Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

What do you mean by impeaching evidence from phone calls? Admission of guilt?

I don’t think it was admission of guilt beyond what they’d already made, but he just said a lot of stuff that made him seem insincere and which prosecutors would have brought up on cross examination to make him look really bad to the jury, so the defense decided they couldn’t call him to testify at all. And he was the stronger of the two in terms of witness testimony about the boys’ fear and motivation.

"Seemed" insincere? His lying caught up with him because he IS an insincere, manipulative liar.

Agree. Those two are disgusting, lying POSs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

What do you mean by impeaching evidence from phone calls? Admission of guilt?

I don’t think it was admission of guilt beyond what they’d already made, but he just said a lot of stuff that made him seem insincere and which prosecutors would have brought up on cross examination to make him look really bad to the jury, so the defense decided they couldn’t call him to testify at all. And he was the stronger of the two in terms of witness testimony about the boys’ fear and motivation.

"Seemed" insincere? His lying caught up with him because he IS an insincere, manipulative liar.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

I am the same age as Lyle Menendez and clearly remember both times when he and his brother were on trial.

I do not think the mindset during this time period was that men could not be raped, molested, etc.
I never remember this being a barrier to why their abuse allegations did not exonerate them at the time.

I think the problem that people had w/the abuse allegations were that there just wasn’t enough solid proof to justify the brutal crime that was committed by them.

Even now, I do not think there is solid evidence that they were abused even though I am not ruling it out.
In order for these men to be released into society after such a heinous murder there would need to be substantial proof of abuse to even justify their release.

If these two individuals were truly abused at home, then why did they claim self-defense?
Adding in this element only takes the case in a completely different direction when these brothers now claim that they feared for their own lives.
The only ones who should have feared for their lives were their parents and rightfully so.

End of story.

You have a faulty memory. The prosecutors in the case said on the record in court that men cannot be raped.

“During the trial, a prosecutor told jurors, "Men cannot be raped since they lack the necessary equipment to actually be raped.”

DA Gascon commented on that when the case rose into public consciousness again in the last few years.

It happened, full stop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

What do you mean by impeaching evidence from phone calls? Admission of guilt?

I don’t think it was admission of guilt beyond what they’d already made, but he just said a lot of stuff that made him seem insincere and which prosecutors would have brought up on cross examination to make him look really bad to the jury, so the defense decided they couldn’t call him to testify at all. And he was the stronger of the two in terms of witness testimony about the boys’ fear and motivation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

What do you mean by impeaching evidence from phone calls? Admission of guilt?

I don’t think it was admission of guilt beyond what they’d already made, but he just said a lot of stuff that made him seem insincere and which prosecutors would have brought up on cross examination to make him look really bad to the jury, so the defense decided they couldn’t call him to testify at all. And he was the stronger of the two in terms of witness testimony about the boys’ fear and motivation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a new A&E series that Eric participated in, and I find it very compelling. He says that he and his brother honestly thought their dad was going to kill them when they plotted out and killed the parents. He said he had broken down and told Lyle about what his dad had been doing to him--and still was, and Lyle had confronted the father. He said this had never happened before, and the dad was making very threatening overtures, and they were legitimately scared to death of him.

While I don't feel like it excuses murder, I feel like the boys got screwed on their retrial by a judge with political motivations for ensuring they were convicted. I think they should have the possibility of parole. Hell, their whole family save maybe one uncle supported the boys even at the time of trial. A very sad case.

During their initial (first) trial, sexual allegations against their father was not introduced and there was a mistrial.
During the second trial the abuse allegations were introduced and there was hardly a dry eye in the courtroom I assume.

However these two had no record of ever disclosing the abuse to anyone - except one cousin who one of them had written a letter to months before.
Of course now we also know that a former Menudo member alleges that the father sexually abused him.

These two things are not enough evidence imo to free these two sociopaths from prison.
Because anyone can say they were abused.
And the letter that was written months before the parent’s murder could have been part of the brother’s strategic murder plan.
After all it appears they orchestrated this killing as evidenced by driving to SD to obtain the guns.

If they truly were fearful that their father planned on killing them that fateful night all they had to do was not return home.

They already had a car that they had used to leave the house that evening.

No, you have this wrong. Yes during first trial the sexual abuse was introduced and the defense won them a mistrial.

Then in the second trial the judge denied them the opportunity to introduce most all of the evidence about sexual abuse they’d presented at the first trial, and they were hampered by the older brother’s inability to testify because of impeaching evidence that had come into the hands of the state thanks to his recorded calls with a female admirer while in jail between trials. The defense was much weaker and the jury convicted them of first degree murder.

The Menendez case is in my mind infamous for the assertions in a court of law by the prosecutors that men cannot be raped. Shocking, horrible ignorance.

What do you mean by impeaching evidence from phone calls? Admission of guilt?