CA - Court upholds Menendez brothers' convictions

[neesaki]

Sorry.

But they confessed and it wasn't self defense.

Now the sexual abuse would only work for the sentencing mitigating factors.

Just like it worked for the Affluenza Teen who killed 4 people and got probation.

So the judge obviously didn't take the sexual abuse seriously since they got the max sentence.

So imo. The judge knew but didn't allow the jurors to know.

But the judge still showed not one care , which means they were not buying the reason at all.

So the verdict was right. But the judge is the one to be upset with. Jmo.

Im just surprised that the million dollar lawyers couldn't get the sentence reduced or partly suspended or something.

I agree with you actually, it wasn't self defense, and the verdict was right as to guilt, but then the mitigating factors, as you make a good point of bringing out, are what should have played a part in the sentencing. That's what the sentencing should have taken into consideration, as well as the appeals. Yes, the judge is the one to be upset with. JMO

 

[Noirdame79]

No, not naive at all. We'll agree to disagree. Regarding the above photo, with the boys on Jose's lap, I think it's pretty clear that it is you, in fact, who is seeing what you want to see. I'm loathe to defend anyone in this whole mess, but no, Jose is not "clearly fondling" Lyle's genitals. In a case as sordid as this, there's no need for hyperbole and mischaracterization in order to heighten the titillation factor. The fact that they attempt to excuse their actions by claiming to have been sexually assaulted by their father is repellant and an affront to sexual abuse victims everywhere. Good riddance to all 4 of them.

No, it is not just me. Other people have mentioned this as well; that photo was put on display during the first trial by the defense and the brothers were directly questioned about it. Show me another photo like that and we can have a debate. The brothers did not say it excused the murder of their parents, only that their state of mind and judgement was impaired because of the abuse they had suffered and that Jose had made threats when Lyle told his father that he would expose him as a child molester. They have both said that what they did was not right or justifiable, but that they were not thinking clearly at the time. No one is excusing the crime they committed; but when looking at cases and trying to determine motive it is important that both sides be examined. Predators are shielded in Hollywood, that is a fact. You also have not addressed the naked photos taken when they were kids or the fact that Jose has been accused of sexual abuse by other people too. Talk about seeing what you want to see!

 

[Noirdame79]

I agree with you actually, it wasn't self defense, and the verdict was right as to guilt, but then the mitigating factors, as you make a good point of bringing out, are what should have played a part in the sentencing. That's what the sentencing should have taken into consideration, as well as the appeals. Yes, the judge is the one to be upset with. JMO

The problem was, the judge made sure that that jury didn't hear corroborating testimony of abuse until after conviction. As I stated in my earlier post, he had also presided over the first trial and did not want another hung jury; what he did was unethical, which is probably one of the reasons why he didn't allow television coverage in the second trial.

 

[DexterMorgan]

The problem was, the judge made sure that that jury didn't hear corroborating testimony of abuse until after conviction. As I stated in my earlier post, he had also presided over the first trial and did not want another hung jury; what he did was unethical, which is probably one of the reasons why he didn't allow television coverage in the second trial.

Great.

So you are basically saying that the verdict was right but the judge was wrong for not showing them lienicy during the sentencing phase.

Or are you saying that the verdict was wrong because the judge nor the appeals court allowed the killers to mention the abuse while the parents are not here to tell their side or what?

Now I understand that 1 million people would have testified to back up the boys claims of abuse.

But some also could have been motivated to want to do so, since the brothers would have inherited big millions if cleared of the charges.

But I do agree that it was a big case just like the Rodney King and OJ case.

So the state definitely did probably show bias towards them.

But it also happens everyday with impoverished kids on trial as well.

So I somewhat agree with you to a point.

 

[animlzrule]

No, it is not just me. Other people have mentioned this as well; that photo was put on display during the first trial by the defense and the brothers were directly questioned about it. Show me another photo like that and we can have a debate. The brothers did not say it excused the murder of their parents, only that their state of mind and judgement was impaired because of the abuse they had suffered and that Jose had made threats when Lyle told his father that he would expose him as a child molester. They have both said that what they did was not right or justifiable, but that they were not thinking clearly at the time. No one is excusing the crime they committed; but when looking at cases and trying to determine motive it is important that both sides be examined. Predators are shielded in Hollywood, that is a fact. You also have not addressed the naked photos taken when they were kids or the fact that Jose has been accused of sexual abuse by other people too. Talk about seeing what you want to see!

My intention was not to have a point by point rebuttal of your posts. Predators are shielded everywhere, this isn't a Hollywood thing. FGS, the "president" of this country is a predator. It's obvious looking at the photo to which you refer as clear evidence of fondling, shows that Lyle has perfectly relaxed hands and a relaxed torso. In fact, his legs are relaxed too. There's nothing in that picture other than a father holding his child on his lap. I don't care about the Menudo allegations, or the other photo. In hindsight, one can make anything seem nefarious, or claim anything without substantiation as is being done here. When there are so many other cases with actual documented proven abuse and resultant homicidal violence available to dissect, why this one? Their side WAS examined, and the sexual abuse allegations were determined to be false. It's curious to me that one would spend so much time trying to mitigate the actions of two entitled, spoiled, cunning and manipulative killers when there is so much real injustice out there in our court and prison systems. Oh well. Everyone needs a hobby, I guess.

 

[Noirdame79]

Great.

So you are basically saying that the verdict was right but the judge was wrong for not showing them lienicy during the sentencing phase.

Or are you saying that the verdict was wrong because the judge nor the appeals court allowed the killers to mention the abuse while the parents are not here to tell their side or what?

Now I understand that 1 million people would have testified to back up the boys claims of abuse.

But some also could have been motivated to want to do so, since the brothers would have inherited big millions if cleared of the charges.

But I do agree that it was a big case just like the Rodney King and OJ case.

So the state definitely did probably show bias towards them.

But it also happens everyday with impoverished kids on trial as well.

So I somewhat agree with you to a point.

We can agree to disagree, but everyone is entitled to a defense under the law, and the Menendez brothers were deprived of one during their second trial, something that prosecutor David Conn justified to the press after the verdict. Whatever way it would have gone, who knows. I can't really answer that because I don't know what would have happened.

As for the millions that you say would have benefited the defense witnesses, well, by the second trial the Menendez fortune was pretty much gone, thanks in large part to legal fees. That's why in the second trial Lyle's attorney was a public defender and Erik's attorney had to take a significant pay cut compared to what she had demanded the first time around. Family members continue to support the brothers and those who can have corroborated much of their abuse claims. Alicia Hercz, one-time neighbor in Princeton who taught at Princeton Day school continues to maintain that the family was very dysfunctional and she also served as a defense witness. Very few people have anything good to say about Jose Menendez, even now.

 

[Noirdame79]

My intention was not to have a point by point rebuttal of your posts. Predators are shielded everywhere, this isn't a Hollywood thing. FGS, the "president" of this country is a predator. It's obvious looking at the photo to which you refer as clear evidence of fondling, shows that Lyle has perfectly relaxed hands and a relaxed torso. In fact, his legs are relaxed too. There's nothing in that picture other than a father holding his child on his lap. I don't care about the Menudo allegations, or the other photo. In hindsight, one can make anything seem nefarious, or claim anything without substantiation as is being done here. When there are so many other cases with actual documented proven abuse and resultant homicidal violence available to dissect, why this one? Their side WAS examined, and the sexual abuse allegations were determined to be false. It's curious to me that one would spend so much time trying to mitigate the actions of two entitled, spoiled, cunning and manipulative killers when there is so much real injustice out there in our court and prison systems. Oh well. Everyone needs a hobby, I guess.

I personally believe that the sexual abuse happened, but I don't claim to know for a fact that it did. I'm just presenting things that I view as corroboration. How exactly was it "determined to be false"? Please be so bold as to name your source? Just because the prosecution didn't believe it proves NOTHING. You don't care about the Menudo stuff (and there were allegations against him) or the rest of it, fine. But do you also know that that majority of family members still support and believe the brothers? Or that the judge and prosecution went out of their way to deprive the brothers of a defense during the second trial because they were desperate to get a conviction? Or that the some of the jurors in retrospect stated that had they heard more about the family history, they would not have voted for first-degree murder?

Yeah, because the fact that Lyle and Erik were born into wealth and were spoiled materially was ALL their fault and their parents bore absolutely no responsibility for that. Or the fact that they were not taught morals or ethics and were treated like property rather than human beings was all their doing, right?

I am well aware that there are predators everywhere; the reason why I mentioned it for this case is because sexual abuse is rampant in Hollywood and Jose happened to be an executive in that industry. I am also aware that there are cases of injustice; this one just happens to be something that I have studied and I am allowed to have interest in it. Nobody forced you to take part in this thread and it's rather immature to ridicule someone for having a different opinion.

 

[DexterMorgan]

We can agree to disagree, but everyone is entitled to a defense under the law, and the Menendez brothers were deprived of one during their second trial, something that prosecutor David Conn justified to the press after the verdict. Whatever way it would have gone, who knows. I can't really answer that because I don't know what would have happened.

As for the millions that you say would have benefited the defense witnesses, well, by the second trial the Menendez fortune was pretty much gone, thanks in large part to legal fees. That's why in the second trial Lyle's attorney was a public defender and Erik's attorney had to take a significant pay cut compared to what she had demanded the first time around. Family members continue to support the brothers and those who can have corroborated much of their abuse claims. Alicia Hercz, one-time neighbor in Princeton who taught at Princeton Day school continues to maintain that the family was very dysfunctional and she also served as a defense witness. Very few people have anything good to say about Jose Menendez, even now.

You are right. Everyone deserves a proper defense.

But unless a perp is pleading self defense or doctors deem them as 51/50.

Then those are the only defenses allowed for a true not guilty verdict. Jmo. But I respect yours as well.

 

[Noirdame79]

You are right. Everyone deserves a proper defense.

But unless a perp is pleading self defense or doctors deem them as 51/50.

Then those are the only defenses allowed for a true not guilty verdict. Jmo. But I respect yours as well.

I'm not sure that I would have said they were not guilty but I don't know that if I had been on the jury and I had heard the defense witnesses and evidence if I would have voted for first-degree murder. Yes, they deserved to be punished for what they did, but as you said, the abuse they suffered should have been a factor in the sentencing. Maybe second-degree murder or manslaughter. Lyle and Erik Menendez are the only people alive who know what led up to the killings, and on that we can only speculate. I do think fear was a factor but it clearly was not reasonable, at least not at the moment that it happened.

 

[Swirlz]

I was mesmerized by the televised trial and watched almost all of it The discussion here is interesting. Just to make the point, the defense took the position that the brothers had done nothing wrong. That no crime had been committed other than the crimes Jose and Kitty had committed against their sons. The defense contended that Erik was in imminent danger of forcible raped and that both brothers reasonably believed that they were in danger for their lives and that under the law, given their set of circumstances, they had a right to use lethal force. The judge read a self-defense instruction to the jury. Evidence of prior abuse was allowed in under a California law that had been intended for battered women's defenses.

 

[Noirdame79]

I was mesmerized by the televised trial and watched almost all of it The discussion here is interesting. Just to make the point, the defense took the position that the brothers had done nothing wrong. That no crime had been committed other than the crimes Jose and Kitty had committed against their sons. The defense contended that Erik was in imminent danger of forcible raped and that both brothers reasonably believed that they were in danger for their lives and that under the law, given their set of circumstances, they had a right to use lethal force. The judge read a self-defense instruction to the jury. Evidence of prior abuse was allowed in under a California law that had been intended for battered women's defenses.

Leslie Abramson stated that the brothers believed they were in danger, even if that wasn't actually the case. What they did argue against is the prosecution's theory that it was about money or that it was about having committed "the perfect crime". The defense's argument was an imperfect self-defense, that they were not actually in danger at the time but they believed that they were. They did not say that child abuse was an excuse for murder, but that it creates fear in a person. No doubt the defense was hoping for an acquittal, but their main goal was to spare the brothers from the gas chamber. Abramson hoped that no jury would convict Erik of first-degree murder, and in the second trial, had the jury heard corroborating defense testimony before handing down their verdict the may not have been convicted of first-degree murder. It was later argued that they brothers could not use the battered women's defense because they are men.

 

[neesaki]

I haven't seen the details of the sex abuse claims that are reported in this article. Also wasn't aware the mother allegedly was involved in the sexual abuse. As well as Jose making Lyle molest his brother, Eric. If this is all true it's beyond horrific and that was one evil, perverted man. And the mother , how sickening! I honestly don't believe these young men would say such horrible things if not true because it would be so humiliating.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-boys-molested-brutally-murdered-parents.html

 

[Noirdame79]

When I resurrected this thread some months ago, I pretty much expected to be the only person posting; I didn't expect it to take on the life that it has, and I mean that in a positive way. My interest in the case started in 1996, with the verdict of the second trial and having seen the American Justice episode dedicated to the case. At the time, I was a teenager, struggling to survive in an abusive situation at home and that's probably why this case became of significant interest to me. One thing I want to make clear: I do not condone the murder of Jose and Kitty Menendez by their sons, nor do I think that Lyle and Erik Menendez should not have been punished for their crime, but I felt that the media is slanted toward the prosecution's theory and tends to ridicule and dismiss the abuse allegations, purely because the brothers came from a wealthy family and until recently, there has been a tendency to disbelieve males who have been abused. I'd like to think that we know more now and have a deeper understanding, especially with the revelations in recent years of sexual abuse of children and teenagers in the entertainment industry, and as I have noted, Jose Menendez was an entertainment executive and has been implicated in the Menudo sexual abuse scandal and that information did not come from me.

We mostly engage in healthy debates here, but if anyone has ever felt that they were personally attacked in this thread I apologize, as that was not my intention in posting in this thread.

I just want to make it clear that I don't know the Menendez brothers or anyone associated with their case personally; this is all my own opinion and research. On other sites I have actually been accused of ridiculous things; on youtube, especially, I was once accused of being one of the brothers' wives (that one really got me laughing, as I don't even live in the US), or that I am smearing the "good name" of Jose Menendez. That is something else that I can't really take seriously; as much as he and his wife were murder victims, I am certainly not the only one to have a negative opinion of him; even former prosecutor Pamela Bozanich admitted that she was later told by people who knew Jose that he was "one of the most horrible people on earth". After the murders, Lyle was sent an note by Warren Hudson, who had worked at the Hercz corporation while Jose was general manager:

Having worked under your father and been on the receiving end of more than one of his tirades and having been witness to his destroying people in business meetings, actually reducing grown men to tears, I was wondering if I could ask you a question? I was just wondering if Jose was a whimpering piece of **** when the other guys(s) had the big guns and all the power on their side, or if he was still super macho, Mr. Arrogance and spit in their eye. When all the stories came out about the Beverly Hills police department 'interviewing' everyone who might have had a motive to kill Jose, I called to ask them why they never contacted me . . . . and lots of other Hertz people . . . . I explained to them that I would have done the job for nothing, but at the least, I would want to shake the hand of the actual killer(s).

I am not forgetting that Jose was a murder victim, but he was most certainly NOT innocent and in my opinion, he smeared his own name by being a horrible person and a rotten husband and father, who cared only for himself and what he felt the world owed him. Kitty was something of a victim in her own right, but she failed to protect her sons and this is what ultimately, led to her death, IMO. It doesn't make it right or acceptable, but given the circumstances, Jose and Kitty did bear some degree of responsibility as to the environment that they created. As I said before, it is never mentioned in documentaries that Jose and Kitty owned guns themselves or that Lyle and Erik are not the only ones who have accused their father of sexual abuse. But Hollywood produces these documentaries and they are not to going to expose one of their own, even one who has been dead nearly 30 years.

As long as I am able and as long as there is interest in the case I will continue to post and update. Thank you all for making this thread as active as it is.

NOTE: I made a mistake when I stated in an earlier post as to where Erik Menendez is currently incarcerated. He is in Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga, California; his job position in the prison hospice and his determination to further his education still stands. I apologize for the error.

 

[Swirlz]

The defense adamantly argued for a standard self-defense instruction as opposed to imperfect self-defense. Leslie Abramson took the position publicly that if the brothers had left, Jose would have or could have had them killed. Both defense attorneys argued that Erik was in imminent danger of forcible rape. Leslie Abramson stated publicly that manslaughter was the only charge Erik would ever be willing to plead guilty to.

 

[Noirdame79]

The defense adamantly argued for a standard self-defense instruction as opposed to imperfect self-defense. Leslie Abramson took the position publicly that if the brothers had left, Jose would have or could have had them killed. Both defense attorneys argued that Erik was in imminent danger of forcible rape. Leslie Abramson stated publicly that manslaughter was the only charge Erik would ever be willing to plead guilty to.

It's possible that Jose could have done that, but we'll never know. Perpetrators often do threaten victims. Erik stated that he felt that his father was going to rape him that night, and was going to kill him and Lyle that night and their mother was in on it. Was that actually the case, at least at the time they shot their parents? It didn't look like it. Manslaughter, well I could see why Erik agreed with that, since he stated that he felt his life was threatened at that time. That didn't mean that it actually was true at least not at that actual time. But if Jose did rape Erik before, there's no reason to think that it wouldn't have happened again at some point.

 

[Swirlz]

This article is old (like me) but I thought it was interesting: Killers as Victims: Defending Menendez Brothers

Speaking to reporters recently, Leslie Abramson, the lawyer for Lyle Menendez, described that theory this way: "Given what they knew about their parents, their fear at that point is unquestionably genuine. So whether they were right or whether they were wrong in the way it turned out doesn't mean that at the time they acted they didn't reasonably believe they were in danger. And that is all the law requires."

It was their lawyers' innovation to seek to apply to child abuse the precedents that have been developed in battered-wife cases, in which a spouse is so scarred by years of abuse that she may finally strike out in self-defense at a moment when she actually faces little objective threat.

The article contains a minor factual error. Leslie Abramson was Erik, and not Lyle's attorney.

 

[Scarlettabby]

Actually Lyle posted Erik's mailing addy on his FB page a few weeks ago and Erik is at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego. Very interesting thread.

 

[Noirdame79]

Actually Lyle posted Erik's mailing addy on his FB page a few weeks ago and Erik is at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego. Very interesting thread.

Wow, how confusing, LOL. Lyle would know since he writes to Erik.

 

[Noirdame79]

Jose, Kitty, and newborn Lyle, The Bronx, New York, 1968

Erik

Jose and Lyle

Lyle, Jose, Kitty, and Erik, Princeton, New Jersey, circa 1984

 

[Noirdame79]

Erik and his former "best friend", Craig Cignarelli

Erik and his parents at his high school graduation ceremony, Beverly Hills High School, 1989

Erik and Lyle