Cheri

How can we hear her side when she's dead? Of course Ted is to be blamed because he was the driver. Think about it, He spend nine hours after the accident avoiding calling the police, while Mary Jo was left to die in his car. Ted had a list of traffic offenses, and they did not even do a thing about the death of Mary Jo, only that they had suspended his driver's license. He should have been charge of negligence and manslaughter in the death of Mary Jo. I think she might would have been alive if she was saved sooner, but he waited nine hours!!...

__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

Liebling:-)))

[QUOTE]Exactly!!! Why should we obsessed Ted's past for when we don't know Mary Jo's side but want to talk about his health issue at Jolie_77's thread?

Yes, they suspended his driving license. He accept his responsibliy for that... He is not alone in the world who made mistakes. He already got punished for that... What and how he did belongs past...

Accord Reba's one of links, Ted drank a lot and was shock after car accident. You know what drunk and shock alike, right? Yes I also know what it alike, too.

We know that Ted & Mary Jo left party early at their friends' house. It look like that Mary Jo agreed to go with him... and agree to take his offer to take her home... with no force... I would say No to him when I were Mary Jo because I know he is drunk and do not want to risk my life to ride with drunk driver...

Yes, Ted accepted his responsiblity for the death of Mary Jo.

About charge of negligence and manslaughter in the death of Mary Jo - The law was different at 1960s as present time. I agree it's negligence, not manslaughter.

those link explain better.
http://www.ytedk.com/epilogue.htm

__________________

Cheri

That was an easy punishment he received. It seems even so people with money and power are given a relatively easy punishments. Hey, you know what, if we do the crime, we pay the time. But it’s a different with Ted. Laws were not created to be bargained out of. I only really have sympathy for Mary Jo.

__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.

Mistyrose

Get real, Reba....lots of drunks are much capable to do things
like calling people,go shopping, keep on driving, do things
like that except they are sometimes incoherent, belligerent or
whatever.
You'd be surprised that a lot of alcoholics can control and hide
their alcoholism! Probably they have been doing it for so long,
that they are able to do that.
Some people cant tolerate the alcohol so they usually pass out.

Tousi

Speaking of capability, it's too bad he wasn't CAPABLE enough (in his inebriated state) to miss the dive into waters. Now he's CULPABLE, right?

Barbaro

I read one of the books at some library years ago that contained the details of how the incident had happened and the FBI reports. It had been claimed Mary Jo's parents had received approx. $90,000 plus $50,000 from insurance from Ted Kennedy. Mary Jo's father had stated publicly that he didn't want to sue Teddy to make him look bad in seeking for blood money at the time the Kennedy family were so powerful. The incident had had been damaged Ted's political career and reputation badly, and cost his nomination to then President Carter. Ted Kennedy stated publicly on the television he was not drinking nor was he having a sexual conduct with Mary Jo.

My mother used to be a Ladies' Home Journal magazine subscriber when I was a kid. She always keeps important historical articles and even LIFE magazines. In the Ladies' Home Journal Magazine interview, Mary Jo's father had said "he was worried about himself, not about Mary Jo." Gwen Kopechne insisted," Somebody's hiding something." Ted Kennedy met Mary Jo's parents and family only twice. She also said,"I don't think he seemed upset either time...and I don't remember him saying he was sorry." The New York Times had repeated some of the same quotes. Of course, Ted Kennedy had declined the comments to their statements. Last December, Mary Jo's mother, Gwen had been passed away in her nursing home, and the media barely brought up the incident again, and discussed the infamous incident. Ted Kennedy had given no comment on the passing of Mary Jo's mother. At some point, a friend of Mary Jo's cousin had hoped Ted Kennedy will be suffering in hell. I sure hope he better had been repented in what he had caused such great pain to himself, his family and Mary Jo's Family. It will definitely be between Ted Kennedy and God, nobody else. Not even man-made laws.

__________________
We know what we are but not what we may be.
-Author:Shakespeare

Mistyrose

Yeah, he is culpable for letting that to happen. I know he was
drunk so was Mary Jo. He probably was so drunk that he didnt
know what happened until it was too late? If it was several hours
before he reported the accident, is it possible that he "passed out"?
I dont remember the whole story anyways..care to enlighten me?

Tousi

Reba already has so ya gotta go back maybe two pages and read back to here where I will be awaiting........

dreamchaser

Amen to that. Our current system has been bought and paid for in some instances.

I was hoping that tragedies such as these cause repentence and a change of actions and attitudes. I am thinking the test is in the fruits since the life-changing incidents. Did Ted go on to raise minimum wage and fight for human rights? I can't tell you all that happened..

Did other political figures buy courts and judges and yet are not repentent in their deeds? I can't say.

Tragedies should cause our characters as human beings to change and become better...

Justice is rarely meeted out fairly. Why? Because of policitcs and the mood of the climate.. Some laws are rediculous,, and yet.... they get enforced. Some laws are fair and right, and yet, they can be avoided and manipulated if you have enough money.

The point being... What is right today? What do we want in the future? Who makes the laws? Who votes and gets involved? Why don't we have a Deaf person running for office..


If we want fairness,, we have to put the right people in office, or we need to run for office.. At the very least,, we need to call our representatives when we see something is wrong...

By the people, for the people,, but if we are the people,, who is actually taking the right measures to change things?
That is true patriotism..

Liebling:-)))

[QUOTE]If the rumor about Mary Jo's parents recieved the claim from Ted Kennedy is true then I see nothing wrong with that. It's their right. It does the same with John F. Kennedy's wife Carolyn and her sister Lauren's parents... They sued Kennedy and claim their right. I only know that Mary Jo's parents want to keep their daughter Mary Jo privacy. I guess it could be the reason why they did because media could create dirty image of Mary Jo, that's why they want to aviod it.

But Ted Kennedy was attended Mary Jo's funeral. If he deny his responsiblity then he would not attend Mary-Jo's funeral, don't he? It would not stop Mary Jo's mother for spread the truth about her daughter Mary Jo and Ted if she want to but she doesn't until she died last year. Could you please give us source about Mary Jo's cousin who negative about Ted Kennedy because we are interesting to know about Mary Jo and what she know about Mary Jo, etc.?

__________________

Cheri

But, there wasn't no tests performed to determine if alcohol was involved. So, we don't know how much Ted drank, or Mary Jo. Ted should still report the accident even if he was in a shock state of mind.

I don't think it has anything to do with responsibilities. I think he wanted sympathies. Let me tell you why, he was wearing a neck brace during the funeral, but after the funeral he wasn't saw wearing it anymore.

__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.

Mistyrose

Ok, got it..I just didnt get to read all the posts and i just did.
You know what? We will never know the truth except God and
another thing, we were not there so we really cant judge.
Id say leave the past alone and im sure Ted has repented in his
own way..
We all make mistakes and nothing we can do to change the past.
He is not the only one who messes up..ya know?
We all just have to forget the past and move on.

Liebling:-)))

Yes I second that.

__________________

jillio

Agreed. That is the whole point. The law has already dealt with Ted Kennedy in the way that our legal system deemed reasonable. If there are those that disagree with the charges and the sentence, then their problem is with the legal system, not Ted Kennedy. I would suggest they put forth their efforts in campaigning to change the legal system rather than spending time attempting to convict Ted Kennedy post hoc.

And, since the legal system has already dealt with Ted Kennedy, any issues remaining are, indeed, between Ted Kennedy and his God.

Mistyrose

Good post!
I totally agree about what you said about the legal system, it is
so screwed up! Look at OJ Simpson's case that was so screwed
up. All evidences were pointed to OJ but he was found not guilty..geez.

Cheri

It's both the legal system and Ted Kennedy, He had years to turn himself in to the authorities, and admit that he wanted her to die. Let's not forget how he helped his nephew William Kennedy Smith get off of a rape charge.

__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.

Angel

I certainly did not mean to sound insensitive but from what I'm reading here is, some claim that Ted was too drunk to save Mary Jo in a 5 feet of water even though he was able to swim 500 feet across to the surface... ALIVE.. And he had no valid driver license, why was he driving in the first place?...

It amazes me that people who has enough money and power can beat the justice system and walk away from it all... That's scary..

Angel

Forgiveness may takes time and effort but forgetting is not easy because it reminds you of the tragedy or horrific, painful, hurt, bruised and shaken experiences...

Of course most of us forgive and move on, but forgetting, that's another thing.

Barbaro

I think you haven't perused my entire post carefully. Therefore, I'm assuming you read it too quick.

The word, claim has several different meanings. There is a major difference between Carolyn and Lauren's parents had sued the Kennedy estate and Mary Jo's parents hadn't sued Ted Kennedy for the passing of Mary Jo. Mary Jo's parents were from Pennsylvania, and were extremely introvert, private citizens and religious, not public citizens such as The Kennedy.


That is rhetorical question. Whether Ted Kennedy attended the funeral or not, the public remains divided between his act of deception or sympathy.


Again, Gwen and Jon Kopechne were introvert and occasionally discussed it quietly. According to the book, Mary Jo's cousin, Georgian Poloski (sp?) mentioned the family were very upset by the circumstances and were disappointed the incident was handled poorly.


I never stated it was Mary Jo's cousin, no, ......not that Georgian Poloski. It was a friend of Mary Jo's cousin. It was a brief article (Jan. 2008) from the Pennsylvanian newspaper, and I am not going to order a few dollars fee to resurrect the article. You have to contact The Times-Leader of Wilkes-Barre from Pennsylvania. Mary Jo's family and friends occasionally interviewed with the Times-Leader of Wilkes-Barre for years. I had to seek articles from the New York Times and frequently quoted some of its articles from The Times-Leader of Wilkes-Barre. Several ones were found. It looks like the book I read at a library turned out to be true. Too bad Mary Jo's parents still didn't receive the apology directly from Ted Kennedy. God is probably gonna ask him,"Teddy, why didn't you apologize to them?"

It was published in July 1994. You have to read the entire article.

Chappaquiddick Journal; Dark Anniversary Draws the Curious - New York Times

__________________
We know what we are but not what we may be.
-Author:Shakespeare

Texan Guy

Well, as far as I know Ted Kennedy's car kills more people than my gun....

just kidding.

__________________

Liebling:-)))

[QUOTE]I do read your post. Yes I assumed that it's claim, the parents received from Kennedy's insurance because I consider it's as their rights. Do you really think Kennedy volunteered to pay the amount to Mary Jo's parents when they do not request him to? I doubt, that's why I beleive it's claim, no matter either the parents requested the amount of money or Ted Kennedy volunteered to pay the amount to them... to aviod the court... Maybe they agreed with the amount to aviod court?

Yes, Carolyn & Lauren's parents sued the Kennedy which Mary Jo's parents doesn't. Maybe they want more than Kennedy want to pay them to aviod the court.

I have nothing against both parents what and how they get their rights in different way because it's their rights.

Oh I see. I didn't know much about Mary Jo's parents'. It could be true but some people prefer their children's reputation privacy.


for this link. I find sad if it's really true that Ted did not apology them... but funeral? It mean that Ted did not made few words about Mary Jo or few words to parents at funeral? It's hard to beleive that Ted never apology Mary Jo's parents...

__________________

Liebling:-)))

Yes, true...

Forgive and forget is not same thing but it's good to forgive and move on.

__________________

Liebling:-)))

[QUOTE]Ted want Mary die?

Well, there're no proof either it's really rape or not because a woman did not report police straight way. It would be different story if she did. Why wait so long?

William claimed that woman agreed to have sex with him.


It's Jurors' decision for vote him as not guilty...

__________________

jillio

What are you talking about? He turned himself in, was charged with what our legal system deemed appropriate, and was tried and sentenced. Admit that he wanted her to die? I don't know what crystal ball you are using, but I doubt seriously that it allows you to see into the heart and mind of Ted Kennedy, and pronounce what he wants and doesn't want in any circumstance.

And as far as William Kennedy Smith is concerned, again, your problem is with the legal system, not the person. If you feel that he was unfairly acquitted, you need to spend your time attempting to correct the inequities in the legal system, not berating those who have used the inherent loopholes.

jillio

And that is the whole point. The problem is with the legal system, not with the individual.

And Ted Kennedy did not beat the justice system, actually. He was charged, tried, and sentenced. Had he beat the justice system, he never would have had charges levied against him. If one disagrees with the charges, the sentence, and the punsihment, then the problem needs to be dealt with as the inequities in our criminal justice system.

Mistyrose

Exactly right!

Liebling:-)))

Skakel's attorneys argue for new trial in Conn.
Court is weighing credibility of a claim implicating two others in murder


updated 4:56 p.m. ET March 26, 2009

HARTFORD, Conn. - A claim that implicates two men in a 1975 murder that sent Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel to prison is "pretty compelling," a Connecticut Supreme Court justice said Thursday, but justices also expressed skepticism.

Justice Richard N. Palmer pressed prosecutors about why they didn't grant Gitano "Tony" Bryant immunity when he implicated two men in Martha Moxley's death a year after Skakel was convicted. Bryant's videotaped account is key to Skakel's request to overturn his 2002 murder conviction.

"It's pretty compelling, I think," Palmer said during a state Supreme Court hearing Thursday.

Prosecutor Susann Gill said Bryant was not a credible witness. None of the 15 people he claimed to have seen the night of the murder — including Skakel's siblings — corroborated his presence, she said.

"The state is not in the habit of granting immunity to people whose credibility we think is worthless," Gill said.

Nephew of Ethel Kennedy
Skakel, a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, was sentenced to 20 years to life in prison for fatally beating Moxley with a golf club when they were 15.

Thursday's hearing was an appeal of a 2007 decision by Stamford Superior Court Judge Edward R. Karazin Jr. that denied Skakel a new trial.

Bryant and Skakel attended the same private school as children. In his videotaped statement to an investigator hired by Skakel, Bryant said his two friends were in Greenwich the night Moxley was killed. He said they told him they got Moxley "caveman style."

Bryant has since invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The two men he implicated have done the same.

Prosecutors have said Bryant's claim was fabricated and that nobody saw him and his friends in the predominantly white, gated neighborhood the night of the murder. Bryant and one of the men he implicated are black; the other has been described as mixed race.

Palmer and other justices on Thursday questioned why nobody saw Bryant's friends in Greenwich on the night of the murder. One justice said the men would have been hard to miss.

One of Skakel's attorneys, Hubert Santos, blamed the Greenwich police investigation.

But Palmer challenged that argument.

"It's hard for me to believe the Greenwich police could have been that slothful in ascertaining who was in the neighborhood at that time," Palmer said.

Appears to be a reluctant witness
Palmer also pressed prosecutors on why Bryant would make up the story. Gill called it "I Love Lucy syndrome." Coined by Skakel's trial attorney, Michael Sherman, it refers to people who want to "get into the act" in the high-profile case.

But Palmer said Bryant seemed to be a reluctant witness.

"That's somewhat counterintuitive to me that anybody would do this," Palmer said. "It's hard for me to fathom."

Skakel's attorneys also accused state investigator Frank Garr of bias because of a book they say he planned with a former Newsday reporter. Garr said he did not get involved in the book until after the verdict.

Santos said Garr was paid $7,000 for his role in the book. He said the book deal would have opened a whole new line of defense: that Garr's interaction with witnesses made their testimony unreliable.

Appeal pending in federal court
The court did not indicate when it would make a decision.

Skakel lost an appeal before the state Supreme Court in which he argued, among other things, that the statute of limitations had expired when he was charged in 2000. He has an appeal pending in federal court.

Dorthy Moxley, the victim's mother, attended the hearing and said she remains convinced of Skakel's guilt.

"You do get a little anxious at the thought maybe you'll have to go through another trial," Moxley said. "I know he will get out some day, but I'd like it to be later rather than now."

Skakel's brother Stephen said he remains confident his brother will be vindicated. He said he considers Bryant's claim credible.

"Why would any one in their right mind put themselves in that situation?" Skakel said.

Kennedy cousin's attorneys argue for new trial - Crime & courts- msnbc.com

__________________