Posted on 05/16/2006 4:08:00 PM PDT by STARWISE
I saw Olsen on the tube the other night and heard him mention Kobe Bryant's relative.
SKAKEL is NOT A BLOOD KENNEDY RELATIVE.
HOW DARE YOU. Maybe, he actually BELIEVES Skakel is innocent. Alot of people do.
And remember another thing...it was the PI firm that was hired by the Skakils that developed serious doubts about Michael.I think one factor was the fact that,after the advent of DNA technology,Michael changes part of his story and states that he climbed a tree outside her window and masturbated.
I don't know if you're male or female but if you're a guy you,like me,know that no guy,at any age,masturbates while sitting in a tree branch.
SKAKEL IS NOT A KENNEDY.
Ted Olson is helping a man he must believe is innocent. That's noble, in my book.
I'm from Massachusetts...lived here all my life (except for Army time).I *know* the Kennedys.
*Please* trust me when I tell you that Michael is a Kennedy.And here's a bit of proof:
How many Kennedy cousins testified at his trial?????
They decided to sentence him as an adult, even though he would never have gotten an adult sentence 30-40 years ago.
I don't like the guy but he got shafted. (no golf club pun intended)
I hope Olsen wins. It reminds me of the bastardization of double jeopardy, where the government re-tries those they "dislike" on Civil rights charges after an aquittal.
Wrong is wrong. IMHO
I'm sorry, but what on Earth does that have to do with anything? He is NOT a blood Kennedy.
If the Kennedys didn't think of him as one of their own,would any of them have shown up at his trial or issued statements in his support?
If the Kennedys think of him as a Kennedy,he's a Kennedy.
If he wasn't a Kennedy,would his cases have received as much nationwide attention as it did?
If he wasn't related to a KENNEDY, he probably wouldn't be in jail right now.
I'll go along with the conclusions of the Sutton report which,BTW,was initiated by and paid for by the Skakels,and you can subscribe to the Kobe Bryant story.
I'm not a true believer, but for people to start insulting the character of Ted Olson is, to me, beyond the pale. I'll wait to hear what he has to say.
" ... Skakel, 45, is serving a sentence of 20 years to life for his 2002 conviction in the 1975 beating death of his Greenwich neighbor, Martha Moxley, when the two were teenagers.Skakel appealed his conviction to the Connecticut Supreme Court last year, arguing among other issues that the five-year statute of limitations expired when he was charged in 2000. The court unanimously rejected the appeal in January. That decision overturned a 1983 precedent. ..."
I'm confused about what this "5-year statute of limitations" is in reference to. There is no statute of limitations on murder. He was tried and convicted within 2 years of being charged, so it wasn't a 5-year statute for that.
His appeal was rejected in January, 2006 - so maybe this is all it is? That they failed to rule on his appeal within 5 years of when he was *charged*? That doesn't make sense, either. You can't even file an appeal until you've had a conviction.
*Scratching my head here.*
Murder only has a five year statute of limitations in Conn.?
Perry Mason had the luxury of knowing that every single one of his clients was innocent of the charge(s) brought against them.
In the real world,it could well be true that a small enough percentage of those accused of crimes are,in fact,innocent that any lawyer who limited his/her practice to representing those he *knew* to be innocent would go hungry in a big hurry.
The man you write of is named Ken Littleton, and he is very much alive. His life was ruined for years by endless hassling from the police over this matter, and they could never prove a thing because he did not do it. If they had found anything against him, he would have been arrested and tried long ago. They never found anything. He had just come to the Skakels and just settled in the day of the murder. If he did the murder, he sure found the custom-made set of clubs once owned by the Skakels' mom pretty fast in order to murder Martha with one of the clubs just a few hours after he arrived.
Ken Littleton also has never, never admitted to the crime which he manifestly did NOT commit.
If he wasn't related to a Kennedy, he would have been arrested within days of the murder and tried shortly thereafter (plus convicted).
On Kenneth Littleton:
On October 30, 1975, a twenty-three year-old teacher and coach from the exclusive Brunswick School in Greenwich, Connecticut, spent his first night in residence as a tutor for the Skakel family children. It was a job, and a night, which dramatically changed the course of Ken Littleton's life for the worse. Young, athletic, handsome, and a recent graduate from Williams, it seemed his future was full of nothing but promise. In the wake of Martha Moxley's murder, however, Ken Littleton fell victim to heavy substance abuse and extreme psychiatric problems. He was arrested in the summer of 1976, on Nantucket, for grand larceny, breaking and entering, and burglary. His criminal record would grow from that point to include shoplifting, assault and battery, and numerous DWI convictions. Within five years, he was working on a loading dock.
While there is no doubt Littleton was profoundly affected by Martha Moxley's murder and its subsequent investigation, to what end his problems can be attributed to this event is uncertain. He is a haunted man, but why? Is he somehow responsible? Is he involved in some complicity, some conspiracy?
Ken Littleton is a wild card š literally and figuratively. If he is entirely innocent of any involvement in the murder of Martha Moxley, he has certainly gone to great lengths to make it seem otherwise.
A couple of years ago, the tabloid television program, A Current Affair, ambushed Littleton in Canada for an expose-style interview. Anxious, stuttering, and shaking uncontrollably, Ken initially tried to flee the encounter, but then awkwardly relented. He made a few comments and answered some questions while remaining just barely within the realm of coherence. He is a man who suffers from severe depression and alcoholism, and his demeanor is inherently disabled. In this regard, he is his own worst accuser.
Littleton's crime spree on Nantucket, which he attributed to his drinking problem, brought him swiftly to the forefront of speculation in the investigation of Martha Moxley's murder. The Greenwich Police Department's efforts to attach the crime to Tommy Skakel had proven futile. Their focus now shifted. Defenders of Littleton insist the continued harassment of the Greenwich Police š who frequently questioned Littleton while he was working š lead to his dismissal from teaching jobs.
Littleton probably did lose teaching jobs because of his status as a suspect and the Greenwich Police's continued efforts to build a case against him, but he has only himself to blame for their interest. His foolish crimes on Nantucket were a red flag to investigators. Furthermore, to this day, he has left many questions unanswered about his actions and whereabouts on the night of October 30, 1975.
I don't know...it seems to me, that if you're going to send a man to jail 30 years after a crime is committed, you better damn be sure he's the one who did it. And I don't think the Skakel case rises to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.