Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel wins new trial in 1975 murder of Martha Moxley

     Today (October 23, 2013), Fox News reported on an event first covered by the Associated Press and NBC staff reporter Daniel Arkin.  There is no overt argument being made here but there is an implied slant that functions as the warrant in the Fox version.  The implication is that the wealthy and connected Michael Skakel being allowed a new trial is an abomination to the justice system because he has already been sentenced to incarceration.  I consider this an argument by moral dilemma because it highlights the myriad of evidence against Skakel and questions his ability to demand a new trial in the face of that data.  At core it is also a logos argument that builds upon evidence and the ethos of court participants and officials to support its claims. In essence,  Connecticut Judge Thomas Bishop, ruled that Skakel’s  former trial attorney  Michael Sherman “failed to adequately represent him,” when he was tried for murdering his neighbor 15 year old neighbor Martha Moxley with a golf club in 1975. In 2002, Skakel, now 52 and a cousin to the Kennedy clan through Bobby’s widow Ethel; was found guilty of killing Martha in a fit of jealousy exacerbated by drug abuse.  Skakel’s new attorney Hubert Santos, hopes to get the convicted murderer released on bail right away, while State Attorney John Smriga says that the state will file a motion against the decision to grant the appeal.  Although Santos has declared that his new client is innocent, in his rebuttal Martha’s brother John Moxley argues that it was the convicted man’s own words that landed him behind bars.  On the other hand, Judge Thomas has maintained that there were significant failures in Sherman’s handling of the case, and that the defense failed to pursue other leads, challenge eyewitness accounts, or pick competent jurors.  The state counters that in fact Sherman did all of those things. Among the state’s evidence are three confessions by the perpetrator and over a dozen statements he ostensibly made through the years; which point to he alone being the killer. In comparing the two accounts of the same piece of information – those of Fox and NBC,  it is interesting to note that NBC ends its essay with facts while Fox ends their take with  Skakel’s declaration of innocence juxtaposed on the fact that he was denied bail again last year. The latter version has a decidedly more judgmental tone.  

 http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/23/21100925-judge-orders-new-trial-for-kennedy-nephew-michael-skakel-convicted-of-1975-teen-girl-slay?lite 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/23/kennedy-cousin-skakel-wins-new-trial-in-175-killing/