Michael Skakel Conviction
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

The ClubHouse: Archives: Michael Skakel Conviction

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 12:44 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Here's a case finally where a celebrity-type person (a Kennedy no less) actually has been found guilty. Personally, it seems to me that people are growing tired of the Kennedy problems and the fact that they always have been above the law (along with most other political families)

Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel was convicted Friday of murdering neighbor Martha Moxley in 1975 when both were 15, according to news reports. The widely watched case drew great interest because it was brought against Skakel, 41 -- the nephew of Robert Kennedy's widow, Ethel -- 27 years after the crime was committed, raising questions as to whether Skakel had been protected because of his family ties.

Of the verdict, which came after the jury deliberated for three days, Martha's brother, John, said: "It's bittersweet. It's a hollow victory," the Associated Press reports. After the verdict was read, Skakel's lawyer declined Judge John F. Kavanewsky's offer to let him speak. The judge refused Skakel's request to say something.

Sentencing is set for July 19. Skakel could get between 10 years and life in prison, the AP reports.

Martha Moxley was beaten to death with a golf club that belonged to a set owned by Skakel's mother. The tony community of Greenwich, Conn., where the Moxleys and Skakels lived, was rocked by the violent crime. Prosecutors had to try the decades-old case with no forensic evidence to tie Skakel to the murder; the case was largely built on testimony by former classmates of Skakel's, who said he had confessed. According to the testimony, Skakel was angered because of his unrequited crush on Moxley, who was said to be more interested in his older brother, Thomas, who also had been a suspect, the AP reported

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 12:45 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Sorry- I should put the source. This article was from
http://people.aol.com/people/news/now/0,10958,260475,00.html

Julieboo

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 12:52 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
(In my opinion, being the nephew of Robert Kennedy's widow does not make him much of a Kennedy.)

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 12:57 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Probably why he was so easily convicted. It doesn't make him much of a Kennedy but anyone with a Kennedy connection seems to be viewed with a degree of awe (including Maria Shriver and I don't see her as being much of a Kennedy) by the media and a good portion of the U.S. population.

Marysafan

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:03 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think it was too fold. Yes...there was the Kennedy connection...but also...LOTS of money. The rich are treated differently.

Julieboo

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:17 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Well Maria Shriver IS a Kennedy. Her mom is one of the 9 kids of Joe & Rose

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:51 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Okay, well whoever is and is not a Kennedy isn't that important to me, nor is the degree of Kennedy-ness. I'm more interested in the case itself- I don't know a lot about it but I just find it hard to believe that he was convicted of a murder that occurred when he was 15 years old based primarily on people's testimonies. Was there any other evidence?

Julieboo

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:55 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I can't believe that either (that he was convicted on "hearsay". I think there should be some hard evidence to convict someone. (I also think if the Kennedy name was not near this case, then we wouldn't have heard about this case.)

Grooch

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:59 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Wasn't the weapon used a golf club that belonged to the Skakel family?

Grooch

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:02 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Julieboo, I believe that after the OJ trial, Mark Furhman (since he didn't have a job anymore) went and investigated the case and came up with either some new theries or new evidence and wrote a book about it.

I think that's what started the investigation again.

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:02 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Oh, Grooch, I think you're right. I remember hearing something about that a long time ago. Even so, evidence like that often isn't enough to convict. Think of O.J. and the gloves.

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:04 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Furhman wrote a book about what- the Skakel case?

Karuuna

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:07 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
The golf club used was matched forensically to a set of golf clubs owned by Michael's deceased mother; and kept inside the Skakel home.

Michael changed his story several times during the years, and "confessed" that he committed the murder privately several times. There were several people that testified during the trial that Michael either told them he did it, or that he alluded to the fact that he did it.

Even his family members changed their testimony to giving Michael an alibi years ago to now saying "I don't recall".

One of the interesting things about the case is that originally Michael said he was nowhere near the Moxley's home that night. A few years ago, when DNA matching became available (specically to semen), Michael changed his story to say that he climbed a tree outside Martha's window and masturbated. That was the same tree under which Martha's body was found, pants around her ankles, beaten and stabbed thru the neck with part of the golf club.

Circumstantial perhaps, but I think it's pretty damning circumstantial. JMO.

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:13 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Wow, Karuuna, thanks for all the info! And, duh- the golfclub thing was in the article above- I don't know how I missed that. It sounds like there WAS some forensic evidence then, despite what the article reported.

And by the way- what a freak masturbating in a tree outside her window. Yuck!

Karuuna

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:19 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
You're welcome, Kaili. :)

What's really freaky is that older brother Tommy admitted (just a few years ago as well) that he spent some time in the yard with Martha Moxley "fooling around" earlier that evening too; and also left some forensic evidence of his own. His original story was that he was nowhere near the house that evening either.

The motive the prosecution offered was that Michael was jealous of his brother's relationship with Martha.

Things that make you go hmmmmm....

Kaili

Friday, June 07, 2002 - 02:28 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Really- so then it goes back to what people testified about Michael admitting and/or implying that he did it as the main evidence. Otherwise, I would think, the brother would be just as much a suspect (aside from the jealousy thing). Weird case.

I wonder how they'll decide to sentence him.

Seamonkey

Sunday, June 09, 2002 - 12:17 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
What mostly convicted Michael was his own mouth..

http://www.courttv.com has lots of info..