The Case of Tragedy and the Lawyer who failed

There are three professional titles that require higher education (aka college level): Teacher, Doctor, and Lawyer. Those are not the only professions that require college level education, however there is a very specific reason why those professions require so much education. Those three are responsible for "saving lives" which is a very heavy, deep, and difficult responsibility. Some teachers reach greatness sacrificing their personal lives as they put their students first. Some doctors reach greatness saving lives as they are committed to their Hippocratic Oath. Some lawyers reach greatness saving lives with the best defense. And then there are failures such as the tragic case of the Menendez Brothers whose overpaid defense attorney Leslie Abramson failed to save them.

Abramson was not liked in the legal world. It wasn't because she was a female who had passed the Bar; it was probably because of her first "win" in 1987 when she saved Dr. Parwez's life -- a gynocologist who was found "not guilty" for murdering his 11-year-old son. Though she saved the Doctor's life, many people thought that justice was not served.

She redeemed herself with her next case in 1988, where she saved the life of 17-year-old Arnel Salvatierra who was facing the judgement for First Degree Murder. Abramson got the charge reduced to "Voluntary Manslaughter" alleging that the teenager had suffered years of abuse.

So when the Menendez Brothers were arrested in March 1990 for murdering their parents in August 1989, it seemed like she was the best choice to be their Defense Attorney. She could save Lyle and Eric, the way she saved Arnel Salvatierra, right? Wrong. She had the heart, but along with the fact that Lyle and Eric had presented a very messy case, Abramson's priorities were all messed up also.

I should preface my explanation with stating that my opinions are based on watching the artistic representation of the case in the show "Monsters" airing on Netflix, and the reading I've done online (regarding the case) at Wikipedia. The Menendez story is a very tragic story. I say this as a former student and teacher who read "Romeo and Juliet" in the 9th grade, and taught "Julius Caesar" to 10th graders. The Menendez story makes those Shakespearean tragedies look mild in comparison.

The Prosecution team always wins. They have it easy. Even if they "lose" the case, they still win. They already arrested the charged, and held the charged for punishment while the trial attempts to prove "innocence". If a Defense Attorney makes the mistake of thinking that the proof is the burden of the Prosecution, the Defense team has already made their first mistake. This is why many people think that Justice can not be served in the courtroom. The Jury is rigged. You can not get on the Jury if you believe that a person is "Guilty before proven Innocent". You must say that a person is "Innocent before proven Guilty" to get on the Jury, but everyone involved knows that is a big fat lie, or else the "charged" wouldn't be sitting in a jail cell rotting waiting for the proper defense. It's a terrible Lying Game, but the lies are not how you save a life. You have to save a life with the Truth. That's the burden put on the Defense Attorney, not the Prosecution. Sociologists will continue to point out that Humans have no "instincts" based on their observations of exceptions to common behaviors. However, those Sociologists will be hard pressed to find an exception to the most common human behavior of all: Blame. Is Blame a human instinct or is Blame learned the same way that Hatred is learned?

The Menendez Brothers did not need a lawyer who thought lies were going to save them. The Menendez Brothers did not need a lawyer who just wanted the money so that she could take care of her new baby. The Menendez Brothers did not need a Woman using "abuse" as the defense when she only wanted to prove with her new baby, that children are not abused. She was the wrong lawyer for that case. That's why it should be a mistrial.

Also, the Jury decided to ignore the "abuse" presented as the defense and go with the "guilty" verdict because they had determined that both Abramson and the Menendez Brothers were liars. However, that is the greatest hypocrisy of the case because they were only on the Jury because they lied to get there.

I spent many college essays on the topic of the Death Penalty. For years, I tried to present a case in essay form against the Death Penalty as a loyal, loving, faithful Christian. However, when I see the injustice and failure in the case of the Menendez Brothers, I can't justify my old essays against the Death Penalty. The only justice for murderers is the Death Penalty. If the Jury could not forgive the Menendez Brothers for committing murder after years of being raped and abused, then only murdering them back would have been just. Not sticking them in another place where they would be raped and abused for the rest of their lives. The Jury got it wrong. The defense team failed. The trial should have been deemed a mistrial based on the fact that the Menendez Brothers were too mentally ill to know the truth from the lies, or too abused from such an early age to know that lying is immoral. No one pointed that out, and the defense team was supposed to.

O.J. Simpson was released from jail punishment around the same time for a similar murder charge. His lawyer did not fail him. Some people say justice was served, some disagree.

It just goes to show that in the court room, the prosecutor's job is just to uphold the courtroom. The defender's job is to save a life. The burden is always on the defender.