CA - Court upholds Menendez brothers' convictions

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I am so torn over this as a feel like they are getting a lot of press because they are White Good looking guys. You only have to see TikTok videos about them from their girl fan base.

So would this be happening if they were BAME?

They brutally gunned down their parents in the most barbaric of circumstances and they have since admitted the parents were no threat to them that night. But then they have been model prisoners and served over 30 years so I guess they have done their time.

Calling it now: first stop will be divorce lawyers. The newly released brothers will be ready for some heavy pocket book women to keep them in the lifestyle they were accustomed to prior to incarceration. JMO
 
This was my understanding of the first 17 seconds of the announcement:

The murderers, who will remain convicted and sentenced as murderers, are re-sentenced to 50 years in prison (rather than life sentence). This means they fall under the rule that murderers who were under the age of 26 at the time of the murders would be eligible for parole today (after 35 years in prison).

Sound right?

I'm curious ... does that rule about being under age 26 at time of murder kick in after 35 years in prison?
 
Calling it now: first stop will be divorce lawyers. The newly released brothers will be ready for some heavy pocket book women to keep them in the lifestyle they were accustomed to prior to incarceration. JMO
I'm curious how they will go forward. Will they be thankful, and live quiet, private lives? OR will they hit the book tour and seek to profit from the murders again?

Is it legal for convicted murderers to publish books about their murders, maybe as child victims of murdered parents? Son of Sam law? What about media tours - is that allowed, even though it's profiting from the murders?
 
I am so happy for them. I honestly hope they get a second chance at life and that if and when they do get out, the can live private, peaceful, happy lives. They certainly cant get back all the lost time. I agree that they should have served time and been punished, but the punishment was completely out of line. They have served their time and been punished enough. Both by the judicial system and in the public eye..
 
I'm curious how they will go forward. Will they be thankful, and live quiet, private lives? OR will they hit the book tour and seek to profit from the murders again?

Is it legal for convicted murderers to publish books about their murders, maybe as child victims of murdered parents? Son of Sam law? What about media tours - is that allowed, even though it's profiting from the murders?

That's too much work. I think they'd just aspire to marry money. It's a fact there are plenty of wealthy but lonely men and women who are willing to keep house with killers-- not to be alone. Connecting with L or E would be seen as greatly improving their social calendar. MOO
 
I'm curious how they will go forward. Will they be thankful, and live quiet, private lives? OR will they hit the book tour and seek to profit from the murders again?

Is it legal for convicted murderers to publish books about their murders, maybe as child victims of murdered parents? Son of Sam law? What about media tours - is that allowed, even though it's profiting from the murders?
No son of Sam law in California, it was ruled to impinge on free speech.

But family of victims can file against the defendant, as happened with OJ's book.

Most of the family are supportive of the brothers, but they may face a suit from KM's brother if they choose to write their story, as he opposed the bid for their resentencing.


MOO
 
There's still a chance that the resentencing won't happen... That said, they let Gypsy Rose Blanchard out (who deserves to be still incarcerated imo) so who knows, especially with it being such a 'hot topic' in society today.

I've followed the case forever, watched every second of trial footage half a dozen times over as well as read/watched everything to do with the case and my emotional opinion ducks and weaves at different times. Sometimes I believe the sexual abuse allegations (to an extent) and sometimes I believe that they're two crafty men who were at most bossed around and pressured to be the best by their father and ignored by their mother. Regardless, they still killed their parents in a brutal way and whilst abuse can be a mitigating factor, it doesn't get them a get out of jail free card. What doesn't duck and weave at all though is my logical/professional/educational opinion that regardless of abuse or not, it was a beyond reasonable doubt proven financially motivated and fully premeditated murder. There was no self defense aspect at all that was proven and I cringe every time I watch Burgess on the stand in this case and wish so much she had have listened to her colleagues.

That's the thing now though with social media and celebrities, the justice system feels a sense of pressure and there's all the 'Innocence p*&n' flying around. One only needs to look at the wave of loons who are making their own scientist badges and PhD's and screaming how Lucy Letby is innocent! Same with cases like this, IF they were abused then yes it's appalling and should have been a mitigating factor at sentencing, however they literally blew away their unarmed and seated parents with shotguns in a pre planned murder and people are crying they shouldn't have been found guilty and/or shouldn't be in prison... What sort of precedent is that setting really?

All imo ofc

***EDIT TO ADD***
The above said, part of me thinks that serving 35 years is a decent sentence and given their records whilst being incarcerated, IF this is successful I believe they should get the chance to go up to the parole board and let them decide. Then IF released, there should be something put in place where they simply cannot profit from anything to do with their parents or the murders.
 
My heart aches for the little boys who suffered the SA. By their father no less. I hope they are freed and go on to live as normal life as possible.

Well in that case, hypothetically speaking of course, every felon doing time in CA should be allowed to walk free -- if they state they were abused as kids, without proof to back it up.
Regardless of that criminal's crimes, no less.

Murdering your parents seems, imo, 10x worse than a killing a store clerk while in the middle of a robbery.
Not to minimize murder during a robbery... that's terrible as well.
But the people who raised you ?
Agree to disagree, that's all.

Outside of hearsay, there's simply no proof.
The family members advocating for Eric and Lyle, why were they silent before ?
Going back outside to reload and pressing the barrel of the rifle against your own mother's face is unspeakably horrendous.
Nauseating.

At the ages of 18 and 21 they could have left.
They could have taken their dad to court and pressed charges.
Their mother was collateral damage and apparently neither Lyle nor Eric had an issue with that.

My heart aches for two people who were never allowed to give their side of the story.

Imo, I wouldn't want the brothers living anywhere near me !
I would never feel completely safe.
Omo.
 
Last edited:
There's still a chance that the resentencing won't happen... That said, they let Gypsy Rose Blanchard out (who deserves to be still incarcerated imo) so who knows, especially with it being such a 'hot topic' in society today.

I've followed the case forever, watched every second of trial footage half a dozen times over as well as read/watched everything to do with the case and my emotional opinion ducks and weaves at different times. Sometimes I believe the sexual abuse allegations (to an extent) and sometimes I believe that they're two crafty men who were at most bossed around and pressured to be the best by their father and ignored by their mother. Regardless, they still killed their parents in a brutal way and whilst abuse can be a mitigating factor, it doesn't get them a get out of jail free card. What doesn't duck and weave at all though is my logical/professional/educational opinion that regardless of abuse or not, it was a beyond reasonable doubt proven financially motivated and fully premeditated murder. There was no self defense aspect at all that was proven and I cringe every time I watch Burgess on the stand in this case and wish so much she had have listened to her colleagues.

That's the thing now though with social media and celebrities, the justice system feels a sense of pressure and there's all the 'Innocence p*&n' flying around. One only needs to look at the wave of loons who are making their own scientist badges and PhD's and screaming how Lucy Letby is innocent! Same with cases like this, IF they were abused then yes it's appalling and should have been a mitigating factor at sentencing, however they literally blew away their unarmed and seated parents with shotguns in a pre planned murder and people are crying they shouldn't have been found guilty and/or shouldn't be in prison... What sort of precedent is that setting really?

All imo ofc

***EDIT TO ADD***
The above said, part of me thinks that serving 35 years is a decent sentence and given their records whilst being incarcerated, IF this is successful I believe they should get the chance to go up to the parole board and let them decide. Then IF released, there should be something put in place where they simply cannot profit from anything to do with their parents or the murders.
The parents were standing when they were shot; the medical examiner. Dr. Irwin Golden, confirmed this in his testimony at the first trial.

Dr. Ann Burgess has maintained her stance in this case; she's also a crime scene analyst and her conclusion is that it was done out of fear and the overkill at the crime scene supports that. As I've mentioned before, Lyle and Erik were always going to serve time. They've been incarcerated since 1990. An acquittal was not going to happen. If they had been convicted of manslaughter, they probably would have served 25 years - 10 years for each parent, plus a weapons charge. It was never going to be a get out of jail free card. As I previously stated, killing your abuser is not the same as targeting random or innocent people.

There's no question they were abused, IMO. There is more than enough evidence and eyewitness testimony. Dr. Burgess was not the only expert witness who came to the conclusion that the brothers were abused and in fear. Dr. John Conte, Dr. Stuart Hart, and Dr. Ann Tyler came to the same conclusion. The fact that the prosecution in the first trial chose not to call their own experts speaks volumes.

MOO
 
Last edited:
This was my understanding of the first 17 seconds of the announcement:

The murderers, who will remain convicted and sentenced as murderers, are re-sentenced to 50 years in prison (rather than life sentence). This means they fall under the rule that murderers who were under the age of 26 at the time of the murders would be eligible for parole today (after 35 years in prison).

Sound right?

I'm curious ... does that rule about being under age 26 at time of murder kick in after 35 years in prison?

I believe they became eligible for parole after serving 25 years. I'm sure sympathizers will argue they've already served 10 years more than required under the new sentence guidelines. JMO

 
The parents were standing when they were shot; the medical examiner. Dr. Irwin Golden, confirmed this in his testimony at the first trial.

Dr. Ann Burgess has maintained her stance in this case; she's also a crime scene analyst and her conclusion is that it was done out of fear and the overkill at the crime scene supports that. As I've mentioned before, Lyle and Erik were always going to serve time. They've been incarcerated since 1990. An acquittal was not going to happen. If they had been convicted of manslaughter, they probably would have served 25 years - 10 years for each parent, plus a weapons charge. It was never going to be a get out of jail free card. As I previously stated, killing your abuser is not the same as targeting random or innocent people.

There's no question they were abused, IMO. There is more than enough evidence and eyewitness testimony. Dr. Burgess was not the only expert witness who came to the conclusion that the brothers were abused and in fear. Dr. John Conte, Dr. Stuart Hart, and Dr. Ann Tyler came to the same conclusion. The fact that the prosecution in the first trial chose not to call their own experts speaks volumes.

MOO

Lyle's own words:

“I really don’t have any particular memory of why I did some of these things that don’t make particular sense,” he protested when Bozanich tried repeatedly to push him beyond vague answers.

“I remember bursting into the room,” he said. “I remember some very vague things and then I remember it being over.”

Bozanich pressed him again. “When you went into that room and shot your parents, they were eating blueberries and ice cream?” she asked.

The issue of whether there were blueberries and ice cream in the room that night remains in hot dispute. Because the brothers are charged with the special circumstance of murder while lying in wait, the image of the parents enjoying such a desert would serve as a powerful suggestion of an ambush.

Defense lawyer Leslie Abramson objected to the prosecutor’s question and Van Nuys Superior Court Judge Stanley M. Weisberg sustained the objection without explanation.

Undeterred, Bozanich showed Lyle Menendez a photo of the room taken after the killings, pointing out the items on the coffee table: a glass with liquid in it, a container with a spoon and a white substance, a Michael Jackson cassette tape, a cigarette lighter and some papers from UCLA, where Erik Menendez was due to enroll within weeks.

“What on this coffee table was threatening you?” she asked.

“Nothing,” Lyle Menendez said.

Speaking of Jose Menendez, Bozanich said: “He didn’t threaten you? He didn’t have a weapon? He didn’t do anything out of the ordinary?”

“Well, yes, he closed the doors,” Lyle Menendez said, meaning the doors to the TV room. That simple act convinced him death was “more than near,” he said.

Bozanich asked if closing the doors was the “last straw.”

“It wasn’t the last straw,” he said. “It was the last thing I remember before I panicked.”

The brothers ran outside to Erik Menendez’s car, loaded their shotguns and ran back in, toward the TV room, Lyle Menendez said.

“I just remember going in, it was dark . . . someone was coming toward me on the right, like a shadow,” he said, adding that the figure turned out to be his father. He said he began firing wildly.

Jose Menendez “was not rising. He was standing. I just kept firing,” the son said.

Someone else was off to his left. “I’m not sure at what point I realized the person to my left was my mother,” he said.

After firing several shots, Lyle Menendez said, he put the 12-gauge shotgun against the back of his father’s head and pulled the trigger.

“Was he seated or standing?” Bozanich asked.

“I guess I was over him,” he said. “Because I was over a little to the side of the couch.”


“I didn’t put it up against his head on purpose,” he added. “. . . It was just a rush and me firing.”

“When you went to the area behind the sofa and unintentionally put the gun against your father’s head and pulled the trigger, where was your mother?” Bozanich asked.

“She was sort of sneaking around the side of the coffee table,” he said.

“You said your mother was sneaking,” Bozanich said. “Did you think she was going to do something sneaky to you?”

“No. I thought we were in danger still,” he said, adding that something about the sight “caused me to freak out and run out of the room,” to the car, where he grabbed one more shell and loaded it in the shotgun.

“When I went outside to reload,” he said, “I was confused and afraid and I wasn’t thinking even these were my parents. I was thinking, ‘Danger!’ And going through the motions.”

He said he ran back to a room “filled with smoke. You could not see well at all. I could barely see that area that freaked me out and I ran over to it.”

“And then you pulled the trigger?” Bozanich asked.

Lyle Menendez sighed deeply. “Yes,” he said.

Later, Bozanich said, “Your mother wasn’t sneaking. She was trying to get away from being shot to death?”

“I don’t know,” Lyle Menendez said. “I really don’t.”

Autopsy reports indicate that Kitty Menendez was shot 10 times. One of the fatal wounds was a contact wound to the left cheek, meaning she was hit with the gun muzzle against her skin.

Lyle Menendez said he had no memory of the gun muzzle on her face.

9/24/1993--

 
No son of Sam law in California, it was ruled to impinge on free speech.

But family of victims can file against the defendant, as happened with OJ's book.

Most of the family are supportive of the brothers, but they may face a suit from KM's brother if they choose to write their story, as he opposed the bid for their resentencing.


MOO
Some of Jose and Kitty's family support the reduced sentence, so they might waive rights regarding how their deceased relatives are presented in the media. Some relatives won't waive rights - Kitty's brother.

Kitty's brother does not believe that his sister and her husband were child molesters. There is no evidence that they were. Someone has to protect the victims.

I hope Kitty's brother has children, nieces, or nephews who will benefit when he wins that lawsuit in perpetuity.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
134
Guests online
543
Total visitors
677

Forum statistics

Threads
612,184
Messages
18,290,243
Members
235,531
Latest member
lawskool
Back
Top