WHY IS THIS EVEN A QUESTION???

About a week or 2 ago, I heard something about the Mendez brothers, Lyle & Eric, were trying once AGAIN to try to get out of prison ....

They are there for KILLING THEIR PARENTS!!!!!

You may not have been around in 1989 when they did it .... and it's actually quite tough to find anything on YouTube which actually deals with the ORIGINAL cases .... I think I found maybe 2, and even then, one of those was clipped to fitt into a series about what happened ....

So here's the jest:

The OLDER SON (I don't know which is which, so I just say older and younger) .... the older son was going to COLLEGE on the EAST COAST (Princeton, I think) ... he was 21 years old (don't call him a kid) ... he had come home, over the summer by the sounds of it, and at the time had intended of returning to New Jersey.

He arrived home in time to attend they YOUNGER BROTHER's high school graduation (he was 18 years old, while yung, legally he was still an ADULT) ... 

From what I can gather, between June graduation and end of July ... there was bickering - the Dad wanted to pick what the YOUNGER son was going to study, and he was going to start by living at HOME during his first year ....

Okay - I've been here .... a good parent would encourage their kid to choose a line of study which will pay the bills first, then once they have a good paying job, they can go back to school to get the Underwater Basketweaving degree.

The YOUNGER son said he was of the opinion that his parents were going to pay for him to live ON HIS OWN ....

I've been here too ... kids hear what they want to hear - whether you really say it or not .... but it's just his word about what the conversation was ....

The OLDER son said that he would move in with the YOUNGER son to keep him out of trouble, as well as ENROLL in college in CA.

Okay - So - somewhere between June and end of July, the YOUNGER brother told the OLDER brother -THEY SAY - about the s-abuse that he said he suffered at their Dad's hands ....

Remember - they were the ONLY ones who were telling this story ... 

Then in AUGUST they went to a gun shop .... in another city - some 1 1/2 hour away from their house .... and attempted to buy handguns .... yep ... the guy who waited on them (don't know if he was just a worker or the owner) testified AT THE TRIAL that they said they needed the guns for self-defense ....

When the guy told them there was a two week waiting period - they were told that shotguns were not covered by that rule .... so the bought 2 shotguns and AMMO right then ....

I have not heard how they paid for them - but they wouldn't have been cheap .... especially in CA in the 1980s ....

Then the story says, the family went on a "fishing trip" .... at the trial the BOAT CAPTAIN testified that the parents went inside, the boys went to the stern of the boat, and NOBODY fished ...

Then they went home .... and all witness statements are gone .... only 2 people remain who know what really happened ... and both of those held shotguns.

Now - when I hear the word "shotgun" I think of a Double Barrel, split in half, manual load type of weapon .... Elmer Fudd style.  But I'm guessing there are other loading systems as well .... even back in 1989.

The parents were watching tv .... together ... on the couch .... 

POLICE say the brothers came into the room after the parents were into the program they were watching, and began shooting ....

If you believe what ONE of the brothers say happened - they didn't aim, they just shot .... BUT ....

While, yes, there were shots from the FRONT of the parens (between the tv and them) which riddled the couch and the French doors behind .... scatter gun style .... someone, one of the brothers, shot their dad in the head POINT BLANK ....
This means they had enouh thought to place the BARREL of the shotgun AGAINST the BACK OF THE HEAD, and pulled the trigger.

And since the majority of the shotts went from Front to Back - it would mean that either the headshot was after the initial shots ended (wait for it) or the other brother MOVED OUT OF THE WAY before the shot occured.

I have never heard anyone ask this question .... it's kind of important ....

It was said that when they ran out of ammo they went OUTSIDE to the car an RELOADED .... at least one did ...

At least one of them, the one who reloaded presumably, went back in .... found his Mom hadn't been killed, so he finished the job by SHOOTING HER IN THE CHEEK .... in other words, he blew her head off too.

Gruesome is not the word for this ....

But .... it ges WORSE .... how??

According to the brothers, they were surprised the police didn't show up ....

They WAITTED FOR THEM in the house with the dead bodies .... but when they didn't show up, they CHANGED heir clothes and WASHED UP (remember, they would have been covered with bits of their parents)

They then went TO THE MOVIES .... so that they could get a MOVIE TICKET to prove they WEREN'T THERE .... but they also found that the tickets had TIME STAMPS on them, so it wasn't going to work ....

So, instead, they went to the "Taste of California" fair ... I know the "Taste of Minnesota" used to be so big, thatt it would have been nearly impossible to get anyone who could have POSITIVELY identified when they saw you there.

They then went home .... remember, they would have had something to EAT at the fair .... cold, man .... they got home ... and they say they thought for sure the cops would have shown up by then .... but .... nope ....

So they waited a little longer .... kicked around what the heck to do ....

The story is, the YOUNGER brother went into the house and saw his parents, and finally broke down screaming .... so the OLDER broher took this time to CALL 911 hmself ...

But he did not say "hey we killed our parents" .... he said "someone shot his parents, and they were dead" ...

You can hear the YOUNGER brother screaming in the background ...

The cops showed up, found the parents, and believed the brothers ... didn't even do a GSR test on them ....

Did I mention that on the way to eiher the movie or the fair, the brothers thught enough to ditch both the guns and their clothes??

The cops figured it was a "mob" hit, because of the shot in the back of the head of the dad ...

So for WEEKS/MONTHS the brothers got to run around FREE .... and they said NOTHING to anybody, at first.

One got a PRIVATE TENNIS COACH ... he was going to become of professional tennis player ((eye roll)) ... it had to be the younger brother ....

The other broher bought a RESTRAUNT in New Jersey (had to be the older brother), a fancy big priced car, and 3 Rolex watches .... who needs 3 watches???

It is said the brothers wen through OVER $400,000 in about a month ....

That kind of raised a red flag for the police ....

GEEZ YOU THINK?????

So .... they have tried every avenue available to them to have the verdict set aside .... to get a re-trial .... whatever it took to get out of jail.

Now remember, they had TWO TRIALS - each - the first trial, where all evidence, all witnesses were put in the witness chair, everything was put out there by their attornies ended in a MISTRIAL ....

A mistrial is where something so aggregious happened during the trial (like protestors outside the building .... remember, the trial was in the 90's .... that it could taint the way the jury looked at the case, or threatened the jury ....

OR .... as in this case, the jury could not agree on a verdict - all it takes is one, 1, juror to hold out for a significant enough time, for the jury to just give up.

Itt's also interesting, that at the time - BOTH brothers were not only tried at the same time, not only did they have seperatte lawyers to represent them, but they also had seperate juries ....

The juries had no interactions with each other, other than being in court at the same time ....

I know that the trial which convicted them beyond a reasonable doubt didn't only convince 12 jurors ... it actually convinced 24 JURORS .... because each defendant had their own set of jurors ...

You might be able to convince 12 people to think all the same ... but 24???  That's a lot tougher to do.

I'm actually surprised this case is being brought back up again ... even 20/20 has released a newer version, a newer look at the case ....

I'm sorry - but if you can find the ORIGIANL Barbara Walters interview of these guys ... and watch closely - you will find only one of them seems to talk, the other only speaks up if the talker seems to either not going to answer "correctly" or seems not to have an answer ...

I think it would have been much better if Barbara had insisted that they be interviewed seperately ... but it's too late now.

I would be likely to believe them, had they at least ONCE gone to someone of AUTHORITY ... remember, the YOUNGER son had just graduated High School - so surely there had to be a teacher, counselor, principal he trusted ...
A parent of a friend - just not from the houses that he had robbed, oh this was the first ime I heard of these too.

There is always the police or child services as well - in 1989 Child Services was very strong in the US, even in CA ... if not more so ... 

The OLDER one, if you believe the YOUNGER ones story, shouldn't be set free no matter what .... he was an ADULT ... he was LIVING ON HIS OWN ... he had plenty of oppotunity to seek help for his brother from less lethal means.

No - I am not for releasing them ...

Mostly because, I don't believe them.

TRAIL 1: Jose Menedez (I think this is Lyle)
Jury make up: 7 women, 5 men
Duration of Trial: 6 months
Deliberation time: 25 days
Possible charges & votes:
3 First Degree
3 Second Degree
6 Voluntary
0 Involuntary

They did not give any other information .... and it seems like this is only for ONE of the brothers, not both.

They did not give ANY stats on the reTrial, at that time, of how the jury was made up, nor what charges were put before them, or how they voted on those charges.

All despite this - they got LIFE sentences ....

5 things you may not know

1. BOTH brothers have gotten married - one of them got divorced and then married AGAIN!!

2. One of them was caught on jail audio (yes, the cells are wired, and they are told about it) speaking to OJ SIMPSOM ... and talking aoubt defense stragedy!!!!

3. They claimed only the father abused them, but during the 20/20 interview, suddenly one of them said Mom did it too .... to which, the oher brother looked at hm like "What??"  Even Barbara Walters mentioned the shocked look 

4. The brothers were dressed EVERY DAY in pull over knit sweaters over polo shirts, to make them appear younger.

5. When giving the eulogy - the "final farewell" - at their father's funeral, one of the brothers (I want to say Lyle) not only bought a $1000 suit, and a Rolex watch (not one of the three mentioned before) ... but he also said, in the eulogy, that his dad said he could "never fill" the dad's shoes -- and then showed that he was wearing similar shoes to those his father had worn (they never said if they were his father actual shoes, so that why I added the modifier)

Its just heartless .... and I understand that IF they had been abused like they said, it would be likely to manifest itself in several different ways .... but this is just .... beyond ....

I will keep you posted ....

I find this story very disturbing ....

FOLLOW UP: Caylee

OMGs -- the cadaver dog found dirt in the trunk of the grandfather's car. The dogs react to the sent of decomp/blood ... so if the girl had been put into the trunk (alive or dead) while there was blood there, the dog would have acted to it.

The grandmother had done her best to deswade the police from talking to the grandfather.

The mother was allowed to use the grandparents cars.

now why aren't the whole bunch in jail??? This is amazing. Neither or grandparents are showing any over emotional outcry over the loss of this child. This whole family stinks like yesterday's garbage.

time to call out the goyles I think.

Missing Child: Caylee

Okay - So I'm watching the initial hearing of the mother of the little missing girl Caylee. You know the one where the mother didn't report the girl missing for 5 weeks? Then she said that she left the child with the baby sitter...but the woman said she never babysitted the girl.

I am about to say some things that may upset people who know the family -- please understand that I do NOT know the family, and my opinions are just that ... my opinion.

The grandmother are on the stand giving testimony to try to get her daughter (the suspect) out of jail to help with the search.

The grandmother on the stand was being caught in fib after fib - from what she did for a living, to whether she had financial troubles, to when the last time was she saw the little girl! It was the answers about when she saw the little girl that shocked me!

How can you not remember the last time you spent with your grand-daughter when you had an actual VIDEO of the event? I'm sorry, but if she saw her granddaughter as much as she says I would think she would remember when it suddenly stopped!

Then when they reported it to the police -- it sounds like they went to the cop station, found it closed, called 911 and instead of being so worried that she would stay on the line until someone came -- they went back to the house? And by the sounds of it, they waited once they got home to recall the cops again??

I wish I had heard the question the prosecution had asked that the grandmother had said, on stand, was 'irrelevent to this hearing' -- everyone knows the witness does not get to judge such a thing directly to the lawyer, you need to turn to the judge to mention is.

Wow - the grandmother said 'everyone knows I don't eat, I just drink water' ... what kind of statement is that? Her brain chemistry would be so out of whack ... after she took the drink her speech/thoughts became very stuttery - it could be that she was just trying to listen to what she was saying but ...

The interesting thing - that the anchors noticed be for me - the mother says the last she saw Caylee on June 8th, the grandmother originally said June 9th ... now she says June 15th -- but they all live together in the same house. So there's a missing WEEK of time where the grandmother didn't notice the granddaughter was missing? Where was SHE?? According to her she was home.

This is such a weird family dynamic. And this is the family where this suspect is supposed to be released into the custody of??? The prosecutor asked about it (after all apparently the mother would disappear for days at a time and the grandmother wouldn't report her missing - and question as to whether she should have to call the cops everytime the mother went missing for more than 2 days). The grandmother's reply was 'well she won't have access to a car' - like that's going to make that big a difference??

This is soooooo strange. I have a real feeling that if the new timeline is true -- then the GRANDMOTHER would have been the last one to actually SEE Caylee. Which should make her the likely suspect. And I have to say the more I hear the more I think she knows something she's not saying.

The neighbor says the mother asked to borrow a shovel, but that doesn't sound right either ... why borow a shovel? I can't imagine a house without a shovel - we aren't talking apt. here, but an actually house. The neighbor figured it was about an hour from the time she borrowed the shovel to the time she returned it -- but if the neighbor finished their own yard work, and then showered afterwards ... it more than likely took more than an hour. While, yes, the average shower lasts only 15minutes , prep time is going to at the very least double that.

I am not sure this girl is alive anymore ... I hate to think that way ... but it just doesn't sound well.

You know looking at photo graphs of this girl -- she looks older than 2 yrs old to me .... I worked with 2 yr olds for several years, had 4 of them of my own, and she looks older than that - maybe 5? Especially given that the little girl could read already? Not that there aren't early readers (I've known several) but it isn't something every kid can do.

I wonder if they have checked the birth records of this girl ... or rather the birthing records of her mother.