QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Dr. Burgess was pleasantly surprised. "Did you ever think you'd be having a conversation about the brothers being resentenced?" ABC 10News asked. "No, no, I didn't because I thought it would seem so unlikely," she replied. "I certainly never thought that they would ever have a chance. But, as I listened to it, I think it's very fair. Very fair what they have done with this."
----------------------------------------------------
STORY: "'Very fair': Expert witness in Menendez brothers' first trial reacts to resentencing," by 10 news weekend anchor Max Goldwasser, published by KGTV, on May 14, 2025.
SUB-HEADING: "'Very fair': Expert witness in Menendez brothers' first trial reacts to resentencing."
GIST: "The groundbreaking decision to resentence the Menendez brothers to 50 years to life, with the possibility of parole, was one an expert witness in their first trial never saw coming.
ABC 10News has introduced you to Dr. Ann Burgess several times before. She's the psychiatric nurse and forensic expert who testified on the brothers' behalf.
She interviewed them for more than 50 hours inside the LA County Jail in the 90s, and told ABC 10News she always believed their story of sexual abuse.
"Usually in a case like this, where it's a domestic, it's gotta be issues in the family," Dr. Burgess said. "I said something is really wrong in that family."
At the time, she pushed for a manslaughter charge. The jury couldn't reach a verdict, leading to a second trial in which the issue of abuse wasn't allowed.
Erik and Lyle Menendez were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1989 murder of their parents. All these years, Dr. Burgess never felt that was fair.
"I've always felt, in many cases, you know, even in the worst of worst cases, serial killers or whatever, to give them a chance at parole is important," Dr. Burgess said. "They necessarily won't get it, and most of them never do, but it doesn't take away hope. I think when we take away hope that that's, that's unfair."
The Menendez brothers' haven't had hope for the last 35 years behind bars. However, that changed Tuesday when Judge Michael Jesic decided to resentence them to 50 years to life, with the possibility of parole.
Dr. Burgess was pleasantly surprised.
"Did you ever think you'd be having a conversation about the brothers being resentenced?" ABC 10News asked.
"No, no, I didn't because I thought it would seem so unlikely," she replied. "I certainly never thought that they would ever have a chance. But, as I listened to it, I think it's very fair. Very fair what they have done with this."
Still, it's no guarantee the California Parole Board grants the brothers' release, especially after labeling them a "moderate risk" in its recent assessment.
"I hope they consider parole," Dr. Burgess said. "I think that that would be fair. It's been a long time, and I know how they felt. As I said, Erik was — he said seconds went by after this happened and they had felt that it was, he just regretted it. Felt so bad, and they have to live with it."
As for where they'll live with it, the answer should become more clear on June 13, when the parole board is expected to submit its clemency recommendation to the governor."
The entire story cannot be be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
—————————————————————-----------------------
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;