A Private Inquest

From the beginning, the Kennedy-Kopechne case has been viewed by most Americans in terms of personal tragedy and political impact. But its legal implications, as Edward Kennedy and his advisers are painfully aware, are still to be resolved. The fact that Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident does not completely preclude prosecution on a more serious charge. An official inquest could determine whether grounds exist for further proceedings, and last week, after nearly two months of delay, the procedure for an inquest was settled.

Originally, the inquest was to have begun Sept. 3 in Edgartown, Martha's Vineyard. But Kennedy's lawyers argued that the inquest would not really be a neutral inquiry. They said that it would be an adversary proceeding in which Kennedy--under the guidelines set by District Court Judge James Boyle --would be denied crucial rights. Boyle had wanted to open the inquest to press coverage and to deny Kennedy's attorneys the right to cross-examine witnesses called by District Attorney Edmund Dinis. Therefore, Kennedy petitioned a higher court to order the inquest to be held in privacy, to grant the right of cross-examination and to replace Boyle as judge in the case.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last week did not give Kennedy everything he requested. Boyle will preside at the inquest. Further, it will be up to the district judge to determine whether witnesses' lawyers will have the right to question their own clients and other witnesses. But Kennedy did win a partial victory. The inquest will be private, with the record impounded until the case is finally closed. "These general rules," said the Supreme Judicial Court, "tend to avoid embarrassment by premature publicity."* The court also noted that "Petitioner Kennedy's own resort to television may have increased public interest in the events."

The court's decision still holds some dangers for Kennedy. Privacy, similar to that of a grand jury proceeding, could, of course, protect Kennedy's interests if Dinis does later press for prosecution. Theoretically, Kennedy at least will be spared an indictment by headline. Given the degree of interest in the case, however, leaks, rumors and speculation are bound to spring from the inquest. These could result in gross distortions or wild theorizing. The shortage of hard facts and the oversupply of half answers since Mary Jo Kopechne died have all along been most damaging to Kennedy, and a closed inquest will not necessarily change that. For his part, Kennedy greeted last week's decision as good news. "I hope," he said, "that the proceedings will be held soon."

*The rule will now apply to all inquests in Massachusetts. The state's highest court did not treat the Kennedy case as one requiring special consideration.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.