Liebling:-)))

I create a new thread to separate Jolie_77´s thread over Ted´s health issue to respect her.

Doctors: Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor

We can discuss anything about all Kennedy clan´s history... where they have experience with women like Mary Jo, Marilyn Moore, etc. etc. etc. etc.

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

Oceanbreeze

Actually, I was a baby when Chappaquiddick went down, so I don't know that much about it. I did google and learned some facts of the case. From what I learned, Kennedy was never charged with any crime beyond leaving the scene of a crime, and that is what I based my opinion on. If he was charged with manslaughter or murder, I could understand some people's feelings, but even then, to be so harsh as to say or imply that he deserves brain cancer, in my opinion is a bit harsh.

__________________
"There comes a time in your life, when you walk away from all the drama and people who create it. You surround yourself with people who make you laugh. Forget the bad, and focus on the good. Love the people who treat you right, pray for the ones who don't. Life is too short to be anything but happy. Falling down is a part of life, getting back up is living."

Chase

Quote: Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))
There´re no situation comparison between Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron because they are total different.

Just so you know, in argument (not bickering but civil discussion) there are two accepted forms of comparison. It's the same for English and German. One is point-by-point comparison you mention. The other is analogy, signaled by "as," "like," or "rather than."

In analogy, the explanation is in the similarity of a few salient points. The reason I didn't choose point-by-point is obvious. For instance, Los Angeles is in California; Chappaquiddick is in Maine; different laws apply. Ron and Nicole were aggressively cut; Mary Jo was negligently left to drown (or suffocate, that part of the record isn't clear, either).

However, the false claim that one is the other is just another form of begging the question--to avoid the issue and misdirect. That's the false argument here.


Quote: Originally Posted by Liebling:-))) Ted accept his responsibly for the death of Mary Jo which OJ doesn´t.

If you call accepting responsibility pleading "no contest" to watered down criminal decisions, then OJ also accepted the legal decision of a jury in criminal court "not Guilty." This is much closer to point-by-point comparison.

Another is I think both men in "accept his responsibilty" are examples of blatant miscarriages of justice.

jillio

Different situation. Nicole's and Ron's families sought retribution through the civil courts. They obviously spoke out against the injustice. Mary Jo's family chose not to. One family kept the incident alive, the other chose to put it to rest. It has absolutely nothing to do with political party. It is about respecting the way a family chose to deal with their loss.

jillio

And such is the nature of the justice system. You cannot take the law into your own hands and seek justice for something that you are not even directly involved in.

Nor do you have any knowledge of whether he has accepted responsibility on a personal level for the tragedy, as you do not have a special insight into the man's mind and heart.

jillio

And such is the nature of our criminal justice system. The blatant miscarraiges of justice are a common occurrance, and evidence of the fact that justice is served, in out system, not always dependent upon guilt or innocence, but on having the financial means to obtain a good attorney.

Chase

Agreed. Another comparison of the two cases in point-by-point.

Had both been required to use city or county defense attorneys, they might both have gotten the chair, rope, gas, needle -- whatever was the method du jour.

On a journalist's assignment, it soon become evident that the entire show is musical chairs. Defense attorneys were once prosecuting attorneys or will soon be. Judges are merely graduates of either pool moving up through city to country to state benches. Before and after each performance, they're all big buddies. Who was where was mostly a matter of current political affiliation.

Not in my lifetime, even though our legal system is one of the beat, I hope someday there's a better way.

Liebling:-)))

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - Doctors: Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor

I don´t think so.

Do you remember John Kennedy Jr., his wife Carolyn and her sister Lauren were being killed by plane crash? Carolyn & Lauren´s parents filed the lawsuit against Kennedy for million for the loss of their 2 daughters because John ignored weather warning in first place. Why should Mary Jo´s parents were afraid or whatever?

It could be that Mary Jo have relatives who know them? They would bring this subject up but they doesn´t. ?

__________________

jillio

Mary Jo's parents were not dead at the thime of the incident. They had the opportunity to pursue civil recourse at that time. The statue of limitations for civil action is limited. They allowed that time period to pass without action. It was their daughter and their decision. Had they wanted help with seeking justice, they had the opportunity to ask for assistance at that time. I do not recall them ever requesting that the public take up the cause for them. Perhaps they prefered to deal with this as a private matter within their family. That is their right to do so.

Attempting to play arm chair quarterback at this point in time is totally unproductive, and serves no purpose.

Chase

Actually, it drives to the heart of this amended thread. An armchair quarterback implies a frivolous, unprofessional critic, but ranking police investigators and crime reporters were skeptical of the odd responses by the Kopechne family. "No comment" was their right, but it didn't answer hard questions.

Those unanswered questions will surface again (not just here) as those who remember serve as counter-points to political soft soap in the hogwash.

jillio

I wasn't aware that any participating in this thread were ranking police investigators or crime reporters participating in the investigation at the time. Therefore, speculation falls into the category of arm-chair quarter backing, especially as it applies to Mary Jo's family's concept of whether justice was served to their satisfaction.

jillio

It has also ben speculated that JFK was directly involved inthe death of Marilyn Monroe. However, as both are dead, to what end does speculation lead?

Mary Jo is dead. Her remaining family members are dead. If the progression of Ted Kennedy's disease follows its usual course, he will soon be dead. Unless we plan to prosecute him in the next few days, speculation regarding what might have occurred and the way in which justice could have been better served in this particular case is useless.

If one wishes to celebrate the death of Ted Kennedy based on the assumption that his life was undeserved, then one could at least wait until he is in the grave to do so.

Reba

Remember, I posted that they lived in a different era, in different circumstances?


Do you know any of her relatives? I don't.

Reba

I don't see anyone celebrating the death of Kennedy.

Just because someone has brain cancer it doesn't make him an untouchable saint deserving of honor. A terminal illness doesn't whisk away the past.

jillio

Nor does it make him a parriah deserving of a total lack of empathy.

"At least he got to live to a ripe old age, which is more than poor Mary Jo Kopechne ever got to do."
Your quote says it all.

~SG~

Mod's note:

I have moved couple of last posts from Doctors: Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor to here.

Cheri

Agreed; I don't know why some jumped the gun and assume the worst.

__________________
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.

jillio

"At least he got to live to a ripe old age, which is more than poor Mary Jo Kopechne ever got to do."

As stated prior, perhaps this quote from another post reagarding the topic will explain it all. It is entirely without empathy, and seeks to distract from the issue of his health. It would appear to say, "So what. He desreves what he gets."

Reba

My quote says that he enjoyed a long life, whereas Mary Jo's life was cut short. Is that not true? I've read many posts, in many threads here where people refer to the long lives that people led before dying in contrast to people who tragically died young.

Reba

I never said that he deserved to get cancer. I wish that he didn't have cancer. Apparently it just makes him unjustifiably more "heroic" in the eyes of many people.

So, for the umpteenth time, I will state, "I NEVER SAID THAT TED KENNEDY 'DESERVED' TO GET CANCER, AND I NEVER CELEBRATED THE FACT THAT HE GOT CANCER."

It's too bad that people can't show more "empathy" for Mary Jo's tragic death. Gone and forgotten; "move on". Yep.

Byrdie714

Ahh....Kennedy's conspiracist live's on.......

jillio

IMO no one has shown less empathy for MayJo's death than they have for Kennedy's current situation. I don't recall any posters making comments like, "She shouldn't have been a an auotmoblie with a married man in the wee hours of the morning." There has been no personally directed judgement against her at all.

Quite frankly, Mary Jo's death has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Ted Kennedy has been diagnosed with a fatal brain tumor. To even bring the incident into a discussion regarding his health shows obvious intent to discount his situation. The majority have agreed that no one has all of the information into the events of that morning except the 2 that werre present, and that her family had choices, made them, and the incident has been dealt with both on a legal level and a personal level as far as the surviviors are concerned. There was absolutely no reason to even bring the incident back up unless the intent was to cast dispersions against a dying man.

jillio

Exactly.

Byrdie714

She also made the choice/decision to go home with a drunk driver as well.....so if it's anyone's faults, it's also hers as well.

jillio

And now we're into the issue of personal responsibility. If we ask one participant to take personal responsibility in a specific incident, we must ask all involved to take personal responsibility.

Byrdie714

I couldn't agree with you more.

Sad thing is that nowadays, no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions.

jillio

Yep.

Cheri

What are you saying then? Are you saying Mary got what she deserved to get because she rode with a drunk? I do hope I'm wrong.

__________________
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.

Liebling:-)))

Well, I view is remain unchanged. Ron & Nicole did not know that their life end to the Killer, don´t they? It´s not their responsiblity to end/risk their life. Ron have to die because he returned Nicole´s glass back to her which she left at resturant. Nicole have to die because she decided to divorce OJ and built her new life. It´s not their responsiblity which is total different as Mary Jo.

Yes, I would say it´s also Mary Jo´s responsiblity for her action as well for take Ted´s offer to ride her to home when she KNEW Ted is drunk and would risk her life..., don´t she? I would say responsiblity on the both sides between Mary Jo and Ted... Mary Jo agreed to take Ted´s offer as the same as Ted violate the DUI law and neglect Mary Jo that´s time he was drunk.


If I see my friend who drunk to offer me to ride... I would firm No and order the taxi or overnight at friend´s house. This is sensible. It would be my responsible either for agree to take drunk driver´s offer to drive me home.

That´s why I said their comparison is total different.

__________________

jillio

Byrdie, and several others are saying that 2 bad decisions were made that evening. One of them was made by MaryJo. If you decide to get in the car with a drunk driver, then you accept the risk inherent in doing so. If you don't want to risk being in a fatal accident, then don't get in the car with a drunk driver behind the wheel. It's very simple. She was an adult, and she made a decision. It turned out to be a fatal one.