Cuz We Said So

CWSS Book List Update

Russell has finished reading Chindi, Jack McDevitt's novel about humankind's first contact with aliens, and moved on to "Bobby Fischer Goes to War" by David Edmonds and John Eidinow. Russell writes, "This book will perhaps not illuminate me on the subject of aliens... unless there's more to this 'Fischer' guy than meets the eye!" Being from another planet would certainly explain Fischer's super-human chess abilities, as well as his curious attraction to Iceland.

I'm still working on The Fabric of the Cosmos, Brian Greene's introduction to modern cosmology. I'm about halfway into it, more than enough for Greene to confirm my belief that the closer you look at the universe around us, the more fantastically strange freakishly weird it appears.

Terri Schindler-Schiavo, 1963 - 2005

Thirteen days after being cut off from food and water by her husband and the State of Florida, Theresa Marie Schindler-Schiavo has died.

Jonah Goldberg: "Now that she has passed let us hope and pray that Michael Schiavo was right and her parents were wrong, even if we don't believe that to be the case. Rest in peace."

Lucky 7

Autoblog has pictures of the updated BMW 7-Series from the New York Auto Show. I'm not sure I like it as much as I liked the last new 7, but it's not terrible, either—and that's a big improvement for BMW these days. Why, with the 3-Series redesign, that's two less-than-hideous redesigns in a row. I'm hoping this is the start of a trend, and a sign that someone has successfully reined in design chief Chris Bangle (even if that's just Mr. Bangle himself).

Thought for the Day

"It is of interest to note that while some dolphins are reported to have learned English -- up to fifty words used in correct context -- no human being has been reported to have learned dolphinese."
—Carl Sagan

An Answer by One Death Penalty Opponent

David asks:

...if you believe the courts are incapable of accurately establishing the guilt of a capital murder defendant... must you not also logically conclude that our courts are no more capable of accurately establishing the wishes of Terri Shiavo...?

I, for one, don't believe the courts are incapable of accuracy.

Even Better

An NRO reader suggests a possible alternative to the death penalty: banishment.

I like the idea, but the counter-proposal is better still: "Nevermind banishment, let's bring back gladiatoral games!"

Evolving Away

Matt Welch

The Federal Election Commission, charged with interpreting precisely which freedoms of speech shall be abridged by the McCain-Feingold Act, has issued its new proposed rule changes governing communication on the Internet.

Puh-lease. You'd think freedom of political speech is protected by the Constitution, or something. Haven't you heard these things change to accomodate evolving standards?

And No...

I don't plan to blog all Terri Schiavo, all the time. You can doubtless tell, however, that her case is something I feel strongly about.

A Question for Death Penalty Opponents

In a death penalty criminal trial, a jury determines whether the accused lives or dies. A presumption of innocence leans in favor of the survival of the accused, and the central fact of the case (guilt) must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the case of Terri Schiavo case, based on Florida law, a judge, not a jury, determined whether Terri would live or die. There was no presumption in favor of her survival--to the contrary, as noted in the Boston Globe, the judge assumed she would want to die. And the central fact of the case (Terri's wish to die) had to be established only to a lower "clear and compelling" standard of evidence.

My question is: if you believe the courts are incapable of accurately establishing the guilt of a capital murder defendant, even with the safeguards associated with a trial of that type, must you not also logically conclude that our courts are no more capable of accurately establishing the wishes of Terri Shiavo, and those like her, in the absence of those safeguards?

"Conflicting Memories"

The Boston Globe ran a story over the weekend that highlight how shaky the evidence was that Judge Greer used in deciding Terri should die. There was one detail I hadn't heard before, which I found particularly troubling.

In deciding between these conflicting accounts, Pinellas County Circuit Judge George W. Greer, who made the crucial ruling in the case, relied in part on an assumption about young adults coming of age in the 1980s.

Terri Schiavo's support of the right to die, as recalled by her husband's family, was believable because it ''would be expected by people of this country in that age group at that time," Greer wrote in the February 2000 opinion ordering the removal of the feeding tube.

Florida law requires that judges in cases like that of Terri Schiavo establish the patient's wishes with "clear and compelling" evidence. So here, in this case, there is testimony refuting Schiavo's claim as to his wife's wishes—and keep in mind, this is after Michael Schiavo won a large medical settlement by insisting he wanted to take care of Terri for the rest of her life, never mentioning that his wife did not wish to live in her current condition. But instead of concluding, for example, that the evidence is too ambiguous to meet the clear and compelling standard required by the law, he instead decides to toss in as a tie-breaker his belief as to a generalization of what people of that age would want?

Are you kidding me?

How would you react to a murder trial where there is contradictory testimony, and the jury ignores the evidence that the defendant is innocent because "guilt would be expected of people of the defendant's color?"