Speaker 1: Hey, folks, it is late on Thursday, August twenty second,
Speaker 1: and we have just gotten word that parole has been
Speaker 1: denied for Eric Menindez. Welcome to this episode of Amy
Speaker 1: and TJ. An episode being recorded much later than anticipated
Speaker 1: because as I record this, it is past ten o'clock
Speaker 1: on the East coast, it is past eight o'clock on
Speaker 1: the West coast, And for the past ten hours, the
Speaker 1: parole board hearing for Eric Menindez has been taking place.
Speaker 1: That is a much longer duration than most were anticipating,
Speaker 1: thought this might go three hours or so. It has
Speaker 1: been a long, long day and we're just getting word
Speaker 1: before I started recording here, folks that yes, Eric Menindez,
Speaker 1: all that momentum, all the publicity, and a lot of
Speaker 1: people thought this was going to be it. But no,
Speaker 1: Eric Menindez is not going to be getting out of prison,
Speaker 1: at least through the parole system, at least through that
Speaker 1: metthad that for now, because parole has been denied. The
Speaker 1: parole Board says he can come back and it's eligible
Speaker 1: to go before the parole board again in three years.
Speaker 1: But as of now, Eric Menendez is going to stay
Speaker 1: in prison. His brother lyle is up with his parole
Speaker 1: board hearing tomorrow. So what does this mean for him?
Speaker 1: Is it an automatic? Not necessarily. Just because his brother
Speaker 1: was denied, it doesn't mean that Lyle will be denied.
Speaker 1: I'll explain that in a second. But this parole board
Speaker 1: hearing happened today at eleven thirty am Eastern time, eight
Speaker 1: thirty local out there from the prison in San Diego.
Speaker 1: He was doing it from his San Diego prison. This
Speaker 1: was video conference. He wasn't taken into a courtroom, so
Speaker 1: this was all done via video conference. Now why was
Speaker 1: he even up for parole now? This is the first
Speaker 1: time he has ever been eligible. This is his first
Speaker 1: shot up at this. Well, he's eligible now because after
Speaker 1: they were convicted, he and his brother were convicted of
Speaker 1: killing their parents. They got life in prison without the
Speaker 1: possibility of parole. But just this summer, at the start
Speaker 1: of the summer, they were reclassified and they were resentenced,
Speaker 1: i should say, and they were eligible for parole immediately,
Speaker 1: and that's why we ended up here. The decision now
Speaker 1: that this board has made is that Eric is not
Speaker 1: suitable to be released. They are saying he is enough
Speaker 1: of a risk that he should be denied bail. Right
Speaker 1: now now. Because of the system and the rules and
Speaker 1: the laws out there in California, we had no access today,
Speaker 1: no video, no audio to this parole board hearing. This
Speaker 1: isn't the same as a court hearing. There is no
Speaker 1: judge in there and lawyers on both sides and people
Speaker 1: sitting at a table. It's not that kind of situation.
Speaker 1: This is actually supposed to be kind of a private event.
Speaker 1: This is supposed to be a very a private and
Speaker 1: confidential happening here a parole board hearing, so it does
Speaker 1: not the same rules that the whole public gets access.
Speaker 1: So what happened and instead this time is that one
Speaker 1: pool reporter was assigned I believe it was from the
Speaker 1: La Times. He was the only person who was in
Speaker 1: there and able to watch, but he wasn't able to
Speaker 1: disseminate that information in real time because there are rules
Speaker 1: about that information going out before the parole board has
Speaker 1: actually made their decision. So so many people, if you've
Speaker 1: kept up on social media, maybe you were following this
Speaker 1: story today as well. Everybody seemed to be doing the
Speaker 1: same thing, hitting refresh, refresh, refresh, looking for some kind
Speaker 1: of update of any kind, and it just did not
Speaker 1: come because it could not come the rules did not allow.
Speaker 1: So we've all been standing by and we all got
Speaker 1: the information at the same time just a little bit
Speaker 1: ago that yes, the board has denied, denied, denied Eric
Speaker 1: Mendez the opportunity now to get out on parole. Now,
Speaker 1: this was a long hearing in part because so many people,
Speaker 1: according to the reporter inside, showed up to speak on
Speaker 1: Eric Menendez's behalf. By this reporter's count, at least eighteen
Speaker 1: people family friends were there to speak on his behalfs
Speaker 1: that there were a lot of tears during the video
Speaker 1: conference today, a lot of tears during the hearing, and
Speaker 1: the family even made a plea yes about the boys.
Speaker 1: I say the boys, they were twenty one and eighteen,
Speaker 1: they're fifty seven and fifty four now. But saying that
Speaker 1: the Eric and Lyle, they've been remorseful, they've admitted what
Speaker 1: they've done, they've been rehabilitated, they plan on doing good
Speaker 1: work and continuing some of their work when they get
Speaker 1: out of prison. They made this claim, but they also said, hey,
Speaker 1: we have been waiting thirty years for them to come
Speaker 1: home or hoping for them to come home. We have
Speaker 1: forgiven them and the family is trying to move on.
Speaker 1: They even made an argument that one of the relatives
Speaker 1: that was there has staged four cancer and argued that
Speaker 1: they might die before Eric and Lyle get out, And
Speaker 1: that was a part of the argument that some people
Speaker 1: in the family were making, but the board seemed to
Speaker 1: be vrding to the reporter in the room, really really
Speaker 1: really interested and hung up on a few issues with Eric,
Speaker 1: because Eric had some rules violations while he's been in
Speaker 1: prison over the past thirty years. And the reason that's
Speaker 1: key is because they are making a decision to put
Speaker 1: you back out into society. You are in prison because
Speaker 1: you broke rules, you did something wrong. If we put
Speaker 1: you back out there, can you still follow the rules?
Speaker 1: And the only indication we have of whether or not
Speaker 1: you can is what you've been doing the past thirty
Speaker 1: years in prison. And he has been violating rules at times. Again,
Speaker 1: nothing necessarily so outlandish, but some of these instances were
Speaker 1: it was caught with a cell phone on occasions that
Speaker 1: is a major no no in prison. I suppo to
Speaker 1: have a cell phone. He was caught with a cell phone,
Speaker 1: also allegedly caught with drugs, also allegedly helped a gang
Speaker 1: in a tax scheme of some kind. Also, he did
Speaker 1: have a couple of instances of violence in prison. I
Speaker 1: think one was in the night. If I believe, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't have the day's right, so let me not speculate.
Speaker 1: But it's been at least a decade, and I believe
Speaker 1: two decades that one of them allegedly happened. So the
Speaker 1: parole board is really hung up and looking at this
Speaker 1: guy who is convicted and has admitted to a very,
Speaker 1: very heinous crime. Do we want to let him back out?
Speaker 1: This wasn't a one off. This is Yes, it's over
Speaker 1: thirty years, and I guess on average that's not a
Speaker 1: lot over thirty years, but it was enough. And according
Speaker 1: to the reporter who was listening that they were really
Speaker 1: really hung up on several of those and asked him
Speaker 1: about them in depth. The other thing, and a lot
Speaker 1: of legal experts talked about this the mom. As you know,
Speaker 1: we're all here because Eric and Lyle killed their parents.
Speaker 1: They killed their dad, who they accused of molesting them.
Speaker 1: But the board was hung up on or certainly questioned
Speaker 1: them about why you had to kill the mom. You
Speaker 1: all will remember this case, remember it well. Some of
Speaker 1: these details and this it really was. It was a sensation,
Speaker 1: it was a media sensation. And still the fascination continues
Speaker 1: with this case. There have been documentaries of course that
Speaker 1: hit Netflix series last year. There's just this fascination. But
Speaker 1: folks were always wondering in nineteen eighty nine, you're saying,
Speaker 1: your dad was the one who was molesting you, Who
Speaker 1: was the threat? Why did you have to kill the mom?
Speaker 1: And it wasn't just an instant death for the mom,
Speaker 1: if you will, there was some reloading involved in the crimes.
Speaker 1: Details are just atrocious, they absolutely are. So the argument
Speaker 1: that was made over the years that the Meninda's brother's
Speaker 1: maid was that this was done in self defense. They
Speaker 1: were in fear of their stepfather who was doing the harassing.
Speaker 1: They were fear in fear of their lives and fear
Speaker 1: of the harassment and the harasser. So why did you
Speaker 1: have to kill the mom? It was unnecessary. She wasn't
Speaker 1: a threat, She wasn't an imminent threat of any kind.
Speaker 1: And the reporter in the room said one of the
Speaker 1: board members specifically asked why did you shoot her? And
Speaker 1: his answer were simply a wish he hadn't done it.
Speaker 1: I mean, they have said that they have admitted. But
Speaker 1: the board went through and so much was expected that
Speaker 1: they would go through what happened over the past thirty years,
Speaker 1: what kind of and not necessarily go through it and
Speaker 1: not trying to reltigate and relive the entire crime, but
Speaker 1: they were going to look at how you behaved over
Speaker 1: the past thirty years. But it was interesting to hear
Speaker 1: from the reporter that they did go back. They did
Speaker 1: have questions still about the crime, why you did it,
Speaker 1: and that was something that they brought up, and they
Speaker 1: were hung up on why did you have to kill
Speaker 1: your mom? And I heard some legal experts talk about
Speaker 1: that before that this could be a challenge, like you
Speaker 1: want to make the argument that the guy was doing
Speaker 1: this to you, your dad was doing this, and he
Speaker 1: was the imminent threat, then why did you have to
Speaker 1: kill mom? And also this idea of the imminent threat
Speaker 1: did you have to shoot them? Right? There was an
Speaker 1: imminent threat in that moment, an imminent threat of something
Speaker 1: happening that night. You had options. Now, a lot of
Speaker 1: people will tell you these two are these young men
Speaker 1: were abuse victims, and there's so much more we've learned
Speaker 1: over the past couple of decades and even years about
Speaker 1: what goes into and what that kind of abuse can
Speaker 1: do to a person, So don't want to downplay that.
Speaker 1: But still the argument was made that the brothers may
Speaker 1: have had options, so why do this if they didn't
Speaker 1: have some other motive. Obviously, the argument has always been
Speaker 1: made because they went on that spending spree afterwards that
Speaker 1: you hear so much about spending tens of and yes,
Speaker 1: hundreds of thousands of dollars of their parents money and
Speaker 1: the immediate aftermath of the deaths, so that continues to
Speaker 1: be brought up. But the board was very interested, very
Speaker 1: interested in that particular thing. Why why did you have
Speaker 1: to kill your mom? Now, the family did express that
Speaker 1: they were disappointed in what happened today, disappointed that they
Speaker 1: are not that he wasn't granted parole. They did put
Speaker 1: out a statement saying, while we respect the decision, today's
Speaker 1: outcome was of course disappointing and not what we hoped for.
Speaker 1: But our belief in Eric remains unwavering, and we know
Speaker 1: he will take the board's recommendation in stride. His remorse,
Speaker 1: growth and the positive impact he's had on others speak
Speaker 1: for themselves. We will continue to stand by him and
Speaker 1: hold to the hope he is able to return home soon. Tomorrow.
Speaker 1: We turn our attention to Lyle's hearing, and while it
Speaker 1: is undoubtedly difficult, we remain cautiously optimistic and hopeful that
Speaker 1: the Commissioner will see in Lyle what so many others have,
Speaker 1: a man who is taken responsibility, transformed his life and
Speaker 1: is ready to come home again. That's the statement from
Speaker 1: the family, And I give you idea of this board
Speaker 1: hearing here. They're actually going to have different board members
Speaker 1: for Lyle tomorrow than they do did for Eric today. Now,
Speaker 1: that is just one of the reasons why there is hope.
Speaker 1: There is hope that even though Eric was denied today,
Speaker 1: Lyle could still be granted parole when he goes before
Speaker 1: the board on Friday. How is that possible? All right?
Speaker 1: We continue now. Yes, it is late as of this recording,
Speaker 1: way past my bedtime, and this is way passed When
Speaker 1: a lot of people thought that parole board hearing for
Speaker 1: Eric Menndez thought it would be done a lot sooner
Speaker 1: than now. But this thing went ten hours today started
Speaker 1: at eight thirty local times, that's eleven thirty Eastern time
Speaker 1: on this morning, and it went for some ten hours,
Speaker 1: and because we didn't have any cameras, didn't have access,
Speaker 1: and the one reporter that was in there wasn't able
Speaker 1: to give real time updates publicly, we have all essentially
Speaker 1: been standing by for ten hours waiting for any trickle
Speaker 1: of information to come out, and sure enough we got it.
Speaker 1: A little bit ago. Eric Menendez has been denied, denied
Speaker 1: parole by this parole board. They say he can come
Speaker 1: back in three years. His brother Lyle is up tomorrow,
Speaker 1: up on Friday. Now you hear his brother Eric has
Speaker 1: been denied, and there were in this together the same crime,
Speaker 1: then surely he would be denied as well. But this
Speaker 1: is why, not necessarily there was argument that there could
Speaker 1: be a split decision, And here is why. The same
Speaker 1: parole board members are not expected to rule for each
Speaker 1: So you got a different set of eyes, a different
Speaker 1: set of ears tomorrow who will be considering Lyle's case.
Speaker 1: Lyle's case will be considered based on his merits and
Speaker 1: based on his behavior in prison, so he doesn't necessarily
Speaker 1: have as many rules violations as his brother, or the
Speaker 1: board members who are there tomorrow could maybe not put
Speaker 1: as much emphasis on those rules violations. You just don't know. Yes,
Speaker 1: common sense might dictate and you might assume that he's
Speaker 1: going to be denied, but there is reason for possibly
Speaker 1: his case and his history in prison being viewed differently
Speaker 1: by a different set of Parole Board members. Now we
Speaker 1: say all this, we see what happens, but we have
Speaker 1: to remember there's one other option, one other possibility. Right now,
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom can step in and get them out of prison.
Speaker 1: He can grant them clemency anytime he sees fit. He
Speaker 1: has held off on doing so, but now he might
Speaker 1: not have a decision to make if the parole Board
Speaker 1: denies both Menindez brothers. It's tough to figure that the
Speaker 1: guy who was setting up to run for president wants
Speaker 1: to be running a tough on crime campaign and have
Speaker 1: to be asked questions about why he went against the
Speaker 1: parole board and let two double murderers out of prison.
Speaker 1: Politics just comes into that, but take the politics out
Speaker 1: of it. If he just went with the parole board,
Speaker 1: why wouldn't he listen to the experts on this So
Speaker 1: an extraordinary day with an extraordinary lack of details all day,
Speaker 1: but this was the one that was anticipated for so long,
Speaker 1: after all these years, after all the moments them, after
Speaker 1: all the documentaries, after all the Netflix hit shows, after
Speaker 1: all the celebrity endorsements, after all that's gone on. In
Speaker 1: this case, they finally get to this day and denied.
Speaker 1: We'll keep an eye on it tomorrow as well, when
Speaker 1: Lyle is up. We'll see how long that one goes.
Speaker 1: But folks, just going to hop on and give you
Speaker 1: all the update, and stayed up late to do so,
Speaker 1: so I always appreciate you hanging with us. And a reminder,
Speaker 1: Rogues is out on this one. She is in Bolder
Speaker 1: dropping her daughter off for her sophomore year in college,
Speaker 1: so Robes will be back with me soon. But now
Speaker 1: I always appreciate you all listening.