The Schiavo Post-Mortem
The University of Miami has released some interesting court papers related to the Terri Schiavo murder, although they are difficult to find, and even more difficult to sort out. The three papers are pdf files, and can be found at the following addresses:
http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/DCF%20Abuse%20Investigations%20part%201.pdf
http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/DCF%20Abuse%20Investigations%20part%202.pdf
http://www.miami.edu/ethics2/schiavo/DCF%20Abuse%20Investigations%20part%203.pdf
If you click on these links, however, what may happen is you will given a �404 Error� screen, telling you the documents cannot be found, and offering a search screen. If you search �Schiavo DCF Abuse� on the U-Miami screen, however, these documents will then be presented and available. I don�t know why the link works that way, but it did for me.
Anyone looking for proof to support either the validity or criminality of anyone in the case will be disappointed, as these documents do not provide anything a court would accept as proof. However, the 45 pages in the report do illuminate the debate, and present interesting points of reference, and some confirmation of essential facts in the background of the case. The context presented by these facts is chilling.
Here are the essentials:
BASELESS CLAIMS1. Michael Schiavo accused the Schindlers of exploiting Terri, by making a video of her at the hospice for the purpose of selling it at $100 per copy. Investigation revealed there were four videos, there made in the normal process of doctors� evaluations (brought by the Schindlers, not by the hospice of Michael Schiavo, who have produced no public records from any evaluations by medical doctors on their contentions) , and a video extracted from old film. The videos were available for free, although the Schindlers accepted donations to provide a legal defense for Terri.
2. The Schindlers accused Michael Schiavo of causing bone fractures. Examination by doctors revealed the fractures were consistent with compression fractures caused by degenerative bone loss from long periods without exercise.
UNRESOLVED CLAIMS
1. The Schindlers accused Michael of withholding food and/or water, even when the feeding tube was in place. The hospice has claimed they investigated, but did not categorically confirm or deny the allegations
2. The Schindlers claimed that on five separate occasions, Michael visited Terri and demanded he be left alone with her, after which time Terri was sick, which the Schindlers claim was caused by something Michael did. The hospice never addressed this specific 2003 allegation.
3. A nurse from the hospice has claimed that Michael Schiavo repeatedly demanded to know �Is the b---h ever going to die?� and similar statements. The hospice stated there was no support for these claims, but did not formally interview the relevant staff or ask for corroborating evidence from any source.
4. The Schindlers claimed that Terri was, in fact, responsive to her surroundings. The hospice denied this claim, but admitted that she did open and close her eyes, move at times, and made sounds.
SUPPORTED CLAIMS
1. The Schindlers claimed that Michael Schiavo was not paying for Terri�s care. The hospice did not directly address the question of whether Terri�s bills were being paid (claiming the financial matters were being handled by courts), but on several occasions confirmed that Michael Schiavo was not responsible for payments to the hospice.
2. The Schindlers claim that Terri lost teeth on at least two occasions, due to neglect. The hospice denied any neglect, but admitted several teeth were �darkened�, and admitted the tooth loss on two occasions.
3. The Schindlers claimed Terri had an untreated yeast infection, and that Terri had not had a GYN exam while at the hospice. The hospice did not respond to the yeast infection allegation, but admitted that Terri Schiavo never had a GYN exam while at the hospice.
4. The Schindlers claimed Michael Schiavo controlled access to Terri, and restricted or prohibited family visits. The hospice admitted this was correct.
5. The Schindlers claimed that Michael Schiavo had demanded that Terri not be given antibiotics for infections. The hospice did not address the question of whether thy had denied Terri antibiotics, but admitted that on 2 previous occasions at other hospices, Michael had demanded antibiotics not be given to Terri, and had been told that antibiotics would be administered in treatment of infection, and if he did not like it, he could move Terri to another hospice, which is what happened.
6. The Schindlers claimed Terri had bed sores from neglect. The hospice denied neglect, but admitted treating Terri for �stage two� bed sores.
7. The Schindlers claimed someone had injected Terri with an unknown substance. The hospice confirmed what appeared to be puncture marks on Terri�s arm, along with scratches on the other arm, and found a purple �needle cap� in the room which was not from the hospice. Strangely, the hospice interviewed Mrs. Schindler about the cap, but did not interview Michael Schiavo about the cap, although nurse reports indicate he was the last person alone with Terri before the puncture marks and needle cap were found.
STRANGE EVIDENCE
1. The hospice repeatedly claimed that Terri Schiavo was unable to feel pain, but admitted that on each occasion where the feeding tube was removed, �morphine, ativan, tylenol, and compazine� were all administered, which is only done to alleviate pain and suffering
2. The hospice noted that Michael Schiavo�s stated assets were $29,000 in October 1992, $139,000 in April 1996, and $776,000 in July 2002, after which time his financial assets were sealed by Judge Greer.
3. There were nine reports of �Collateral Communication� made as part of hospice investigations into allegations. Only two allegations, the exploitation claim made by Michael against the Schindlers and the police involvement in the unexplained injections, received any sort of follow-up or witness corroboration. In seven of nine cases, the hospice made no attempt to verify claims or obtain witness statements.
The details of relevant documents are noted here, in chronological order. Decide for yourself:
No comments:
Post a Comment