Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (14443)	6/7/2002 7:41:24 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

<<It's good it wasn't a case of a black celebrity defendant, a white victim or two, and a predominantly black jury, or, I have reason to suspect, there might well have been a different verdict, even if the case was stronger than it was. Anyone want to disagree with that?>> Jeez E, you are starting to sound like Edwarda there.

To: E who wrote (14443)	6/7/2002 9:05:56 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

Any case against a Kennedy in Mass is "thin". It's just amazing they finally won one. Or that it even got brought. I imagine the Moxleys, living near the Kennedys, must have money and influence. That probably helped quite a bit. This guy wasn't a "real" Kennedy, so the clan probably decided he was expendable. In most cases, court proceedings are open to the public. However, TV cameras are commonly banned. I'm not sure about tape recorders. And I'm not sure if the transcripts made by the court recorder are publicly available. I would think they would be.