re: The Growing Movement to release the Parricidal Menendez Brothers…

quote:

---

Eta, lol just went back and looked, you emotionally defend the mother on account of her being abused but call for life in prison for the boys? That's quite a conclusion to come to

---

Man, this board really needs a remedial reading comprehension class. I think if they were abused by their father, they are excused from what they did to him. But they then proceeded to murder another abuse victim of their father. That's where they have to be held accountable.

There own statements about killing her were that it was a mercy killing because they didn't think she'd be able to live without her husband.

I don't need a remedial lesson in anything. Your premise is completely illogical. The mother allowed it to happen regardless of whatever excuse you make for her. You're holding two kids to a higher standard than am adult whose job was to care for them. Either abuse excuses heinous actions or it doesn't

quote:

---

don't need a remedial lesson in anything.

---

You most definitely do.

quote:

---

The mother allowed it to happen regardless

---

No, not regardless you ignorant rube. She didn't commit murder, they did. That's the standard they're being judged by, she's a deceased victim of abuse.

Did you even read what their statement was as to their reasoning for killing her?

And the weren't kids, they were 21 and 18.

fricking troll.

This whole new resurgence in interest is crazy. I admit that the 3 new productions about the case gave me a renewed want to learn more.

I think it’s hard to put this case in typical boxes due to the actual era that it happened in. For one, the creation of trials being televised. Instead of the process being handled without the public getting every detail on tv, we got the start of the culture of information. In my opinion, this makes everyone more cognizant of their public perception, the judge included.

For two, the stigma of male abuse was still very hush hush. I don’t think anyone would disagree that the perception was that men were not and could not be victims of sexual abuse.

The problem with logic in this one is that we only have testimony from the murderers and no real exculpatory evidence besides a new letter that was found and testimony from family. There’s no diary or Weinstein level accusations to help bolster their claim.

Kitty Menedez is an enigma to me. No, she most certainly deserve to die in the way she did. Did she know about the abuse and help to keep it hidden? We don’t know for certain. Could I see an argument that the brothers thought she would side with the dad and not protect them if his alleged threats were to happen? I probably could.

With those things being said, the most logical defense of the brothers still can’t be proven but definitely creates some doubt. Their statements now are that on the night of the murder, they thought that the parents were planning to kill or otherwise hurt them and were prepared for this and it was “go time.” To be fair, this defense is predicated on the notion that the father had threatened serious harm or death with the abuse becoming public knowledge. We have one brother who wanted to move away for college but was told that he would go to UCLA and live in the house and another brother who confronted the father about the continued abuse of the younger sibling and was told that it was to never be brought up again.

Again, adding these alleged incidents with a father who was a very powerful and aggressive business man makes a compelling argument for the defense. Where this fails for me is that there will never be any evidence to help prove it. They are guilty of killing their parents, that is an absolute truth. The motives are tougher. Money as the motive? They already had, and spent, that type of money before the killings. However, I do see a case where Dad puts the brakes on what they think they deserve and it adds fuel to their fires.

My last point in this comment is about the two trials. I see where coming two weeks after the embarrassment of OJ could make the justice department in LA put the screws to this case and do whatever is necessary to get a conviction, including keeping out testimony for a defense. Did that happen? I don’t know. It sure makes me think though.

To wrap it up, this case gets the attention it does because it is very divisive, as seen by the comments of this thread. Some will only see murder and money and others take into account the defense that the brothers offered in their first trial.

I honestly think the truth is somewhere in the middle. The dad was likely abusive to some degree with the mother likely hiding things due to her own abuse and preservation of the family. They did kill their parents. It’s an odd dynamic and it’s hard for me to really pick a side.

quote:

---

What's the evidence of this other than the statements provided by the brothers AFTER the double murder?

---

Statements from family members as well as another kid he sexually abused