Tuesday, March 22, 2005

Dr. Blinky?

Wow - was Dr. Cranford in rapid-eye-movement (REM) sleep when he gave his pitch on FOX news's Hannity & Colmes? His eye-blinking must set a record for the 17 pantomimes of a liar.

What can I say, Hannity did a great job. The only wiggle room he left Cranford was the "doctor's" assertion that "this has been going back and forth for 15 years, it's the longest right to die case in history." (Though Hannity followed up with a compelling argumentative point.) I take issue with Cranford's spin on three counts:

  1. The doctor is flat wrong on the "15 years". Michael only "discovered" Terri's "wish to die" 7 years into the case, making the "longest right to die case in history" only a 7- to 8-year-long case. Presumably Dr. Cranford was aware of this fact already. That would either make his statement deliberately misleading or would implicate him in a conspiracy well before the case was filed in 1997. Surely he's not suggesting that?

  2. This is no longer a "right to die" case. It has become a Spousal Abuse Victim's rights case.

  3. The only question revisited during the entire fifteen-year period is "who gets to decide?", not whether Terri's condition was midiagnosed or whether Michael was the one who injured her. So the point is meaningless. Shame on him; he should know better. And he calls himself a doctor?
Besides: the only person who could think her "right to die" (established only in 1997) was a crusade from the very beginning is someone who was also uninterested in her demonstrated early successes. That is more apt to reflect the thought process of someone implicated (by sworn testimony) of attempting his wife's murder on at least one occasion, and someone strangely incurious about the evidence exculpating his wife, than the man put forward to the public as a loving husband arguing bravely for her "right to die".

That would make it one of the longest, if not the longest, cases on the record of willful manipulation of a woman's rights by spousal, medical, legal & judicial fraud.


Blogger Lady Raven said...

Unfortunately, unless Michael is unseated as guardian or terri is placed in the witness protection I can't see that any of the other facts will come to light. The court seems to have blinders on.

Has anyone (outside the Schindler family) sued Michael and Michael's doctors for maltreatment? Why doesn't Terri have a guardian ad leitem (or however that is said?) My kids could have had one in our divorce had it gotten ugly. Terri needs one more than they do....

8:26 PM  
Blogger RD said...

I agree. Even if we save her life for the moment Mr. Schiavo still has to be removed, or else she will remain imprisoned.

8:38 PM  
Blogger Maggie said...

Lady Raven,
George Greer has appointed himself in that role. The guardian ad litem who said that it was not in Terri's best interests for Michael to be guardian got the boot.

12:47 AM  
Blogger Maggie said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12:47 AM  
Blogger Maggie said...


this is an excellent revisit to what Blinky Bill (hey that is an Australian character) said.

You picked up on yet another inconsistency that is coming through from the interviews.

Yes, you are right, Dr. Cranford is implicating himself in something here when he says something like that.

I am still working on the inconsistency angle, especially the statements on these TV shows compared to what was said in trial.

Stay tuned for when I get my head around how Felos and Schiavo are continuing to twist the evidence given by the Schindler family and Terri's friends to make it sound like statements to Michael and his brother.

Let's just say that there is a pattern that I have discovered.

3:22 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home