?

The crucial issue in deciding whether or not one would want to intervene to keep her alive is whether there is, as one bioethicist put it to me, ''anyone home.'' Her parents, who see her often, believe that there is. The husband maintains there is no one home. (But then again he has another home, making his judgment somewhat suspect.)

The husband has not allowed a lot of medical testing in the last few years. I have tried to find out what her neurological condition actually is. But the evidence is sketchy, old and conflicting. The Florida court found that most of her cerebral cortex is gone. But ''most'' does not mean all. There might be some cortex functioning. The very severely retarded or brain-damaged can have some consciousness. And we do not go around euthanizing the minimally conscious in the back wards of the mental hospitals on the grounds that their lives are not worth living.

Given our lack of certainty, given that there are loved ones prepared to keep her alive and care for her, how can you allow the husband to end her life on his say-so?

Because following the generally sensible rules of Florida custody laws, conducted with due diligence and great care over many years in this case, this is where the law led.

For Congress and the president to then step in and try to override that by shifting the venue to a federal court was a legal travesty, a flagrant violation of federalism and the separation of powers. The federal judge who refused to reverse the Florida court was certainly true to the law.

But the law, while scrupulous, has been merciless, and its conclusion very troubling morally. We ended up having to choose between a legal travesty on the one hand and human tragedy on the other.

There is no good outcome to this case. Except perhaps if Florida and the other states were to amend their laws and resolve conflicts among loved ones differently -- by granting authority not necessarily to the spouse but to whatever first-degree relative (even if in the minority) chooses life and is committed to support it. Call it Terri's law. It will help prevent our having to choose in the future between travesty and tragedy.

Conflict Brews over Judicial Nominees
The Terri Schiavo Case Is Providing Fodder
For The U.S. Senate's Pending Conflict Over Judicial Nominations.

U.S. Senate | the Schiavo Case

WASHINGTON - Last week's legal struggle over whether to keep Terri Schiavo alive is blazing a direct political path to the U.S. Senate's next confrontation over President Bush's judicial nominees.

With back-to-back refusals by federal judges to reinsert a feeding tube into the severely brain-damaged woman, religious conservatives are portraying Schiavo as a potent symbol in their drive for more socially conservative judges and for a socially conservative majority on the Supreme Court.

Likewise, liberal groups say the decisions by a federal judge in Florida, an appellate court in Atlanta and the U.S. Supreme Court not to second-guess rulings by Florida courts illustrate the need for an independent judiciary that is willing to stand up to Congress.

The Schiavo case already had political undercurrents. It rallied Christian conservatives and anti-abortion forces, prompting the Republican-dominated Congress to intervene with extraordinary legislation to thwart a state court's order that Schiavo's feeding tube be removed.

But in throwing the case into federal court, the Republicans in Congress put their faith in a branch of government that conservatives love to disparage. The court decisions last week only fueled that hostility.

''The greatest blessing is that people are realizing that the court system in America has dictatorial control over too many people's lives,'' said the Rev. Louis Sheldon, the head of the Traditional Values Coalition. ``This is a precursor to what I believe is going to be happening when there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court.''

Tony Perkins, the president of the religiously conservative Family Research Council, said the Schiavo case ``clearly will have implications for the increasing debate over the role of the courts in public policy. It certainly does increase the debate over whether or not the courts have overstepped their bounds.''

Liberals and Democrats, citing opinion polls that show broad opposition to Congress' intervention in the case, portray last week's court rulings as examples of judges properly using their authority to block congressional overreach.

''This shows exactly what conservatives, especially social conservatives, want from these judicial nomination battles: They want judges who will do their bidding,'' said Seth Rosenthal, the legal director at the liberal Alliance for Justice.

What's more, the argument that the Schiavo case is an appropriate symbol for a judicial-confirmation debate could backfire with some Republicans and small-government conservatives who have bristled at Congress' decision to step into what they consider a personal or states' rights issue.

The showdown over judges could come as early as next month, when Congress returns from its Easter recess. Earlier this year, Bush resubmitted seven appellate court nominees whom Senate Democrats blocked during his first term.

The first of the seven, William G. Myers III, cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee and is ready for a vote by the entire Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., has threatened to strip Democrats of their ability to block judicial nominees by the extended debate known as a filibuster, which requires a 60-vote majority to end.

Each of the nominees Bush sent back to the Senate was unable to get enough votes to overcome Democratic filibusters, the first time they have been used to block appellate court judges.

Frist could end a filibuster simply by getting a favorable ruling from the chair, which would be occupied either by another Republican senator or by Vice President Dick Cheney. Democrats would challenge the ruling, at which point it could be affirmed by a simple majority of the Senate. There are 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats and one independent in the Senate.

Frist telephoned Christian conservatives and described the Senate's efforts to intervene in the Schiavo case, promote a ''culture of life'' and confirm ''good judges,'' although he did not directly link the topics.

''I'm also committed to overcoming the minority's filibuster and restoring this 220 years or more of Senate tradition and history,'' Frist said, according to a recording made by Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 'The minority broke the tradition, they violated the founders' intent, and we will bring the president's nominees up for a vote and we will confirm them.''

Democrats argue that the tradition of minority rights is on their side, the threat of filibusters encourages compromise and removing the filibuster on judicial nominations could open the door to more Republican efforts to strengthen their hand.

Removing the use of filibusters probably would set the stage for the biggest judicial fight of Bush's presidency: filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court. Although no justice has announced an intention to leave, Chief Justice William Rehnquist's battle with thyroid cancer has prompted widespread speculation that he could retire in June.

According to the Associated Press, Michael Schiavo sued medical professionals who he said failed to recognize symptoms that caused his wife's heart to stop beating, causing her brain damage. As a result, he won a $1.2 million settlement.

At the time, Michael sought the funds with the promise to use the money for Terri Schiavo's care and rehabilitation.

As part of the settlement, Michael Schiavo received $300,000, the rest being earmarked for Terri's care and rehabilitation.

His attorneys say today most of the money designated for Terri is gone, spent on her care and legal bills.

One of his lawyers, Deborah Bushnell, told the AP that more than half of the $700,000 designated from the malpractice award for Terri's care has been spent for that purpose, with the rest going toward litigation.

But that statement is at odds with records that show that lawyers - not medical care - ate up most of the expenditures and have been paid directly from Terri's Medical Trust fund, with the approval of Judge George Greer:

      Atty. Gwyneth Stanley: $10,668.05
      Atty. Deborah Bushnell: $65,607
      Atty. Steve Nilson: $7,404.95
      Atty. Pacarek: $1,500
      Atty. Richard Pearse (GAL): $4,511.95
      Atty. George Felos: $397,249.99
      Other - 1st Union/South Trust Bank: $55,459.85
      Michael Schiavo: $10,929.95

These funds, the result of a malpractice suit, were intended solely to provide for Terri Schiavo’’s care and rehabilitation, not to pay lawyers to help Michael Schiavo kill his wife.

Schiavo’’s primary attorney, George Felos, a professional advocate of mercy killing, has received upwards of $400,000 since Schiavo hired him. This same attorney, at the expense of Terri’’s medical fund, publicly likened Terri to a "houseplant" and has used Terri’’s case on national television to promote his newly published book.

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (AP) -- So bitter and vindictive is the family feud over whether Terri Schiavo lives or dies that her husband and parents couldn't even agree on what priest should administer last rites or what should happen to her body after death.

Once embraced by them, Michael Schiavo hasn't spoken to his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, since 1993.

The Schindlers have fought his effort to remove his brain-damaged wife's feeding tube so she can die, painting him as an abusive monster who wants her out of the way so he can inherit her money and marry his longtime girlfriend. They've tried for more than a decade to have him removed as Terri's guardian.

Michael Schiavo says the Schindlers hold a grudge because he refused to share a $1 million medical malpractice award in his wife's case, and says they lie when they insist their daughter is not in a persistent vegetative state as court-ordered doctors have determined.

Add years of vitriol from attorneys on each side and the hatred has reached the point where a relative began monitoring television last week so the Schindlers wouldn't have to see their son-

in-law on national news programs. Visiting schedules at Terri Schiavo's hospice have been worked out so they don't cross paths.

"And these are the same two people that testified in the malpractice case ... he was a wonderful son-in-law and you couldn't ask for any better son-in-law," said Michael Schiavo's brother, Scott Schiavo. "But now he's this, he's that."

Michael Schiavo has restricted who may visit his wife and when they can come, and a judge was asked recently to sort out such issues as whether the Schindlers could take photos of her before her death and what would happen to her body.

"I think a lot of the reason Michael is doing this is because of vindictiveness and maybe anger toward my family for whatever reason," said Terri Schiavo's brother, Bobby Schindler. "It doesn't make any sense to me why he's doing this."

Michael Schiavo, who did not respond to repeated requests for an interview, has said his wife made statements that she wouldn't want to be kept alive artificially, and that he is merely fulfilling a promise to her. A judge agreed with him after a trial in 2000 that it would be her wish to die.

The Schindlers had asked Circuit Judge George Greer to allow Terri to be buried in Florida with her body intact, but the judge refused to intervene in Michael Schiavo's plans to have her cremated and interred in their native Pennsylvania.

In a court filing, the Schindlers insisted that Terri would not choose cremation.

"To Mrs. Schiavo and her nuclear family, burial without cremation is a central tenet of the Roman Catholic faith," the motion said. "They are wholly motivated by their religious belief that burial without cremation will comfort Mrs. Schiavo in death."

The family has suggested that an autopsy might confirm their claims that Michael Schiavo abused his wife before her collapse, an accusation he has repeatedly denied. It was not clear whether any autopsy would be performed, and the Pinellas County Medical Examiner's Office did not return calls seeking clarification.

The Schindlers wanted to take photographs and video of their daughter before she died, but Michael Schiavo opposed it and Greer agreed with him. The Schindlers also were unable to persuade Greer to grant their daughter a divorce so she could die with the Schindler surname.

Michael Schiavo agreed to have a priest give last rites to his wife, but when the Schindler family priest, Monsignor Thaddeus Malanowski, went into her room shortly before her feeding tube was removed March 18, he found another priest at her bedside, one who was brought in by the hospice at Michael Schiavo's direction.

Pat Anderson, a former Schindler attorney, has gone to court several times over the years to get the parents access to their daughter after Michael Schiavo restricted their visitation.

"From the Schindlers' side, I would say they are distrustful and completely dismayed at his behavior," Anderson said.

Scott Schiavo said the feeling is mutual. He said the Schindlers made an international spectacle of what should have been a private family matter.

"Mike never wanted to put Terri out there like a clown in a circus," he said. "Her parents have desecrated her memory and any type of dignity."

Why Schiavo's Parents Didn't Have a Case

By Andrew Cohen
CBS News' legal analyst.
Commentary
March 25, 2005

Terri Schiavo's parents did not lose their federal case because they didn't try hard enough. They didn't lose their case because everyone conspired against them. They didn't lose it because Congress ticked off the judiciary over the weekend with its over-the-top custom-made legislation. They didn't lose it for lack of money or because they failed to file a court paper on time. They didn't lose it because the laws are unfair or because bureaucrats sometimes can be arbitrary and capricious.

The Schindlers lost their case and their cause —— and soon probably their daughter —— because in the end they were making claims the legal system has never been able or willing to recognize. They lost because they long ago ran out of good arguments to make —— those arguments having been reasonably rejected by state judge after judge —— and thus were left with only lame ones. And they lost because in every case someone has to win and someone has to lose. That's the way it works in our system of government. It isn't pretty, and sometimes it's unfair. But it's reality.

Especially during this final round of review, orchestrated by Congress' extraordinary attempt at a "do-over" for the couple, Schiavo's parents lost appeal after appeal specifically because they were asking the federal courts to declare that their constitutional rights had been violated by the Florida state court rulings in the case. They were arguing, in other words, thanks in part to their custom-made congressional legislation, that the federal Constitution gave them the right as losers in state court to get a new, full-blown trial in federal court.

If you ponder that notion you will realize just how astounding it is. If accepted, it would have meant the end of state courts as we know them. No decision at the state level ever would be final, because every losing litigant at the state court level would be able to walk into federal court and declare a federal constitutional violation. State court trials thus would become like practice sessions and the federal courts, which are supposed to be of "limited jurisdiction," resolving only certain kinds of disputes, would become free-for-alls.

It's true that there are many federal claims that run concurrent with state law. And sometimes, in rare cases, it is necessary for the federal courts to look behind the curtain of a state court ruling. And sometimes it is required. In capital cases, for example, the law requires a federal review of a state court death penalty conviction. In such cases, the government is seeking to kill someone on behalf of the people. In the Schiavo case, a private guardian (a husband) was seeking permission to fulfill his wife's wishes, as determined by the state court of Florida. Yes, there is a difference, one that has been recognized in law and tradition.

If we were to open the doors of federal courts to every losing side in a guardianship case, or a child custody case, or any other matter traditionally left to state courts, we would be changing the very nature of the balance between federal power and states' rights. And we would be doing so at the request of politicians who have spent a generation trumpeting states' rights over the intrusion of federal power.

So how has the federal judiciary reacted to this terrible idea? Predictably, those judges haven't been crazy about it. The federal trial judge in this latest case, U.S. District Judge James D. Whittemore, specifically rejected it. The argument by Schiavo's parents, he wrote, "effectively ignores the role of the presiding judge as judicial fact-finder and decision-maker under the Florida statutory scheme ……. [Michael Schiavo] is correct that no federal constitutional right is implicated when a judge merely grants relief to a litigant in accordance with the law he is sworn to uphold and follow."

It is no wonder that the federal appeals court refused to reverse Whittemore's ruling. And it is no wonder that the conservative U.S. Supreme Court decided for a fourth time to stay out of the case. This harsh reality won't make it any easier for the Schindlers, but government cannot run on passion or emotion or sympathy. As the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote: "There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo……. In the end, and no matter how much we wish Mrs. Schiavo had never suffered such a horrible accident, we are a nation of laws."

I don't blame the Schindlers and their lawyers for coming up with any and every argument they could think of. Grief expresses itself in many ways. By refusing to accept the Florida court decisions, Congress and the White House enabled this grief, falsely encouraged it and then used it, and the Schindlers, for political purposes. The federal courts, on the other hand, by refusing to change the Constitution for one family, acknowledged this grief and tried to deal with it as humanely as possible while still providing the finality that our legal system provides and that our society needs.

(So does that mean that Terri's parents never had a chance and the courts put on a public show at public expense?)

Dead flowers are sent to his home. Hundreds of hate messages, some calling him "murderer," clog his e-mail. Bodyguards accompany him to work.

George Greer, the Florida circuit court judge at the center of the bitter legal battle over the fate of Terri Schiavo, is a soft-spoken intellectual who never expected to be in the political spotlight.

"He is really everything all the radical people critical of George Greer are," a long-time friend, lawyer Denis deVlaming, told The Miami Herald.

Greer, 63, is a Southern Baptist, a Republican member of the religious right, who recently quit his church after his pastor suggested "it might be easier for all of us."

"He may have a personal belief in the right to life, but he doesn't have the luxury to allow any of that to enter into his decision," deVlaming said.

Friends say the Brooklyn-born Greer, who moved to Florida at age 4, takes controversy in stride. And he has faced controversy before.

In 1998, he denied a woman an order of protection against her husband because she hadn't listed any of his acts of violence. He stabbed her to death a few days later.

Greer went to Florida State University, where he briefly shared a house with future rocker Jim Morrison of the Doors.

In 2000, after hearing testimony in the Terri Schiavo case, he ruled for the first time that her feeding be stopped.

Hundreds of grieving protesters knelt in prayer for Terri Schiavo yesterday as a priest celebrated Mass for the dying woman outside the hospice where she is slowly fading away from starvation and thirst.

"It's throwing away a life, denying her the right every human being should have," said Stan Zgurzynski, a Florida official of the Knights of Columbus.

On a makeshift altar before the priest stood a vase of red roses, candles and a golden monstrance to display the wafer given in communion.

Schiavo, 41, was given communion for the last time a week ago. Just before her feeding tube was removed by court order last Friday, a priest anointed her with holy oil and placed drops of consecrated wine in the tube.

At a vigil outside the Woodside Hospice that lasted long into the night and was illuminated by a full moon, one handwritten sign read: "Save Terri from being euthanized."

Although outnumbered by supporters of Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, other people rallied behind Michael Schiavo's desire to let his wife die after 15 years in a permanent vegetative state.

"We're here because they're here," said Gloria Centonze, 53, referring to a group of people holding such signs as "Murder is legal in America."

"It's a man's place to carry out his wife's wishes, not the government's," said Centonze, the sister-

Randi Lacey, 42, of St. Petersburg, Fla., added: "Michael knows what his wife wanted. He could have walked away any time in the past 15 years, but didn't."

Lacey was standing near a man holding a sign reading, "Support Terri's Wish: Let Her Go."

As supporters of Terri's parents chanted "Give Terri water," Michael's supporters rallied back, "Give Terri peace."

Some protesters sealed shut their mouths with pieces of red tape —— the word "life" written across it —— to symbolize the denial of nourishment to Schiavo.

Since last Friday, there have been arrests almost every day as protesters symbolically cross the police line —— some carrying cups of water for Schiavo —— and are handcuffed by police.

Her parents, brother and sister had to have a police escort into the hospice to see Schiavo amid the growing crowd of several dozen protesters and TV cameras. At different points in the night, Schiavo's father and her brother Bobby waded into the crowd to thank supporters.

By the family's side was a man clad in a long black robe and sandals, Brother Paul O'Donnell of the Franciscan Brothers of Peace from St. Paul, Minn., who has become their spokesman and spiritual adviser.

Another family spokesman, Randall Terry, worked the crowd while planning a Good Friday protest today in Tallahassee, Fla., the state capital.

"It's like what you're doing here, but right at the governor's doorstep," Terry told would-be protesters.

Many of the Schindlers' supporters are holding out hope that Gov. Jeb Bush will find a way for the state to take custody of Schiavo.

"Hopefully, Bush will do the right thing," said Jean Williams, 50, of Pinellas Park. "But we need him to come down here."

In Washington, a dozen protesters gathered outside the U.S. Supreme Court, which yesterday, for at least the fifth time, rejected pleas from Terri's parents to intervene and keep her alive. With Post Wire Services

WASHINGTON —— The frantic race to save Terri Schiavo is nearing a heartbreaking dead end.

"It's absolutely horrible. It's surreal. I can't believe I'm actually in there with my sister and I'm watching her being slowly killed this way," said her brother, Bobby Schindler.

"It's like looking at someone who's been in a concentration camp. That's how you can envision my sister right now," he added after visiting Terri yesterday.

The family was reeling from more court rulings against them yesterday —— the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case for at least the fifth time and a Florida judge turned down Gov. Jeb Bush's attempt to have the state take custody of Schiavo.

Her parents turned once again to federal Judge James Whittemore, who previously rejected a request to reattach the feeding tube. He heard the case last night and promised to work overnight to issue a decision. During the hearing, the area near the courthouse was evacuated because of a suspicious package that was safely exploded by cops.

Jeb Bush also filed an appeal in federal court, but observers said both were long shots at best.

Schiavo, 41, has been without food or water since her feeding tube was removed one week ago, and doctors said she would be unlikely to survive another week.

She was showing signs of dehydration —— flaky skin, dry tongue and lips and sunken eyes, according to attorneys and friends of the Schindlers.

With legal options running out, the family turned to a higher power to answer their prayers.

"At this point, it's a miracle and that's it," Brother Paul O'Donnell, the spiritual adviser to Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, told CNN.

"They're in shock. They can't believe this is happening. Their hope is dimming, dimming quickly."

A spokesman for President Bush said: "The president is saddened by the latest [Supreme Court] ruling. When there is a complex case such as this, where serious questions have been raised, the president believes we ought to err on the side of life."

A lawyer for husband Michael Schiavo, who's fought his in-laws every step, hailed the courts for staying out of the emotional right-to-die family feud.

Lawyer George Felos said Terri would now "be able to die in peace," and he warned Schiavo's parents against pursuing more "fruitless" lawsuits.

"I think their time would be better served in reflection," Felos said. "Terri is peaceful. She's resting comfortably. She's dying. She's in her death process."

Jeb Bush's last-ditch attempt to take custody of Terri was rejected by the same Florida judge who initially ordered her feeding tube removed earlier this month.

Judge George Greer didn't buy Bush's argument that new information suggests Schiavo is not really in a vegetative state. The judge deemed it nothing more than an attempt at "circumventing the courts' final judgment."

But debate over whether Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state continued to rage within the medical community.

Dr. William Cheshire of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla., said in the court document touted by the governor that he believed Schiavo was likelier in a "minimally conscious state" than a vegetative one.

In a minimally conscious state, a person shows inconsistent signs of consciousness and can occasionally follow simple commands or use a comb for its correct use.

Patients in a vegetative state make only reflexive movements and aren't aware of what is going on around them. Schiavo's parents are convinced she responds to them and tries to communicate.

But four doctors have diagnosed her as being in a vegetative state during earlier court efforts to determine her mental capacity, while two have not.

Meanwhile, the clock continued to tick. "Every minute that goes by is a minute that Terri is being starved and dehydrated to death," her brother said.

After Jury Award, Battle Lines Drawn
A Dispute over Money Grew into a Lasting Schism
Between Michael Schiavo and His Wife's Parents

ST. PETERSBURG - Once, Mary Schindler spoke in glowing terms of her son-in-law, Michael Schiavo, and the way he cared for her invalid daughter, Terri.

"Without him there is no way I could have survived all this," Mrs. Schindler said.

Then, on Valentine's Day 1993, Terri Schiavo's husband and parents quit speaking to each other. That was the day a $1-million malpractice verdict helped trigger a family conflict that has made its way to Congress and the White House.

Mary and Bob Schindler say they want to care for their daughter and try to rehabilitate her.

Even those close to the case can only speculate as to the motives of Terri Schiavo's family.

But in the shadow of a monumental right-to-die standoff is a feud muddied by that money.

"I frankly don't know what really happened," said Richard Pearse, who once served as Terri Schiavo's court-appointed guardian.

Terri Schiavo was in a Largo nursing home when her husband, Michael, arrived with an armful of Valentine's roses. Two dozen of them.

He set them down and started studying for college classes next to his wife's bed. The former McDonald's manager wanted to become a nurse so he could care for her on his own.

It had been nearly three years since Terri had collapsed and lapsed into a vegetative state. A heart attack, thought to have been caused by an eating disorder, left her brain-damaged and helpless.

Michael sued the Clearwater gynecologist who had been treating his wife for a year because he never asked about her medical or nutritional history.

Despite his wife's grim outlook, Michael had taken her to California for experimental treatment. He insisted on daily baths for Terri, not the usual twice-weekly standard.

As Schiavo studied that day, he awaited dinner with Terri's parents. But soon after the Schindlers showed up, a fight erupted. Michael Schiavo was on one side, throwing books and pushing a table. His father-in-law was on the other, his fists clenched.

"The parties have literally not spoken since that date," wrote Pinellas-Pasco Judge George Greer in a 2000 ruling ordering Terri's feeding tube removed. "Regrettably, money overshadows this entire case and creates potential of conflict of interest for both sides."

From the $1-million malpractice verdict, Terri Schiavo had received more than $700,000, which was put into a trust fund for her continuing care.

Schiavo said the Schindlers grew angry because he would not share the settlement money.

The parents said the argument was about an infection Terri had contracted that Michael did not want to treat.

The son-in-law said they said he owed them at least $10,000 for rent and moving expenses. They had helped him financially over the years.

When the settlement money came, the Schindlers said they believed Michael would use it to buy a house, where they could care for Terri. But that didn't happen.

In testimony, Schindler said he asked Schiavo if he remembered their "agreement" to share the jury award.

"Michael, you made an agreement with my wife and myself that you were going to share that money with us," he said.

Schindler said he wanted to be his daughter's guardian because he didn't approve of the way Michael Schiavo was using the money.

"We're fighting for her," Schindler said. "We want her to live. It's as simple as that."

The Schindlers argued that Schiavo wanted to remove his wife's feeding tube so he could inherit the rest of the $1-million settlement money.

Schiavo said the Schindlers were motivated by greed. He alleged that they planned to become guardians and then ask for Terri's feeding tube to be removed.

The Schindlers questioned why Schiavo aggressively pursued treatment for his wife for years after her 1990 accident, and then, after the malpractice award, he changed his view.

"He's having my daughter put to death to get her money. That burns me up," Schindler testified in 2000 before bursting into tears.

Two weeks ago, Schiavo turned down a $1-million offer from a California businessman to walk away as his wife's guardian and let her parents take over. In 1998, Schiavo offered to donate the settlement to charity if her parents agreed to let her feeding tube be removed. They refused.

Schiavo has repeatedly said his wife did not want to live in a vegetative condition.

Schiavo attorney Deborah Bushnell told the Associated Press only $40,000 to $50,000 remains.

Times staff writer Lauren Bayne Anderson and researchers Caryn Baird and Kitty Bennett contributed to this report.

Terri's Medical Fund is Being Used To Facilitate Her Death

We recently posted a summary on Terri’s web site highlighting the money that has been withdrawn from Terri’s medical fund. Since then, we have been contacted by many of the web site visitors requesting we explain the malpractice award in more detail and to itemize the fund withdrawals. Essentially, visitors asked four questions:

1) How much was originally in the fund?
2) How did the money get into Terri’s medical fund?
3) Where did it go?
4) How much is remaining in Terri’s medical fund?

November 10, 1992 – Jury Document, Item 5. What is the amount of Theresa Schiavo's future damages for medical expenses and lost earning ability to be sustained in future years?

Note: The jury award amount was reduced to $1,290,000.00 to reflect Terri’s attributable negligence. Separate from these monies was Michael Schiavo’s personal award of $600,000.00.

Prior to this trial and in a completely independent medical malpractice lawsuit, Terri was awarded $250,000.00 in an out-of-court settlement. Also, prior to the two medical malpractice lawsuits, an estimated $50,000.00 was contributed to Terri’s medical fund via community fundraisers.

In Summary, Terri has received an aggregate sum of $1,590,000.00. Nonetheless, in June of 1993, the asset balance in Terri’s account was reduced to $761, 507.50, as reported by Michael Schiavo. Schiavo's attorney, however, has sealed the accounting, which would disclose how Terri's account was depleted by approximately $828,492.50, (52%) in only 1 year and 6 months.

November 1992 – A medical malpractice trial is petitioned by Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo. He asks the jury for 20 million dollars to pay for his wife’s (Terri) future medical and neurological requirements. This request was based on estimates of her life expectancy, which Michael Schiavo and his attorneys were estimating at 50 years.

November 1992 – In a highly emotional trial, Michael Schiavo implored the jury to award money for his wife’s future medical and neurological care. Actual excerpts from the malpractice trial transcript reveal Michael Schiavo’s sworn testimony as he responded to his attorney's question. (It is important to note that Terri’s alleged wishes stating, "she wouldn’t want to live this way," are never mentioned by her husband at the 1992 malpractice trial).

Q: Why did you want to learn to be a nurse?
Michael Schiavo: Because I enjoy it and I want to learn more how to take care of Terri.

Q: You're a young man. Your life is ahead of you. When you look up the road, what do you see for yourself?
Michael Schiavo: See myself hopefully finishing school and taking care of my wife.

Q: Where do you want to take care of your wife?
Michael Schiavo: I want to bring her home.

Q: If you had the resources available to you, if you had the equipment and the people, would you do that?
Michael Schiavo: Yes, I would, in a heartbeat.

Q: How do you feel about being married to Terri now?
Michael Schiavo: I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't trade her for the world. I believe in my wedding vows.

Q: You believe in your wedding vows, what do you mean by that?
Michael Schiavo: I believe in the vows I took with my wife, through sickness, in health, for richer or poor. I married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that.

Summer 1993 – Michael Schiavo dramatically demonstrates his interpretation of what his trial testimony "taking care of," really means. Less than a year after the medical malpractice jury award, Schiavo makes his first of two attempts to end his wife’s life. Bear in mind, Michael Schiavo is the inheritor of Terri's medical fund.

Michael Schiavo, under oath, in a November 1993 deposition, admits that he knew Terri would die when he instructed Terri’s caretakers not to medicate Terri with antibiotics for a potentially fatal infection. He also instructs Terri’s caretakers "not to resuscitate" should Terri require any life saving action.

As mentioned, in November1993, Michael Schiavo’s guardianship was challenged for his actions when he instructed Terri’s caretakers not to medicate Terri with antibiotics for a potentially fatal infection. This legal charge culminated with a February 1994 Judge Pennock hearing in which Michael Schiavo was exonerated and his guardianship remained intact. The court permitted Michael Schiavo to withdraw money from Terri’s medical fund to reimburse his legal expenses.

May 1998, Michael Schiavo hires attorney George Felos to petition the court to have Terri’s feeding terminated. Subsequently, the court has permitted Michael Schiavo to withdraw money from Terri’s medical fund to reimburse his legal expenses in his efforts to have Terri die.

Note: In the ensuing (9) years since the 1992 jury malpractice award, Michael Schiavo has used Terri’s medical fund money in his pursuit of Terri’s death and to defend his guardianship role. The bulk of the money has gone for legal fees. Although Terri’s medical fund is sealed; there are court transactions available for public inspection.

The bleeding of money from Terri’s medical fund is far from over. The primary attorneys Michael Schiavo has used in his quest to end Terri’s life, Attorney Deborah Bushnell and Attorney George Felos, have not been compensated for their services since their last invoice – September 2001.

We estimate that Terri's account balance is now less than $300,000. We expect Attorney Deborah Bushnell and Attorney George Felos to invoice over $90,000 to bring their legal fees current. We believe that after legal fees are paid the balance in Terri’s fund, as of February 28, 2002, will be around $200,000.

Also, there is no telling the future amount Attorney George Felos will charge Terri, via Michael Schiavo, for his legal endeavors. On February 22, 2002, in response to the attorney’s February 7, 2002 appeal, the Florida Supreme Court issued a stay to the 2nd District Appellate Court’s order calling for Terri’s neurological examinations. The Florida Supreme Court is presently reviewing their posture regarding Terri’s case.

Should the Florida Supreme Court take jurisdiction, Attorney George Felos will then have the opportunity to totally deplete the entire assets in Terri’s medical fund.

Sheriff Hired Michael Schiavo as Jail Nurse
Four Days Before Joining Florida’’S
House of Representatives in November, 2004,

Everett Rice left the office of Pinellas County Sheriff, a position he had held since 1988 and after 33 years in the sheriff’’s department.

But before he left office he hired Michael Schiavo, estranged husband and guardian of Terri Schiavo.

The Empire Journal has learned that days before leaving office as Pinellas County sheriff, Rice hired Schiavo, a registered nurse, to work in the Inmates Medical Care Division of the Pinellas County Jail.

The relationship of Rice and Schiavo raises grave questions of alleged impropriety in the Terri Schiavo case and ongoing allegations of conspiracy, collusion and cover-up which have resulted in calls for Gov. Jeb Bush to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the matter and the impaneling of Grand Jury.

Rice’’s hire of Schiavo came at the same time contentious guardianship proceedings were proceeding in the courtroom of his long-time friend, Sixth Circuit Court Judge George W. Greer where Schiavo was seeking to end the life of his wife by court order of Greer.

And after Rice had repeatedly refused to investigate allegations of abuse against Schiavo.

According to informed sources, neither Schiavo nor his attorney, George Felos, disclosed to the court or attorneys for Terri’’s parents, Mary and Robert Schindler Sr., of Schiavo’’s change in employment, particularly in light of the disclosure Feb. 23 that the state’’s Department of Children and Families has opened an investigation into some 30 allegations of abuse, neglect and exploitation of Terri Schiavo.

According to pleadings filed before Greer by DCF attorneys, Michael Schiavo is the suspected abuser.

The Empire Journal has also confirmed that the mother of Jodi Centonze, Schiavo’’s live-in girlfriend and fiancéé with whom he has two children was employed in the civil division of the sheriff’’s department from June 18, 1979 until June 25, 1999, some 11 years while Rice was sheriff and at the same time her son-in-law had petitioned Rice’’s good friend Judge Greer to end her daughter-in-law’’s life.

Rice’’s employment of Michael Schiavo came just weeks after Rice had allegedly unlawfully lent the prestige of his office and the resources of the sheriff’’s office in endorsement of the reelection of Greer in a televised political advertisement.

Although prohibited by Florida Statutes, Rice and other Pinellas county public officers including state attorney Bernie McCabe public defender Bob Dillinger, allowed employees of their offices to appear in a campaign commercial for Greer which inferred that Greer was ""tough on crime"" although Greer is a administrative probate judge. http://www.theempirejournal.com/02230590_schiavo_judge_tv_commer.htm

According to a sheriff’’s employee, Sheriff Rice had authorized the use of the county-owned sheriff’’s car and the appearance of the uniformed deputy in Greer’’s TV commercial. State law prohibits the same.

In 2003, Rice became the center of controversy in the Terri Schiavo case when Patricia Anderson, then attorney for the Schindlers, filed a motion asking Greer to recuse himself for alleged violations of judicial canons and bias. Greer has controlled the Schiavo case since 1998.

In her affidavit, Anderson said that Rice had told her that he and Greer had discussed the Schiavo case at a ball game the night previous with Rice without other parties to the matter being present. Greer refused to recuse himself and Rice later denied that he had made the comments to Anderson. John Carassas, an assistant attorney general in the office of Charlie Crist, was also involved in the controversy. http://www.cnsnews.com/pdf/2003/motion091003.pdf. http://www.cnsnews.com/pdf/2003/flaffa.pdf . Crist had previously denied that his office had ever received any allegations of abuse involving Terri Schiavo.

Rice, as well as McCabe, has been directly involved in the Schiavo case, steadfastly denying requests to conduct alleged criminal investigations of criminal wrongdoing in the matter by Michael Schiavo.

Rice and Schiavo’’s attorney, George Felos, have also served on the board of directors of the Hospice of Florida Suncoast, the corporation which operates the Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park where Terri Schiavo is a residence.

Felos failed to disclose his affiliation with the Hospice at the time in April, 2000 when he and Michael Schiavo moved Terri to the Hospice. However, it has since been learned by The Empire Journal that the proper certification for Terri’’s admittance to the Hospice was never completed and that she was not legally designated as terminal, a requirement to be admitted to a hospice and for her care to be paid for by Medicare. The federal government has initiated collection procedures against the Hospice of Florida Suncoast to recover some $14.8 million which they say was unlawfully paid to the hospice as a result of fraudulent claims made for Medicare reimbursement for patients that were not terminally ill and therefore not eligible for hospice care, allegedly at a time when both Rice and Felos were members of the Hospice board of directors.

Terri Schindler-Schiavo has been at the center of a life and death tug of way between her parents and Michael Schiavo. While her husband has sought permission in the Probate Court of Greer to end the life of his wife by the removal of her assisted feeding, her parents have fought in Greer’’s courtroom to keep her alive, saying that she could be rehabilitated with therapy and proper treatment which has been denied the woman. http://www.theempirejournal.com/greer_schiavo_articles.htm

Unless a stay is issued by the 2^nd District Court of Appeals or other action is forthcoming by the Legislature or other agencies, Terri Schiavo will have her feeding tube removed at 1 p.m. Friday which will result in her death by starvation in 7 to 10 days.

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. —— Michael Schiavo and Bob and Mary Schindler once were very close. He was the husband. They were the in-laws.

Their shared joy was Terri, Michael's wife, the Schindlers' daughter. In photos from Terri and Michael's wedding day in 1984 and later, everyone is smiling.

The bonds remained strong even after tragedy befell Terri. Early on the morning of Feb. 25, 1990, she suffered a heart attack that led to massive brain damage.

Today, Terri Schiavo's agonizing struggle for life —— or death —— grips the nation and much of the world. Driving the sorrowful, sometimes angry rhetoric in this epic clash over the right to live or die is something less cosmic: a vitriolic family feud.

It is a feud, to some degree, over principle. Michael Schiavo says Terri should be allowed to die because she told him long before she was stricken that she would never want to be kept alive by a feeding tube or other such measures. The Schindlers say their son-in-law is starving Terri to death. They want to keep her alive and try to rehabiliate her.

But it also appears to be a fight over money —— how a $1 million malpractice settlement Schiavo won 13 years ago over Terri's care should be spent.

Without that emotional public schism, the Schiavo case might simply have been one of thousands of wrenching family decisions about life and death that unfold quietly every year.

What once was a fond relationship —— Michael Schiavo had called the Schindlers "Mom" and "Dad" —— has dissolved into bitter recriminations playing out in courthouses, capitols, weblogs and on Larry King Live. Schiavo says he hasn't talked to his in-laws in years.

Some of the protesters gathered outside Woodside Hospice here have demonized Michael Schiavo, accusing him of everything from murder to adultery because he lives with a woman and has two toddlers, a daughter and a son, by her.

It wasn't always this way, according to a USA TODAY review of voluminous records in the Probate Division of Pinellas County Circuit Court in nearby Clearwater.

Those records show that Michael Schiavo and the Schindlers jointly supervised care for Terri after she collapsed. For the first 16 days and nights that she was hospitalized, Schiavo never left the hospital. Over the next few years, as she was moved from the hospital to a skilled nursing facility, to a nursing home, to Schiavo's home and finally back to a nursing home, Schiavo visited Terri daily.

They had met in a class at Bucks County Community College in Pennsylvania. They were engaged five months later and married on Nov. 10, 1984, in Huntingdon Valley, Pa. She was, he said, "sweet. Very personable. You would meet her and just be charmed by her. ... To me, she was everything."

John Pecarek, a court-appointed guardian for Terri, described her husband as "a nursing home administrator's nightmare," adding, "I believe that the ward (Terri) gets care and attention from the staff of Sabal Palms (nursing home) as a result of Mr. Schiavo's advocacy and defending on her behalf."

Mary Schindler testified that, while her daughter was at one nursing home, her relationship with her son-in-law was "very good. We did everything together. Wherever he went, I went."

Schiavo and the Schindlers even sold pretzels and hot dogs on St. Pete Beach to raise money for Terri's care. But everything seemed to change on Valentine's Day 1993 in a nursing home near here.

In 1992, Schiavo had filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against two doctors who had been treating his wife before she was stricken. Late that year came a settlement: Schiavo received $300,000 for loss of consortium —— his wife's companionship. Another $700,000 was ordered for Terri's care.

Mary Schindler later testified that Schiavo had promised money to his in-laws. They had helped him and Terri move from New Jersey to Pinellas County, let them live rent-free in their condominium and had given him other financial help.

"We all had financial problems" after Terri's crisis, she testified. "Michael, Bob. We all did. It was a very stressful time. It was a very financially difficult time. He used to say, 'Don't worry, Mom. If I ever get any money from the lawsuit, I'll help you and Dad.' "

On Valentine's Day that year, he testified, he was in his wife's nursing home room studying. He wanted to become a nurse so he could care for his wife himself. He had taken Terri to California for experimental treatment. A doctor there had placed a stimulator inside Terri's brain and those of other people in vegetative states to try to stimulate still-living but dormant cells.

According to Schiavo's testimony, the Schindlers came into Terri's room in the nursing home, spoke to their daughter, then turned to him.

"The first words out of my father-in-law's mouth was how much money he was going to get," Schiavo said. "I was, 'What do you mean?' 'Well, you owe me money.' "

Schiavo said he told his in-laws that all the money had gone to his wife —— a lie he said he told Bob Schindler "to shut him up because he was screaming."

Schiavo said his father-in-law called him "a few choice words," then stormed out of the room. Schiavo said he started to follow him, but his mother-in-law stepped in front of him, saying, "This is my daughter, our daughter, and we deserve some of this money."

Mary Schindler's account of that evening is far different. She testified that she and her husband found Schiavo studying. "We were talking about the money and about his money," she said. "That with his money and the money Terri got, now we could take her (for specialized care) or get some testing done. Do all this stuff. He said he was not going to do it."

She said he threw his book and a table against the wall and told them they would never see their daughter again.

The accounts of that confrontation came in testimony during a January 2000 hearing on a petition Schiavo filed to discontinue his wife's life support. Pinellas County Circuit Judge George Greer ruled the next month that the feeding tube could be removed.

Despite the row over money, Schiavo and the Schindlers agreed on one major point in the 2000 testimony: the extent of Terri's brain damage, according to additional court documents cited by The Miami Herald. In the documents, Pamela Campbell, then the Schindlers' lawyer, told the court that "we do not doubt that she's in a persistent vegetative state." Campbell could not be reached to confirm the statement.

At this point, however, the gulf between Schiavo and the Schindlers could not be bridged.

"On Feb. 14, 1993, this amicable relationship between the parties was severed," Greer wrote. "While the testimony differs on what may or may not have been promised to whom and by whom, it is clear to this court that such severance was predicated upon money and the fact that Mr. Schiavo was unwilling to equally divide his loss of consortium award with Mr. and Mrs. Schindler."

Daniel Grieco, the attorney who handled Michael Schiavo's malpractice case, says his client never promised money to Bob Schindler. He also said Schindler never understood that he wasn't entitled to money under Florida law.

Grieco says the money is at the root of the estrangement. "It was the precipitating factor," Grieco says. "That was the fracture. That was the basis of it."

Without the acrimony, Terri's life-or-death saga probably would not have become big news, says Steve Mintz, a history professor at the University of Houston who studies families.

"There have been similar cases where people have been disconnected, but because they didn't reach the same level of in-law tensions, they didn't evoke such strong feelings," Mintz told the Associated Press. "The subtext of this case is intergenerational tension. Parents are more invested than ever in their children, even when they're grown."

In a case similar to Terri Schiavo's, a 1983 car accident left Nancy Cruzan unconscious. She could breathe but needed a feeding tube. The Supreme Court, in its first right-to-die case, ruled in 1990 that Cruzan had a right to refuse treatment but said her parents did not present sufficient evidence of her wishes. Friends said that she would not want to be kept alive; a Missouri court allowed her tube to be removed. She died 12 days later.

"Nancy Cruzan was also found to be in a persistent vegetative state," says Kendall Coffey, former U.S. attorney in Miami now in private practice. "But the family was in agreement. So you've got that extraordinary dynamic (in Schiavo's case) of a bitter family disagreement."

Mintz says similar end-of-life cases, including one this year involving a baby in Houston, have not resonated with the public because they did not have the element of family tension. The money, he told USA TODAY, has become "the symbol of whether one is genuinely concerned about her interest."

Today, the money from the lawsuit settlement is almost gone, Grieco, the attorney, says. Just $40,000 to $50,000 remained as of mid-March. The $700,000 in Terri's trust has paid for her care, lawyers, expert medical witnesses. Michael Schiavo's $300,000 share evaporated years ago, he says.

Terri Schiavo left no instructions about her care. In such an instance, Florida law requires a judge to follow a person's last wishes, if they can be established.

In his order, Greer said he relied upon the testimony of five witnesses regarding Terri's views about right-to-die issues. Schiavo, his older brother Scott and Joan Schiavo, wife of another of Schiavo's brothers, all said Terri had said or indicated that she would not want to be kept alive if her brain stopped working. Mary Schindler and Diane Meyer, a childhood friend of Terri's, testified that she she would.

Scott Schiavo testified that after the 1988 funeral for his grandmother, who was briefly kept alive on artificial life support, a clutch of relatives sat around a luncheon table in Langhorne, Pa., talking about the way she had died. "And Terri made mention ... that, 'If I ever go like that, just let me go. Don't leave me there. I don't want to be kept alive on a machine.' "

Joan Schiavo testified that she and Terri, whom she described as "my best friend and like a sister that I never had," had discussed artificial life support as many as 12 times. Joan Schiavo testified that she had a girlfriend who had decided to take her baby off life support, and that Terri indicated she would have done the same thing.

Mary Schindler's recollection of what her daughter wanted was different. She testified that Terri had commented on news coverage of the case of Karen Ann Quinlan, whose ventilator was turned off in 1976 after her parents went to the New Jersey Supreme Court. Schindler said her daughter told her this about Quinlan: "Just leave her alone. Leave her. If they take her off, she might die. Just leave her alone and she will die whenever."

Casting Angry Eye On Courts Conservatives
Prime For Bench-Clearing Brawl In Congress

The intense fight in the Terri Schiavo case is injecting another explosive element into the coming Senate showdown over President Bush's choices for federal judgeships as well as into future battles to fill Supreme Court vacancies.

The Republican-led effort to circumvent a state court order to disconnect Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube, combined with a federal judge's refusal on Tuesday morning to countermand that order, has crystallized issues in the judicial debate in a compelling and singular public way, Republicans and Democrats alike said.

Conservatives, already disdainful of the way judges have handled subjects like same-sex marriage and abortion, say the court treatment of the Schiavo case illustrates a judiciary that is willing to ignore the will of the public and elected officials.

Within a few hours of the decision by Judge James D. Whittemore of Federal District Court in Tampa, who refused to order nutrition restored to Ms. Schiavo, conservatives were expressing their outrage, accusing the judge of giving no deference to the legislation rushed through Congress.

''Judge Whittemore has engaged in a gross abuse of judicial power,'' said Burke J. Balch of the National Right to Life Committee.

Richard Viguerie, the strategist behind conservative direct mailings, said, ''It could be the opening shot in the Supreme Court nomination battle that we expect sooner rather than later.''

Mr. Viguerie added, ''It is very dramatic proof of what we have been saying: that the judiciary is out of control.''

Ken Connor, a social conservative and Florida lawyer who has been central in pressing the case both in Congress and in his home state to keep Ms. Schiavo alive, said, ''If the courts allow Terri to die during this interval, I think the courts will suffer badly in the eyes of the public.''

Mr. Connor added, ''The Republicans in the Senate will simply use this as Exhibit A to highlight their concerns about an imperial judiciary.''

To Democrats, the week's maneuvers by Republicans provide mounting evidence of their unwillingness to accept the independence of the courts and demonstrate a headstrong will to change Senate rules to ensure the installment of archconservatives to the federal bench.

''There is no question that Bill Frist is sort of setting a new standard for overreaching,'' said Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, referring to the Senate majority leader. ''I think there is that whole attitude of the arrogance of power, and that is what is driving this.''

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who along with Mr. Kennedy has voted to block some of Mr. Bush's judicial nominees from getting a vote on the Senate floor, said the Schiavo case ''shows how important the courts are as a check on the overreaching majority,'' particularly given that several opinion polls indicate that the public believes Congress overstepped its authority.

Mr. Schumer and Mr. Kennedy say they hope the handling of the Schiavo matter will spark second thoughts among moderate Republican senators who could cast the deciding votes on whether to change Senate rules to prohibit filibusters against judicial candidates. The confrontation could come early next month if Republicans try to force a floor vote on one of the appeals court nominations sent back to the Senate after being blocked by Democrats last year.

Conservative Congressional Republicans have expressed rising anger at state and federal judicial rulings on an array of topics, including the Pledge of Allegiance and deviations from sentencing guidelines.

Judge George Greer of Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court, the Florida judge who ordered the tube removed, has faced bitter attacks from conservatives who see him as a symbol of a flawed judiciary.

''Just because there is a judge somewhere in the world who would give an estranged husband like that the time of day tells you how bad the court system is,'' the Rev. Jerry Falwell said.

When the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal rising out of the case on Saturday, Representative Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, had tough words for the justices: ''When this tragic episode is resolved, the Supreme Court will have some serious questions to answer about its silence and arbitrary interpretation of federalism, but those questions will have to wait for now.''

And Dr. Frist, after discussing Congressional intervention in Ms. Schiavo's case in a telephone call to Christian conservative activists last week, moved directly to the need for ''good judges'' and his plans to end the ability of Democrats to filibuster.

''One of the first tests we will have is this whole confirmation of judges,'' he said, according to a recording of the talk made by the organization Americans United for Separation of Church and State. But in addition to his commitment to the president's nominees, Dr. Frist also said, ''I am also committed, though, to overcoming the minority's filibuster and restoring this 220 years or more of Senate tradition and history.''

Bob Stevenson, a spokesman for Dr. Frist, said it would be a mistake to connect the Schiavo case to the pending Senate fight, saying, ''There is no link between the two.''

Terri Schiavo's Plight: A Case Study in Judicial Bias

by Wesley Smith
Lifenews.com
March 2005

LifeNews.com Editor's Note: Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, and an attorney for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. He is also a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture.

The "Rule of Terri's Case" has struck again. The term was coined by Pat Anderson, attorney for Terri Schiavo's parents Bob and Mary Schindler, who complained: "If following a legal procedure will likely result in Terri dying, it will be adhered to. But if a procedure could make that outcome more difficult to attain, it will not be followed."

Anderson's complaint has ample evidentiary support. For example, under Florida law, Terri should have a court-appointed guardian ad litem to exclusively represent her interests. But, Judge George Greer, of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, refused to allow one for Terri in the guardianship case ever since her first ad litem was dismissed after recommending that she not be dehydrated to death.

Similarly, "Terri's Law," the new statute that permits Florida's governor to suspend the planned removal of a feeding tube in certain cases, also requires the appointment of a guardian ad litem. This was done. But after the ad litem Jay Wolfson urged that she be allowed a swallow test, David A. Demers, chief judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, refused to renew his authority. This, despite Governor Jeb Bush specifically informing Demers that he needed further information from Wolfson to properly carry out the governor's responsibilities under Terri's Law. So, once again, Terri is without the protection of a guardian ad litem.

And now Judge Greer has repeatedly allowed Michael Schiavo to skirt his statutory duty to file mandatory annual guardianship plans to establish a ward's approved plan of care for the coming year. This appears to be a direct violation of the applicable Florida Statutes, which read in part:

Each guardian of the person must file with the court an annual guardianship plan which updates information about the condition of the ward. The annual plan must specify the current needs of the ward and how those needs are proposed to be met in the coming year. (Section 744.3675; emphasis added)

Most important for the Schiavo case, the plan must describe the "plan for provision of medical, mental health, and rehabilitative services in the coming year." If a guardian fails in this duty:

The court shall order the guardian to file the report within 15 days after the service of the order upon her or him or show cause why she or he should not be compelled to do so. (Section 744.3685)

The court must review the initial and annual guardianship report to determine that the report: (a) meets the needs of the ward . . . (Section 744.369 (4); emphasis added)

The approved report constitutes authority for the guardian to act in the forthcoming year. The powers of the guardian are limited by the terms of the report. (Section 744.368 (8); emphasis added)

In other words, the guardianship plan is supposed to be reviewed by the court prospectively, not retrospectively, which makes sense since its purpose is to ensure that the plan is appropriate to the ward's future needs. (This is not the same thing at all as reviewing an accounting of past expenditures.) Moreover, the approved guardianship plan constitutes the guardian's authority to act, and the guardian's actions are limited by the contents of the plan in the coming year. Thus, it would appear that a Florida guardian of the person has no legal authority in the absence of an approved plan.

Yet, despite these very clear statutory mandates, Judge Greer only shrugs his shoulders at Schiavo's apparent unwillingness to file annual plans. Indeed, he has instead six times granted Schiavo's requests for "time extensions" for the July 2001-June 2002 plan. It is now almost 3 years late. He also just approved a time extension permitting Schiavo further time to file his guardianship report that should have been in place between July 2002 and June 2003. By granting these repeated extensions Judge Greer sends a clear message to Michael Schiavo: I am not going to require you to comply with the statutes.

THIS MAKES a mockery of the rule of law. The guardianship plan is intended to establish the plan of care and grant the guardian authority to act in the year ahead. This means that the plans for 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, as opposed to reporting about previous guardianship activities, are utterly irrelevant at this point. Moreover, Greer should have long since ordered Schiavo into court to explain his failure to file a July 2003 to June 2004 annual plan, which the law permits to be punished as contempt of court. Not only that: Since there is apparently no current court-approved annual guardianship plan in effect for Terri, based on the above cited statutes, it would appear that Michael Schiavo has no legal authority over Terri's care.

We've all heard of judicial discretion, but this ridiculous. Greer has repeatedly denied Terri important protections to which she is entitled under Florida statutes--for almost three years--and no court will do anything about it. No wonder the Florida legislature passed Terri's Law.

I asked Pat Anderson why, in her opinion, hard and fast rules that govern other guardianships don't apply to Terri. She chuckled bitterly, "It's the Rule of Terri's Case. Both the guardian and the judge treat Terri as though she were already dead and in no need of these statutory protections."

Harsh words? I think not. Schiavo's most recent requests for time extensions were for the purpose of waiting to see whether "the mandate of the Second District Court of Appeal may be complied with." The "mandate" in question is Terri's dehydration. Thus, to put it bluntly, Judge Greer permitted Schiavo to again avoid complying with his already long overdue statutory obligations because, in essence, Terri is as good as dead: So, why go through the time and bother of complying with the law?

WHILE WE ARE ON THE SUBJECT of Michael Schiavo treating Terri as if she were already dead: I recently completed reading his November 19, 1993 deposition. The examination took place after the Schindlers attempted to remove Schiavo as Terri's guardian because he refused to allow the administration of antibiotics to treat a serious infection. After admitting to having been romantically involved with other women during this period, he was asked what he did with Terri's jewelry. He answered:

"Um, I think I took her engagement ring and her--what do you call it--diamond wedding band and made a ring for myself."

Michael Schiavo Insults Institution of Marriage

By Janice Sanford
February 8, 2005
Justice1949@aol.com

In November of 1991, Michael Schiavo filed a malpractice suit against two doctors for misdiagnosing Terri.(One was settled in court and one was settled outside of court)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO. 92-939-15 EXCERPT OF JURY TRIAL - TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL RICHARD SCHIAVO

( November 5, 1992)
page 26
Q.   Why did you want to learn to be a nurse?
page 27
A.   Because I enjoy it and I want to learn more how
to take care of Terry.
Q.   You're a young man. Your life is ahead of you.
Your future is beyond you. Up the road, when you look up
the road, what do you see for yourself?
A.   I see myself hopefully finishing school and taking
care of my wife.Q.   Where do you want to take care of your wife?
A.   I want to bring my wife home.
Q.   If you had the resources available to you, if you
had the equipment and the people, would you do that?
A.   Yes, I would, in a heartbeat.
Q.   How do you feel about being married to Terry now?
A.   I feel wonderful. She's my life and I wouldn't
trade her for the world. I believe in my -- I believe in my
wedding vows.
Q.   What do you mean? You want to take a minute?
A.   Yeah.
MR. WOODWORTH: If the Court would let us take a
minute.
Q.   (BY MR. WOODWORTH:) You okay?
A.   Yeah. I'm sorry.
Q.   Have -- you said you believe in your wedding vows,
what do you mean by that?
A.   I believe in the vows that I took with my wife,
page 28
through sickness, in health, for richer or poorer. I
married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that.

WHAT DID MICHAEL DO?

Aug 1992 - Terri awarded $250,000 in malpractice 'OUT-OF-COURT' settlement.

Nov 1992 - Terri awarded $1.4 million in malpractice trial.

Nov 1992-Michael Schiavo awarded $600,000 in malpractice trial.

After the malpractice suit Michael took Terri home for approximately four months....

In 1993-Michael Schiavo orders no treatment for Terri's potentially fatal infection.

July 16,1993- Mary and Bob Schindlers' letter to Michael Schiavo

Letter to Michael from Bob and Mary Schindler

Nov 1993-Michael admits in deposition that he knew withholding treatment of infection could result in Terri's death.

Sept 1995- Schiavo orders Palm Gardens not to treat Terri for potentially fatal infection.

In 1997, with the help of pro-death attorney, George Felos, Michael Schiavo started his efforts to have Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed....... Since then her feeding tube has been removed and put back in twice. Once on the orders of a judge. The second time on orders of Florida Governor Jeb bush........

" I believe in the vows that I took with my wife,
through sickness, in health, for richer or poorer. I
married my wife because I love her and I want to spend the
rest of my life with her. I'm going to do that."-Michael Schiavo

In Michael Schiavo's Nov 19, 1993 Deposition he admitted to having more than one intimate relationship with women other than his wife since 1990.........

At the time He ordered Terri not to be treated for an infection that could have ended Terri Schiavo life-he was already involved with his present day girlfriend who he moved in with in 1995.

I guess he didn't marry his wife Terri Schindler Schiavo because he loved her and wanted to spend the rest of his life with her. Since, of the 20 years Michael Schiavo has been married to Terri Schindler, he has spent the last 10 years living with the mother of his two children.

The last time the Terri's feeding tube was pulled (Oct 15 2003) In the statement Michael Schiavo released he said:

"That left me to carry out her wishes. It has been hard. In fact, it is the hardest thing I have ever done. In the end, I did what I believe Terri would have wanted me to do. "

Someone should Tell "unfaithful" Michael Schiavo that "Terri's not dead yet."

The St. Petersburg Bar Association Also Lauds Former Times Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Barnes' Work.

The Case That Wound Through Numerous Courts May
Be Used by a Conservative Effort to Change the Judiciary

Why Schiavo's Parents Didn't Have a Case

After Jury Award, Battle Lines Drawn
A Dispute over Money Grew into a Lasting Schism
Between Michael Schiavo and His Wife's Parents

Terri's Medical Fund is Being Used To Facilitate Her Death

The St. Petersburg Bar Association Also Lauds Former Times Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Barnes' Work.

The Case That Wound Through Numerous Courts May Be Used by a Conservative Effort to Change the Judiciary

Why Schiavo's Parents Didn't Have a Case

After Jury Award, Battle Lines Drawn A Dispute over Money Grew into a Lasting Schism Between Michael Schiavo and His Wife's Parents

Terri's Medical Fund is Being Used To Facilitate Her Death

The Case That Wound Through Numerous Courts May
Be Used by a Conservative Effort to Change the Judiciary

After Jury Award, Battle Lines Drawn
A Dispute over Money Grew into a Lasting Schism
Between Michael Schiavo and His Wife's Parents