Why the Menendez Case, George?

Erik and Lyle Menendez killed their parents.

Well, I’m pretty sure they did – they were convicted of it – but the question has always been why.

Their first trial, the jury (one jury, even though they were technically tried separately) deadlocked on the charges they murdered their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez. The first trial allowed them to present evidence they were sexually abused by their father (at least).

The second trial did not delve into that issue and they were convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

The trial has always been one of those “terribles” people talk about – rich, privileged, entertainment-industry tied dad, etc.…it’s the kind of thing you watch on TV. And Netflix has just released a series called “Monsters” on the murders. The series has drawn great praise and definite criticism, specifically for its implication that the two brothers may have been sexually involved with one another.

Of course, when one’s parents are molesting them, the blurring of the lines of sexual propriety are completely destroyed so who knows what really happened…

But Ryan Murphy, co-creator of the show  said the brothers should be “sending him flowers” for their portrayal in the series.

Turns out, that’s probably true because Thursday Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon announced he is reviewing the case.  A number of court filings have been made upon the brothers’ behalf recently, so Gascon said he will review the case.  Such a review could lead to vacated the sentence to the possibility of parole to, well, nothing. 

Gascon announced  that his office will review the evidence and the convictions.

Gascon said he is reviewing the case with no preconceptions – he said he does “believe” nor disbelieve the claims made by the Menendez lawyers (one is Mark Geragos – you may remember that name from the Scott Peterson case Ick). 

But the question remains – why?

There is no massive public continuing groundswell to free the brothers as it were a heaven forfend, a “social justice” case.

It seems they really did it, and in a very nasty way,

Typically when a DA decides to review a case it because something new and odd has come up.

In this case it seems Gascon is reviewing the case because of a TV show.

And to what demographic is he trying to appeal? Rich kids who want to kill their  parents?

It has never been a “progressive” cause – like “Free (the cop killer) Mumia”  nor a cause for anyone else, except that eminent legal scholar Kim Kardashian.

One can only assume that if their last name had been “Smith” and were poor and they had not been on a TV show, Gascon wouldn’t be bothering.

Using a potential possible maybe not quite right conviction -they did it seems kill them, whether or not the parents deserved it, as it were – is a sign of election desperation on Gascon’s part.

And it will fail.