Kennedy's cousin, Michael Skakel, who killed his teenage neighbor in Connecticut in 1975 and spent more than a decade in prison before being indicted on procedural grounds, has led the city of Greenwich and its lead investigator to the prison. The lawsuit alleges that he was trapped. Targeted attack.
The complaint alleges that investigators decided to kill Skakel for personal and financial gain.
Skakel, the nephew of Robert F. Kennedy's widow Ethel Kennedy, was convicted in 2002 of murdering 15-year-old Martha Moxley and sentenced to 20 years to life in prison, but the judge ruled His conviction was overturned and he was released in 2013.
Skakel's conviction was overturned in 2018 when the state Supreme Court found that his trial attorney failed to properly represent him, and in 2020 it was announced that he would not be tried again on the murder charge. The lawyer argued that: The damage had already been done.
“Michael spent over 11 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. Time and relationships – his life as he knew it – cannot be given back to him,” Stephen Seeger told The Post via text. Ta.
“The nickname 'Kennedy Cousin' has sensationalized Michael's case. Given procedural and evidentiary limitations, differing standards of appeal, and more, Michael's case has been misunderstood for many years.'
Seeger said the case, which he called a “civil rights case,” became so sensational that new details that had not previously been revealed came to light.
“There is a different story underlying this case, and now a civil court is being called upon to use a different standard of proof to right the wrong that wrongfully deprived Michael of his freedom and family,” Seeger said. he said.
The new lawsuit alleges that Detective Frank Garr sought to convict Skakel for personal gain and withheld important evidence from Skakel's defense regarding other potential suspects. ing.
The defendants in this case “knew there were other likely suspects and that there was no probable cause to arrest and/or sustain charges.” [Skakel]But he continued to do so intentionally and maliciously in order to incriminate “Kennedy's cousin,'' the lawsuit alleges.
Mr. Skakel, who was 15 years old at the time, was watching the TV show “Monty Python” with others miles away around the time Mr. Moxley was bludgeoned to death on Oct. 29, 1975, at a golf club owned by the Skakel family. He claimed to have watched it.
She was found the next morning on her family's property across the street from the Skakel residence.
At Skakel's trial, prosecutors suggested that Moxley was angry because she had rejected his advances, even though she had had a sexual relationship with his brother Tommy shortly before she was killed. did.
Skakel's appellate attorneys later argued that Skakel's trial attorneys made poor decisions, including not focusing on Tommy as a suspect and failing to contact alibi witnesses.
The latest lawsuit alleges that Garr, who worked for the Greenwich Police Department, prosecutor's office and then the Greenwich Police Department before becoming a lieutenant in the state's attorney's office, told witnesses who said there were two other men in Moxley's neighborhood. They allege that he withheld important information that could prove Skakel's innocence, including his statements.
The suit also alleges that Mr. Garr harbored a “deep antipathy” toward Mr. Skakel and his family, and that he threatened witnesses who would poke holes in Mr. Garr's story that a relative of Mr. Kennedy was the murderer. did.
According to the complaint, Garr hoped to profit from the case by helping Skakel write a book about Moxley's murder.
Messages left at numbers for Mr. Garr and his attorney were not returned.
Greenwich's attorney did not immediately respond to an email.
In addition, Skakel suffered violations of constitutional rights, loss of liberty in prison, humiliation, embarrassment, “severe emotional distress, fear and terror,” economic loss and damage, and “destroyed reputation and family relationships.” suffered, the lawsuit says. .
The lawsuit, filed in November in state court in Stamford, seeks unspecified damages in excess of $15,000.
with post wire
