The Verdict : THE CHOICES FACING THE MENENDEZ JURIES

Lyle Menendez, 25, and Erik Menendez, 23, were arrested in the Aug. 20, 1989, shotgun slayings of their parents, Jose Menendez, 45, a wealthy entertainment executive, and Kitty Menendez, 47, in the family’s Beverly Hills mansion.

The Indictment

They were indicted by a Los Angeles County grand jury of four counts:

Count 1: The murder of Jose Menendez, adding the special circumstance of “lying in wait.”

Count 2: The murder of Kitty Menendez, adding the special circumstance of “lying in wait” and “multiple murder.”

Count 3: Conspiracy to murder Jose Menendez

Count 4: Conspiracy to murder Kitty Menendez

The Judge’s Instructions

Van Nuys Superior Court Judge Stanley M. Weisberg instructed jurors that they will have four options in deciding counts 1 and 2: first-degree murder, second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter.

The judge ruled that the facts of the case did not warrant the option of an outright acquittal. Nevertheless, jurors could still return a not-guilty verdict if they ignore the instructions.

Murder: California law defines murder as the unlawful killing of a human being with “malice aforethought.” But “malice” does not mean what it does in common speech, merely “ill will” or “hatred.” The legal definition requires jurors to find that shootings were done purposely, showing an intent to kill.

Homicide: The Jury’s Four Options

I. First-degree murder: Murder with one other component: that the shootings were premeditated, meaning planned. The law does not demand any particular length of time for premeditation. It can be days, weeks or years--or just a few seconds.

The penalty: A prison sentence of 25 years to life, unless the jury finds special circumstances. In that case, the penalty is either life in prison without parole, or death.

The Special Circumstances: “Lying in wait” means what it says: an ambush. The law requires “waiting and watching for an opportune time to act.” Again, though, the time spent “watching and waiting” need not be long.

“Multiple murder” also means what it says: two convictions for murder. At least one, however, must be first-degree murder. If the jury returns one conviction of first degree and another of second degree, that is a “multiple murder.”

II. Second-degree murder: The law defines it as murder without premeditation. Frequently, however, it is chosen as a compromise verdict by jurors who want to convict on murder charges, but cannot agree unanimously on first-degree murder.

The penalty: 15 years to life in state prison.

III. Voluntary manslaughter: Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being--but without “malice.” Unlike murder, it is not divided into degrees. As with murder, however, it comes in two forms: Voluntary and Involuntary.

Voluntary manslaughter means the brothers intended to kill but did so:

* in a “sudden quarrel or heat of passion” or

* in the “honest but unreasonable” belief they had to defend themselves against “imminent” peril.

The instructions given jurors in this case, however, specifically say that “passion” is not limited solely to rage, but means “any emotion including fear.” The brothers contend they lashed out in fear and self-defense after years of physical, emotional and sexual abuse.

The penalty: three, six or 11 years in prison.

IV. Involuntary manslaughter: Manslaughter, but without intent to kill.

The penalty: two, three or four years in prison.

Conspiracy

Conspiracy means an agreement to do something--in this case, according to the indictment, to murder. All conspiracies must include “overt acts.” The indictment alleges three in this case:

* On Aug. 18, 1989, the brothers drove to San Diego and bought two 12-gauge shotguns.

* At some time before Aug. 20, 1989, they bought ammunition.

* On Aug. 20, Lyle Menendez called a friend to arrange a meeting that night as an alibi.

The penalty: The same as a murder conviction.

Penalty Phase

If the jury finds murder with either special circumstance, the case would proceed to another proceeding that would almost resemble a second trail. After more testimony, the jurors would make a decision on which penalty is warranted: life in prison or death.

Two different verdicts?

Separate juries were chosen for Lyle and Erik Menendez because some evidence was admissible only against one brother. The panels are deliberating separately and could deliver distinctly different verdicts. It’s theoretically conceivable that one could get the death penalty and the other be set free.

Research by Alan Abrahamson