Grab The Money And Run
I’m sorry the media bias against this man is just a joke- What was he suppose to do, let the gold digging parents file for the pittance that is left? The same parents who were taping their daughter in secret and selling tapes on the internet? The same parents who insisted that he go out and date after carring for their daughter for years?
In general I love your site but this stance in regards to Michael really makes me think someone has not looked too close at both sides of the story.
disgusted.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 07:35 AM
Oh, and equate him with OJ rather was rather sad too.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 07:57 AM
When I took care of some estate proceedings for my late wife it took a couple of weeks.
Did you have your late wifes parents shooting film as she lay in her deathbed and hawking the tape for sale?
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 08:28 AM
GDONOVAN: To me, it’s a matter of respect and propriety. It could have waited a few days or a week. As the court-designated guardian and husband of Terry, her parents didn’t have any chance whatsoever of “grabbing” the money, of which there is only a few hundred thousand left from the original $1.4 million settlement.
There are no good guys in this story. Only a dead woman and a bunch of shrieking maniacs surrounding the body.
His grabbing the estate so quickly tells me there is still too much hostility between him and the Schindlers and that he didn’t trust them not to try to grab it first.
There are all kinds of “wrongs” in this saga, not the least of which is Michael’s behavior. Bashing the Schindlers, as you are doing, does nothing to explain Michael’s behavior over the last 12 years and even more importantly over the last three months of Terry’s life.
...maybe he wanted to cut and run before the results of the autopsy were released…
Her parents were hawking the tapes for sale. I haven’t heard anything on that.
Doesn’t take long to find.
It could have waited a few days or a week. As the court-designated guardian and husband of Terry, her parents didn’t have any chance whatsoever of “grabbing” the money, of which there is only a few hundred thousand left from the original $1.4 million settlement.
1) Perhaps it could perhaps not. I’d bet money the parents would have filed to go after it in short order.
2) How much money is left? I have seen anything from just about nothing to as much as $300k.
There are no good guys in this story. Only a dead woman and a bunch of shrieking maniacs surrounding the body.
I agree 100%
Bashing the Schindlers, as you are doing, does nothing to explain Michael’s behavior over the last 12 years and even more importantly over the last three months of Terry’s life.
And comparing Michael to OJ (a man who either murdered or knew who murdered 2 people) isn’t bashing?
Be even handed my man.
There is a lot of wrong done by the Schindlers, but it much easier to make a whiping boy out of Michael isn’t it?
No one wishes to point the shortcomings of the grieving parents who are willing to give interviews to the MSM at the drop of a hat.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 09:18 AM
...maybe he wanted to cut and run before the results of the autopsy were released…
Can we apply some critical thinking here?
Where is he going to “cut and run” as you put it? Even best case of $300k you could barely buy a middle class house around here for that amount.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 09:50 AM
They may have done that but when you make a statement like that, just be prepared to back with a reference it up when someone asks
Why should I do the research for you? Are you so unwilling to so some looking yourself?
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 10:38 AM
Yes I did make the statement- Are you afraid of something that might be true?
Try doing some research before attacking!
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 10:48 AM
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/28/State/Schiavo_case_has_myri.shtml
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 10:58 AM
Sorry I’m a bit wound up today if I sound a bit harsh.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 11:11 AM
See post #14.
If your unwilling to look anything up, then how do you verify that your not being fed BS?
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 11:15 AM
Yes on both sides- There was another article that the family had made bad investments and were looking to become solvent again through the settlement money but things got nasty when it turned out to be much less then everyone expected.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 11:43 AM
gdonovan: Using the St. Petersburg Times means nothing to me. That is one of the most biased “newspapers” in America.
Having to die that way is cruel and unusual punishment. Just one reason America went insane. The St. Petersburg Times didn’t cover their front pages with finding a better way to kill Terry. Their coverage is always slanted to their agenda.
Posted by Z Woof
05/26/2005 at 11:45 AM
“Like the saying goes...Look for the paper trail.”
No shit. Someone better be checking out Judge Greer’s accounts!
Ease up everybody. This place is for dialogue, not innuendo. GDONOVAN: don’t just throw statements out there without providing us with your source. We take nothing here on faith.
Why is it so important for you to trash the Schindlers? If you wish to defend Michael, help us understand why he was so quick to grab the estate, why did he re-marry, why was he so eager to pull the feeding from Terry, why did he insist on cremation .... there are way too many things wrong with his side of things.
You accuse me of jumping on him prematurely but all you come back with is not a defense of him but an attack on Terry’s parents. Something just doesn’t ring true with that. Are you related to Michael? What’s your interest in this? I don’t mean to attack you, I just want to know who I am dealing with here. Kindly inform me.
Their coverage is always slanted to their agenda.
Oh and that would be?
Like I said a quick search about turns up lots of things or do you only agree with sources that reflect your point of view?
My point was there is a very real bias against Michael (who I don’t know from Adam) in the media and to see it repeated here is rather ironic since isn’t one of the points of this site to point of the media bias on the left?
Did the guy some odd things? Hell yes he did some odd things but everyone seems to be ignoring the elephant in the room that the Schindlers have done some pretty damn odd things as well.
Be even handed.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 12:05 PM
"to point out the media bias on the left?”
Sorry about that.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 12:07 PM
Skipper my bio has been updated and yes I feel very much that way.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 12:25 PM
GDONOVAN: If you have an emotional, family or other involvement in this case, I invite you to present your argument in a guest post. Put together your argument (with credible sources) and submit it to me. I’ll post it here and we’ll let the members here discuss it and decide in a rational manner but first you must present a rational counter-argument to the perception we all have of Michael Schiavo. Don’t just point the finger of blame at her parents. Two wrongs do not make a right, do they?
I am a firm believer in the fact that there are usually two or more sides to every dilemna like the tragedy of Terry Schiavo. Give us your opinion (based on facts and reliable sources) and let’s hammer it out.
Consider that an open invitation.
My beef is with the way the media has continually demonized this guy while ignoring her own parents off the wall antics.
Indeed they have been given a free pass to sling mud left and right to see what sticks without anyone calling them out.
I am a firm believer in the fact that there are usually two or more sides to every dilemna like the tragedy of Terry Schiavo.
Skipper you just made my point out for me by taking the words right out of my mouth- Most of the time there are two sides if not more to every story.
All I see here is one and sadly it isn’t too far off from the mainstream press.
Michael bad, Schindlers good.
Equating the guy with OJ is terrible IMHO.
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 01:41 PM
I hesitate to chime in ...
1. Michael Schiavo is suspect for a number of reasons. This is just another.
2. The Schindlers too, are suspect. As I understand it, all of their expenses have been covered by various ‘right to life’ groups AND they consigned Terri to the State to escape her medical costs. IF they had not ... NONE of this would have happened.
Posted by Steel Turman
05/26/2005 at 06:03 PM
the parents also put up the mailing list of people who had donated to them for sale.. right after her death .... I don’t know who is worse.. they both have some skeletons in their closets maybe..
How about the offers of millions of dollars to give up his right to decide her medical treatment which he turned down?
Link-
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-03-10-schiavo_x.htm
Does this sound like a man motivated by greed?
Posted by gdonovan
05/26/2005 at 08:01 PM
He turned down the money which was offered to let her live. It sounds more like a man with something to hide.
This is at least the 25th time the subject has been discussed here, gdonovan. Here’s a list for your convenience.
It sounds more like a man with something to hide.
If you going to throw out a statement back it up.
Posted by gdonovan
05/27/2005 at 05:30 AM
That’s my opinion. Read the list of threads I posted. It’s all there, including that opinion and the reasons for it.
So when I throw something out it’s expected I provide a source with a link but if you throw something out I’m expected to wade through several hundred posts?
Just making sure were on the same playing field.
My contention isn’t who is right or wrong in this case, but was one side painted as “bad” and demonized and was another painted as “good” and given a free pass in the press.
Posted by gdonovan
05/27/2005 at 01:37 PM
The subject was thoroughly covered and discussed at the time, questions were asked and answered. Opinions were formed and expressed. It’s all there. I have provided a list of the threads to help you to see why we feel the way we do.
Not all of us agree on the subject, although most of us didn’t like the idea of causing a woman to be dehydrated and starved to death on the unsubstantiated sudden recall, after seven years, of a husband with dubious motives. A husband who would not permit any form of rehabilitation or outside stimulus. Who would not let her family care for her while he was raising a family with another woman. There were questionable injuries which might point to him as precipitating her condition. His insistence on killing her rather than allowing someone else to care for her after he and his lawyer had spent all the money in her settlement didn’t sit well either.
If you want to discuss it either leave a post on the thread, if it’s still open, or bring it back to this thread. Most of us have email notification on threads we’ve commented on so either way should work.
I see you have formed an opinion even though some of the things you have stated have been proven false.
Posted by gdonovan
05/27/2005 at 03:49 PM
Please read the threads and feel free to correct any specific errors I have made.
Franky based on the tone of your posts and the “facts” mentioned in #37 I doubt that there is anything factual I could present that would change your position.
Sorry, unfounded allegations from questionable people hold zero water with me.
Just the facts as Sgt. Friday use to say.
Posted by gdonovan
05/27/2005 at 06:40 PM
Well, if you won’t read the threads and the articles referenced, how about The New York Review of Books? The article seems to cover everything I have mentioned and more.
I’ll leave the “questionable people” remark alone for the present.
I had some time to sit down and read it at lunchtime, it’s rife with errors.
The “Talking Points” memo circulating among Republicans part was VERY amusing since this had been discredited just days after it hit the media as a Democratic “dirty trick” and traced back to the Dem staffer who came up with it.
Clearly the source you provided leaves something to be desired.
Just the facts please.
Posted by gdonovan
05/28/2005 at 01:46 PM
My apologies, I was in error on that point.
Posted by gdonovan
05/29/2005 at 06:40 AM
Thank you for acknowledging that, gdonovan, it helps your credibility.
I wanted to believe that the memo was a “dirty trick” but since the truth came out, I accept it and go on. The whole thing was a mess and only got worse when the pols got involved.
The subject was vigorously thrashed out here, including some name calling and maybe some hurt feelings. It’s all there in those threads.
We’re usually pretty civil about disagreements, but it did get a little warm for a while.
Frankly on the memo since it was clear from get go it wasn’t widely circulated “as reported” and full of sloppy errors I stopped actively following the issue.
Last I knew the “blog-o-sphere” had come to the conclusion that it was pretty much dirty tricks, funny how low profile a lot of people were about reporting the truth of the matter later.
Again my apologies and I will look over that page a bit closer.
Posted by gdonovan
05/29/2005 at 09:51 AM
