Michael Skakel may get a new trial...

[Spindrift]

Let me just respond to one of Kennedy's ridiculous arguments:



Seriously? A 15-year-old boy couldn't shatter a golf club shaft by swinging the club at a girl's head? Let me tell you, an eight-year-old boy could easily shatter a golf club shaft by swinging it against a tree. Note as well the absurd, third-hand nature of the testimony. A Skakel family friend told Kennedy that another person (a doctor) told her that it was impossible.

It's well known that Skakel always hooked his drive, he never sliced.

 

[Brainster]

Note as well that Kennedy's article argues that Littleton committed the murder; however, the New Yorker piece makes clear that it was exactly that argument that the Judge found incompetent.

Sherman made a key strategic choice at the beginning of the trial. He pointed to Kenneth Littleton, who had begun working as a live-in tutor for the Skakel children that very day, as the true perpetrator of the murder. This was a plausible, if ultimately unpersuasive, argument. Like so many people in this case, Littleton had a lifetime of psychiatric and substance-abuse problems, but there was never any reason why he might have wanted to kill Moxley, much less on his first day at the house. Given Littleton’s history, it wasn’t a surprise that Sherman cast suspicion in his direction, but neither was it a surprise that the jury didn’t buy the theory. (Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a cousin of the defendant and his most vocal public defender, also pointed the finger at Littleton in an article in The Atlantic.)

Judge Bishop had a different idea about how Sherman should have defended the case: he should have claimed that Thomas Skakel was the real killer. Tommy was the last person known to have seen Moxley alive on the night of her death; when they were together at the Skakel property, he and Moxley made out for a brief time that evening. In light of all this, it was reasonable to consider Tommy a suspect in the case, and the police did investigate him in the aftermath of Moxley’s death.

So either Kennedy's article is wrong, or the Judge chose the wrong argument to cite in calling for the new trial.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

... Why not read the article before you reject it?

Time is a precious commodity.

...What are you afraid you might learn?

 

[KatieG]

It's well known that Skakel always hooked his drive, he never sliced.

There's humor in the murder of a 15 yo girl and the failure to pursue and prosecute the perpetrator of this murder? I can't seem to find any.

 

[lane99]

Cutting remark

You're just jealous because the jokes you tried to pull off earlier in the thread (im)pale by comparison.

 

[KatieG]

You're just jealous because the jokes you tried to pull off earlier in the thread (im)pale by comparison.

What?

 

[Bob001]

.....
So either Kennedy's article is wrong, or the Judge chose the wrong argument to cite in calling for the new trial.

That's really the point. Thomas Skakel could have done it. Kenneth Littleton could have done it. The Skakel gardener -- who according to RFK quit his job and kissed off a pension (you have to be of a certain age to grasp how serious that is!) immediately after the murder -- could have done it. And of course, Michael Skakel could have done it. I'm just not convinced that he has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

My initial post presumed that Skakel is guilty. But it looks like the conviction was largely based on "jailhouse snitch" claims by two other residents to whom Skakel allegedly confessed at a rehab center. One of those residents was dead at the time of Skakel's trial and "testified" from the grave, beyond cross-examination. I have trouble believing that Skakel would have put his life and freedom in their hands. Where's the physical evidence? Where are the eyewitnesses? Where's the real confession (given to the cops)? If Skakel is so rich and well-connected, where's the plea deal? And I have serious reservations about prosecuting someone as an adult at the age of 42 for something he did (let's presume) as a juvenile at age 15. It's not very likely that a 15-year-old in 1975 would have been sentenced to 20-to-life.

This case has been a mess from the beginning. But if there's a chance the wrong guy is in prison, that doesn't make it better.

 

[KatieG]

If MS has manned up and confessed to what happened, he'd have been sentenced to juvie and he'd long be a free man. His father's money prevented that from happening. There is no evidence Kenneth Littleton knew enough about the area, the golf clubs or Martha Moxley a viable suspect in this crime. Thomas Skakel had actual, credible, alibi witnesses to where he was at the time. The gardener may have beat feet out of town but perhaps he sensed he might be set up as a fall guy.

The only person who stated he was in the area of the Moxley home was MS. Martha rebuffed him earlier in the evening and he was probably pissed off. They'd all been drinking. Alcohol induced rage can have terrible repercussions.

 

[lane99]

He's right, but for the wrong reason

...The legislature changed the law in 1976, and the defense appealed the conviction on that basis and lost. RFK claims that the defense would have had a better chance of winning the argument at preliminary hearings before the trial rather than after the conviction...

It's a strange claim for RFK to make. In light of the fact the SOL issue was raised and adjudicated before the trial. A judge denied Skakel's motion at that time, and the trial proceeded shortly thereafter.

Actually, legal precedent suggested Skakel probably should have ultimately prevailed with the SOL argument. Add to that there's a reasonable chance he is in fact innocent, and I agree with Jeffrey Toobin (no friend of the Kennedys, to be sure) that this new ruling ordering a retrial is, in it's own way, admirable.
.
.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

That's really the point. Thomas Skakel could have done it. Kenneth Littleton could have done it. The Skakel gardener -- who according to RFK quit his job and kissed off a pension (you have to be of a certain age to grasp how serious that is!) immediately after the murder -- could have done it. And of course, Michael Skakel could have done it. I'm just not convinced that he has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

My initial post presumed that Skakel is guilty. But it looks like the conviction was largely based on "jailhouse snitch" claims by two other residents to whom Skakel allegedly confessed at a rehab center. One of those residents was dead at the time of Skakel's trial and "testified" from the grave, beyond cross-examination. I have trouble believing that Skakel would have put his life and freedom in their hands. Where's the physical evidence? Where are the eyewitnesses? Where's the real confession (given to the cops)? If Skakel is so rich and well-connected, where's the plea deal? And I have serious reservations about prosecuting someone as an adult at the age of 42 for something he did (let's presume) as a juvenile at age 15. It's not very likely that a 15-year-old in 1975 would have been sentenced to 20-to-life.

This case has been a mess from the beginning. But if there's a chance the wrong guy is in prison, that doesn't make it better.

Skakel contradicted himself with his alibi multiple times -- on tape! He admitted to masturbating while watching Martha that very night. He admitted to being panicked when Dorothy Moxley asked him where her daughter was, and the only part of the murder weapon missing was the section which identified it as belonging to the Skakels. The tutor or the gardener would have had no reason to take the single identifying piece of the murder weapon. In fact, either of them would have deflected attention from themselves by leaving it at the scene of the murder.

 

[Brainster]

It's a strange claim for RFK to make. In light of the fact the SOL issue was raised and adjudicated before the trial. A judge denied Skakel's motion at that time, and the trial proceeded shortly thereafter.

Actually, legal precedent suggested Skakel probably should have ultimately prevailed with the SOL argument. Add to that there's a reasonable chance he is in fact innocent, and I agree with Jeffrey Toobin (no friend of the Kennedys, to be sure) that this new ruling ordering a retrial is, in it's own way, admirable.
.
.

Except that Toobin does not think that there's a reasonable chance Skakel is innocent:

The question is whether Skakel was wrongfully convicted. I covered the trial and read Bishop’s opinion, and I still think that the jury got this one right—that Michael Skakel killed Moxley.

 

[lane99]

"Except", nothing

1. I never said Toobin holds that Skakel is innocent. His opinion to the contrary is well-known (as is the potential that his opinion is not entirely unbiased and impartial).

2. Not to mention your cite does not support your assertion that Toobin doesn't think there is a chance Skakel is innocent. It shows nothing more than he "thinks" he is guilty. It gives no indication of the degree of certainty he holds that opinion. Ask him if he thinks there's any chance he could be mistaken. And expect a reply in the affirmative.

3. Though I couldn't be bothered to correct you at the time, I've not been impressed by your previous posts in this thread. For instance, you said RFK argued that the tutor committed the murder. That is not correct, and is a feckless interpretation of what RFK actually asserted.
.
.

 

[Brainster]

1. I never said Toobin holds that Skakel is innocent. His opinion to the contrary is well-known (as is the potential that his opinion is not entirely unbiased and impartial).

2. Not to mention your cite does not support your assertion that Toobin doesn't think there is a chance Skakel is innocent. It shows nothing more than he "thinks" he is guilty. It gives no indication of the degree of certainty he holds that opinion. Ask him if he thinks there's any chance he could be mistaken. And expect a reply in the affirmative.

3. Though I couldn't be bothered to correct you at the time, I've not been impressed by your previous posts in this thread. For instance, you said RFK argued that the tutor committed the murder. That is not correct, and is a feckless interpretation of what RFK actually asserted.
.
.

Toobin thinks the jury got it correct. Ergo he doesn't think that there is reasonable doubt.

As for RFK, you are technically correct. He labored mightily to portray Littleton as guilty, and then weaseled out of it by saying he doesn't know if the tutor was guilty or innocent. It's a typical bit of BS from a longtime BSer.

 

[lane99]

One man's weasel...

...weaseled out of it by saying he doesn't know if the tutor was guilty or innocent...

He doesn't "weasel" out of anything. He posits the perfectly viable, though debatable, argument that there is a stronger case to be made against the tutor than against Michael Skakel. He readily acknowledges (in a point not particularly subtle but one nevertheless apparently beyond your grasp) the intellectual distinction between arguing that, and arguing the tutor is, in fact, the killer.

....He labored mightily to portray Littleton as guilty...

He didn't "labor" at all. No heavy lifting involved. Littleton has always been a viable suspect and there are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of him. As the authorities always had been.
.
.

 

[KatieG]

A stronger case against Kenneth Littleton? What would that be?

 

[FenerFan]

Skakel is out of jail on $1.2M. Guess he will get a new trial.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/21/justice/connecticut-skakel-bond-hearing/index.html?c=&page=1

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

How sad for Moxley's loved ones they have to go through this again.

 

[rcfieldz]

All I can say is someone got away with murder.

 

[shemp]

Michael Skakel, Kennedy cousin whose conviction in killing of Martha Moxley was overturned, sues investigator and town

Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, whose murder conviction in the 1970s killing of a teenager in Connecticut was overturned, is suing the lead police investigator in the case and the town of Greenwich for alleged malicious prosecution, civil rights violations and other claimed wrongdoing. The case made headlines worldwide and was the subject of the "48 Hours" episode "The Diary of Martha Moxley."

Skakel, 63, a nephew of Robert F. Kennedy's widow, Ethel Kennedy, was found guilty in 2002 of the 1975 bludgeoning death of Martha Moxley, who lived across the street from the Skakel family in wealthy Greenwich and whose body was found in her family's backyard. Both Skakel and Moxley were 15 at the time of her death.

The Connecticut Supreme Court overturned Skakel's conviction in 2018, after he had served more than 11 years in prison, saying his defense lawyer failed to present evidence of an alibi. A state prosecutor announced in 2020 that Skakel would not be put on trial again and the murder charge was dropped.

The new lawsuit alleges the investigator, Frank Garr, was intent on getting Skakel convicted and withheld key evidence about other potential suspects from Skakel's trial defense.

I don't know if he did it or not, so I have no opinion on this. We'll keep an eye on it.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

48 hours

The host of a blog wrote, "They did not look underneath the pine tree where Martha lay dead...The medical examiner at the time, Elliot Gross, was contacted and stated that he was not available to come to the scene. Gross ordered her body be taken to the morgue where he would perform an autopsy the following day...Had this person [the murderer] smoked? Did he chew gum and spit it out? Could he have dropped something of his to assist the police in revealing his identity? We will never know, as the Skakel yard would not be searched for months."

The host of Chilling Crimes wrote, "Evidence from the crime scene was not collected properly either. Blood on leaves beside Martha’s body was never collected. More alarmingly though, the police who were first on the scene said that the golf club handle was sticking out of Martha’s neck when they arrived. Nobody knew what happened to it. It would have had initials of the owner and possibly fingerprints of the killer."

I don't have an opinion as to how reliable the two individuals who wrote the essays above are. Taking the accuracy of these observations as a given, I would opine that one cannot always solve a crime in the first 48 hours, but one can hinder and perhaps prevent its ever being solved by incompetent crime scene management and poor interview practices.

 

[shemp]

Wikipedia page of Elliot M. Gross

I assume he was the medical examiner you refer to above, because of this:

Gross became chief medical examiner after replacing Michael Baden in 1979.[3] Previously, he had been the chief medical examiner of Connecticut for nine years. He headed the New York City Chief Medical Examiners office in 1979 and performed the controversial autopsies such as Graffiti artist Michael Stewart, Eleanor Bumpurs, and Nicholas Bartlett, all killed by police officers.[4]

It doesn't sound like he's has a stellar career:

In October 1987, Mayor Koch dismissed Gross, faulting his leadership and managerial ability.[1] In 1990, after a five-year investigation, Gross was cleared of 11 charges of negligence, misconduct, and incompetence stemming from nine autopsies, including several that involved people who died in police custody. He moved on to be a pathologist with the Lake County Coroners office in Crown Point, Indiana.[11] Later, he became medical examiner for the New Jersey counties of Cape May and Cumberland, and was an assistant medical examiner in nearby Atlantic County; he was fired from his position in Atlantic County in 2002, after a formal investigation into one of his autopsy findings concluded that he had incorrectly classified a death from natural causes as a homicide.[2] In 2003, he was barred from performing any more autopsies in the state, but the ban was reversed the following year.[12]

 

[Chris_Halkides]

time of death

I do not understand why her body was not found sooner. But that coupled with the apparent lack of an examination at the crime scene means that an attempt to determine the time of death using temperature of the body will have a larger error bars than it should. I don't know this case very well, but I have to wonder how the time of death was established.

The grip of the club was missing, but I have to wonder whether fingermarks could have been found elsewhere.

Some of the deficiencies of the investigation might have occurred because the police had not seen a homicide in years from what I can gather. Some deficiencies might have occurred because the police were too deferential to the Skakel family or perhaps to everyone in a rich community.
EDT
A reporter who acknowledges a belief in Michael Skakel's innocence wrote, "Gregg Coleman actually didn’t give evidence. He was stone-cold dead in his grave from a heroin overdose. Before his death, he admitted that when he testified before a grand jury about Skakel’s confession, he was higher than a kite on smack."

 

[Chris_Halkides]

apparent lack of crime scene photographs

The New York Post reported, “'The reason I wasn’t there [at the murder of Martha Moxley] was because I was on a much more sensational murder,' he said, as if one murder is less sensational than the other. 'Wanda Avcollie, the wife of Connecticut state Rep. Bernard Avcollie, was found dead in the swimming pool of their house in Naugatuck,' the doc was saying."

I still don't see why someone else could not have been called in. I also found this claim: "Tom Sorenson, the Greenwich criminologist and photographer, claims to have approached the body with a fully loaded camera, but someone (he does not remember who) forbade him to take photos of the corpse."

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Elan

The National Registry of Exonerations stated in part, "Other Elan students testified that these statements [of Skakel's admitting guilt] couldn’t be taken at face value. They said that Joseph Ricci, Elan’s executive director, taunted Skakel and constantly accused of him of being involved in Martha’s murder. When Skakel pushed back, Ricci would make an example of him, and invite other students to verbally and physically assault Skakel at events called “General Meetings.” One classmate said Skakel always denied a role in Martha’s death, but the beatings would continue with ferocity until Skakel expressed doubt about his innocence."

This case is a mess.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

at least four persons of interest

"The school [Elan] had a $50k admission fee and unless the students flew in willingly, many were picked up by transport staff, the YouTube video stated. Parents would arrange pick-up but to the teen student, it would be a surprise, just shy of kidnapping. Transporters would reportedly enter the teen's room in the middle of the night, handcuff them, throw them into the van, and begin the drive to Poland, Maine." link

Taking the veracity of this article as a given, Michael Skakel's confession is not worth a plugged nickel. There are four pretty good persons of interest: Michael, Tommy, Kenneth Littleton (the tutor), and Franz Wittine (the gardener). If one accepts that the window spanning the possible time of death is a large one, I would hazard a guess than none of the four has an alibi that covers it entirely. Edward Hammond is a least worth another look. I don't put much stock in outside suspects, inasmuch as this was a gated community, but I could be convinced otherwise. This case is a hot, sticky mess.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

fellow Elan clients

In 2019 Oxygen reported, "Now, [Chuck] Seigan believes that no credible confession could have come from Skakel during his time at the Elan School. As time went on, Seigan also began questioning [John] Higgins’ credibility. Seigan spoke with several other former classmates, who caused him to reflect that Higgins had “tried to get people in trouble all the time.”

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Littleton's 2002 testimony; Ofshe's 2013 testimony

The NYT reported in 2002, "The judge in the murder trial of Michael C. Skakel allowed jurors to hear conflicting and confusing testimony today from another longtime suspect [Kenneth Littleton] about whether he had ever confessed to the crime."

I had a difficult time deciding whether he did or did not confess. Given that he appeared to be mentally ill during at least one period in his life, I am not taking anything he said very seriously. Both Mr. Littleton and Michael Skakel probably made one or more statements that incriminated themselves. Yet everything that I have been able to uncover concerning the circumstances of those statements suggest that they were made under some type of duress. For that reason alone, I would take such statements at a deep discount.

I do not think that Mr. Sherman was wrong to suggest that Mr. Littleton was a plausible suspect, but I do think that his choice not to suggest that Thomas Skakel was also a plausible suspect is open to serious question. Whether it rises to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel is another matter.
EDT
The Stamford Advocate reported in 2013: "In my opinion they [statements made by Michael Skakel] could not be considered to be reliable because they were the product of a coercive system and they were not admissions to anything because there were no facts given," [Emeritus Professor of Sociology Richard] Ofshe said. Dr. Ofshe is an expert in the area of false confessions. If Mr. Sherman failed to call witnesses such as Dr. Ofshe, then that adds substantial weight to the argument that he did not provide effective assistance of counsel.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Oxygen reported, "In July 2016, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. published “Framed: Why Michael Skakel Spent Over a Decade in Prison for a Murder He Didn’t Commit.” The book was an attempt to clear Michael’s name and claimed two Bronx teenagers, Burton Tinsley and Adolph Hasbrouck, were the ones responsible for Martha’s murder." I still think that the evidence against Michael Skaekel is weak for reasons I provided above. However, the facts that the crime took place within Belle Haven, a gated community within Greenwich, CT, and that a golf club belonging to the Skaekel family was used must be factored into any serious hypothesis of the crime. My understanding is that Kennedy's book claims that Michael Skaekel was framed, but I am unfamiliar with evidence to suggest this.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I listened to a Jim Campbell's podcast interview with reporter Len Levitt (circa 2017). The murder was in 1975, and DNA was first used roughly ten years later in the Colin Pitchfork case. Therefore, it makes little sense to say that Michael came up with the masturbation story to explain DNA, unless there are some items that could be tested. Microscopic hair comparison makes an adequate presumptive test, but MtDNA would have to be performed as a confirmatory test. Mr. Levitt makes much of the fact that this was Mr. Littleton's first day, and he did not know Martha (implying that he would not have had a motive). Yet if the hair is indeed his (as someone from the FBI believed according to this podcast), then there is little chance that the hair was transferred casually. At present I would say that the hair has only a little probative value, but if it still exists and could be tested, its value would increase substantially. I just found a link to a discussion on the hairs. One hair did not have sufficient DNA. A hair found on a sheet was excluded as coming from Mr. Littleton.

The podcast did not delve into the serious problems at Elan, the reform school at which Mr. Skakel resided.