HARTFORD, Conn. — Perhaps the law was ambiguous. Perhaps there was even a loophole large enough to set a killer free. Regardless, in 1975, Connecticut state law set a five-year limit on the prosecution of most murders, a lawyer for Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel argued Friday.

Addressing the five justices on the state's highest court, defense attorney Hope Seeley charged that Skakel, 43, never should have been prosecuted for the Oct. 30, 1975, murder of his teenage neighbor Martha Moxley.

A nephew of Ethel Kennedy, Skakel was convicted of killing Martha after a sensational four-week trial in 2002 — more than 22 years after the statute of limitations had expired.

At least that's how Skakel's appellate lawyer reads the law books.

Story continues

advertisement

"For murder, in 1975, there is a five-year statute of limitations," Seeley said. "This court has held that criminal statutes must be strictly construed ... It's about a rule of law."

Senior Assistant State's Attorney Susann Gill, who prosecuted Skakel, responded by citing a voluminous amount of case law to argue that Connecticut legislators never intended to create a time limit on murder prosecutions.

Gill explained that the apparent loophole Skakel is trying to exploit arose out of evolving murder statutes in response to a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that put most states' capital punishment procedures in doubt.

Connecticut's legislature rewrote its murder statute in 1973 and set a five-year limit on the prosecution of murders "not punishable by death."

The defense argues that the five-year limit applies to Skakel because he was 15 years old in 1975, and therefore could not have punished by death for the brutal killing of Martha, with whom he had an unrequited infatuation.

Gill, however, noted that all of the discussion about the 1973 amendment centered on creating a constitutionally acceptable capital punishment system. Legislators never discussed setting time limits on investigators who pursued killers.

In fact, Gill argued, the 1976 amendment that did away with the statute of limitation on murder was merely a clarification of an implicit policy — not a reversal of law.

Seeking the loophole

Connecticut authorities dropped their longstanding focus on Skakel's older brother, Thomas, in the mid-1990s, and began pursuing Skakel after learning he had incriminated himself in statements to fellow students at a Maine reform school in the late 1970s.

Skakel's trial attorney, Mickey Sherman, argued unsuccessfully to jurors that Skakel was in another part of Greenwich at the time of the murder and anyone who claimed that Skakel confessed was either mistaken, lying or distorting what he said.

Martha Moxley's mother and brother, Dorthy and John Moxley of New Jersey, showed no reaction while both sides delivered oral arguments in support of extensive briefs that were previously submitted.

Outside the courtroom, John Moxley told reporters that the defense worked diligently to raise issues in an effort to get Skakel's conviction overturned.

They tried everything, that is, except arguing that Skakel is actually innocent of killing Martha, John Moxley said.

"I think it's ironic that paradise for Michael lies in a legal loophole," he said. "Michael's lawyers were very smart, very articulate, but I think they were wrong."

Skakel's siblings left the courthouse through a side exit to avoid reporters.

"We have hope," Thomas Skakel said, declining further comment.

Missing sketch

Part of Skakel's appeal focuses on the failure of prosecutors to disclose to the defense until the middle of the trial an arrest warrant application police drafted in 1975 for Thomas Skakel, the last person to be seen with Martha before she was killed.

A prosecutor refused to present the arrest warrant to a judge for approval, but Skakel's lawyers contend that the document was exculpatory and should have been disclosed earlier.

The defense also complained that the state never turned over a composite sketch of a man seen in the area until after Skakel was convicted. The defense contends the sketch resembles Kenneth Littleton, the Skakel's live-in tutor.

Prosecutors say the sketch turned out to be a likeness of a neighborhood boy, and that the defense claims were a red herring.

Noting that the sketch was mentioned on two of the 1,806 pages of police reports provided to the defense, Gill argued that Skakel's lawyers should have been aware of the sketch and would have received a copy had one been requested.

Chief Justice William Sullivan referred to the volume of material and said, "That's kind of expecting a lot."

Both sides spent about 20 minutes of their allotted time discussing the statute of limitations issue and 10 minutes on discovery issues.

The justices, who reserved decision on the appeal, typically take six weeks to several months to issue an opinion on the merits of the arguments presented.

'I know he killed Martha'

"We'll wait and see what happens. We'll deal with whatever happens," John Moxley said. "There is no dispute of whether he did or didn't do it. It was just, he wants to get out of jail."

Dorthy Moxley said she remains convinced that Skakel, a teenage alcoholic from a dysfunctional branch of the extended Kennedy clan, killed her daughter.

Remaining as gracious as she has been throughout her own family's 30-year ordeal, Dorthy Moxley said Skakel has already paid a price. She said she believes he will come out of prison one day and be a good father to his son, George.

"There is some good to Michael. I know there is," she said. "But I know he killed Martha."

When a reporter noted that the Supreme Court's pending decision could mean she never has to return to court again, Dorthy Moxley smiled broadly and replied, "Now wouldn't that be something!"

Skakel was not in court to hear the arguments. He is serving a 20-year sentence but could be paroled as early as 2013 under the applicable 1975 sentencing rules.