The Terri Schiavo Forum

james

IP: 172.130.255.173

Sep 10, 07 - 10:31 PM

Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo

I believe Pamela Campbell, the lawyer for the Schindlers during the 2000 trial was one of the primary reasons Terri lost her life. Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial was horrible and I thinka first year law student could done better. The Schindlers got railroaded and Felos essentially steamrolled over Campbell. Anyone looking at the 2000 trial can easily see that Terri did not get a fair trial of her life.

The Schindler's hired an attorney who was unexperienced and ill-financed to effectively advocate for Terri's life.

It seem as though, the Schindler were set up by hiring Pam Campbell for the purpose to say Terri got her due process.

But Pam Campbell sucked in almost every way and was conflicted on several points for even representing the Schindlers.

Lets look at the some of the facts:

Pam Campbell was reccomended by a Schiavo attorney (Woodworth)- of course the Schindlers had no money, so I guess they had no option to accept her appointment.

Pam Campbell also had ties to Mark Shames, the judge who authorized Michael to hire George Felos as his lawyer.

Terri had no GAL - The GAL was discharged when it was discovered Michael had several conflicts of interest by the request of Felos. No GAL was appointed.

Terri had no legal counsel.

The 2000 Trial also presented a profound fianancial inequity on the part of the Schindlers.

While Michael was authorized to use Terri's money to hire Right to Die lawyers, doctors and specialists,

The Schindlers were not affored the same right to effectvely advocate for Terri's life.

Campbell just plain sucked. Her incompotence and confusion is evident through out the trial transcripts. Lets look:

As far I know Campbell only deposed one witness; Michael Schiavo.

Campbell didn't even depose Scott or joan Schiavo.

For some reason this oversight escaped Judge Greer.

Failing to depose Scott and Joan Schiavo was critical mistake to compromised the "Level Playing Field" of the trial:

From Wikipedia:

The chief value of a deposition, as with any discovery proceeding, is to give all litigant parties in a contested case a fair preview of the evidence so that a "level playing field" is achieved and surprise (traditionally regarded as an unfair tactic) is avoided at time of trial. Another benefit of deposition is to preserve a witness's recollection while it is still fresh, though the trial may still be some time later. In the event a witness is unavailable for trial, his deposition testimony may be read before the jury and made part of the record in the case, with the same legal force as live testimony. In some states, depositions can be offered into evidence even if the witness is available. In any case, one party can use a deposition to impeach (or contradict) the witness's testimony in open court.

james

IP: 172.130.255.173

Sep 10th, 2007 - 10:38 PM

Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo

Campbell's opening Statement:

We do not

13 doubt she's in a permanent vegetative state.

14 However, a lot goes to the cognitive activity and

15 brain activity of Theresa Schiavo. In reading

16 through some of the medical records, you will hear

17 testimony about her no recognition. However, you

18 will hear testimony from our side there is

19 recognition. She does recognize her mother.

Campbell here is obviously confused. First she stipulates that Terri is PVS. Then she says Terri has Cognition. If Terri was truly PVS, then there can be no cognition by definition.

Campbell seemed confused on what Terri's diagnosis was.

We do not believe, as the guardian ad

18 litem also found, that the evidence you will hear

19 is credible.

Interestly enough, Campbell never tries the taint the credibility of Michael, Scott or Joan. Her efforts suck.

Michael's Testimony:

20 Q Good morning, Mr. Schiavo. As you

21 recall, I am Pam Campbell. I represent Mr. and

22 Mrs. Schindler.

It's unclear why Campbell wasted time with this statement. Michael obvisously knew who Pam Campbell was.

3 Q Could you describe that relationship for

4 me?

5 A We are boyfriend/girlfriend. We live

6 together.

7 Q Would you consider her your fiancee?

8 A I would consider her -- yes. Yes.

9 Q Has she ever been so noticed as anything

10 in writing in the newspaper as your fiancee?

11 A Yes.

12 Q You and she own a house together; is

13 that correct?

14 A Yes.

After this testimony is revealed, Campbell seems to shrug her shoulders and moves on to a different subject.

7 A Terri and I had a very loving marriage.

8 We had our problems, just like every other

9 marriage does. Terri never ever mentioned to me

10 about divorce.

Campbell doesn't pry and moves on. Go figure.

Campbell with also ineffectual in cross examining many of the Schiavo witnesses.

Campbell brought only few witness if her own.

She failed to bring in a priest to refute Fr. Murphy.

She failed to bring an expert witness to refute Beverly Tyler.

She failed to bring in an expert witness to refute Dr. Gambone and Dr. Barnhill.

Campbell also failed to do proper pretrial investigation and allowed many the Schindler witnesses to get caught up in Felos's cross examination.

This evident from Jackie Rhodes testimony.

She also did not try to rehabilitate Bob and Mary Schindler from the vigorous cross examination from Felos.

James

IP: 172.167.140.226

Sep 16th, 2007 - 11:54 AM

Re: Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo

Sometimes I wonder who side Campbell was really on. Given the egrecious nature of Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial, I something think that Campbell was really on the side of Felos. Given some of the conflicts of interest Campbell had of even representing the Schindlers, this could be considered at least a conceivable possibility.

If David Gibbs or Ken Connor did the 2000 trial, I have no doubt that Michael Schiavo would have absolutely been destroyed.

Walter in FL

IP: 70.127.118.160

Sep 16th, 2007 - 4:34 PM

Re: Re: Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo

James

Shoulda, woulda, coulda!!!

And what does that have to do with the year 2007.

James

IP: 172.130.182.148

Oct 20th, 2007 - 12:10 PM

Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo

There was nothing in writing and no tangible proof to Terri's wishes and desires except the word of Michael Schiavo and his self-serving witnesses. The strength of Terri's wishes was based entirely on the credibility and word of these 3 witnesses. I'm pretty sure that if Pat Anderson had managed to depose Michael, Jodi and perhaps eventually Scott and Joan, the case would have been over in about 5 minutes in the Schindler's favor. The problem was that Pamela Campbell failed to do a vigorous and through cross examination into either of these witnesses. Susquently, Greer felt that they sounded good on the witness stand. I believe that this was one of the primary fatal flaws in the 2000 trial that cost Terri Schiavo's life; failing to depose Scott and Joan Schiavo and failing to effectively perform a vigorous and throughly cross examination of these witnesses including Michael Schiavo and even perhaps Jodi. Felos did do this and Greer found the many of the Schindler's witnesses credibility in question. Had the same been done to the Schiavo witnesses, there is no doubt that Greer would have ruled that there was insufficent or credible evidence to support removing the feeding tube from Terri Schiavo.

Michael did write in his book that he felt the Pamela Campbell's cross examination of him was that of a ***** cat.

I think that is key and speak volumes about Pamela Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial.

In fact, I have read most of Campbell's cross examination of Michael Schiavo. It is completely ineffectual and really accomplishes nothing. Campbell brings up subjects that have nothing to do with issues at hand, and Campbell glosses over issues or leave out issues that show a blatant conflict of interest on Michael's part.

I beleive in all fairness, the court should have done the 2000 trial over again with more effective legal counsel.

There were so many legal problems with it on some many levels that it doesn't begin to give the appearance of justice or due process in the Schiavo case.

Here is Micheal's opinion of Pamela Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial. For once, I agree with Michael on this entirely:

pg.143

"And then she changed the subject - again and again and again. I'd been expecting to be cross-examined by a pit bull, not a ***** cat, and I remember thinking that Pam Campbell seemed way too nice to be in this line of work. I don't recall how long her cross-examination took, but it runs only 13 pages in the court transcript while my direct examination by George Felos is almost 60 pages."

Hmmm...

pg. 159.

"Pam Campbell's cross-examination of Joan didn't rise to the level of Law & Order courtroom drama."

Go Figure!

For once I agree with Michael on his analysis of Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial.

GAL Pearse in his report raised numerous conflict of interest issues on Michael's part.

Pamela Campbell hardly addressed even one of them.

I will admit that George Felos is a very skilled litigator. In his examinations, he vigorously and thoughly cross examined the Schindler witnesses. The transcripts of his cross examinations run many many pages. Felos's litigation skills in the 2000 trial were by a factor of 10 of those of Pamela Campbell's

I think it speak volumes when see that Felos's examination of Michael ran 60 pages and Campbell's cross examination of Michael ran 13 pages.

With all the potential conflicts of issues outstanding on Michael's part that just doesn't make sense.

Anderson anf Gibbs would have absolutely destroyed Michael and his witnesses if they were representing the Schindlers.

Unfortuntnately the Schindlers had no money and had to settle for a green-horned attorney whose was reccomended by Michael's previous attorney.

So, in this case you have the Schindlers who represented by ineffective legal counsel and Terri herself who was untterly unrepresented. George Greer served as advocate and aduduicator in the case which was in violation for Florida statutory law, case law and the constitution.

	The Terri Schiavo Forum The right to Self-determination ceases to exist when others make decisions for us. Feel free to post a message.
Return to Website

Author	Comment
james IP: 172.130.255.173 Sep 10, 07 - 10:31 PM	Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo I believe Pamela Campbell, the lawyer for the Schindlers during the 2000 trial was one of the primary reasons Terri lost her life. Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial was horrible and I thinka first year law student could done better. The Schindlers got railroaded and Felos essentially steamrolled over Campbell. Anyone looking at the 2000 trial can easily see that Terri did not get a fair trial of her life. The Schindler's hired an attorney who was unexperienced and ill-financed to effectively advocate for Terri's life. It seem as though, the Schindler were set up by hiring Pam Campbell for the purpose to say Terri got her due process. But Pam Campbell sucked in almost every way and was conflicted on several points for even representing the Schindlers. Lets look at the some of the facts: Pam Campbell was reccomended by a Schiavo attorney (Woodworth)- of course the Schindlers had no money, so I guess they had no option to accept her appointment. Pam Campbell also had ties to Mark Shames, the judge who authorized Michael to hire George Felos as his lawyer. Terri had no GAL - The GAL was discharged when it was discovered Michael had several conflicts of interest by the request of Felos. No GAL was appointed. Terri had no legal counsel. The 2000 Trial also presented a profound fianancial inequity on the part of the Schindlers. While Michael was authorized to use Terri's money to hire Right to Die lawyers, doctors and specialists, The Schindlers were not affored the same right to effectvely advocate for Terri's life. Campbell just plain sucked. Her incompotence and confusion is evident through out the trial transcripts. Lets look: As far I know Campbell only deposed one witness; Michael Schiavo. Campbell didn't even depose Scott or joan Schiavo. For some reason this oversight escaped Judge Greer. Failing to depose Scott and Joan Schiavo was critical mistake to compromised the "Level Playing Field" of the trial: From Wikipedia: The chief value of a deposition, as with any discovery proceeding, is to give all litigant parties in a contested case a fair preview of the evidence so that a "level playing field" is achieved and surprise (traditionally regarded as an unfair tactic) is avoided at time of trial. Another benefit of deposition is to preserve a witness's recollection while it is still fresh, though the trial may still be some time later. In the event a witness is unavailable for trial, his deposition testimony may be read before the jury and made part of the record in the case, with the same legal force as live testimony. In some states, depositions can be offered into evidence even if the witness is available. In any case, one party can use a deposition to impeach (or contradict) the witness's testimony in open court.
james IP: 172.130.255.173 Sep 10th, 2007 - 10:38 PM	Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo Campbell's opening Statement: We do not 13 doubt she's in a permanent vegetative state. 14 However, a lot goes to the cognitive activity and 15 brain activity of Theresa Schiavo. In reading 16 through some of the medical records, you will hear 17 testimony about her no recognition. However, you 18 will hear testimony from our side there is 19 recognition. She does recognize her mother. Campbell here is obviously confused. First she stipulates that Terri is PVS. Then she says Terri has Cognition. If Terri was truly PVS, then there can be no cognition by definition. Campbell seemed confused on what Terri's diagnosis was. We do not believe, as the guardian ad 18 litem also found, that the evidence you will hear 19 is credible. Interestly enough, Campbell never tries the taint the credibility of Michael, Scott or Joan. Her efforts suck. Michael's Testimony: 20 Q Good morning, Mr. Schiavo. As you 21 recall, I am Pam Campbell. I represent Mr. and 22 Mrs. Schindler. It's unclear why Campbell wasted time with this statement. Michael obvisously knew who Pam Campbell was. 3 Q Could you describe that relationship for 4 me? 5 A We are boyfriend/girlfriend. We live 6 together. 7 Q Would you consider her your fiancee? 8 A I would consider her -- yes. Yes. 9 Q Has she ever been so noticed as anything 10 in writing in the newspaper as your fiancee? 11 A Yes. 12 Q You and she own a house together; is 13 that correct? 14 A Yes. After this testimony is revealed, Campbell seems to shrug her shoulders and moves on to a different subject. 7 A Terri and I had a very loving marriage. 8 We had our problems, just like every other 9 marriage does. Terri never ever mentioned to me 10 about divorce. Campbell doesn't pry and moves on. Go figure. Campbell with also ineffectual in cross examining many of the Schiavo witnesses. Campbell brought only few witness if her own. She failed to bring in a priest to refute Fr. Murphy. She failed to bring an expert witness to refute Beverly Tyler. She failed to bring in an expert witness to refute Dr. Gambone and Dr. Barnhill. Campbell also failed to do proper pretrial investigation and allowed many the Schindler witnesses to get caught up in Felos's cross examination. This evident from Jackie Rhodes testimony. She also did not try to rehabilitate Bob and Mary Schindler from the vigorous cross examination from Felos.
James IP: 172.167.140.226 Sep 16th, 2007 - 11:54 AM	Re: Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo Sometimes I wonder who side Campbell was really on. Given the egrecious nature of Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial, I something think that Campbell was really on the side of Felos. Given some of the conflicts of interest Campbell had of even representing the Schindlers, this could be considered at least a conceivable possibility. If David Gibbs or Ken Connor did the 2000 trial, I have no doubt that Michael Schiavo would have absolutely been destroyed.
Walter in FL IP: 70.127.118.160 Sep 16th, 2007 - 4:34 PM	Re: Re: Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo James Shoulda, woulda, coulda!!! And what does that have to do with the year 2007.
James IP: 172.130.182.148 Oct 20th, 2007 - 12:10 PM	Re: Pamela Campbell and Terri Schiavo There was nothing in writing and no tangible proof to Terri's wishes and desires except the word of Michael Schiavo and his self-serving witnesses. The strength of Terri's wishes was based entirely on the credibility and word of these 3 witnesses. I'm pretty sure that if Pat Anderson had managed to depose Michael, Jodi and perhaps eventually Scott and Joan, the case would have been over in about 5 minutes in the Schindler's favor. The problem was that Pamela Campbell failed to do a vigorous and through cross examination into either of these witnesses. Susquently, Greer felt that they sounded good on the witness stand. I believe that this was one of the primary fatal flaws in the 2000 trial that cost Terri Schiavo's life; failing to depose Scott and Joan Schiavo and failing to effectively perform a vigorous and throughly cross examination of these witnesses including Michael Schiavo and even perhaps Jodi. Felos did do this and Greer found the many of the Schindler's witnesses credibility in question. Had the same been done to the Schiavo witnesses, there is no doubt that Greer would have ruled that there was insufficent or credible evidence to support removing the feeding tube from Terri Schiavo. Michael did write in his book that he felt the Pamela Campbell's cross examination of him was that of a *** cat. I think that is key and speak volumes about Pamela Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial. In fact, I have read most of Campbell's cross examination of Michael Schiavo. It is completely ineffectual and really accomplishes nothing. Campbell brings up subjects that have nothing to do with issues at hand, and Campbell glosses over issues or leave out issues that show a blatant conflict of interest on Michael's part. I beleive in all fairness, the court should have done the 2000 trial over again with more effective legal counsel. There were so many legal problems with it on some many levels that it doesn't begin to give the appearance of justice or due process in the Schiavo case. Here is Micheal's opinion of Pamela Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial. For once, I agree with Michael on this entirely: pg.143 "And then she changed the subject - again and again and again. I'd been expecting to be cross-examined by a pit bull, not a *** cat, and I remember thinking that Pam Campbell seemed way too nice to be in this line of work. I don't recall how long her cross-examination took, but it runs only 13 pages in the court transcript while my direct examination by George Felos is almost 60 pages." Hmmm... pg. 159. "Pam Campbell's cross-examination of Joan didn't rise to the level of Law & Order courtroom drama." Go Figure! For once I agree with Michael on his analysis of Campbell's performance in the 2000 trial. GAL Pearse in his report raised numerous conflict of interest issues on Michael's part. Pamela Campbell hardly addressed even one of them. I will admit that George Felos is a very skilled litigator. In his examinations, he vigorously and thoughly cross examined the Schindler witnesses. The transcripts of his cross examinations run many many pages. Felos's litigation skills in the 2000 trial were by a factor of 10 of those of Pamela Campbell's I think it speak volumes when see that Felos's examination of Michael ran 60 pages and Campbell's cross examination of Michael ran 13 pages. With all the potential conflicts of issues outstanding on Michael's part that just doesn't make sense. Anderson anf Gibbs would have absolutely destroyed Michael and his witnesses if they were representing the Schindlers. Unfortuntnately the Schindlers had no money and had to settle for a green-horned attorney whose was reccomended by Michael's previous attorney. So, in this case you have the Schindlers who represented by ineffective legal counsel and Terri herself who was untterly unrepresented. George Greer served as advocate and aduduicator in the case which was in violation for Florida statutory law, case law and the constitution.