All language subtitles for Murder.and.Justice.The.Case.of.Martha.Moxley.S01E01.WEBRip.x264-ION10.English

- When Martha
walked in the room,

it was like the sun
coming up in the morning.

- A 15-year-old girl,
Martha Moxley.

- She was a straight-A student.

She had everything
to look forward to.

- But on October 30th, 1975,
Greenwich, Connecticut,

one of the nation's most
exclusive communities,

bears witness to
a brutal murder.

- Martha's body was found
bludgeoned to death

with a golf club outside
of her home in Greenwich.

- Police have few
clues to follow,

and decades slip by
with no arrests.

A heartbroken family holds
its breath for answers.

Then...

25 years later, a new suspect
is pulled into the limelight.

The heir to a family fortune,
and a Kennedy cousin.

- Michael Skakel.
- Michael Skakel.

- Michael Skakel.

- With a prominent family
at the center of it,

his 2002 trial ignites
a media firestorm.

And as the verdict echoes
around the world...

- Michael Skakel found
guilty of murder.

- ...the nation grapples
with a new nightmare.

A young 15-year-old girl with
a life of endless possibilities,

murdered by a member
of American royalty.

- Twenty years to life
given to Kennedy nephew,

Michael Skakel.

- But as firmly as
the Moxley's believe

Martha's killer
is behind bars...

- You know, he thought he
could get away with murder.

- ...the Skakels and Kennedys
stand by Michael's innocence.

- Michael Skakel
was 11 miles away,

with five eyewitnesses,
when this murder occurred.

- After 11 years of appeals

and millions of
dollars in costs...

- The Moxleys do deserve
their pound of flesh.

It just isn't me.

- All rise.

- A judge ruled that Micheal
Skakel's original trial lawyer

provided an
ineffective defense.

On October 23rd, 2013,
a mother watches

as Skakel's conviction
is overturned.

- An innocent man
now goes free.

- I would like Michael Skakel
to go back to jail

and serve the rest
of his sentence.

- And on January 7th, 2019,
a decision by the U.S.

Supreme Court effectively
upholds the ruling.

43 years after Martha
Moxley's death,

the same questions remain.

Why has justice
been so elusive?

Does Michael Skakel really
belong behind bars?

Or, did someone else
get away with murder?

When I was a federal prosecutor
in Washington D.C.,

my sole focus was to
advocate tirelessly

on behalf of
all the victims,

and provide their grieving
families with the relief

of justice and convictions.

My goal in re-exploring
the murder of Martha Moxley

is to clear away
the distortion

from an infamous
rollercoaster of a case

whose story has been
twisted by media, money,

and privilege.

With the help of the world's
preeminent crime experts...

- The first thing I said is,
"The suspect knew the victim."

- I hope to provide a 360 degree
view of the evidence,

test new theories,

and explore previously
overlooked clues.

- Wait a minute.

Has somebody else actually
committed the crime?

- To finally answer a question

that's haunted
a grieving mother,

and the entire country,

for more than four decades.

Why has there been no
justice for Martha Moxley?

- I spent over seven years
investigating violent crimes,

like sexual assault
and crimes against the elderly,

crimes against children.

But it's when I look at a crime
through the eyes of a mother

that really--

I get this shared fuel
that drives me to prevail.

When Martha's mother,
Dorthy, and her family,

moved to the breezy
shores of Belle Haven,

she did so expecting
a sense of security and safety.

That, unfortunately, proved
to be anything but true.

I'm hoping Dorthy can now help
me get to know her daughter

a little better.

- I haven't seen
those in a long time.

- Obviously, this beautiful
young woman is Martha.

- This is Martha.

This was the picture for
her high school ID card.

And so that was one
of the last pictures

that was ever taken, yes.

- She's beautiful.
A beautiful smile.

- She had her braces taken
off her teeth recently.

And she was
a very easy child.

She was
a very happy person.

Liked people,
people liked her.

- It's hard not to capture
Martha not smiling.

- Smiling, yes.

- Here she is with her father.
- With her father, yes.

- They say every little girl
has her father's heart.

It must have been true
for your husband as well.

- Yes, yes.
It was.

Yes.

She was just a very
wonderful person, I thought.

Makes me sad now.

You know, we had
wonderful times.

I didn't realize this was
gonna be so hard on me.

I really didn't.

- Tell me about the night
she disappeared.

October 30th, 1975.

- Um, well...

she had stayed out late
the weekend before,

and I remember saying
that she was grounded.

But I thought,
go ahead.

You can go.
That's fine.

- It was the night
before Halloween.

- Yeah.
Yeah.

And, um, the time came when
I thought she'd be home

and she wasn't.

And so then I called
Helen Ix,

to see where she was.

And Helen is the
one that told me

that she was with one of
the kids in the neighborhood,

Tommy Skakel, the last
she had seen her.

You know, before
Helen went home.

And they were,
at the Skakels.

- You must have stayed up.

- I did.
I stayed up.

And I finally just fell
asleep in the window seat

in the library.

And when I woke up the next
morning, I went upstairs to see

if she was in her room
and she wasn't.

- Martha was last seen leaving
the home of her neighbor's,

the Skakels.

Relatives of America's
First Family, the Kennedys.

As she crosses
the lawn to her house,

someone assaults
her so savagely...

that the steel golf club
used in the attack

breaks into pieces.

- It was one of these
neighborhoods,

the kids could just
go meet people.

- It was a safe
neighborhood, really.

- Yes.
Yes.

Very safe.

Um, everyone liked everyone,
it seemed like.

- What has it been like
for you all this time?

- It-it hasn't been easy.

But, um...

but-but you
learn how to adjust.

I don't cry very
often anymore.

But I used to cry a lot.

- Dorthy, what do you
want people to remember

about your daughter?

- Well, the new
people that I meet,

they don't even have to
know I had a daughter.

You know, I don't burden
friends, new friends,

with my sorrows.

But the people that she knew,
and who loved her,

will always love her.

A lot of people just
can't handle it.

You just learn how
to live with it.

- In the 43 years since
the murder, the Moxleys

have left Belle Haven
and Greenwich behind.

But I need to know,

what kind of world did
Martha live and die in?

Her brother, John,
was 17 at the time,

but the pain of
coming back here...

never goes away.

What's it like for
you to come back here?

- You know,
it's been 43 years,

and it's one of
those things where...

different times
you feel different ways.

You know, you just
can't help but wonder,

you know,
what might have been.

If she had been allowed
to live her life out,

you know, would she have been
the CEO of a major corporation,

or would she have been the
president of the Peace Corps?

Who knows?

I put a lot of effort
in over the years

to make sure that I didn't
go down that dark road

that I could
never get out of.

So...

- You know, you look
at this area.

It seems like
a dream neighborhood.

- Yeah.
No, absolutely.

I always thought,
and I still think,

it's as good as it gets.

- The Moxley family moved here
in the summer of 1974,

and were looking to
make it their home.

But just one year later,
Martha is murdered.

This is the street
where your house was.

- Yeah.

- So, the house that you lived
in is no longer here, right?

- Correct.

- Where was your house?

- Our house was on
the piece of property

that are these next
two houses on the left.

So, that house
and this house.

- These two-- the brick
house and that one?

- Yes.

- And this is
the Skakel's old house.

- This is the Skakel home?
- Yeah.

So, you can see how close the
Skakel's house was to our house.

- So, it was really close.
- Yeah.

And that looks exactly
like it used to.

- My goodness.

The Skakel house is where
Martha was last seen alive,

hanging out with
teenage brothers

Tommy and Michael Skakel.

Their widowed father,
Rushton Skakel,

is the heir to a family fortune
from the coal industry,

and is the brother
of Ethel Skakel,

wife of the late
Robert F. Kennedy.

The night before Halloween is
Mischief Night in Belhaven.

But for the Skakel brothers,
it's just an excuse

for an alcohol-fueled party
with no adult in sight.

Before it was over,
Martha would be dead.

Where would Martha
have been found?

- And the tree would've
been, you know,

kind of up by where
that chimney is,

if not, maybe a little
bit farther back.

- Right where the trees are?
- Yeah, right in there.

- But the tree is gone.

- Yeah, it was
back a little bit.

- John Moxley
is giving me a glimpse
of a tight-knit community.

And it was inside this world
that Martha's murder

would ignite intrigue
and questions of whether

money and privilege
could impair justice,

and began an enduring
mystery surrounding

what really
happened that night.

- So, we see where
the clubhead is,

where the two pieces of
the shaft of the club are,

as well as where the blood
and the drag marks are.

- All murders are caused
because money, sex, or revenge.

That's it.

- Mark, who do you think
killed Martha Moxley?

- Martha Moxley,

beaten to death on
her own front lawn.

Inside a wealthy enclave,
sealed off from outsiders.

What can the
place she died in

tell me about her murder?

I've gotten to know
Martha a little

through her mother, Dorthy.

And had an insider's
view of Martha's world

from her brother, John.

But as an investigator,

I always want to retrace
a victim's last steps up close.

Because, sometimes,
a tiny overlooked detail

can reveal something
new about a murder.

The Moxley residence is now
gone, which, of course,

makes it difficult
to piece together

Martha's exact moments.

But one thing I can do is map
out and mark the crime scene

inch by inch
at another location

to see what
that can tell me.

So, I'm going to
go see Matt Steiner,

one of the top experts
in the field

of crime scene
reconstruction.

So, what do we have here?

- It's a bird's eye
view of the scene,

showing relative positions
of the evidence

and fixed features,
like the home

and the driveway
and Walsh Lane.

- Using the measurements
from this diagram,

Matt has laid out
a life sized recreation

of the crime scene on
this playing field.

He's used cones and flags,
as well as artifacts

to represent
the Moxley property

and indicate where
evidence was found

on the morning of
October 31, 1975.

- This is Walsh Lane,
right here.

The Moxley home
is right there.

So, if we start over here
at the driveway,

this would've been
asphalt or concrete,

not grass, like we're
standing on.

And this where we see our
circular stains of blood

from the crime scene
photographs from that day.

- So, you think maybe
she was hit here.

- In the driveway.

And then, at some point,
winds up over there.

- Do we know how?

- Possibly chased?
Maybe she's stumbling.

Maybe she's disoriented from
being struck in the head.

Then she falls
and then hits some more.

She's bleeding for
a period of time here.

And we have this pool
that's created.

A saturation standing
at the grass.

- Do we know how long?

- We do not know how long.

So the next piece of evidence is
right by the pool of blood,

is our section of the shaft
of the golf club.

Let's go towards the other
side of the driveway.

- Here's another piece
of the golf club, though.

- This is the other section
of the golf club shaft.

Now we're at the broken
golf club head.

- This is the third piece.

- And we're missing
the fourth piece.

- According to investigators,

the golf club used in
the attack on Martha

was smashed into
four pieces on impact.

Three pieces of the club
are recovered at the scene.

And Greenwich police
determined that it was

a Tony Pena
lady's six iron

from a monogrammed
set of clubs

inside the Skakel's home.

But, to this day,

part of the puzzle
is still missing.

The part that wasn't
recovered was the handle?

- Was the handle, yes,

which had the leatherette
grip on it.

- But that leatherette part
would've had--

- Would've had definitely DNA,

by using that to-to
hit somebody.

Could possibly also
have fingerprints.

- How did that impact
the investigation?

- It's all evidence.

So, you're missing
some of your evidence.

- So, where do
we go from here?

- She's dragged
towards the tree.

- So, this curvy line here,
this is the drag pattern?

- Yes.

This path starts to curve
towards this large pine tree.

It probably took a bit
to get the momentum up

to figure out the mechanics
of dragging Martha.

And then the correction
to figure out

how do I get
to that tree.

- The tree was the goal.
- The tree was the goal.

Between these two cones is
where her body was found.

And that cone is the side
of the pine tree.

- After my crime scene
walkthrough,

one thing is clear--

the killing was prolonged.

And whoever did it also
needed time to hide the body.

But I'd like to know more
than just how Martha died.

It is possible that the injuries
that caused her death

can help identify
a suspect

as clearly as any
eyewitness could.

I'm getting ready to
meet with Dr. Henry Lee.

He's one of the most
famous medical examiners

in the entire world.

He's investigated,
he's consulted,

he's testified in, like,

a who's-who of high
profile criminal trials.

He's also been intimately
involved in this case

for decades.

So, just so I'm clear, from
reviewing the autopsy report,

and reconstructing the scene,

is there any way for you

to conclude whether she
knew her attacker?

A frenzy?

- Yes.
- What do you mean?

A pursuit and then
a frenzied killing?

Terms that,
by definition,

describe a suspect
seething with anger.

And a definite purpose.

But how exactly did the killer
use a golf club to kill Martha?

Dr. Lee has recreated the
mechanics of the murder

from medical
and autopsy reports,

and can demonstrate for me.

So, on Martha's face,
there were imprint marks.

Okay.

Soft tissue would have
left the imprint of this--

- Right.
- Okay.

We already know this was an
up-close and personal murder,

and it took some time.

But Martha was not
killed by the brute force

of the golf club
that struck her,

but by the sharp tip
of the broken shaft

that was thrust
through her neck,

which indicates
the sustained anger

of someone Martha
may have known.

- In one of America's most
exclusive communities,

while walking home
across her lawn,

15 year-old Martha Moxley is
beaten and stabbed so savagely

that investigators
say the murder weapon,

a steel golf club,
breaks into pieces.

With the help of world-renowned
forensic scientist Henry Lee

and crime scene
reconstructionist
Matt Steiner,

I've come to
the realization.

The up-close and personal
nature of her attack

and the body's placement
between the Moxley's

and their neighbor's
house, the Skakel's,

means the assailant is
likely someone Martha knew.

The golf club matches
others from a set

inside the Skakel home.

So that points
the finger even further.

But at who, exactly?

Back in 1975,

Greenwich police
faced the same problem,

but they looked closely
at the last two people

known to have
seen Martha alive--

brothers Tommy
and Michael Skakel.

According to their reports,

Martha arrived at the Skakel
house with her friends

Helen Ix
and Jeffrey Burns

around 8:45 PM.

Michael greets them, and they
all go to listen to music

in the car in the driveway.

A short time later,
Tommy joins them.

Martha sits between
Tommy and Michael,

and Tommy tries to put his
hand on her leg twice.

Around 9:30, Tommy
and Michael's brothers,

John and Rushton Skakel, Jr.,

decide to drive over
to their cousin's,

the Terriens.

Michael invites Martha to
join them, but she declines

and heads home instead.

Tommy goes back in
the house to do homework.

And then around 10 PM,
Tommy watches television

with the family's
live-in tutor.

11:30, Michael returns
and goes straight to bed.

Greenwich police confirm
the Skakel boys' alibis,

putting them in the clear.

So who else had the
opportunity to kill Martha?

Veteran criminal
profiler Pat Brown

thinks she knows the answer.

In Greenwich,
Connecticut, Pat,

obviously this
is a town that is

really kind of
branded as a utopia.

- To have somebody
so brutally murdered

is shocking to the police.

I mean, people think,
"A lot of police, well,

"they don't see
this all the time."

They don't.

First of all, somebody
has to have opportunity.

And in my opinion,

the time frame for when
the crime was committed

was very, very narrow--
9:30 to 10:00.

- And why is that important,
that narrow time frame?

- It's extremely important
because we don't have

that many people who could
have had access to her.

The police certainly
looked at the neighbors,

but they also looked at
the Skakel household.

So Michael had witnesses

that he was not on
the Skakel property

between 9:30 and 10:00.

He was already with his buddies,
off to another location.

He had alibi that
he wasn't there.

Then the police
looked at Tommy,

who was the last person
to be with Martha,

who said, you know,
"We kissed, and all that,"

and then she said, "I gotta
go home," and she left.

And so he is basically
seeing her leave.

He certainly had
the opportunity,

'cause he could go
right behind her,

and he could get
a hold of the golf club.

But Tommy was a, not-not
so great a suspect, but--

- Why do you say that?

- Simply because
motive certainly wasn't
really obvious there.

Was he really that upset if he
kissed Martha and she said,

"No more, I got
a- I got a curfew."

- So Tommy had access to
the murder weapons,

he had opportunity,
but he had no motive.

And it should be noted,

Tommy Skakel has always denied
involvement in the crime,

and he was never
charged or convicted.

- So Ken Littleton was
a reasonable person to look at.

- Often away on business,

Rushton Skakel
hired Ken Littleton

as a live-in tutor
and companion for his sons.

On the night of the killing,
the 23 year-old former teacher

had only just moved
in hours earlier.

But Pat says it was Littleton's
behavior after the murder

that is the key.

- Ken Littleton changed his
story quite a few times.

And that's one of the reasons
the police looked at him,

because usually people
only have one story.

I mean, "This happened."

But when you keep
changing your story

for what appears to be
no good reason whatsoever,

you have to start
questioning whether

that person had an
involvement in the crime.

- One detail in Littleton's
story didn't change.

- He was there present
in the household.

And he is not accounted
for the whole time.

- The night that
Martha Moxley was killed?

- Correct.
So he did have opportunity,

and he did have access
to the golf club.

Ken Littleton could've seen
Martha just walking,

and if he's
psychopathic in nature,

he might just wanted what he
wanted right then and there.

- He called and left a message
on my answering machine

threatening to kill me.

- On October 30, 1975,

the same day that
Martha Moxley

is killed in Bellhaven,
Connecticut,

an outsider arrives in
the private enclave

and takes up
residence next door.

Skakel family tutor
Ken Littleton.

Littleton's alibi that he was
watching TV with Tommy Skakel

changes over time.

According to criminal
profiler Pat Brown,

it's part of
a disturbing pattern.

- This man had a lotta
trouble with women.

He had very
bizarre behaviors.

And just because some people
didn't recognize it

at the age when he was
there with the Skakels

doesn't mean he wasn't
emotionally disturbed.

- You think Ken Littleton
had some latent psychopathy?

- I'm not a psychiatrist,
so I can't say,

"This man is a psychopath."

I can say he exhibits
a lot of similar traits

and similar behaviors
as other psychopaths.

I would call it a personality
disorder of some sort

that is very,
very concerning.

And it didn't start
after this happened.

- How do you reconcile
that with motive?

"It's all about me,

"and it's not about you.
And if I want something,

"I should be able
to have it."

He could've seen Martha just
walking along and he's like,

"Well, I want to take that."

Right then and there.

- But doesn't it seem more
far-fetched for Ken Littleton

to just happen upon
Martha Moxley and murder her?

- He didn't happen upon her.

What I'm trying
to get across here

is that they had probable cause
to look at Ken Littleton.

They had the fact that
he had opportunity.

He was also a big guy,
a strong guy.

He was a football player,
he was a rugby guy,

he was a baseball--
he was a big guy.

He certainly had
a lot of strength,

could commit
a crime easily.

- So do you think that Ken
Littleton killed Martha Moxley?

- I would say the evidence
that exists, as of today,

would put,
in my opinion,

Ken Littleton still at
the top of the suspect list.

- According to Pat Brown,
Ken Littleton

had the capacity to kill,
and lie to police.

And that's not all.
By April of 1976,

Littleton is no longer
welcome in the Skakel home.

That summer, police on Nantucket
Island arrest him for a burglary

committed under the influence
of alcohol and cocaine

in what amounted
to a crime spree.

Was he suffering the
mental anguish of taking

a young girl's life?

I'd like to ask
someone who knew Ken,

so I've tracked down
his ex-wife, Mary Baker.

A few years after the murder,

Ken started
a relationship with her.

Mary, what's your
connection to Ken Littleton?

- I was married
to him from,

1983 until 1990.

- How did you meet him?

- To make a long story short,
my father had died,

and my godparents asked me
to go to Florida.

And I was at loose ends,
so I-I met Ken in Florida.

- Did you know him very well
when you first started dating

and married?

- No, and my judgment was not
exactly what you'd call

stellar at the time.

But, you know,
in retrospect,

anybody watching was
very much against it.

But no, he left
Florida with me.

And when I like
decided to come home,

he came up
to Ottawa.

- What did you ever hear
Ken Littleton say

about Martha Moxley
or her murder?

- Until later,
nothing.

- When is the later?

- I don't think I talked
to him at all about it

until we were
long divorced, and

I made a couple of attempts
to let him come up here.

But, he was
still drinking,

and having psychotic breaks.

And, he called and
left a message on

my answering machine,
threatening to kill me.

- The police had come
and gotten him,

and put him under
a- a naked light bulb.

- Did Ken ever take
a lie detector test?

- Many times.

- And to what you
understand,

did he pass the lie detector
test for fail it?

- No, he-he failed.

- An opportunity to kill,
a history of

emotional disturbances,

and a failed polygraph

beg the question,
did Ken Littleton murder

Martha Moxley
that fateful night

43 years ago?

Did you think Ken
was exuding guilt

or some other emotion?

- I was asking him,
"Why do people think

"that you killed Martha?

"Why can't you prove
that you didn't?"

- After Michael and
Tommy Skakel's alibis

all but clear them, police
then turn their attention

to their live-in tutor,
Ken Littleton,

who is apparently
a very troubled person.

His ex-wife, Mary Baker,
says that Ken failed

numerous polygraphs
during the Moxley

murder investigation.

What was your impression
when he failed?

- I could see why.

He's his own worst enemy.

- How so?

- If he were drinking or
drugging, he'd up

to be combative,
difficult, obsessive.

And he didn't like
the police,

because he'd already
been arrested

in Nantucket.

After that,
he was very resentful

of the inquiry
into him.

- Do you think that Ken
was involved at all

in her death?

- I told them
everything I knew.

And that didn't involve
anything about

Ken being a murderer.

- So Mary Baker says that
Ken was not involved.

I'm not sure what to
make of Mary's defense.

But if he was involved

in one of the nations'

most infamous murders,
could he really have

hidden it from his wife
of 7 years?

Martha Moxley's brother,
John, shares a story

about what happened
when he tried

to find out for himself.

- You know, the police
looked at him real hard.

And Ken's life kind of
raveled out of control

after that.

I went up to see
him in Boston.

I asked him a lot of
real hard questions,

and he broke down crying
several times.

- Did you think

he was exuding guilt?

- I thought it was
some other emotion.

You know,
I was asking him, "Ken,

"why do people think that
you killed Martha?

"Why can't you prove
that you didn't?"

And you could just see
that he was crumbling.

And, at first, I thought
that maybe this might

lead to a confession.

But it was just
the opposite.

It was, at the end,
kind of a-a tragic plea

on his part to, you know,
help prove he wasn't there.

- How did you
end that meeting?

- You know, I walked out
and I was convinced that

Ken didn't kill Martha.

You know, I look at him now
as, you know,

as a tragic figure that
got caught up in something

that, you know,

he had nothing
to do with.

- To me, Ken Littleton
isn't a killer.

He's someone who needed help,
but got caught up

in the middle of
a murder case.

But John's revelation
doesn't move the search

into new territory.

And while police spend
years trying to get

a confession from Ken,
they never charge him.

But in the early '90's,
the whole world of

forensic investigation
is turned upside down

with the advent
of DNA testing.

And around the same time,
the Skakel family pays

a private detective agency
nearly a million dollars

to prepare a definitive
analysis of the facts

and evidence in the case.

Why?

Because with no arrest
after two decades,

both Michael and Tommy Skakel
were facing increased scrutiny,

and their father
wanted to assess

their level of risk
in any further

police investigation.

I wanna talk to one
of the only people

ever to see
that report.

Mark Fuhrman.

- In the process of
the OJ Simpson trial,

I came to meet Dominick Dunne
of "Vanity Fair"

and several books.

And he said,
"I think you should

"look into this case.

"Maybe you could solve it."

- An employee of the firm
that investigated

Martha Moxley's death
on behalf of the Skakels,

leaked a highly confidential
final report to

veteran crime journalist,
Dominick Dunne.

What was in that report,
and who was it written by?

- Well, Sutton
is a group of

retired law enforcement,

some of which
are FBI agents.

They do private
security work

for people that
can afford it.

Rushton Skakel hired
the Sutton Associates

to see how exposed

the boys were.

This was a private report,
never to be seen by anybody,

to say how exposed they are

and what they would do
to account for that.

- What did the Sutton
investigators

get out of Tommy Skakel
about where he really was

that night with Martha?

- Well, Tommy,
at the very least,

lied to the police
about sexual contact

with Martha.

His involvement
was extreme.

- But Tommy's
not the only Skakel

who changes his story.

- Initially,
Michael Skakel

leaves to go to
the Terrien's house

at about 10:00.

Came home at 11:30,
and he went to bed.

What he says in
the Sutton report is,

"Well, I got back

"and I went over to
the Moxley house.

"And I climbed up a tree
and I threw pebbles

"at her windows,
and she didn't

"come to the window.

"So I stayed there awhile.

"I masturbated
in the tree."

Now, when I read this,
I'm thinking to myself,

why would somebody make
these statements

at this late day?

- So, showing, well, yeah,
I may have been there,

and my DNA may be
on the scene.

'Cause, of course,
Michael Skakel's

aware at this point,
now the Sutton report

has been written,

that technology has
changed since 1975.

- Right.

Exactly.

If a defense attorney can
attribute innocent actions

to criminal actions,
you have reasonable doubt.

- By 1998,
Martha Moxley's murder

is the most famous

cold case in America.

But former LAPD detective
Mark Fuhrman believes

the Skakels used
the Sutton report

to create
a false narrative.

Shielding a potential
suspect in the family

with a plausible reason
for why his DNA

might be at
the crime scene.

- Now, when you
look at Michael,

they also needed
to develop a defense.

He's a troubled teen.

His mother died,
and dad is non-existent.

And we know he
was an alcoholic.

He goes into
treatment facilities

as a young teen.

They are building
this mental defect,

this personality flaw,
to be able

to pull that card
like a knife.

At the same time,
they're hiding Michael.

Sending him to
boarding school.

They kept him
on the move.

All murders are because
of money, sex, or revenge.

That's it.

It covers everything.

And so, you look at money.

This was not a family
that had old money.

These were not
billionaires.

And dealings of revenge
are highly unlikely,

at the very best.

You don't have to be
a homicide detective

to realize that
this is most probably

a crime of passion.

So you have to
have a connection.

And anger is part
of that connection

that usually creates
a homicide.

The first attack...

might have been
something that

the suspect realized
what they had done.

And there was a decision
to be made.

Do I render aid,

or do I finish her off?

- It sends a chill
down my spine, Mark,

when you ask that really--

an ominous question.

- It's actually kind of
a psychological test

right there.

Which is
more important?

This young woman
or me?

Suspect made
a choice.

So he finished her off.

Now the most
important thing is,

don't get caught.

Then, the body was hid
underneath the boughs

of an evergreen tree.

You know that the suspect
has to hide the body

to expand
the ability

for them to create
an alibi.

- So even in
a crime of passion,

someone would have
the foresight

to be able to think,
"don't get caught."

- Right.

It's like a child
hiding something like

dirty clothes
under their bed.

This is a very
simplistic way

of hiding the body.

- Mark, who do you think
killed Martha Moxley?

- Michael Skakel
killed Martha Moxley.

- No doubt
in your mind?

- No doubt.

He puts himself in the tree
of the Moxley house.

I mean, how much closer
do you wanna get?

- Michael Skakel
has always denied

being involved in
Martha's murder.

But according
to Mark Fuhrman,

his family had more money,
better connections,

and deeper roots
in the community

than Martha's family did.

Fuhrman goes
public in 1998.

His best-selling book,
"Murder in Greenwich",

lays out his theory of
how Michael Skakel

killed Martha Moxley.

In January 2000,
police arrest 39 year old

Michael Skakel and
charge him with murder.

Two years later,
a jury convicts him,

finding him guilty.

And a judge sentencing him
to 20 years to life

behind bars.

But after 11 years of
well-funded legal appeals,

a judge rules that
Michael's defense

was ineffective at trial,
and overturns his conviction.

After 43 years,
Martha's grieving mother,

Dorthy, and her brother, John,

still don't have justice.

And I'm still
asking myself why.

In the next hour,
I'll take a look at

a sensational murder trial
decades in the making.

- 40 year old
Kennedy nephew,

Michael Skakel, leaves
a Stamford, Connecticut

courthouse moments
after a judge rules

there's enough evidence
to try him for murder.

- We've advanced
one more step.

- Everyone
who came forward,

did so at a price.

- Somebody who's on heroin

testifies in front
of a grand jury.

- And test the evidence
that put Michael Skakel away.

- I believe Michael
when he said this

and when he said that.

- You assess his
credibility and

you believe him?
- I do believe him.

- Then, I'll take a deep dive
into new theories.

- I keep going back
to two people

who had severe
crushes on her.

- Wait a minute,
there's somebody else

that actually
committed the crime.

- To shed new light
on a murder

whose 40-year shadow
just keeps growing.

- I think that
they were there.

- He has a golf club
from the Skakel property

in his hand,
and he's carrying it around.

- Shocking,
isn't it?

- As Martha's
with me forever,

she's going to be with

Michael Skakel
forever, also.

- Michael, did
you kill her?

- For more information,
go to Oxygen.com.