Will the Appeals Panel Decide that Murder and Torture are Bad?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/22/schiavo/index.html
"A three-judge panel at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta received the case hours after U.S. District Judge James Whittemore in Tampa, Florida, refused the request of parents Bob and Mary Schindler to reinsert the tube." (CNN.com)

Well, there's another round in the attempt to stop the cold-blooded murder of Terri Schiavo. She is presently being starved to death by her husband because he says "she would have wanted to be starved to death."

Terry's parents and attorneys are working to save their daughter's life from her husband's twisted idea of what is "good" for her. Congress and the President have stepped in too.

But Michael Schiavo (who is living with another woman and has children with her) says he knows what is best for his wife. He said that his wife told a friend once after a movie that she wouldn't want to be kept alive with tubes. A statement that is against her religious faith. I can only wonder what conclusion Terri would have made had she been given proper counsel on this very serious subject, rather than turned to Hollywood for wisdom.

So Michael thinks that one backhanded comment after a movie should decide life or death for his wife (who he obviously loves so much that he won't divorce but lives and commits adultery with another woman).

For some reason, the courts seem to agree. "Her parents are facing an uphill battle. Repeated court rulings have held that Michael Schiavo is his wife's legal guardian and has the right to make decisions regarding her care." (CNN.com)

Does "regarding her care" mean that he gets to starve her to death slowly? Let the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals grant that Terri can be treated and that Michael Schiavo be brought up on charges of torture, attempted murder, and be held accountable for his adultery.