Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

In this Feb. 24, 2016, file photo, Michael Skakel leaves the state Supreme Court after his hearing in Hartford, Conn.

The Canadian Press

The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would not consider reinstating the murder conviction of Kennedy family member Michael Skakel in the 1975 killing of a teenaged neighbor in the wealthy New York suburb of Greenwich, Connecticut.

Skakel is a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, widow of slain U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy. He has been under legal scrutiny since his neighbor Martha Moxley was beaten to death with a golf club in 1975, when both were 15 years old. He was arrested for the crime after a 1998 book revived interest in the unsolved case.

Prosecutors in Connecticut had petitioned the high court to review last year’s decision from the Connecticut Supreme Court throwing out Skakel’s 2002 conviction on the grounds that his trial lawyer made a crucial error.

Story continues below advertisement

Their request was backed by 11 states, which argued the high court should rule in Connecticut’s favor to forestall a wave of appeals based on claims of ineffective legal counsel.

State prosecutors must now decide whether to retry Skakel, though any new trial would face the challenge of relying on witnesses whose memories are decades old.

Skakel, 58, was sentenced to 20 years in prison and served more than half his term before being released on bail when a judge vacated his sentence.

In 2016, the Connecticut Supreme Court reinstated his conviction, only to review its own ruling at the request of Skakel’s appellate lawyer. In the interim, a justice who voted to reinstate the conviction retired and was replaced by another justice who went the other way, thus flipping the court’s 4-3 decision.

The majority said Skakel’s lawyer failed to present the jury with testimony from a witness regarding a potential alibi.

In their petition to the top Court, the states said the Connecticut court should have considered the overall performance of Skakel’s defense team. The precedent would lead to a swell of appeals focused on isolated mistakes, driving up costs for prosecutors, they asserted.

Moxley was found half-hidden among pine trees near her home, bludgeoned to death by a golf club that was later traced to a set owned by Skakel’s mother.

Story continues below advertisement

The killing went unsolved for more than two decades, until former Los Angeles police detective Mark Fuhrman, known for his role in the O.J. Simpson murder case, implicated Skakel in a 1998 book.

A fresh investigation was launched, and Skakel was charged in 2000.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies