Like most people, I sometimes wonder about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I wonder if it was the mob, Castro, the CIA, the KGB, or Lee Harvey Oswald. But while I've wondered about it, this is not the Kennedy mystery that really exercises my mind. The one I really puzzle over is: how on earth can so many people look upon Ted Kennedy with respect and admiration? It has come up a few times lately, as "Uncle Ted" has been in the news for his ill health, or his support for Obama, or his status as a kind of surrogate for the sadly missed JFK.

I ask my question without reference to his political achievements. I am prepared to accept that they are many and good. I accept, too, that he has faced recent bouts of ill-health with a measure of courage and dignity, and overcome that illness to meet important political obligations - to play the role of Democratic "elder" that most people seem happy to cast him in nowadays.

That is all well and good, and these things are to his credit. And I am certainly not one for regarding private failings, such as marital infidelity, as disqualifications from important jobs as long as a candidate will do the job well - although the lying does give me a bit of pause.

Much more than lying, though, homicide concerns me. Of course, I am talking about Chappaquiddick. Yes, I know it was some 40 years ago now, but some things remain unforgivable after any number of decades. Now, I don't know exactly what happened at Chappaquiddick in July 1969, and nobody else does either. But there are a few "either-ors" that I think we can safely arrive at, and on any possible view of the events, Kennedy should have (a) gone to jail, and (b) been finished, politically, forever.

What we know is that late at night on July 18, 1969, after a wrong turn on the way home from a party, Kennedy's car plunged into a body of water called Poucha Pond. He swam to safety, but his passenger, Mary Jo Kepechne, died inside the overturned, submerged car. We know she didn't die immediately, because she scratched at the upholstery on the floor of the car.

Either Kennedy was under the influence of alcohol while driving, or he just drove carelessly or incompetently, or it was just an accident that no driver could have avoided. An enquiry soon after concluded that "Kennedy operated his motor vehicle negligently" - but even if we allow that the accident was a genuine and blameless one, untainted by alcohol or recklessness, what happened after still stinks to heaven.

This is because Kennedy did not summon help quickly, and did not alert the authorities - in essence, he took no responsibility, even though he was the indvidual responsible for what happened. After the accident had occurred, he passed other homes on his way back to the party without seeking aid, and then got only the help of two other guests, who travelled with him to the scene and attempted to dive in and rescue Kopechne several times. Then Kennedy went back to his hotel and slept relatively soundly until morning, when he could be found chatting casually with others. Police and a professional diver were summoned only after some amateur fishermen spotted the car underwater - the diver in question expressed a belief (though one which cannot really be tested), that the position of Kepechne's body within the car suggested that she had found an air pocket in a footwell of the car, and that she might well have been rescued alive had he been called to the scene as soon as the accident had occurred.

Inquiries were influenced, and "justice" ultimately took the form of a two-month, suspended sentence, on a charge of leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury. Prosecutors agreed that his sentence should be suspended, and the Judge stated that Kennedy had "already been, and will continue to be punished far beyond anything this court can impose." With all due respect to His Honor, I humbly suggest that, while missing out on a Presidential nomination is a bit of a loss, a lifetime in the Senate is by no means worse than any punishment a court could have doled out.

For me, there is too much in the Chappaquiddick story that is reprehensible. I find myself unable to understand the respect that Ted Kennedy is accorded by so many. Even on the most generous interpretation of the events of that night, he did far less than any decent person ought to have done to save Mary Jo Kepechne. If the story were told, with names altered, in a contemporary setting, I cannot imagine any listener not being revolted by the "protagonist"'s conduct. And yet, Ted Kennedy is in more than merely good standing with his party and the electorate. Politicians like Joe Lieberman are vilified - not without any reason, but surely for far lesser failings than Kennedy's. When Ted Kennedy spoke at the Democratic convention back in August, to widespread acclaim, all I could think was, "yeah, but he killed that girl at Chappaquiddick." I know it was a long time ago, and I guess some people would say that the message matters more than the messenger, or that Ted Kennedy has done his penance, that he is a different man today, and all the rest. For me, those defences would probably be convincing if nobody had died. Yes, he may be a good Senator. I don't know. But it strikes me as rotten to the core for a man to avoid justice merely because he was born into a wealthy and powerful family... and without being despised by all who lay their eyes upon him. I guess I might be involved in an accident where someone dies, and be confused, overwrought, or traumatised, and behave in a way that I feel ashamed of. I would hope to be forgiven if I did so, but I certainly wouldn't expect to have a political career afterwards.

This is my Kennedy mystery.  It puzzles me a lot more than any of those more glamorous ones!