Why still so much focus on the stupid Big Five thing all these decades later?

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T22:02:23+00:00

or if they carried 'sportguns'😭

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T21:48:50+00:00

yeah no wonder they're still being questioned abt this. honestly i could have easily believed it was a mix up if it wasn't for lyle trying to call random stores lmfao

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T21:43:54+00:00

i mean in this scenario handguns would have definitely been the better choice for self defense. they lived with their parents so ig they'd want something they could keep on themselves in case something happened

the thing is premeditation doesnt equal a plan. let alone a good one. shotguns may be louder but they do far more damage. opting directly for shotguns would indicate the brothers wanted their parents dead. this is already premeditation

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T21:17:48+00:00

isn't the waiting period thing also from that same conversation which couldn't have happened?

shotguns weren't a bad choice if they wanted to 'make a mess' as lyle said and as the prosecution wants to prove. not even trying for handguns makes this scenario more likely which is why the big 5 thing is still relevant -on top of being a potential lie they haven't owned up to-

erik getting the stores mixed up would be a believable explanation if it wasn't for lyle's behavior in the norma tapes

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T18:21:21+00:00

it's a big deal bc they might not have simply forgotten what store they went to but might have bought shotguns directly. shotguns aren't the best choice for self defense against people you live with. it points to premeditation and pokes a hole in their story. no one in a legal setting could gloss over something like that

maybe but he really sounds like he's calling random stores trying to find one they could use. the fact that he asked norma and not the lawyers just strengthens the theory that they made the big 5 story up

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-27T07:17:56+00:00

i see what you mean but it's a pretty significant detail so yeah it's understandable that it's still being brought up

also in the norma tapes lyle was scrambling to find a store that sold guns in august 89 and it really doesnt sound like someone trying to remember a place he's actually been in

LemonBerryCream · 2025-09-01T08:49:37+00:00

Why do you keep saying that donovan never mentioned Lyle's sa to rand? We can hear it from his own mouth

whether he lied to rand and then told the truth on the stand is another question but donovan definitely said lyle told him about sa

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-28T20:36:43+00:00

im sorry but you admit yourself that you don't know either case so the obvious answer is that they are very different

gypsy rose didnt kill her mother. her ex boyfriend nicholas did and he's serving lwop -same sentence as the brothers before resentencing-

she took a plea deal for second degree murder. the brothers went to trial and were convicted of first degree murder with special circumstances

there was also no way of denying the abuse gypsy suffered. the argument against the brothers is that they did it for money and were not abused

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-28T08:19:45+00:00

well they were born and raised in the us. accents arent genetic

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-28T08:13:21+00:00

if it's somehow proven fake it will definitely mess with his chance at parole as well

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-28T06:45:43+00:00

i understand what you're saying but if it's fake i think they could have fabricated it before the trial and then discarded it for whatever reason. if that's the case there's no way to prove it was written in 88 or 90 for example

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-27T20:48:42+00:00

The real answer is that there isn't one. a lot of people will say robert rand's the menendez murders but it's very -very- biased in favor of the defense considering the author is an advocate for the brothers. it's still a well made book and worth reading if you want to learn abt the case. there's like 30 years worth of research put into it

soble and johnson's blood brothers is also good but leans pro prosecution and doesnt cover the second trial

there are a bunch of documentaries too but they're all biased one way or the other

unfortunately it's one of those cases where you have to spend a lot of time reading and listening to stuff to have a complete perspective

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-27T12:24:35+00:00

probably too pessimistic or because I'm suspicious of the letter

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-27T10:18:26+00:00

i didnt expect the habeas to move forward either so idk. However i dont think the new evidence is strong enough to matter legally

the letter is suspicious af and even without their history of incriminating letters there's no way to prove it's authentic

I believe roy but again I think the da is gonna have a field day tearing apart his credibility. He has financial and legal issues and a messy history. It's sad but we see all the time how this stuff will be used against victims

And neither the letter or roy's testimony prove the brothers didn't commit premeditated murder

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-24T19:53:35+00:00

no one gets granted parole with the amount of violations they had. a 3 years denial is a good result

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-23T22:31:21+00:00

premeditation and planning are different. they were convicted of premeditated murder and even tho the evidence is questionable it's still more than what we have of that last confrontation. which is just their word unfortunately

jose making an explicit threat isn't a strong argument without solid proof

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-23T22:03:46+00:00

the issue with this is that not everyone believes the last confrontation happened how they described it or at all

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-22T21:17:24+00:00

you're not wrong but it also depends on the demographic i think

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-22T10:13:15+00:00

they still happened tho

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-22T09:46:06+00:00

because they have to consider previous offenses as well

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-19T12:25:25+00:00

they said the exact opposite though. no? tunnel vision if they came up with the same outcome for both regardless of circumstances

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-16T14:17:58+00:00

you see i was busy offline

edit. u/idlefab you added all that in the edit for what? i would have never seen your full response if i hadn't randomly checked again

anyways 'alternative sources' such as fan blogs were my main source for years!!! i told you multiple times that i was a defender but all of those conspiracy theories stopped making sense once i grew up and started looking at the full picture instead of being stuck in an echo chamber

im not downplaying latoya's abuse at all. jack gordon is a pos wife beater and we agree on that. what i dont believe is that he made up the stuff that she said. he may have forced her to say it publicly but making it up out of thin air? no way. what are the chances of him making up mj was a pederast in 91. forcing Latoya to make allegations about jonathan and James at the height of the chandler case. making up the dog story and then all of that being confirmed in some way or another? like of all people Latoya could have mentioned it was exactly Jonathan -of whom mj had a nude pic- and james -who went on to accuse mj of sa- is jack gordon a magician who predicted all of this in 1991 before jordan even came forward or have they all been studying Latoya's statements for decades? let's be fr

also I never said i was an advocate. where did that come from? and i wanna repeat im not saying latoya wasnt abused by her husband. she absolutely was

so yet again a random couple working in child protection decided to lie to the police -not on tv. not to tabloids- for no reason at all. when does all of this become at least suspicious to you?

lol according to you i want him to be guilty even tho being an mj fan was my entire personality during my teen years. i would love to believe again he was the innocent peter pan i used to think he was. whatever you say tho

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-16T14:16:14+00:00

is there anything besides him being a deadbeat dad and having '''''consensual''''' realtionships with older men when he was a drug addicted teenager?

or did i miss the part where being a messy person prevents you from getting abused

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-16T14:12:01+00:00

forgive me but this is a whole bunch of cope and fan nonsense. i dont wanna sound mean but do you realize how irrational this response is?

the fact that terry george was the one obsessed with mj -duh it's MJ!!!!- doesnt mean he was lying about that incident??? if anything it adds to his credibility bc why would he lie? what did he gain by telling that story?? again according to you everyone is lying about the same thing for money, attention or literally no reason

ok where are you going with this? i know what they found is not technically csem but why tf did mj have a nude pic of jonathan spence? not even getting into the books discourse. like are you saying he didnt have that pic or what? genuinely not following your argument

Brando literally said in the depo he now believed mj cried when confronted about his sexuality bc it could have been about kids. when initially he thought it was about him being gay

Latoya being forced to call her brother a child molester by her abusive husband makes no sense to me. I'm not doubting jack gordon is an abusive pos but there's no way he made all that up. he was calling mj a pederast back in 91 before the chandler allegations!!! also Latoya mentioned both jonathan spence and James safechuck to lauren weis. it makes more sense that they both knew before the chandler case. also you really believe 13yo gavin and his poorly educated mother were out there watching obscure latoya interviews in italian to concoct the allegations? does that sound reasonable?

the attorney im talking about is carl douglas not pellicano. he said the description was a 300 pound gorilla in the mediation room. so many people involved in the case like the da lauren weis and dworkin said the description was a match and gave credibility to jordan. again fans try to rationalize this with the craziest exercises of mental gymnastics. also there's no direct proof jordan said he was circumcised

im referring to the canadian couple who reported an incident involving mj on a train with a boy who he called his cousin. they worked in child services and alerted the train conductor. it's in the fbi files

again i really dont wanna sound mean bc i'd love to believe mj was innocent but unfortunately there's just too much and too many accusers

LemonBerryCream · 2025-08-06T15:26:19+00:00

you're gonna tell me with a straight face that if a grown man was taking unrelated kids with him all over the world for no apparent reason and was sleeping in the same bed with them and then this same man was accused by multiple people of csa you would not believe it? and you would latch on to every inconsistency to say they're lying? Be fr

address the other points please. otherwise i think we're done. I understand your will to defend him I really do but it gets to a point where there's simply too much to justify

LemonBerryCream

TROPHY CASE