|
 Skakel, a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, widow of slain U.S. Senator
Robert F. Kennedy, has been under legal scrutiny since his neighbor
Martha Moxley was beaten to death with a golf club near his
Greenwich, Connecticut, home in 1975. Both Skakel and Moxley were 15
years old at the time.
Both Michael Skakel and his brother, Thomas, had been romantically
interested in the girl and were regarded as suspects by police, as
was a tutor who lived in the house. More than two decades passed
before anyone was criminally charged.
Prosecutors charged Michael Skakel, now 55, with murder after three
witnesses, including two people who had attended a controversial and
violent Maine drug rehabilitation program with Skakel in the late
1970s, testified that Skakel had confessed to them that he had
murdered Moxley.
 He was sentenced in 2002 to serve 20 years in prison, but was
released on $1.2 million bond in 2013 after a new attorney, Hubert
Santos, persuaded a state court that the attorney who defended him
at trial did a poor job.
"This defendant did not get a fair shake," Santos told the
Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford on Wednesday, at a hearing on
the state's appeal of the 2013 decision.
Santos argued that his client's original lead attorney squandered
resources during the trial and was more focused on winning fame than
his client's freedom. He contended Skakel's trial defense team
should have presented evidence of other suspects in the case,
including Skakel's brother, Thomas, who was never charged. The tutor
was also never charged. Prosecutors, who are asking the court to
order Skakel back to prison, disputed that account.
[to top of second column] |
"This was far from a slipshod defense. This was a well-planned,
well-thought-out defense," said Susann Gill, a supervisory assistant
state's attorney. "It has always mystified me that there was a myth
that has come up that this was a weak case. It was not."
The court did not immediately rule.
Michael Skakel's attorneys have said he is innocent.
Santos said on Wednesday the long delay in charging his client
underlined the weakness of the evidence.
"It's common sense. A 1975 murder, a 1999 arrest. No physical
evidence, no witnesses, no DNA, no trace evidence," Santos said.
"You have to scratch your head, I would submit, and look at it in a
very skeptical manner."
(Reporting by Scott Malone in Boston; Editing by Bill Trott and
Frances Kerry)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
