Yanno, the whole Michael Skakel/Martha Moxley case pisses me off. Immensely.
First off, let’s look at fact number one: For 25 years Michael Skakel was the prime suspect in the case. However, it wasn’t until he said something less than complimentary about Ted Kennedy during Teddy’s most recent rape trial that the wheels of justice were finally allowed to start turning again. I don’t think there’s a single informed adult in this country who doesn’t believe that the Kennedy machine had been used to keep Skakel from being prosecuted for the crime. Certainly I believe that’s what happened. Then, when the investigation is allowed to go forward, it’s forgotten, completely and utterly forgotten.
And people wonder why I think the Kennedy’s are scum. (Well, at the very least Teddy.) And that they can get away with murder, and the media will forget it out of hand.
Secondly, even after 25 years, the evidence is so compelling that Skakel was convicted by a jury of his peers. Now, look at this appeal - http://www.courttv.com/trials/moxley/112403_appeal_ctv.html . He’s upset he wasn’t tried as a minor? WTF? The man lived as a free, and ‘innocent’ man for 25 years. IMNSHO, every day that he denyed he was responsible for killing this girl, every day that continued the lie, every day that he made the decision to keep up his facade of innocence was another crime. That he may have been drunk out of his mind when he killed the girl is one thing. But for him to go on about his primary concern being for his son seems a just a bit self-serving.
Out of curiosity, at what point does a person go from “allegedly committed the crime” to “committed the crime”? Is it after conviction, or after all appeals have been exhausted, or is it a generally meaningless distinction?
One, I get the feeling that the Skakel household (with all of its various characters) was probably not the ideal place to host a Campfire Girls meeting.
Two, we have all these polygraph tests given to the suspects and witnesses over the years. What happened to Michael Skakel? You’d think that somewhere along the line, especially after suspicion turned to him, that he’d have come in to police to show that he could pass a polygraph. But unless I missed something, the only evidence along those lines is a claim by a family attorney that years ago he passed some sort of sodium pentothal examination sponsored by the family.
Okay, he did it as a minor. Sentence him for the murder as a minor, too. Then sentence the adult for abetting murder, one count for every day as an adult, that he didn’t 'fess up.
Unfortunately for you, your novel legal insight runs afoul of the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees that no person may be compelled to incriminate himself. For this reason, a person may not be charged for failing to confess to a previously-committed crime.
I do appreciate your concession with respect to the trial-as-a-minor issue.
but hindering prosecution requires that you actively hide or help somebody else. What you’re suggesting, that he be charged for not confessing to a crime, would almost certainly violate the 5th amendment protection against self incrimination. It’s not the suspect’s job to give the state the evidence needed to convict him…the burden is on the state.
Hey, you never said I had to be rational, here. Or even follow proper legal codes. And I admit you’re right about the 5th Amendment, too. I’m venting spleen more than anything else.
One thing you have to understand…the Kennedy family is immensely powerful, and it has no compunction about using its power. Case in point: Ted kennedy left mary Joe Kopechne dead in his car, at Chappaquiddick Island. He then carried on as if nothing had happened…and was eventually charged with leaving the scene of an accident!
In 1991, Ted had his son and nephew (William Smith) down at their Palm Beach mansion, for a “Traditional Easter Weekend”. Smith and Patrick kennedy picked up two girls, one of which Smith raped. When confronted with this, Ted hired atty. Roy Black, who earned $2 million getting Smith off.
If you DARE to tangle with the Kennedy family, you had better:
-have a LOT of money!
-have a lot of proof…they have a way of smearing the best witnesses
Of course, they prefer to buy people off (court trials are messy and lead to negative publicity for the family image).
First of all, your summary is inaccurate. Kennedy didn’t “carry on as if nothing had happened.” He reported the accident to police. Admittedly, he waited a suspicious eight hours before doing so, but he didn’t do anything else. Under these circumstances, what crime do you contend he committed?
You claim there was a rape. The jury heard all the evidence and found there was not enough evidence of the rape to convict him of a crime. If I come along and claim that Smith was innocent, I can at least point to the jury verdict. What’s your evidence in support of your claim?
This is ironic, since your post constitutes a smear of the family. Doesn’t it?
So you think ted kennedy did the honroable thing by mary Joe Kopechne! Well, to begin with:
-the autopsy report indicated that she was most likely alive for several hours after the car rolled off that bridge! if Kennedy had been a man, he would have called the police immediately…poor mary Joe wpould probably be alive today! instead, he had his aides cook up a story about his whereabouts that night. Eyewitnesses state that Kennedy showed no sign of concern when the MV Police found Ms. Kopechne dead…his oly concernwas how this would affect his election prospects.
So yes, kennedy was guilft of manslaughter (at least).
As for the palm Beach incident, kennedy changed his story several times…and yeah, Roy Black did a good job with the jury…does that make “Willy” Smith innocent? NO!
My reaction when I read it was that Jr. did an amazing job of pointing out similarities in the guy he fingered for the crime and Skakel, but in each case attributing a sinister character or motivation to his suspect, and an innocent or altruistic motivation for Skakel. That, and a lot of “blame the lawyer.” Which, to me, is a good indication that he is guilty.
So in summary: Michael Skakel is icky because he’d rather not spend the rest of his life in prison; ralph124c is pathological on the subject of Ted Kennedy; and SnoopyFan thinks the dog ball joke is still funny.
