SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (105731)3/24/2005 11:44:23 AM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) of 793708
 
We do not know she wants to die.

We "know" that she wants to die because a judge decided that she does, based on evidence presented to him at a full trial on the merits. Admittedly, the evidence was hearsay, but there are many, many exceptions to the rules against hearsay, and apparently in Florida this is one of them.

I would feel a lot better with a law which required these thoughts to be expressed in writing, rather than leaving it to judges to divine the person's intentions based on the testimony of family members who may not have known the person as well as they thought they did, and may have a conflict of interest.

But the Florida legislature just yesterday rejected an attempt to amend the law to require a written directive.

If a judge decides a fact at a full and fair trial, it's a fact for the purposes of legal proceedings, which is what these are. With contested testimony, it could have gone either way, but the judge makes his call, and that's that.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News