Chicago Tribune from Chicago, Illinois • 132

12 CHICAGO TRIBUNE SECTION 1 WEDNESDAY MAY 8, 2002 NATION pretty mirier trial mm ate ieatl 2 years (O TF-l Vlv 1 1 1 -a- mnw hiuhimi.iiiii LiwuuuBm r.V: i 1 Vi Flower Keyfob No.7376 $24 vrLrP in perfect Reuters photo by Mike Segar Michael Skakel (right) and lawyer Mickey Sherman arrive at a Norwalk, courthouse on Tuesday, the first day of Skakel's trial in the 1975 beating death of Martha Moxley in tony Greenwich. By Stevenson Swanson Tribune national correspondent NORWALK, Conn. More than 26 years after the bludgeoned body of young Martha Moxley was discovered beneath a shelteringpine in one of America's wealthiest communities, a relative of one of America's most famous families went on trial Tuesday for her murder. The evidence against Michael Skakel, 41, is admittedly circumstantial, prosecutor Jonathan Benedict told a jury, but, combined with the known facts of the case, they "will permit you only one logical, sensible, reasonable conclusion: The defendant murdered Martha Moxley." The start of the trial marks the latest chapter in a murder mystery that combines high-profile names, conspiracy theories and more bizarre twists than a pulp novel. In fact, the Moxley murder was the subject of a 1993 novel by author Domin-ick Dunne, one of the many celebrity journalists and legal experts whose attendance turned a modest state courthouse here into the setting for an O.

J. Simpson-like melodrama. Martha Moxley was 15 when she was beaten and stabbed with a golf club in 1975 in the exclusive Belle Haven neighborhood of Greenwich, an affluent suburb of New York. Skakel, a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert F. Kennedy, was also 15 and was infatuated with Martha Moxley, Benedict said.

Skakel's attorney, Michael Sherman, countered in his opening statement that the prosecution has no physical evidence linking Skakel to the killing of the high-school sophomore. "The evidence will show that not only was Michael Skakel not the murderer, he was not even in the neighborhood," Sherman told the jury of six women and six men, plus four alternates. "Whoever committed this crime deserves to rot in hell. Michael Skakel was not guilty then, and he's not guilty now." The first witness Tuesday was Dorthy Moxley, the slain girl's mother, who testified that after Martha did not return home by about 10:30 p.m. on Oct.

30, 1975, she became increasingly worried and called neighbors to ask whether they had seen Martha. The teenager was known to have gone out with friends that evening to play pranks as part of "mischief night," the night before Halloween. She was last seen with neighbor Thomas Skakel, then 17. Thomas is Michael Skakel's older brother. Excerpts from Martha's diary released Tuesday show that Thomas had expressed romantic interest in her, putting his hand on her knee while they were in a car and trying to put his arm around her.

For many years, he was a leading suspect. Sherman repeatedly questioned Dorthy Moxley's memory about when she heard teen voices and barking dogs the night of the crime. To build the argument that Michael Skakel was not in the neighborhood when Martha was killed, the defense is expected to argue that the murder occurred later than 9:30 p.m. to 10 p.m., which is the On. A Reuters photo by Mike Segar Martha Moxley's mother, Dorthy, signals onlookers Tuesday outside the courthouse.

The girl was bludgeoned with a golf club. Piped Polished French Purse No.7850 $188 Martha Moxley was killed at 15. talking about his night of mischief since at least the spring of 1978," Benedict said. Also testifying Tuesday were Martha's brother, John, who drove around the neighborhood that night searching for his sister, and Sheila McGuire, a friend of Martha's who discovered the body. The Moxley family left before McGuire testified to avoid seeing photos of the crime scene, which showed Martha's body lying face down.

Forensic tests indicated she had not been sexually assaulted. Later this week, the defense may try to introduce a supposed murder confession by Kenneth Littleton, who started work as a live-in tutor for the Skakel children the day of the murder. Littleton, a longtime suspect, has been granted immunity in return for cooperating with the investigation. But the nature of his confession is murky In a pretrial hearing, prosecutor Benedict said Littleton never admitted to the killing. Instead, Benedict said Littleton said state investigators and his wife tricked him into believing he had confessed during a drinking binge.

The reasons for the deceit have not been explained. Littleton and his wife have since divorced. Benedict called the episode "the most bizarre piece of investigative work I have ever time Moxley testified she heard a "commotion" outside her house. Sherman cited inconsistencies in her accounts over the years, which Moxley attributed to the stress of her daughter's death. "I was a zombie," said Moxley, who wore a small lapel pin of the scales of justice.

"I did not function well at all." A combination of apparent police mistakes and the Skakel family's refusal to cooperate with the investigation caused the case to languish for years and raised suspicions that the Skakels' wealth and connections were behind a cover-up. Dorthy Moxley's persistent calls for a new investigation eventually were taken up by journalists and prosecutors. Michael Skakel, who was said to be upset on the evening of Martha's murder by the attention she was showing his brother, was arrested in 2000 and is being tried as an adult. If convict ed, he could face life in prison. Over the years, Skakel has been in and out of treatment for drug and alcohol problems, including a stay at The Elan School in Maine, a prep school for troubled youths.

While there, he allegedly confessed to friends that he had murdered Martha. But Gregory Coleman, one of the key witnesses who said he heard Skakel confess, later admitted that he had used heroin shortly before testifying in front of a grand jury, which defense attorneys have said demonstrates his unreliability as a witness. Coleman died last year from tainted heroin. In his opening statement, Benedict indicated that the prosecution case would not rest on Coleman's account. Over the years, Benedict said, Skakel told many people that he committed the murder, although his accounts of the crime and his motive have been inconsistent.

"As it turns out, he has been playful WW White House backs right to own guns Briefs filed with Supreme Court signify reversal briefs represented a shift in government policy, Olson noted that when the two cases were argued before separate appeals courts "the government argued that the 2nd Amendment protects only such acts of firearm possession as are reasonably related to the preservation or efficiency of the militia." But, Olson said in the briefs, "the current position of the United States is that the 2nd Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any state militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms." He said the rights were "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." The briefs reflect the strongly held views of Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft on gun ownership. Ashcroft first advanced this interpretation of the Constitution upheld the constitutionality of provisions of federal gun-control laws. The key case involved a Texa9 man, Timothy Joe Emerson, who was indicted for possession of a Beretta pistol while he was subject to a domestic violence restraining order obtained by his wife.

A federal district judge dismissed the indictment on grounds that it violated Emerson's 2nd Amendment rights, but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court judge and ordered Emerson to be tried on the charge. The second case involved an Oklahoma man, John Lee Ha-ney, who was convicted of possession of a machine gun, which is outlawed by federal law. In his brief, Olson said the Emerson decision "reflects a sounder understanding of the scope and purpose of the 2nd Amendment" than other appeals court rulings on the issue, but that the ban on machine guns was.another permissible limitation'on the right to be(ir arms. in a letter last year to the National Rifle Association and reiterated his view last November in a memorandum to the nation's U.S.

attorneys. The issue of the 2nd Amendment's meaning involves more than arcane legal and constitutional questions. It's at the heart of a bitter and long-standing political dispute between defenders of an unlimited right to bear arms and gun-control advocates. The gun right defenders read the amendment as granting an absolute right to all Americans, but others, citing the amendment's introductory phrase on the need to maintain "a well regulated militia," argue that it should be read in that context and that it's limited at a time when the United States has a huge standing military force. In the briefs, Olson stated the Bush administration's position on the 2nd Amendment while also arguing that the Supreme Court shouldn't accept the two cases for review, thereby.letting stand appeals court rulings that Straw Market Tote No.8908 $228Coach Scarves $28 $58 By Edward Walsh The Washington Post WASHINGTON Reversing long-held government policy, the Bush administration has told the Supreme Court that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm that isn't tied to the maintenance of state militias.

The Justice Department staked out the position in briefs filed late Monday by Solicitor General Theodore Olson in two cases that the Supreme Court i9 considering for review. It was believed to be the first time that the department, speaking for the federal government, has said in a formal filing with a federal court that the 2nd Amendment grants an individual the right to bwr arms. Acknowledging that the 62S N. MICHIGAN AVE NORTHBROOK COURT 900 N. MICHIGAN AVE 200 S.

LASALLE OLD ORCHARD OAKBROOK WOODFIELD COACH.COM BOO 262 2411 (Q(Q)k(Q.