CA - Sirhan Sirhan & the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, 1968 - Parole denied
- Thread starter Reader
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2019
- Messages
- 3,688
- Reaction score
- 61,409
IMO it's a disgrace to set him free, and I sincerely hope that the final decision is to keep him locked up.
My opinion in premeditated murder has always been that if the victim comes back to life, the murderer can be freed. No RFK resurrection, no freedom for his killer.
The family is the family and has a say, but I tend to disregard anything coming out of the mouth of RFK Jr. Anyway it's 6-2 with Kathleen abstaining. I'd like to know what Ethel thinks.
Plus, David was collateral damage. I've heard the Kennedys say that David as a child saw his father murdered on live TV and that sent him into his self-destructive spiral.
My opinion in premeditated murder has always been that if the victim comes back to life, the murderer can be freed. No RFK resurrection, no freedom for his killer.
The family is the family and has a say, but I tend to disregard anything coming out of the mouth of RFK Jr. Anyway it's 6-2 with Kathleen abstaining. I'd like to know what Ethel thinks.
Plus, David was collateral damage. I've heard the Kennedys say that David as a child saw his father murdered on live TV and that sent him into his self-destructive spiral.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 11,197
- Reaction score
- 74,107
To my mom, the photo of the mortally wounded Kennedy resembled a baby...
I have a question. Together with RFK, five more people were wounded in Ambassador. They were victims, too.
Any chance that anyone is still alive? Or, if dead, and maybe their lives were shortened by the wounds, why weren't their kids asked to provide their opinions about paroling this lunatic?
I have a question. Together with RFK, five more people were wounded in Ambassador. They were victims, too.
Any chance that anyone is still alive? Or, if dead, and maybe their lives were shortened by the wounds, why weren't their kids asked to provide their opinions about paroling this lunatic?
Last edited:
I was a teenager when this happened. it was horrific for all. I read somewhere that they may deport him to Jordan.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2014
- Messages
- 5,948
- Reaction score
- 41,606
Maria Shriver posted this today on her twitter account. I've included a few excerpts ( below ) from the Op-Ed which was published yesterday.
Written by Maxwell Taylor Kennedy - son of Robert F. Kennedy.
Maria Shriver
@mariashriver
·
3h
A son speaks his truth
Op-Ed: In assassinating my father, Sirhan committed a crime against America. He must not be released
Maxwell Kennedy makes the case against parole for Sirhan Sirhan.
latimes.com"
BY MAXWELL TAYLOR KENNEDY
AUG. 28, 2021 4:01 PM PT
Excerpts:
"My father, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, was murdered in June 1968 by Sirhan Sirhan in full view of many witnesses, including my mother, some of my father’s closest friends and a number of journalists and photographers. There is no question that Sirhan killed my father."
"On Friday, a two-person panel of the California Board of Parole Hearings determined that Sirhan’s request for parole should be approved. I was shocked by this decision. On behalf of my mother and all Americans whose lives were altered by this appalling crime, I condemn this unwarranted recommendation and urge Gov. Gavin Newsom to do the right thing and publicly reject the panel’s decision."
"Because of Sirhan we never got to live out that better history. He killed my father for supporting Israel and the mere thought of Sirhan returning to Palestine, where he may be cheered for his crime, is sickening. I commit myself to doing everything within my power to stop his release."
Maxwell Taylor Kennedy, a son of Robert F. Kennedy, is a writer in Los Angeles and a former prosecutor in Philadelphia.
Written by Maxwell Taylor Kennedy - son of Robert F. Kennedy.
Maria Shriver
@mariashriver
·
3h
A son speaks his truth
Op-Ed: In assassinating my father, Sirhan committed a crime against America. He must not be released
Maxwell Kennedy makes the case against parole for Sirhan Sirhan.
latimes.com"
BY MAXWELL TAYLOR KENNEDY
AUG. 28, 2021 4:01 PM PT
Excerpts:
"My father, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, was murdered in June 1968 by Sirhan Sirhan in full view of many witnesses, including my mother, some of my father’s closest friends and a number of journalists and photographers. There is no question that Sirhan killed my father."
"On Friday, a two-person panel of the California Board of Parole Hearings determined that Sirhan’s request for parole should be approved. I was shocked by this decision. On behalf of my mother and all Americans whose lives were altered by this appalling crime, I condemn this unwarranted recommendation and urge Gov. Gavin Newsom to do the right thing and publicly reject the panel’s decision."
"Because of Sirhan we never got to live out that better history. He killed my father for supporting Israel and the mere thought of Sirhan returning to Palestine, where he may be cheered for his crime, is sickening. I commit myself to doing everything within my power to stop his release."
Maxwell Taylor Kennedy, a son of Robert F. Kennedy, is a writer in Los Angeles and a former prosecutor in Philadelphia.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2016
- Messages
- 16,133
- Reaction score
- 155,220
I find it very interesting that a decision to Parole a man convicted of murder was made without allowing the family of the victim to make a statement prior to making a decision regarding Parole.
So much for the rights of victims and their surviving family members.
So much for the rights of victims and their surviving family members.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 94,613
- Reaction score
- 322,801
That surprised me too! Don't they usually do that? I hope Gov. Newsom - doesn't sign this off!!!
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2014
- Messages
- 5,948
- Reaction score
- 41,606
Another Op-Ed which Maria Shriver is encouraging everyone to read, and if they agree - to contact the Governor.
Maria Shriver
@mariashriver
·
19h
If you find yourself agreeing with Mr. Tribe and so many others, please let the governor hear from you.
@tribelaw
BY LAURENCE H. TRIBE
AUG. 30, 2021 8:49 AM PT
I was an idealistic 26-year-old clerking on the United States Supreme Court when Sirhan Sirhan murdered Robert F. Kennedy, then a leading candidate for the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination.
My dreams — like those of millions of Americans — for a humane exit from the Vietnam War, for a brighter American future, were killed that day in a crowded hotel kitchen hallway, minutes after Kennedy won California’s Democratic primary. Having committed the assassination in a large crowd and on live television, Sirhan could hardly deny being the gunman.
At times, he has claimed his memory is blurry. But in interviews and interrogations, Sirhan, a Palestinian nationalist, has admitted to trying to kill Kennedy in retribution for Kennedy’s stance on Israel, doing so on the first anniversary of the beginning of the Six-Day War. But he does not take responsibility for ending the 42-year-old senator’s life and crushing the hopes of his millions of supporters. And certainly not for destroying the nation’s opportunity to pass democratic judgment on Kennedy’s bold message.
Sirhan is a political assassin. The nature of his action must determine how we view justice in his case.
When Sirhan was sentenced to death by a California court in April 1969, I felt ambivalent. As a law clerk for Justice Potter Stewart, I had helped draft an opinion, announced just two days before RFK’s murder, that curtailed juries’ ability to impose capital punishment by ending the practice of striking every juror with even the slightest qualms about the death penalty. It was a step toward abolition. But if anyone deserved capital punishment, I thought, it was Sirhan. And if the death penalty were to be ended, then at least Sirhan deserved to die in prison.
Over half a century has passed, and I continue to feel ambivalent about state-sponsored execution, although I’m close to being persuaded that no government — certainly no government in power today — is so infallible that it can justly put anyone to death. Not because none deserve that fate but because no government deserves to play God.
That said, I feel morally certain about this: that Sirhan’s life was spared when his death sentence was converted to life imprisonment in 1972, by virtue of California’s temporary abolition of the death penalty, should not result in him being given his freedom now or ever.
Even if it could be shown that Sirhan no longer poses a threat to others, he must never be released because our justice system demands the strictest punishment for the most atrocious crimes. There is no doubt in my mind that political assassination stands nearly alone in its threat to the foundation of society — it is a crime against our republic as much as against an individual.
I oppose Sirhan’s parole not because he murdered a politician I found inspiring; the assassin of a politician I vehemently oppose would be equally deserving of dying in prison. No, it’s because Sirhan took our history and government into his own bloody hands through an act of premeditated political violence.
The murder was a stroke of terrorism, committed against the nation, obliterating the right of Americans to settle in the ballot booth the debates over Kennedy’s positions on issues such as the Vietnam War, civil rights, social justice, poverty and U.S.-Israeli relations. Vitriolic as our political disagreements can be, we are a nation bound by the rule of law, not the rule of a revolver. By resorting to the latter, Sirhan forfeited his right ever again to breathe the air of freedom.
Those opposed to the death penalty should oppose releasing Sirhan, a move that would give death penalty supporters reason to claim that execution is the only way to remove from society the very worst offenders. And those favoring the death penalty surely should oppose releasing Sirhan.
Under California law, Sirhan has not met the factors that would entitle him to release. For those sentenced to life, parole can be granted only upon a finding of “suitability” for release. The law leaves “to the judgment of the panel” how to weigh factors such as the crime itself, the convict’s motivation and signs of remorse. When asked if he would kill again at his parole hearing on Friday, Sirhan remarked, “I would never put myself in jeopardy again.” Even in asking the state for mercy, Sirhan thinks only of himself, and not at all of his victims.
Bobby Kennedy’s nine surviving children have expressed divergent views on this issue. But as much as I sympathize with the pain felt by the majority of the Kennedy children, who oppose Sirhan’s release, no member of the senator’s family has a special claim to be heard here.
The promise of our judicial system is to impart equal justice based on our collective moral judgments as embodied in law, not on the grief and anger of victims’ families.
In this case, the question we need to answer is, what does an assassin deserve in matters of justice? Sirhan victimized not only the Kennedy family but also the American family. We the people were his victims. And it is we the people who should be outraged by the parole board panel’s decision to recommend his release. The full parole board should reverse that decision. If it doesn’t, Gov. Gavin Newsom must.
Laurence H. Tribe is the Carl M. Loeb university professor and professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard University. He served as the first head of the Access to Justice Office in the Obama administration. @tribelaw
Maria Shriver
@mariashriver
·
19h
If you find yourself agreeing with Mr. Tribe and so many others, please let the governor hear from you.
@tribelaw
BY LAURENCE H. TRIBE
AUG. 30, 2021 8:49 AM PT
I was an idealistic 26-year-old clerking on the United States Supreme Court when Sirhan Sirhan murdered Robert F. Kennedy, then a leading candidate for the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination.
My dreams — like those of millions of Americans — for a humane exit from the Vietnam War, for a brighter American future, were killed that day in a crowded hotel kitchen hallway, minutes after Kennedy won California’s Democratic primary. Having committed the assassination in a large crowd and on live television, Sirhan could hardly deny being the gunman.
At times, he has claimed his memory is blurry. But in interviews and interrogations, Sirhan, a Palestinian nationalist, has admitted to trying to kill Kennedy in retribution for Kennedy’s stance on Israel, doing so on the first anniversary of the beginning of the Six-Day War. But he does not take responsibility for ending the 42-year-old senator’s life and crushing the hopes of his millions of supporters. And certainly not for destroying the nation’s opportunity to pass democratic judgment on Kennedy’s bold message.
Sirhan is a political assassin. The nature of his action must determine how we view justice in his case.
When Sirhan was sentenced to death by a California court in April 1969, I felt ambivalent. As a law clerk for Justice Potter Stewart, I had helped draft an opinion, announced just two days before RFK’s murder, that curtailed juries’ ability to impose capital punishment by ending the practice of striking every juror with even the slightest qualms about the death penalty. It was a step toward abolition. But if anyone deserved capital punishment, I thought, it was Sirhan. And if the death penalty were to be ended, then at least Sirhan deserved to die in prison.
Over half a century has passed, and I continue to feel ambivalent about state-sponsored execution, although I’m close to being persuaded that no government — certainly no government in power today — is so infallible that it can justly put anyone to death. Not because none deserve that fate but because no government deserves to play God.
That said, I feel morally certain about this: that Sirhan’s life was spared when his death sentence was converted to life imprisonment in 1972, by virtue of California’s temporary abolition of the death penalty, should not result in him being given his freedom now or ever.
Even if it could be shown that Sirhan no longer poses a threat to others, he must never be released because our justice system demands the strictest punishment for the most atrocious crimes. There is no doubt in my mind that political assassination stands nearly alone in its threat to the foundation of society — it is a crime against our republic as much as against an individual.
I oppose Sirhan’s parole not because he murdered a politician I found inspiring; the assassin of a politician I vehemently oppose would be equally deserving of dying in prison. No, it’s because Sirhan took our history and government into his own bloody hands through an act of premeditated political violence.
The murder was a stroke of terrorism, committed against the nation, obliterating the right of Americans to settle in the ballot booth the debates over Kennedy’s positions on issues such as the Vietnam War, civil rights, social justice, poverty and U.S.-Israeli relations. Vitriolic as our political disagreements can be, we are a nation bound by the rule of law, not the rule of a revolver. By resorting to the latter, Sirhan forfeited his right ever again to breathe the air of freedom.
Those opposed to the death penalty should oppose releasing Sirhan, a move that would give death penalty supporters reason to claim that execution is the only way to remove from society the very worst offenders. And those favoring the death penalty surely should oppose releasing Sirhan.
Under California law, Sirhan has not met the factors that would entitle him to release. For those sentenced to life, parole can be granted only upon a finding of “suitability” for release. The law leaves “to the judgment of the panel” how to weigh factors such as the crime itself, the convict’s motivation and signs of remorse. When asked if he would kill again at his parole hearing on Friday, Sirhan remarked, “I would never put myself in jeopardy again.” Even in asking the state for mercy, Sirhan thinks only of himself, and not at all of his victims.
Bobby Kennedy’s nine surviving children have expressed divergent views on this issue. But as much as I sympathize with the pain felt by the majority of the Kennedy children, who oppose Sirhan’s release, no member of the senator’s family has a special claim to be heard here.
The promise of our judicial system is to impart equal justice based on our collective moral judgments as embodied in law, not on the grief and anger of victims’ families.
In this case, the question we need to answer is, what does an assassin deserve in matters of justice? Sirhan victimized not only the Kennedy family but also the American family. We the people were his victims. And it is we the people who should be outraged by the parole board panel’s decision to recommend his release. The full parole board should reverse that decision. If it doesn’t, Gov. Gavin Newsom must.
Laurence H. Tribe is the Carl M. Loeb university professor and professor of constitutional law emeritus at Harvard University. He served as the first head of the Access to Justice Office in the Obama administration. @tribelaw
sandy_80
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2020
- Messages
- 945
- Reaction score
- 5,082
the question is...is he guilty ?
this is politics and the truth is always never disclosed
ill bet.. he was just a tool as it happens usually in political assassination .. and that's why he wasn't executed
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-rfk-jr-doesnt-believe-it-was-sirhan-sirhan/
this is politics and the truth is always never disclosed
ill bet.. he was just a tool as it happens usually in political assassination .. and that's why he wasn't executed
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-rfk-jr-doesnt-believe-it-was-sirhan-sirhan/
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2014
- Messages
- 5,948
- Reaction score
- 41,606
In this newscast interview in 1989, Sirhan Sirhan explains what motivated his hate for RFK:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2016
- Messages
- 16,133
- Reaction score
- 155,220
If Newsom doesn't reverse this decision, he will lose the few remaining people who still support him.
- Joined
- May 18, 2016
- Messages
- 712
- Reaction score
- 2,844
When homeschooling my son, I picked out a RFK documentary for a history lesson, and we watched it when my daughter, who's a bit older was also available. I never told them a thing about him, just let the movie play out. When it got to the California primary I was trying to decide if I should say something to warn them. But I didn't.
They were both very taken with how charismatic RFK was. And they're used to my nerdy film choices.
Then a shot rang out, and there was chaos, screaming. My son was just staring, trying to work out what was happening. My daughter was gaping at the screen. She spun around and looked aghast. "They SHOT him?!?" Yes, he was assassinated. They were both just stunned. My daughter actually cried.
I've felt a bit guilty occasionally for sneaking that on them but mostly I think it was a way to teach them a horrible, necessary lesson about violence and hate, without having to experience personal damage. It was a shock, for sure, but it wasn't life changing trauma.
For the Kennedys, it was life changing trauma. I don't understand why we would let this man walk free.
They were both very taken with how charismatic RFK was. And they're used to my nerdy film choices.
Then a shot rang out, and there was chaos, screaming. My son was just staring, trying to work out what was happening. My daughter was gaping at the screen. She spun around and looked aghast. "They SHOT him?!?" Yes, he was assassinated. They were both just stunned. My daughter actually cried.
I've felt a bit guilty occasionally for sneaking that on them but mostly I think it was a way to teach them a horrible, necessary lesson about violence and hate, without having to experience personal damage. It was a shock, for sure, but it wasn't life changing trauma.
For the Kennedys, it was life changing trauma. I don't understand why we would let this man walk free.
sandy_80
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2020
- Messages
- 945
- Reaction score
- 5,082
why is no one .. no one talking about the fact that there were 13 bullets fired while his gun had only room for 8 ? or the simple thing that he was standing in front of him but kennedy was shot from the back ????!
how many political assassination should happen in this manner for ppl to FIGURE that those used are just tools planted there to hide the real power behind the assassinations
i find it quite interesting that ppl reject conspiracy theories when there is doubts and things that dont add up in politics but they like to inject them in civilian crimes (McCanns for ex
how many political assassination should happen in this manner for ppl to FIGURE that those used are just tools planted there to hide the real power behind the assassinations
i find it quite interesting that ppl reject conspiracy theories when there is doubts and things that dont add up in politics but they like to inject them in civilian crimes (McCanns for ex
Gardenista
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 19,034
- Reaction score
- 157,600
California's governor has denied parole for Sirhan Sirhan, the man convicted of assassinating Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Sirhan was recommended for parole in August 2021.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 94,613
- Reaction score
- 322,801
Good!
sandy_80
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2020
- Messages
- 945
- Reaction score
- 5,082
so they dont bother to expose who really was behind the assassination..we might need one of those movies
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2021
- Messages
- 2,122
- Reaction score
- 13,281
From a week ago: Two of Robert F. Kennedy's children, Rory and Max, have endorsed the candidate trying to unseat Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, Nathan Hochman.
And this is because Gascon decided not to advocate against the release of Sirhan Sirhan during his 16th parole hearing in 2022. The parole was denied by Governor Newsom.
Gascon's policy of barring prosecutors from attending parole hearings for convicted murderers has angered the Kennedy children so much that they've broken their pledge to not back challengers against a Democrat. Gascon said that he believes the role of prosecutors ended with the trial and sentencing and parole decisions should be made independently by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Kennedy children announce support for George Gascón's challenger
And this is because Gascon decided not to advocate against the release of Sirhan Sirhan during his 16th parole hearing in 2022. The parole was denied by Governor Newsom.
Gascon's policy of barring prosecutors from attending parole hearings for convicted murderers has angered the Kennedy children so much that they've broken their pledge to not back challengers against a Democrat. Gascon said that he believes the role of prosecutors ended with the trial and sentencing and parole decisions should be made independently by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Kennedy children announce support for George Gascón's challenger
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 11,197
- Reaction score
- 74,107
I always thought that JFK’s assassination was LHO’s own doing, and there is nothing else behind it. LHO reminds me of modern school shooters too much, and if school shooters succeed, why couldn’t this man? Plus, I never believed that anyone considered JFK a menace to a degree that would justify killing him. He was an OK president, his biggest fame and legends start with him m being shot in Dallas. Had he lived, he’d probably be reelected, and Vietnam would be on his conscience. If anything, his death was the testimony to certain oversights by the US Secret Service, the fact discussed in a political thriller of Frederick Forsyth, “The day of the jackal”. (The book is dedicated to an attempt on de Gaulle’s life by “Algerie Francaise”. Forsyth mentions that prior to that, US secret service visited France and found the work of their French counterparts too lax. The Frenchmen said, we’ll do it our way. De Gaulle survived the attempt in 1962, and many others. Kennedy was killed in 1963.) But I am sure many things were changed after JFK’s death. It doesn’t smell of a conspiracy to me.
(Ted Kennedy’s undoing was 100% his own fault.)
RFK’s assassination stands out. This is where I feel that things are not exactly as they seem. Perhaps we shall never be privy to the whole story. But since I believe that no entity but LHO stood behind JFK’s death, then RFK’s assassination, even if plotted, had nothing to do with JFK and someone being afraid. RFK has been glorified in history, but perhaps certain people saw him in the opposite light - too strong, too independent, and not enough of a team player? JMO.
Tiff23fr
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 7,363
- Reaction score
- 53,401
Snapshot of events in recent years:
Paul Schrade passed away Nov 2022
———
Paul Schrade was a union leader for the UAW and a Kennedy confidant. Like Bobby Kennedy’s son, he always maintained there had been a second gunman.
“The prosecution’s own evidence showed that Sirhan fired two shots, missed Kennedy and hit me.”
Autopsy results seemed to back him up, showing RFK was shot at point-blank range from behind, and that 13 shots were fired. Sirhan’s gun held only eight bullets. According to Schrade, RFK Jr. asked for his help explaining what happened to his children. Schrade said, he asked him: "Look, Paul you were there that night. They don’t know what happened to their grandfather. Would you please tell them?"
For the rest of his life, Paul Schrade continued to support the causes that Bobby Kennedy had championed.
——-
Sirhan:
For his own part, Sirhan was little help. He testified that he had been at a firing range earlier that day, had come to the Ambassador to attend a party and had briefly left the hotel and then returned after deciding he was too drunk to drive. The rest of the night was enveloped in fog, he said.
Sirhan offered contrition at his parole hearings, but always stopped short of taking full blame.
To Schrade, none of it added up. The police investigation felt rushed and sloppy, and key pieces of evidence had been ignored, he said. The closer he looked, the more convinced he was that Sirhan did not shoot Kennedy.
“Yes, he did shoot me. Yes, he shot four other people and aimed at Kennedy,” Schrade told the Washington Post. “The important thing is he did not shoot Robert Kennedy. Why didn’t they go after the second gunman? They knew about him right away. They didn’t want to know who it was. They wanted a quickie.”
In 2016, Schrade testified on Sirhan’s behalf but the parole board, as it had before and would again, denied him parole.
Paul Schrade dies; union leader survived bullet to the head when Robert F. Kennedy was killed
Paul Schrade passed away Nov 2022
———
Paul Schrade was a union leader for the UAW and a Kennedy confidant. Like Bobby Kennedy’s son, he always maintained there had been a second gunman.
“The prosecution’s own evidence showed that Sirhan fired two shots, missed Kennedy and hit me.”
Autopsy results seemed to back him up, showing RFK was shot at point-blank range from behind, and that 13 shots were fired. Sirhan’s gun held only eight bullets. According to Schrade, RFK Jr. asked for his help explaining what happened to his children. Schrade said, he asked him: "Look, Paul you were there that night. They don’t know what happened to their grandfather. Would you please tell them?"
For the rest of his life, Paul Schrade continued to support the causes that Bobby Kennedy had championed.
——-
Sirhan:
For his own part, Sirhan was little help. He testified that he had been at a firing range earlier that day, had come to the Ambassador to attend a party and had briefly left the hotel and then returned after deciding he was too drunk to drive. The rest of the night was enveloped in fog, he said.
Sirhan offered contrition at his parole hearings, but always stopped short of taking full blame.
To Schrade, none of it added up. The police investigation felt rushed and sloppy, and key pieces of evidence had been ignored, he said. The closer he looked, the more convinced he was that Sirhan did not shoot Kennedy.
“Yes, he did shoot me. Yes, he shot four other people and aimed at Kennedy,” Schrade told the Washington Post. “The important thing is he did not shoot Robert Kennedy. Why didn’t they go after the second gunman? They knew about him right away. They didn’t want to know who it was. They wanted a quickie.”
In 2016, Schrade testified on Sirhan’s behalf but the parole board, as it had before and would again, denied him parole.
Paul Schrade dies; union leader survived bullet to the head when Robert F. Kennedy was killed
