Doctors: Ted Kennedy has malignant brain tumor

Kennedy clan´s history

Defee said:
We will know the truth about what happened that night
the girl drowned..WE WERE NOT THERE...
Click to expand...
No, we weren't there but other people were, and they investigated her death.

According to one expert, if Kennedy had gone immediately for help, there was enough air left in the car that she could have been rescued. But he didn't go for help, so she died.
http://www.ytedk.com/chapter5.htm
 
jillio said:
And the key phrase here is "leaving the scene of an accident."
Click to expand...
He did more than that. He drove drunk, causing the accident. He didn't try to get help for Mary Jo, and allowed her to die.

He didn't just "leave the scene of an accident". He callously left a girl to drown.

It wasn't an "accident" like knocking over a mailbox, or even hitting a dog. It was leaving a girl to drown.
 
Chase said:
I referred to your speculation in Post #42, but have it your way. Anyway it's begging the question by misdirection and "at the person" attacks, not just at me but at anyone not following official party sympathy.

The point remains that politics-as-usual has little or no base in logic or reality.

Still, even though some of us remember a time that was not Ted Kennedy's finest hour, I hope his last hours are without suffering.
Click to expand...

Oh, i thought we were talking about the post #53..about how Mary Jo's
parents suddenly became well-to-do..it was just speculation on how
they became rich..we dont know if Kennedys paid them or if they just
inherited some money or what..we will never know the truth.
Im sorry if you misunderstood me or maybe i misunderstood you, Chase.
But anyways, It is too bad about Ted's misfortune but we all have to die
sometime, you know.
Have a nice night! Smile!
 
Oceanbreeze said:
OK, so now it's a bad law... Do people deserve to die for drafting bad legislation, so people can sign it into law?

No.
Click to expand...
I never said that.

It's just ironic how every time someone at AD complains about how awful the No Child Left Behind Act is, they blame Bush and never mention Kennedy.

Either it's an act that all participants should be blamed for, or none should be blamed for. It can't be both ways.
 
Reba said:
I never said that.

It's just ironic how every time someone at AD complains about how awful the No Child Left Behind Act is, they blame Bush and never mention Kennedy.

Either it's an act that all participants should be blamed for, or none should be blamed for. It can't be both ways.
Click to expand...

But Kennedy didn't make into law.

Whereas Bush signed the bill into law.

Big difference between the two.
 
Reba is entitled to voice her opinion. Mary Jo Kopechne issue had been a hot-button topic, because Ted did leave the scene of an accident and only received a two month suspended driver's license and one year probation so I can't blame how Reba feels. Mary Jo Kopechne is somebody's daughter, somebody's mother, and she got no justice for her death. So, I'm with Reba. :)
 
Reba said:
He did more than that. He drove drunk, causing the accident. He didn't try to get help for Mary Jo, and allowed her to die.

He didn't just "leave the scene of an accident". He callously left a girl to drown.

It wasn't an "accident" like knocking over a mailbox, or even hitting a dog. It was leaving a girl to drown.
Click to expand...

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.
 
While Mary Jo was someone's daughter, her parents seem to be satisfied with whatever resolution they came to. Who are we to tell them that justice was not served for their daughter if they are satisfied with the results? Had they not been satisfied with the legal out come,they had civil court with which to seek further justice. They did not. Leave them to their peace. They have not requested the assistance of the American public in seeking any further justice regarding their daughter's death. 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. It is for them to deal with. To drag the matter back before the public when it has privately been put to rest is disrespectful to the family of Mary Jo.
 
I see . . . like OJ's free due to a travisty of justice, and it's disrespectful to Nicole's and Ron's families to bring it up?

It's an eye-opener to see the extent that party lines can warp otherwise fair minds.
 
Jillos´ post
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.
Click to expand...
jillio said:
While Mary Jo was someone's daughter, her parents seem to be satisfied with whatever resolution they came to. Who are we to tell them that justice was not served for their daughter if they are satisfied with the results? Had they not been satisfied with the legal out come,they had civil court with which to seek further justice. They did not. Leave them to their peace. They have not requested the assistance of the American public in seeking any further justice regarding their daughter's death. 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. It is for them to deal with. To drag the matter back before the public when it has privately been put to rest is disrespectful to the family of Mary Jo.
Click to expand...

:gpost:
 
Chase said:
I see . . . like OJ's free due to a travisty of justice, and it's disrespectful to Nicole's and Ron's families to bring it up?

It's an eye-opener to see the extent that party lines can warp otherwise fair minds.
Click to expand...

There´re no situation comparison between Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron because they are total different.

The families of Nicole & Ron want it to be public to against OJ. I do not against them but respect what they are & understand where they come from. I also respect Mary Jó´s family as well and also understand where they come from as well when they are different as Nicole & Ron´s families.

Ted accept his responsibly for the death of Mary Jo which OJ doesn´t.


 
Liebling:-))) said:
There´re no situation comparison between Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron because they are total different.
Click to expand...

Disagree, 3 victims are dead, no hard justice for either of those 3, and both murders are still living out on the streets, so yea they are so similar alike. :o

Ted has to accept the responsible because he was the driver.
 
This thread is talking about Ted Kennedy. I don't understand why there are discussing point out of the topic about Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron ? Can anyone to explain this why they discuss about "Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron"?

I am confused to read various topic in this thread ?

What have to do with Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron ?
 
Kalista said:
This thread is talking about Ted Kennedy. I don't understand why there are discussing point out of the topic about Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron ? Can anyone to explain this why they discuss about "Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron"?

I am confused to read various topic in this thread ?

What have to do with Mary Jo and Nicole & Ron ?
Click to expand...

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. :hug:

 
Back
Top