Dead Certain: The Martha Moxley Murder

Episode: The Trial

Date: December 9, 2025
Host: Andrew Goldman, NBC News Studios

Main Theme and Purpose

This episode dives deep into the high-profile 2002 murder trial of Michael Skakel—the Kennedy cousin convicted (and later exonerated) for the 1975 murder of 15-year-old Martha Moxley in Greenwich, Connecticut. Host Andrew Goldman reconstructs the atmosphere, key players, and fragile evidence that fueled the courtroom drama, illuminating why the case captivated the nation and how the trial’s presentation shaped a controversial verdict.

Key Discussion Points

1. The Courtroom’s Atmosphere and Players

• Chris Steele, Michael Skakel’s bodyguard during the trial, provided a rare inside perspective on the daily dynamic:
  • “I would talk to people like a real human being and engage them because it was interesting. You’re seeing people that are legends in their business.” (03:00)
  • Steele enjoyed rapport with people on both sides, but notes most in the courtroom carried tension or bitterness.
• Divisions in the courtroom:
  • The Moxley and Skakel families sat on opposite sides—tense, formal, and detached.
  • Frank Garr, lead police investigator, ostentatiously snubbed Mark Fuhrman, the controversial ex-LAPD detective turned author, furthering the tension.
  • The press gallery, led by Dominic Dunne, was more lively—a “summer camp” for seasoned reporters.
    • “I loved Dominic. I thought the world of him… Because I’d be seeing Dominic.” – Jeffrey Toobin (CNN/New Yorker) (05:25)

2. Michael Skakel’s Behavior in Court

• Michael’s demeanor was a liability—he failed to charm the jury and often antagonized prosecutors.
  • “I would walk by all the prosecutors and go, hey, hey, liar. Hey, face. Good job. I hear the Yankees need a coach.” – Michael Skakel (07:05)
• Jury perceptions:
  • “They just looked at him and saw this massive guy, when in fact he was a little kid. They didn’t like him at all because he didn’t smile.” – Steven Skakel (08:37)
• The defense never managed to reframe Michael as the adolescent he’d been at the time of the murder.

3. Anatomy of the Case: The Confessions

• The prosecution’s case was notably thin on physical evidence (“no fingerprints, no witnesses, no DNA. Nothing but circumstantial evidence”—Dominic Dunne), instead hinging on three alleged confessions:

a. John Higgins (Elan School peer)

• Recalls during a “night owl duty” that Michael, sobbing and emotional, confessed incrementally, ending with:
  • “Eventually it came to the point that he did do it. He must have done it. I did it.” (14:05)
• His credibility was attacked—he wasn’t forthcoming at first and appeared inconsistent.

b. Gregory Coleman (Elan School peer)

• Testified (via prior transcript after his fatal overdose before the trial) that Michael told him:
  • “I am going to get away with murder because I am a Kennedy.” (21:31)
  • Also relayed a salacious and logistically impossible story: Michael returning days later to Martha’s body to masturbate—a timeline debunked by facts.
• The State leveraged his un-cross-examinable status after death, despite his history as a “frequent flyer” heroin addict.

c. Jaron Ridge (Acquaintance from a party)

• At trial, Ridge contradicted herself and ultimately recanted her story.
  • “I did make up stuff, trying to appear to be knowledgeable from things I heard from Marissa and from magazines… I didn’t recall Michael confessing ‘because it didn’t happen.’ ” (30:23)

d. Other Odd Testimony

• Michael Meredith and Andy Pugh (Elan/Skakel associates): Both repeated the “masturbating in a tree” tale, but details varied wildly; Meredith’s version even unintentionally placed Tommy Skakel at the scene.

4. Shaky Defense Choices

• Defense attorney Mickey Sherman pinned blame almost entirely on Skakel tutor Ken Littleton, despite lack of evidence and Littleton’s immunity.
  • “One of the strange strategic choices that Mickey Sherman made was to point all his energy at trying to prove Littleton guilty. It just made no sense to me.” – Jeffrey Toobin (34:12)
• The defense attacked the confession witnesses’ credibility, especially Ridge, but offered little else; no focus placed on Tommy Skakel, previously a primary suspect.

5. Prosecution’s “Twist” – The Shakespeare Testimony

• Andrea “Andy” Shakespeare’s surprise testimony cast doubt on Michael’s alibi:
  • Testified she was certain Michael had not left for his cousin’s house (Sursum Corda) as he’d always claimed—potentially placing him at the scene at 10pm, during the likely window of Martha’s death.
    • “Have you ever had any doubt in your mind about the fact that Michael Skakel was home after that car left from the side driveway? No. From 1975 to today, have you been certain that Michael was home after that car left? Yes.” (39:30)
  • The defense failed to muster reassuring corroboration from the family—memories had faded, and testimony shifted over decades.

6. Closing Arguments – A Dramatic Showdown

• Sherman’s close:

  • “He didn’t do it... He wasn’t there when the crime was committed and he never confessed. That’s the whole case.” (47:00)
  • Dismissed the confession witnesses as dubious and Ridge as an embarrassment to the prosecution.

• Prosecutor Jonathan Benedict’s iconic closing:

  • Crafted “the most reasonable construction of the evidence” out of a patchwork of circumstantial threads.
  • Allowed jurors latitude—whichever narrative they liked, as long as it fell within the 9:30–5:30 window. (49:33)
  • Leveraged Michael’s own voice (from ghostwriter tapes) over crime scene images—a multimedia assault:
    • “Martha likes me. I’ll go get a kiss from Martha. I’ll be bold tonight... booze gave me courage, I guess.” – Michael Skakel, from tapes (53:45)
  • Benedict dramatically reframed Michael’s comments to sound like a tacit confession, distorting the context for emotional impact.
    • “The defendant, for the last 27 years, has been trying to put some spin magic on his meanderings on the night… he needed some kind of an explanation.” (51:12)
  • As the presentation ended, “Dorothy Moxley bellowed with pain. Steven Skakel immediately felt ill.”

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On trial atmosphere:
  • "If the trial were a boxing match, the fighters would be about even on points. In the third round, a little winded, but with no knockout in sight." (14:00)
• On the prosecution’s multimedia climax:
  • “At that point in time, it’s really hard to say you didn’t see what you saw. Right? That’s a big difference than hearing what you heard. It’s more impactful to see what you saw.” – Chris Steele (57:29)
• On the summation:
  • “Jonathan Benedict’s summation was the best summation I ever heard in a courtroom because he did pull a lot of disparate evidence… to make a package of evidence that pointed to guilt.” – Jeffrey Toobin (56:44)

Key Timestamps

• (03:00) – Chris Steele on his role and interactions
• (07:05) – Michael Skakel’s confrontational courtroom behavior
• (08:37) – Steven Skakel on jury perception
• (14:05) – Higgins trial testimony of the Elan confession
• (21:31) – Coleman’s testimony: “I am going to get away with murder because I am a Kennedy”
• (30:23) – Jaron Ridge admits fabricating most of her story
• (34:12) – Toobin critiques defense’s Ken Littleton focus
• (39:30) – Shakespeare’s testimony undermines Michael’s alibi
• (47:00) – Sherman’s opening of his closing argument
• (49:33) – Benedict begins his closing, gives jurors license to choose their preferred timeline
• (53:45) – Michael Skakel’s ghostwriter tapes played for the jury
• (56:44) – Toobin and others praise Benedict’s summation
• (57:29) – Chris Steele on the impact of the state’s multimedia display

Flow & Tone

Goldman delivers the episode with a mix of wry skepticism and narrative urgency, openly critical of the state’s circumstantial strategy and the sometimes dubious defense. The memories and perspectives of courtroom participants and observers are interwoven, often with flashes of dark humor or biting observation. Quotes and transcript readings retain the original voices, whether casual or formal, and the commentary blends journalism with storytelling for immersive effect.

Summary Takeaways

• The Skakel case was swathed in doubt; physical evidence was absent, and much turned on inconsistent confessions and failing memories.
• The prosecution’s multimedia and narrative leverage proved decisive—emotion eclipsed logic in securing a conviction.
• Michael Skakel’s own words, creatively edited and paired with graphic crime scene images, became the case’s emotional climax.
• Decades after the verdict, the question persists: was justice truly served, or was guilt simply performed and believed?

For the next episode:
The fallout from the trial, the lifelong shadow on those accused, and new voices questioning what it means to be “dead certain.”