After a weak argument, a mistrial and several years of waiting, justice has finally been served in the case of the People vs. Lyle and Erik Menendez.
On March 20, a Van Nuys Superior Court jury found the brothers guilty of two counts of murder in the first degree, as well as conspiracy to commit murder. The jury also added special circumstances of murder for lying in wait and multiple murder. These findings qualify the two for the death penalty, which, if instated, will finally bring justice to the victims, Jose and Kitty Menendez.
It is outrageous that it took two trials and two juries to find these brothers guilty of murder, when there was never a defense in the first place.
While the “abuse excuse” may have left the first jury deadlocked between manslaughter and first degree murder charges, the second jury saw right through the defendants’ shallow pleas.
On the second day of testimony, Erik overdramatized his abusive life in front of the jury, appearing on the brink of tears while recounting each painful statement. He testified that he was abused by his father beginning at the age of 6 and by age 11 it left him feeling “icky and dirty.”
More than 20 years later, Erik could no longer stand the abuse and opened fire on his parents while they were in the living room watching television.
The fact that the brothers obviously initiated the confrontation eliminated the possibility of self-defense and forced the defense to grab for straws throughout the rest of the re-trial.
First, they pleaded for the “flannel defense,” also known as “imperfect self-defense,” which meant that the brothers openly admitted to murdering their parents but “held an honest but unreasonable belief” that it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent themselves from being in imminent peril of their lives. In other words, it meant they felt the only option open to them was to murder their parents in cold blood.
This most likely did not convince the jury because two grown men have every opportunity to leave a situation if it were indeed as horrible as the brothers cried on the stand. And of course, there was no immediate peril, with their parents contently eating their ice cream while sitting on the couch.
The prosecution’s witnesses also uncovered many inconsistencies in the defense’s arguments.
Klara Wright, whose son played on the junior tennis circuit with Erik, testified to arriving at the Menendez mansion the morning after the killings. When she met Erik he told her that his parents had been murdered the night before. She said Erik was so excited that he could not get the words out fast enough. Yet, just as quickly, he asked if her husband, an attorney, could handle wills and probate cases.
This would fall under the “out-to-inherit-millions” theory for the murder.
Also testifying was Jamie Pisarcik, a former tennis pro and former fiancée of Lyle’s. She testified that Lyle told her that his parents were killed by the Mob. After his arrest, he quickly changed his story and admitted that he had killed them because of abuse.
This contributed to the idea that the abuse theory was concocted after the arrest of the panic-stricken brothers.
Another convenient tool used by the defense was placing only one brother on the stand in the retrial, which would prevent any inconsistencies in the falsified story.
Having hit nearly every possible excuse for cold-blooded murder in history, they nearly forgot Erik’s claim to mental illness, but it did not hold up, either.
Left with no other excuses for their behavior, the two sides gave closing arguments and only days later, the jury came back with verdicts that should have been given during the first trial. Hopefully, as the trial enters the penalty phase, the jury will once again come to a speedy decision that will let Kitty and Jose rest in peace once and for all.
