Are the Menendez brothers guilty or innocent? Legal experts explain controversial verdict

More than 30 years after Lyle and Erik Menendez were convicted of killing their parents, the debate over their guilt or innocence continues, with renewed interest sparked by the release of Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story.

After murdering Mary Louise “Kitty” and Jose Menendez, the brothers went through two trials before they were ultimately found guilty of first-degree murder. However, recent legal developments have shifted as Erik and Lyle now fight to have their conviction reclassified to manslaughter.

As is explored in Monster Season 2, at the time they alleged they had been subjected to a lifetime of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse at the hands of their parents. New evidence has emerged since then, leading followers of the true crime case to believe they should be freed. 

But while many viewers of the new Netflix series may not believe they’re guilty of first-degree murder, how might an appeal play out in the court of law? Dexerto caught up with a series of legal experts to get further insight into the Menendez case. 

Guilty or innocent? It’s a “grey area” 

Attorney Scott Distasio, founder of Distasio Law Firm, explained that the notion of “guilt” or “innocence” is complex in these types of cases. 

“The call for conviction overturn hinges on the concept that the brothers acted under duress and out of fear due to alleged prolonged abuse, which might diminish the elements of premeditation and malice aforethought required for a first-degree murder charge,” he told us. 

“If sufficient, legally admissible evidence supporting the abuse allegations comes to light, it could potentially sway the courts into reconsidering the case.”

However, as said, it’s not necessarily a case of guilty or innocent. “This doesn’t excuse the act but may explain the motive behind it, shifting it from a clear case of murder to a grey area,” added Distasio. 

While Mark Pierce, founder and CEO of Wyoming Trust & LLC Attorney, believes allegations of abuse backed by substantial evidence could potentially trigger a re-assessment, it’s important to “differentiate between justification and explanation of actions.”

“Abuse could possibly explain the events leading up to the murderous act but doesn’t automatically justify it,” he told us. “This differentiation plays a significant role in the likelihood of their convictions changing from first-degree murder to manslaughter.”

Ultimately, Distasio said any decisions made should be based “on a thorough examination of all available evidence – past, present, and newly emerged.”

In comparison to, for example, Scott Peterson’s bid for a retrial, the Menendez case is unique in that many of those who follow it believe the brothers should have their first-degree conviction vacated. But in the court of law, it’s far more complex. 

Manslaughter or murder?

Kalim Khan, senior partner at Affinitylawyers.ca, elaborated further on what needs to be present when it comes to a manslaughter charge. 

“Under the law, manslaughter typically requires a showing that the defendant acted in the heat of passion or due to extreme emotional disturbance, as opposed to the premeditation required for first-degree murder,” he explained. 

“If their legal team can demonstrate that the alleged abuse created a severe psychological impact leading up to the murders, it’s possible that a court might consider reducing the charges. 

“However, revisiting old cases and altering convictions is rare and difficult to achieve, especially after so many years.”

In the original trials, which are explored in Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story, there was evidence of premeditation, including Erik and Lyle’s purchase of shotguns and attempts to cover up their crimes. 

Khan is not so sure they will have their first-degree murder conviction vacated, describing cases such as this as “an uphill battle.”

“I believe, while the new claims about their father’s abuse certainly bring up questions of motive and psychological duress, it does not fully absolve the brothers from the clear evidence of planning and execution,” he concluded.

Why is the case so controversial?

Despite the experts’ feedback highlighting the challenge of such cases, the Menendez brothers’ conviction continues to draw controversy, with public opinion shifting over the years. 

In light of new evidence amid the brothers’ appeals and a change in how abuse and mental health struggles are perceived, there is a large following who believe Erik and Lyle were driven to kill and should be freed from prison. 

Have a look on any Reddit thread about the Menendez case and you’ll see dozens of comments sharing support for the brothers. 

As said by one after reading the sexual abuse evidence given during the first trial, “Honestly after reading that I’m pretty sure they’ve always been telling the truth and I feel sick to my stomach for not believing them before.”

There’s also the argument that the brothers were victims of the system. At the time, the Los Angeles District Attorney Office had suffered a series of blunders, including the acquittal of OJ Simpson. 

Following the first two Menendez trials, there was fear there would be another hung jury or the brothers would be given the lesser manslaughter charge. This is depicted in Monster Season 2, when defense attorney Leslie Abramson (Ari Graynor) says the DA’s office is “out for blood… they need a win and they need it now.”

Ahead of the final trial, judge Stanley Weisberg moved to block all expert testimony on the “abuse excuse” defense, and took the option of manslaughter off the table. 

Critic Dahlia Schweitzer published a deep dive into the details of the case in 2018, writing, “Imperfect self defense eliminates the element of malice, reducing the level of the offense from murder to manslaughter. However, in trial number two, this was not an option.

“Not only was Leslie Abramson unable to explore the allegations of abuse which, while not excusing the crime, could have served to explain it, but the accompanying reduced charge was also taken off the table by Judge Weisberg. 

“And so, both Menendez brothers were sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison, victims of a legal system that concealed relevant information for reasons both inexplicable and questionable.”

In response, Hazel Thornton – a juror for Erik’s first trial – said the story was “proceeded by decades of prosecution-biased news coverage, documentaries, dramatizations, and late-night parodies. 

“Many today believe they never should have been convicted at all. Had they been convicted of voluntary manslaughter, and even without one day deducted for good behavior (they have been exemplary prisoners and have contributed greatly to their prison communities) they would have been out six years ago. #JusticeforErikandLyle.”

Legal processes are challenging

However, the court of law and public opinion are two very different entities. As stated by Jonathan Feniak, general counsel at LLC Attorney, “In light of the abuse allegations, it’s a challenge to conclude their innocence or guilt concerning the first-degree murder charge.

“As an attorney, I’m guided by the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ Therefore, if these allegations of abuse are substantiated with compelling evidence, it could indeed cast a shade of grey over the seemingly black-and-white case. 

“It would potentially alter the narrative from one of premeditated murder to one of tragic family dysfunction. However, it’s important to differentiate between personal viewpoints and legal judgments, which are rooted in evidentiary standards and legal precedents.

“In essence, it would be a significant legal upset if their convictions were downgraded to manslaughter, but not impossible if the evidence strongly supports their abuse claims. 

“As for the question of guilt or innocence – in law, as in many areas of life, there can often be more grey areas than initially meet the eye.”

Times have changed since the first Menendez trials

All that being said, there’s still a chance Erik and Lyle might have their convictions changed if the abuse allegations are considered sufficient, especially given how legal perspectives have evolved since the ‘90s.

“I think there is absolutely a possibility of the case being overturned to manslaughter,” said Ben Michael, Attorney, M & A Criminal Defense Attorneys.  

“Providing adequate evidence is of course going to be key here, and from everything I’ve heard and read, it seems as though there is in fact quite a bit of evidence to back up the abuse claims.”

Michael went on to say that today it’s more common for expert testimony about psychological impact to be taken seriously compared to when the Menendez case was originally tried. 

“Factors like PTSD stemming from the abuse could be used in favor of the Menendez brothers, helping prove their case,” he concluded. 

To learn more about the case, Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story is streaming on Netflix now. If you’re familiar with the case or you don’t mind spoilers, you can read our breakdown of the ending. And check out other TV shows streaming this month.