One of the menendez brothers married his lawyer but maybe he's not on death row.
I dont think he gave up the location for a plea deal because if he did his lawyer would be involved with the negotiation I would think. Instead the old one quit I'm guessing because he can't have a good case with the body discovered and the new one canceled his Saturday afternoon news conference and stopped with his he's innocent statements has been quiet suddenly. Before they found the body the new lawyer said his arrest was a rush to judgment by th sheriff's department
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/07/01/us/california-boy-body-found/index.html and after they found the body suddenly says it's a sad day.
Plus the body was found around 4am as if it was an independent decision he had in the middle of the night around the same time he had committed the crime as if he had this desire to revisit the site.
Or maybe it was his new lawyer's idea to tell LE where the body was. As a former DA maybe he calculated it was a powerful negotiating chip and was the best time to cut a good plea deal.
Whether on death row or sentenced to LWOP, conjugal visits are not allowed in CA. But people can get married and ahve a ceremony where they are together. They just can't have sex.
Little man syndrome, enraged that Ara's mother got the better of him and he had to show her that he was a big man, able to make her pay.
That's exactly it. He was filled with impotent rage because she left him, so he hurt her the best way he knew how. I think he's proud of himself.
I understand defense attorneys are necessary and important <modsnip> In this situation it would be better to simply say "We are all filled with sorrow due to the discovery of little Aramazd's body. Please take a moment to send your thoughts and prayers to those who grieve for him tonight. Mr Andressian has no comment at this time."
That would be classy and respectful without influencing any future jury in any way. It just DISGUSTS ME that he has to say "he's not guilty and he's grieving like everyone else" when he's been partying it up in Vegas for weeks.
Me too. It's also baffling. It seems so crazy. How can attorneys make completely ridiculous statements like that with a straight face. It makes them seem unhinged. I have to litigate against a couple now and then and I just think they lack any sense of ethics and are outrageous liars. I don't understand how they think they can make crazy statement like that and have anyone believe them. Does it ever work? Because they keep doing it. (Most are not crazy like that).
Assuming the boy was alive when grandma and aunt were dropped off after Disneyland let's say at 1:45am, then how could he say the boy accidentally died when he lived a few minutes away and instead drove 2 hours to Santa Barbara? That plus I would guess his computer was full of searches on how to kill and discard a body since LE stated with certainty it was preplanned. Plus I'm guessing the autopsy will rule out a lot of fake excuses he may make and ideally point out to how he was killed which might match some of his Internet searches.
For example in CA case she had made 83 searches on chloroform on her computer the prior month including how to make it and traces were found on the duct tape and body (yet jury said since they didn't know exactly how the child was killed, even though they thought she killed her, that they couldn't convict her). Anyone know if that's the law in CA, that the precise method of killing must be determined in order to convict? I'm guessing not since it was stated at PC they've made convictions without even a body.
Other potential holes in the story: Sr. tells LE April 22 morning at Arroyo park that he brought boy with him but doesn't remember what happened to him or when he last saw him, denies he's dead and wants him found yet 2 months later remembers the exact remote location he had placed his dead body prior to going to Arroyo park.
He tells LE boy with him at lake but surveillance shows he enters leaves park without him. The former DA/his new lawyer will come up with some fascinating story imo but it will be an uphill battle to convince people when there's so much evidence imo.
I dont care what he says LE has good evidence that he planned it even before his body was found thats why they were able to charge him with murder. Now they have his body a more solid case.
Oh yeah. He's going down. I mean he said he was at the Lake the day before, and then he is found over an hour away, high on pills, lying outside his car which is soaked with gas, claiming he doesn't remember what happened? And then his son's body is found exactly where he was the day before!
Does he believe some random person decided to hit him over the head, grab his son, place his son somewhere, then douse the car with gasoline, inexplicably run off before lighting it, and then take his son coincidentally back to the very place the defendant was at the day before, and hide little Ara's body there?
No one but an insane person is going to believe that.
Oh and if he tries to say he was crazy, well he seemed to be doing quit fine in Vegas, having a blast. If he was momentarily crazy but no longer is, then he would be continuously distraught after the fact, in light of the disappearance of his son, not yucking it up all over the place. And if he remained out of his mind, he wouldn't be able to get to Vegas, dye his hair and shave, trying to change his appearance, and run around town having fun.
It's utterly nonsensical.
