- Joined
- Jan 13, 2004
- Messages
- 31,020
- Reaction score
- 10
Again, is it forbidden for us to tell her that this thread is about Ted´s health issue, not his past background? I hope I make my post clear.
The fact still remains that he was never charged with anything except leaving the scene of an accident. The evidence is not there to prove that his blood alcohol was over the legal limit. Nor do we know what his state of mind was immediately following the accident. Many, many people who are involved in such an accident do not think clearly and lucidly immediately following the event. It is not unusual at all for a car to be found in a ditch or a creek, and the driver to be found walking stunned down the road.
The time for trial was at the time of the accident, and that trial never happened for what ever reason. To attempt to try him and find him guilty at this point in time, particularly without access to evidence, based on nothing more than second-hand supposition, is absurd.
The events of that evening, while perhaps cause for skepticism, were never brought up for charges. The time for legal prosecution has long passed. He is innocent in the eyes of the law, and all the MOday morning quarter backing isn't going to change that fact. The issue nowlies between him and his God. Leave it there.
Yes, but we also entitle our own opinion, too because Mary Jos´situtation has nothing do with Ted´s illness here.
You are exactly right!!
I am with those that this thread has nothing to do with what happened to Mary Jo Kopechne. If any of you want to discuss about that subject then why don't you create a thread about it?
Senator Kennedy's Confirmed Alcohol ConsumptionThe fact still remains that he was never charged with anything except leaving the scene of an accident. The evidence is not there to prove that his blood alcohol was over the legal limit.
He didn't report the accident until the next morning, more than eight hours after. That's not "immediately" after the accident.Nor do we know what his state of mind was immediately following the accident. Many, many people who are involved in such an accident do not think clearly and lucidly immediately following the event.
He wasn't found "walking stunned down the road." See:It is not unusual at all for a car to be found in a ditch or a creek, and the driver to be found walking stunned down the road.
The "reason" was because Kennedy plead guilty, and was given a suspended sentence.The time for trial was at the time of the accident, and that trial never happened for what ever reason.
The judge did find him guilty, so that's been done.To attempt to try him and find him guilty at this point in time, particularly without access to evidence, based on nothing more than second-hand supposition, is absurd.
No, he was found guilty (although the charges and sentencing were very light).... He is innocent in the eyes of the law
I'm fine with letting God take care of him. But that doesn't mean I'll be part of the cover up or denial of what happened. We aren't all fooled by the Kennedys...The issue nowlies between him and his God. Leave it there.
I don't know that they were satisfied. Maybe they were afraid or intimidated or gullible or paid off. They're dead now, so we'll never know.While Mary Jo was someone's daughter, her parents seem to be satisfied with whatever resolution they came to.
You need to remember the event in context of its time. Sure, people now sue left and right for everything. Back then, people weren't so bold, especially middle aged, middle class people who trusted their government and authorities to do the right thing.Had they not been satisfied with the legal out come,they had civil court with which to seek further justice. They did not.
No one did that. The parents are dead, and Mary Jo was an only child, so there were no siblings to take up the cause.It is quite presumptuous to think that we should tell them what is right or wrong in the case of the death of their daughter.
Oops! I'm sorry. I've been catching up with the posts chronologically. If you want to move my posts elsewhere, I'll understand.Mod's Note:
This thread is going offtopic. Please stick to "Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor".
As for other subjects such as "Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron". Please create a new thread.
Exactly, I am wondering the same... We are suppose to talk about Ted Kennedy´s health issue, not his past background or compare them with OJ´s scandal.
Forgive me for not pay my attention on your previous post over Dad as I was busy to make posts. I am sorry to hear about your Dad. He is continue in my though and hope everything goes well for him.
I am with those that this thread has nothing to do with what happened to Mary Jo Kopechne. If any of you want to discuss about that subject then why don't you create a thread about it?
Oh okay... Thanks for the explaination...
I email you update about my Dad at your work.
We all mistakes in our lives but so what? we are human.
:roll:
Mod's Note:
This thread is going offtopic. Please stick to "Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor".
As for other subjects such as "Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron". Please create a new thread.
Liebling, I just logged in AD... I will move some of those post after my message to the new thread you created.
Liebling, I just logged in AD... I will move some of those post after my message to the new thread you created.