CBS/AP/ October 24, 2012, 12:23 PM

Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel denied parole in teenage neighbor's killing

Michael Skakel reacts as he is denied parole during a hearing at McDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Conn., Oct. 24, 2012.

Michael Skakel reacts as he is denied parole during a hearing at McDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Conn., Oct. 24, 2012. / AP Photo

Updated at 1:59 p.m. ET

SUFFIELD, Conn. Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel was denied a bid for freedom Wednesday at his first parole hearing since he was convicted a decade ago of killing his neighbor in 1975.

Skakel, who proclaimed his innocence at the hearing, nodded and patted his attorney on the back after the three-person state parole board read the unanimous decision. He will next be eligible for parole in 2017.

Skakel is serving 20 years to life for fatally beating Martha Moxley with a golf club in Greenwich when they were 15. Skakel is a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert F. Kennedy.

At the hearing at McDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield, Skakel spoke slowly and softly, saying: "I did not commit this crime."

"I know the best chance of me getting parole is admitting guilt in this crime," CBS Hartford affiliate WFSB-TV reports Skakel said. "Ten-and-a-half years later I cannot do that."

In attendance was Dorthy Moxley, the victim's mother, who said losing a child is the worst thing in the world and Skakel should serve at least 20 years in prison.

"Martha, my baby, will never have a life," she said, her voice breaking.

Skakel told the parole board he prays every day that whoever committed the crime is brought to justice, but he is the wrong man.

"If I could ease Mrs. Moxley's pain in any way, shape or form I would take responsibility all day long for this crime," Skakel said. But, he added, "I cannot bear false witness against myself."

The heavyset, 52-year-old Skakel with gray, thinning hair wore a tan prison jumpsuit to the hearing. To support his claims of innocence, he told of how he became sober.

"I pose to you: How can a guilty man stay sober for 30 years with that kind of guilt on his mind?" he said.

Skakel also talked about his mother's death at an early age, his learning disability and a childhood in which he attended numerous schools. He said his ex-wife was recently diagnosed with cancer, and he is concerned about his 13-year-old son.

"I'm at your mercy. The only power I have is prayer," he said.

The chair of the parole board, Erika Tindill, showed some skepticism as she pressed Skakel with questions. She said it was an odd situation for him to ask for early release while proclaiming innocence of the crime.

Ultimately, she said, the board concluded that the time he has served is not punishment enough for the crime.

The victim's brother, John Moxley, said during the hearing that he believes Skakel should serve a life sentence.

"There's no upside in this. So what? He's got another five years in prison. What does that do for Martha? It's a hollow victory," he said after the hearing.

Skakel's attorney, Hope Seeley, said the board's decision is disappointing because Skakel is not a danger to society.

"To incarcerate Michael Skakel for at least another five years compounds the miscarriage of justice that has already occurred in this case," she said.

Skakel, convicted in 2002, was eligible for parole consideration because of laws in place at the time of the crime including good behavior credits.

In letters to the parole board, Skakel's supporters, including his cousin Robert F. Kennedy Jr., say Skakel has helped alcoholics recover. They also portray him as religious and devoted to his son.

Many letters cite Skakel's art work in prison, saying he has made uplifting paintings that show his true nature, give joy to others and encourage family values. Letters objecting to his parole cite the brutal nature of the crime and say releasing him early would be devastating to the victim's family.

Skakel will have another chance to try to get out of prison next April, when one of his appeals goes to trial. Skakel filed the appeal in 2010, seeking a new trial on allegations that his trial attorney, Michael Sherman, was incompetent. Skakel claims Sherman had financial problems and didn't devote enough money to prepare the case, among other allegations.

Sherman insists he did all he could to keep Skakel from being convicted.

The appeal trial is set to begin April 15 before a Rockville Superior Court judge.

© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
13 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
ammo17 says:
IF THIS HAPPENED IN THE MASSACHUSETTES HE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN A FINE AND PROBATION.let him rot in jail.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
six1seven says:
If you read the background of this case, specifically info about Ken Littleton before and after the murder and couple this with the lack of hard evidence implicating Skakel, it seems very. very possible that he did not commit this crime. Read RFK's piece in The Atlantic from 2003. Regardless about what you think of the Kennedy's, this case has little to do with the family name and a lot to do with overzealous authorities and Dominick Dunne.

General rule people, don't comment on cases unless you've attempted a good faith effort to read up on the basics.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
h20zone says:
So sad for the Moxley family - that this low life criminal who refuses to OWN HIS ACTIONS - is still trying to return to a privileged free life.

A life he did not deserve to have - post killing Martha Moxley in 1975. When Michael Skakel chose to engage in cruel demented murder - he gave up his freedom and any right to try and suggest this was all God's will.

Instead of owning his actions and owning the fact he DID IT. He is a cruel demented murderer. Skakel tries to torment the Moxley family even more this week. By refusing to claim this murder - as his own.

What a cruel sick man he is.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
LVwidow says:
"Twelve people thought OJ was not guilty". No, I don't think so. Twelve people brought back a verdict of "not guilty" - which in the judicial system only means that they did not think that the prosecutor proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Doesn't mean OJ did not commit the crime at all. I believe he did it, but of course I understand DNA evidence regardless of how the defense razzle dazzled it to create doubts. And Furhman did not help the prosecutor's case at all, his lies created doubt that should not have been there. Just saying.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hamiltongrad says:
What a sad affair. What good does more punishment do after all these years ?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
MrsHippy says:
It is amazing how time in prison makes people say, "I am innocent, I didn't do it!"
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
MrsHippy says:
This guy admitted to jacking off in a tree while he was spying on her. He is probably still jacking off to his fantasy in prison!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jechaucer says:
Why is it that everyone who is in jail is "innocent"? All the evidence clearly pointed to Skakel. His first lawyer lost because there was nothing to fight, it was as open and shut as OJ. Oh, sorry, bad example. Twelve people thought OJ was not guilty.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
taxed01 says:
She is still dead and the taxpayers are still throwing money at him. This is our excuse for justice.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
djseavy says:
Because I have no faith in the criminal justice system, it is almost impossible for me to believe the way this all played out. The Moxley family deserves justice - and so does Kennedy. There was no physical evidence tying him to the crime. Nothing but conjecture and theory. My present view is this: they wanted to close the books, and because he was handy, he was the easy target. Time might prove me wrong, but for now, I think a horrible mistake was made, and an innocent man is the skapegoat.
reply
Sheepler replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
There are 2 people who testified at his trial that he admitted to this crime. You know nothing abou the case, go crawl back under your rock and in the future, speak about things you have knowledge of!
vielmann replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Who were those two people? Fellow prisoners in jail?
See all 13 Comments
Scroll Left Scroll Right