Did ANYONE watch the original trial or read Dunne's article? (case, murder)

[Mac216]

This new drama about the Menendez case appears to be biased on the side of the defense without showing everything. There are a lot of things which were either not addressed or not shown. I remember seeing the Barbara Walters interview and thinking, "Why isn't she asking him the hard questions like any good reporter would but just taking their word for things." She asked them for instance why Lyle did not testify in the second trial. He answered that he could not go through with it again but Eric could! Eric could! Bogus. The truth is that the prosecution had evidence that could impeach Lyle's testimony if he dared get on the stand. Walters didn't even question Lyle's reason. Prosecution had a tape of Lyle saying to a friend that they fooled 6 of the jurors now so in the next trial they only needed to persuade 6 more." Here are a few things that we don't see in the trial.
1. A Consultant on the case who specialized in defending kids who kill their parents wrote a book of such incidents. There are many similarities in the cases he cites and Lyle and Eric's accounts. The main one being where Eric states he was up in his bedroom with a shotgun on his lap with his door locked waiting for his father. His father bangs on the door demanding to be let in and eventually leaves with the parting words, "You'll have to come out some time." One of the stories in the Mones book almost mirrors that account exactly. We haven't seen this yet in Eric's testimony but let's see if it is brought up. Jury didn't hear the similarities to their testimony and the book's account. There were other smaller similarities like the Vaseline and Eric listening closely to kids who were talking about sex but not participating in the conversation but listening carefully. Bosanich wanted to show the similarities but for some reason the judge wouldn't let it in.
2. Dominic Dunne discovered a script that Lyle had written for his former girlfriend to relate about almost being poisoned by Kitty. I remember hearing her account on the stand and thinking--this sounds like she is reading from a script BEFORE hearing there really was a script. His cousin's testimony about Lyle telling her his father touches him sounded the same way. Scripted.
3. Defense made a big deal about Donovan Goodreaux's lie. He was caught lying about relating the story on a TV show about Lyle telling him his father molested him. He claimed at trial that Lyle never said anything to him. Okay. Goodreaux lied. But to whom? Did he lie under oath or did he lie to some TV reporter make himself look important or for publicity?
4. After the second trial and the sentencing phase we find out that Abramson had some things Eric told the defense psychiatrist removed from the official records they gave to the police. Eric said he hated his father. Abramson told the shrink that if he didn't remove the statement he couldn't testify. He deleted the statement but somehow the police got the original record. If Abramson could manipulate that evidence what else did she manipulate?
5. The Defense witness who was an "expert" in about 4 or 5 completely unrelated fields like crime scenes, psychology, confessions, nursing, etc. made such a ridiculous statement about the confession I remember LOL at the time. Lyle compared their father's strictness to the Kennedy patriarch, Joe Kennedy. This expert says that she saw they subconsciously thought of the Kennedy assassination and it meant they were afraid they were going to be killed by their father. Come on! And there was this testimony about the brothers acting out of reflex when some chemical is released in the brain just like what happens when worms heads are cut off!
6. Defense made a big deal about the brothers not trusting Oziel to tell him the truth about Eric being molested and then went to great lengths to demonstrate Oziel's bad behavior. Trouble with that is A. Neither Lyle or Eric knew the shady and unprofessional things Oziel had done until it came out in the trial and B. Eric trusted him enough to confess in the first place so why wouldn't he have said his father had been molesting him for years and they were afraid he was going to kill him.
7. Defense made a big deal of the fact that a Will written on a computer was not legal so why would Lyle need to delete it? Another crock of ****. Legal or not it proved Jose's intentions of cutting them out of his Will and certainly showed motive. Besides did Lyle or Eric know a will written on the computer was not legal?

Jose Menendez was a bully and-yes--abusive, cruel man, a monster himself he created wo monsters. Even so I think the whole sexual abuse was a lie. They needed to convince the jury that there was a NHI-non-human involved to gain sympathy. They hated their father, they wanted control over their lives and the money. IMHO

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Mac216

This new drama about the Menendez case appears to be biased on the side of the defense without showing everything. There are a lot of things which were either not addressed or not shown.

It seems that a lot of the recent TV shows/docudramas/anniversary specials about crimes are not accurate. They appear to be made to increase television ratings. At least that's the way it seems in the anniversary shows about the JonBenet Ramsey crime, the special about the Cecil Hotel (Elissa Lam), and the series about O.J. Simpson.

Jose Menendez was a bully and-yes--abusive, cruel man, a monster himself he created wo monsters. Even so I think the whole sexual abuse was a lie. They needed to convince the jury that there was a NHI-non-human involved to gain sympathy.

I've never been sure about the brothers being sexually abused, but the emotional and physical abuse they received from both parents sounded horrible.

[Mac216]

I agree with that. There is no question that Jose was an abusive bully but the brothers had other options than to kill him AND their mother--who--again was not a good mother but did not deserve to be murdered.