Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What's the evidence that Skakel did it? I know, during the trial that the prosecution played edited audio of Skakel alongside a slideshow that was designed to influence the jury. It's shocking that they were allowed to get away with that.
But is there actual evidence that Skakel did it? Was his DNA found on the body? I read that he admitted masturbating in a tree near where the body was found. As weird as that sounds its not really evidence of murder.
He made up that story after many years when DNA evidence became a new thing because he was worried about his DNA being found....they believe he did that after he killed her near her body.
The golf club belonged to the Skakel family. He liked this Skakel girl and was jealous his brother was messing with her that night. He had a weird rivalry with his brother. He has behavioral issues.
It had to be someone the girl knew because it was an overkill murder. The person was enraged over something.
He's also confessed to it numerous times over the years including making odd statements the next day. They had several people testify to it.
It either had to be him, or his brother Thomas, who was last seen with her but since Thomas and the girl were hooking up essentially it doesn't make sense he would kill her.
Also, he was a 15 year old kid abusing hard drugs like cocaine.
Martha was a beautiful young girl. This case is very interesting due to everyone being from wealthy and privileged backgrounds. It was always obvious that it wasn't a stranger that murdered Martha. Not many outsiders wandering around that very exclusive community.
I don't know if there is, or is not, a family gene that can be passed down through generations - I don't know, rather, if there may be a propensity for criminal behavior rather than, perhaps, a way of life among some families and/or elites that believe they are above the law, or their societal positions can get them out of situations - I am sociologists and therapists and researches discuss this often and no doubt disagree as well [smile].
Although not specifically connected with this case but rather picking up what has been mentioned within the thread re: Kennedy family, tragedies, crimes, etc., did anyone ever read the Dark Side of Camelot [http://bztv.typepad.com/Winter/DarkSideSummary.pdf]
which was written by Seymour Hersh..quite the book and in some parts, pretty shocking, even to me.
Joe Kennedy, the clan Patriarch, was a lawbreaker who ran rum during Prohibition and chased women. His wife Rose was a devout Catholic who looked the other way. Both behavioral strains have been perpetuated (strong Catholicism and being above the law) in the upbringing of the Kennedy children, who passed this culture on to their children. This is called cultural reproduction, which is stronger in some families than others.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_reproduction
Both behavioral strains have been perpetuated (strong Catholicism and being above the law) in the upbringing of the Kennedy children, who passed this culture on to their children. This is called cultural reproduction, which is stronger in some families than others....
Except that neither Caroline Kennedy nor JFK, Jr, were anything like their cousins. Their mother made sure that they weren't brought up in that same culture.
Ethel Skakel Kennedy was a pampered, self indulgent, wealthy, and spoiled young woman when she married Bobby Kennedy. Her brothers were probably no different. They learned at a very young age that consequences happen to others, never to themselves.
Thanks for the update. I totally disagree with this decision. Though it's a very high burden to meet(as it should be), I think the original finding of "ineffective counsel" from the lower court was justified and Michael should receive a new trial.
The only reasonable question in this case was whether it was Michael or Thomas. Sherman's failure to pursue a third-party culpability defense that fingered Thomas is inexplicable, and inexcusable. There was a great deal of evidence to implicate Thomas. Sherman ignored all of that and instead argued(rather weakly) that Ken Littleton was responsible, despite a complete lack of evidence against him.
He told this story to explain the DNA evidence that was later found. He had not previously told this story.
It sounds like a bizarre, far-fetched story that was made up to explain something.
I don't disagree necessarily, but it's equally noteworthy that Thomas changed his story as well, and likely for the same reason. He later claimed to have a consensual sexual encounter with Martha on that night, near the time of her death, which he hadn't mentioned before.
I think Skakel killed her because she saw him spanking the monkey and was embarrassed that she would tell.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
