Prosecutors try to return Skakel to prison

GREENWICH — The chief state’s attorney’s office has filed a request with the state Supreme Court to revoke the bail for Michael Skakel and send him back to prison.

Skakel was convicted in 2002 and sentenced to 20 years to life in prison for the 1975 murder of 15-year-old Martha Moxley in Greenwich. In 2013, another judge granted him a new trial, citing mistakes by his lawyer. Skakel was released from prison after posting $1.2 million bond while he awaited a new trial.

But in December 2016, the state’s highest court reversed the ruling for a new trial and reinstated Skakel’s murder conviction. A stay was granted after Skakel’s lawyers filed new motions, but now Senior Assistant State’s Attorney James Killen has asked the the Supreme Court to return Skakel to prison.

“There is no apparent reason to continue to allow a duly-convicted murderer to remain at liberty,” the prosecutor wrote in his request, which was filed in Hartford late Monday.

“The petitioner has enjoyed more than a year of additional freedom from serving his sentence, with only the most minimal restrictions on his liberty,” Killen wrote. The prosecutor said the delay in deciding the case was “substantial and unusual” and called for an end to the stay that has kept Skakel out of state custody. “At this juncture, the stay of this court’s decision should be terminated . ... Our legislature has determined that persons convicted of murder are not entitled to postconviction release,” he wrote.

Skakel’s defense team says he should not be imprisoned while legal issues are still being resolved over the longrunning criminal case.

“First of all, we don’t find that there’s any legal basis for their argument,” said Stephan Seeger, a lawyer for Skakel. “Michael Skakel has been free on bond, without incident. The motion is a sign of their impatience, and the position they take is also presumptuous.”

The defense team is preparing a response. “We will get a chance to respond, and then a decision will be made after consideration,” the attorney said Tuesday.

Skakel has been living in northern Westchester County, N.Y., since his release. He has not been wearing an electronic ankle monitor for some time.

Seegar said there was no need for immediate action. “The Supreme Court needs to take the time it requires to reconsiders its own rulings — it’s a good sign that our appellate process is alive and well,” he said. “Justice rushed is frightening.”

In December 2016, the State Supreme Court ruled Skakel received a fair trial. But the vote by the justices was 4-3, and the dissenting opinion was written in unusually strong terms. That divided ruling was another reason to proceed cautiously, Skakel’s defense lawyer said.

“There’s three Connecticut Supreme Court justices that believe the guilty verdict that was handed down was a violation of Michael Skakel’s rights. The state doesn’t want to acknowledge that,” Seegar said.

Skakel was convicted in 2002. After several appeal attempts failed, a judge in 2013 reversed the conviction and determined that substantial mistakes by his trial lawyer, Michael Sherman, cost Skakel a fair trial. That decision, by Connecticut Appellate Judge Thomas Bishop, was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2016.

It remains unclear what might happen if Skakel is ordered to return to state custody: He could be given another bail hearing that could release him from custody if another trial is called for. Or he could be required to return to prison while the Supreme Court decides the motion to reconsider.

Other strategies may come into play, including an argument that the 11 years he served would have made him eligible for parole.

Martha Moxley, 15, was beaten with a golf club and stabbed to death with its broken shaft near her home in the Belle Haven section of Greenwich in 1975. A number of suspects were considered before Skakel was arrested in 2000. Sherman, his lawyer during the murder trial, was criticized for not seeking out a potential alibi witness, and Sherman’s financial troubles were reported to impact his professional judgment, according to Skakel’s appellate team.

Skakel