More stories

  • in

    The Menendez Brothers’ Case Under Review: What to Know.

    Prosecutors are revisiting the brothers’ convictions in the killings of their parents. It could lead to their release from prison.Over 35 years ago, Lyle and Erik Menendez — then 21 and 18 years old — walked into the den of their Beverly Hills mansion and fired more than a dozen shotgun rounds at their parents.Now, after serving decades behind bars as part of a life sentence without the possibility of parole, the Menendez brothers may be getting a chance at freedom.In early October, the Los Angeles County district attorney, George Gascón, announced that his office was reviewing the case after lawyers representing the Menendez brothers asked prosecutors to recommend a resentencing, a move that could lead to their release.The reconsideration of their life sentences comes at a time when the Menendez brothers have been thrust back into the media spotlight thanks to the revelation of new evidence, an army of social media defenders and a recent television series and documentary examining their crime and trials.Here’s what to know about the Menendez brothers’ case:What were they convicted of?In 1996, the Menendez brothers were found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole for killing their parents, Jose, a music executive, and Mary Louise, a former beauty queen who went by the name Kitty.It was their second trial. Two years prior, a mistrial was declared after two separate juries (one for each brother) deadlocked over a verdict.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis Explain Their Letters in Danny Masterson Rape Case

    The letters to a judge ahead of Masterson’s sentencing described their friendship with him and spoke glowingly of his character.Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher on Saturday spoke about letters they had written seeking leniency in the prison sentence of Danny Masterson, the actor best known for his role in the sitcom “That ’70s Show” who was found guilty of raping two women more than 20 years ago.Masterson was sentenced to the maximum, 30 years to life, on Thursday.The letters to the judge in the case, Charlaine F. Olmedo of Los Angeles Superior Court, which were published on Friday on Substacks of journalists who had covered the trial, described the couple’s friendship with Masterson.“I do not believe he is an ongoing harm to society,” Kutcher, who is married to Kunis, wrote of Masterson in a letter dated July 27, adding that “having his daughter raised without a present father” would be “a tertiary injustice in and of itself.”In her letter, Kunis vouched for Masterson’s “exceptional character and the tremendous positive influence he has had on me and the people around him.”Masterson, 47, co-starred on “That ’70s Show” with Kutcher and Kunis from 1998 to 2006. Debra Jo Rupp and Kurtwood Smith, two other co-stars from the show, also wrote letters to the judge in support of Masterson, praising their interactions with him while working together.Kunis and Kutcher defended their letters in support of Masterson in a recorded statement posted to Instagram on Saturday, saying they “were not written to question the legitimacy of the judicial system or the validity of the jury’s ruling.”“They were intended for the judge to read,” Kutcher said. “And not to undermine the testimony of the victims or re-traumatize them in any way. We would never want to do that and we’re sorry if that has taken place.”Comments were closed on the Instagram post addressing the letters, but other recent posts on the account were flooded with outrage and criticism, with many noting Kutcher’s longtime philanthropic efforts to combat sex trafficking.The letters from Kutcher and Kunis sought to portray Masterson as someone who was critical of drug use. Kutcher said he attributed “not falling into the typical Hollywood life of drugs directly to Danny.” Kunis said that “Danny played a pivotal role in guiding me away from such destructive paths.”Those statements appeared to be responding to specific allegations in the case.Prosecutors had accused Masterson of drugging and then raping three women at his home in the Hollywood Hills section of Los Angeles between 2001 and 2003. (The jury deadlocked on the charge that Masterson had raped a third woman.)In the video statement, Kutcher said that he and Kunis were “aware of the pain that has been caused” by the letters. Kunis added, “Our heart goes out to every single person who’s ever been a victim of sexual assault, sexual abuse or rape.”The couple said in the video on Instagram that Masterson’s family had asked them to write the letters “to represent the person that we knew for 25 years, so that the judge could take that into full consideration relative to the sentencing.”Tony Ortega, one of the journalists who published the letters on his Substack, “The Underground Bunker,” wrote that “these letter writers were probably aware that Judge Olmedo could really only choose between 15 to life and 30 to life.”“They knew they were not trying to convince her to let Danny walk out of prison,” he added. Another Substack, “Legal Affairs and Trials with Meghann Cuniff,” also published the letters.The case against Masterson drew widespread attention, in part because of accusations that the Church of Scientology, to which Masterson belonged, had pressured his accusers to keep quiet. The church denied that it pressured the victims.Kutcher and Kunis in their letters described deep connections to Masterson, with Kutcher saying that Masterson had been his friend and role model for 25 years.“We’ve traveled around the world together, raised our daughters together and shared countless family moments,” Kutcher said, adding “he is among few people that I would trust to be alone with my son and daughter.”Kunis added that Masterson’s “unwavering commitment to being an exceptional older brother figure to me has had a transformative impact on my life.”Masterson will be eligible for parole in 20 years, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office. More

  • in

    Tory Lanez Is Expected to Be Sentenced for Shooting Megan Thee Stallion

    The Canadian rapper was found guilty in December of shooting Megan Thee Stallion in both her feet during an argument.The Canadian rapper and singer Tory Lanez is expected to be sentenced on Monday for shooting Megan Thee Stallion, a fellow artist and onetime friend, in both of her feet during an argument in the summer of 2020. Details of the assault came out gradually via social media and evolving law enforcement accounts, leading to a yearslong legal saga that became tawdry tabloid fodder while also generating broader conversation about the treatment of Black women in music and beyond.Prosecutors are seeking a 13-year sentence for Mr. Lanez, born Daystar Peterson, arguing that he lacked remorse and was “clearly incapable of accepting any responsibility for his own actions,” citing “a campaign to humiliate and retraumatize the victim” following the shooting.“The defendant actively invited harassment of the victim by spreading misinformation to his large following in an effort to galvanize the public against the victim and even the prosecution team without any regard to the dangers it posed,” prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum. “The defendant has weaponized misinformation to his large following to such a degree that it has left a lasting traumatic impact on the victim.”Mr. Lanez was found guilty in December of three felony counts: assault with a semiautomatic handgun, carrying a loaded, unregistered firearm in a vehicle and discharging a firearm with gross negligence. He faces a maximum of 22 years and eight months in prison, as well as potential deportation to Canada.Lawyers for Mr. Lanez, 31, had filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that Instagram posts and a tattoo shown in court were prejudicial evidence, but the judge denied their request in May. Prosecutors had said the defense’s motion was “replete with colorful rhetoric” but lacked substance and failed to “cite a single instance of error in the trial court.”Following that hearing, Mr. Lanez told the judge: “Please don’t ruin my life. I could be your son, I could be your brother.”Ahead of the trial, the two artists had traded barbs in songs and online for more than a year.Megan Thee Stallion, born Megan Pete, testified that Mr. Lanez, with whom she had a brief romantic entanglement, fired at her several times after she exited a vehicle that was taking them home from a pool party at the reality star Kylie Jenner’s residence. According to testimony, a drunken fight about relationships and careers had erupted between the two artists and another friend in the S.U.V., Kelsey Harris.Megan Thee Stallion testified in the trial in December, saying Mr. Lanez had offered her a million dollars for her silence.Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesMegan Thee Stallion initially told responding officers that she had stepped on glass, explaining later that she had been on high alert after the police killing of George Floyd and was also worried about how “snitching” on Mr. Lanez would affect her career in hip-hop. Following initial coverage of the case, in which Mr. Lanez was charged only with weapons possession, Megan Thee Stallion named the rapper as her assailant on Instagram.She testified that Mr. Lanez had apologized, and offered her and Ms. Harris a million dollars each to keep quiet about the shooting.On the stand, Ms. Harris declined to identify Mr. Lanez as the gunman, even as the defense put forth a theory that she may have shot her friend out of jealousy. But in earlier text messages and an interview with detectives that were also presented to the jury, Ms. Harris corroborated Megan Thee Stallion’s story.Mr. Lanez’s sentencing had originally been scheduled for January but was rescheduled several times as he hired new lawyers and sought a new trial. The rapper’s defense team argued that the jury might have been improperly swayed by a shirtless photo of Mr. Lanez that revealed a firearm tattoo, saying it could paint him as “a gun-wielding career criminal.” It also said the potential that prosecutors would use Mr. Lanez’s lyrics against him had “impermissibly chilled” his right to testify. More

  • in

    ‘Since I Been Down’ Review: Crime and Punishment

    The inmates in this documentary offer reasons for rethinking the harsh sentencing of young people in Washington State.On a May night in 1997, in Tacoma, Wash., Kimonti Carter strafed a car he believed was carrying rival gang members. It wasn’t — not that that should matter. One of the car’s five passengers, a college student, Corey Pittman, 19, was killed. Carter, who had recently turned 18, was sentenced to life in prison.In the director Gilda Sheppard’s sympathetic documentary “Since I Been Down,” the punishment is also a crime.Rife with archival visuals of Tacoma in the late 1980s and ’90s, when crack cocaine and gang violence were claiming lives, the documentary’s greatest strength is as a listening tour, with Carter as its chief guide.Because Carter shot from a car, he was charged with aggravated first-degree murder, which carried an automatic mandatory life sentence. (His resentencing hearing is scheduled for July 8.) He is not the only subject of harsh prison time. Washington State’s three-strikes sentencing (it abolished parole in 1984) can land especially hard on young offenders.Over the decades, Carter has expressed remorse, but it is his role as a beneficiary of and leader in the inmate-led initiatives the Black Prisoners’ Collective and T.E.A.C.H., or Taking Education and Changing History, that suggests transformation.Other inmates here share insights, as do two former detectives, some ex-gang members, and the mothers of victims and perpetrators. One former inmate, Tonya Wilson, who served 17 years, is especially astute about the personal as well as societal forces that led to her incarceration.Another inmate says, “We say a lot of the answers that people in society are seeking will be found in prison.”“We’ve caused pain,” that inmate says, “primarily ’cause we were in pain.”Far from seeming like an excuse, in “Since I Been Down,” this observation sounds like a way toward reckoning and change.Since I Been DownNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes. Rent or buy on Amazon, Google Play and other streaming platforms and pay TV operators. More

  • in

    Court Orders Resentencing of Joe Exotic in ‘Tiger King’ Murder-for-Hire Plot

    An appeals court upheld the conviction but ruled that the trial court had miscalculated the sentence for hiring people to kill Carole Baskin.The 22-year prison sentence given to Joe Exotic, the central character in the popular Netflix series “Tiger King,” was vacated as improper on Wednesday by a federal appeals court that affirmed his conviction but ordered him resentenced for hiring people to kill his nemesis, Carole Baskin.Joe Exotic, whose real name is Joseph Maldonado-Passage, was sentenced to prison last year after he twice tried to hire people — including an undercover F.B.I. agent — to kill Ms. Baskin, a self-proclaimed animal-rights activist who had criticized his big cat zoo’s treatment of animals.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled in favor of Mr. Maldonado-Passage’s appeal that his sentence was too long. He argued that a Federal District Court in Oklahoma did not group his two murder-for-hire convictions when his sentence was calculated. If the court had grouped the two counts together instead of considering the counts for separate sentences, his prison term could have been as low as 17 and a half years, according to the court ruling.In addition to two counts of murder-for-hire, Mr. Maldonado-Passage, 58, was found guilty of falsifying wildlife records and violating the Endangered Species Act for his role in trafficking and killing tigers. The court on Wednesday upheld his convictions.In a recording his lawyers provided to The Times, Mr. Maldonado-Passage said after the ruling that he believed his original sentence was “absolute crap.” He also said that Ms. Baskin said she would help him get out of prison if he supported the Big Cat Public Safety Act, a congressional bill limiting the trade of big cats.Mr. Maldonado-Passage’s lawyer for the appeal, Brandon Sample, said in a statement on Wednesday that he was optimistic that the court’s decision was the first of many victories for his client.“I knew when I agreed to represent Joe that an appeal would be difficult,” Mr. Sample said, “but I also knew that the law was on Joe’s side.”Carole Baskin at her Big Cat Rescue compound near Tampa, Fla., in 2017.Loren Elliott/Tampa Bay Times, via Associated PressThe contentious relationship between Mr. Maldonado-Passage and Ms. Baskin, 60, was one of the main plot lines of “Tiger King.” He owned a zoo, the G.W. Exotic Animal Park in Wynnewood, Okla., that housed lions, tigers and big cat crossbreeds, which Ms. Baskin condemned, prosecutors said. Ms. Baskin operated her own big cat facility in Florida, but she described hers as a sanctuary that did not crossbreed big cats.The feud escalated when Mr. Maldonado-Passage renamed his cat shows “Big Cat Rescue Entertainment,” a name similar to Ms. Baskin’s sanctuary, “Big Cat Rescue.” Ms. Baskin won a $1 million lawsuit against him over the name dispute, and he filed for bankruptcy because he could not afford his legal fees, prosecutors said.“It was a rivalry made in heaven,” the court ruling said.Mr. Maldonado-Passage decided to retaliate by hiring two people in 2017 to kill Ms. Baskin in Florida, a federal jury found. He paid his zoo employee, Alan Glover, $3,000 to travel to Tampa and cut off Ms. Baskin’s head.But Mr. Glover “got no further than partying on Florida beaches,” the appeals court ruling said.A month later, Mr. Maldonado-Passage offered a $10,000 payment to a man who turned out to be an undercover F.B.I. agent. He was arrested in 2018.“Despite all his efforts, Maldonado-Passage’s murderous plans failed,” the court ruling said.Mr. Maldonado-Passage now awaits a new sentence as he languishes in a Texas prison, the same place where he tried and failed to persuade President Donald Trump to pardon him. He’s hoping that President Biden will free him.“President Biden, if you are listening,” Mr. Maldonado-Passage said in the recording, “this is the time that you need to be a world hero and sign that pardon.”John M. Phillips, another lawyer for Mr. Maldonado-Passage, said in a statement that his team has new evidence that could change the outcome of the case. The lawyer claims that Ms. Baskin’s husband, Howard Baskin, had spoken years ago with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service about infiltrating Mr. Maldonado-Passage’s zoo.“People should know what they saw in television isn’t the full truth,” Mr. Phillips said. “It isn’t even the tip of the iceberg.”Mr. Baskin did not immediately respond to requests for comment. More

  • in

    Drake Bell Given Two Years of Probation in Child Endangerment Case

    The former star of the Nickelodeon series “Drake & Josh” had pleaded guilty to two charges related to a girl he met online. She attended one of his concerts in 2017.Jared Drake Bell, a former star of the Nickelodeon series “Drake & Josh,” was sentenced on Monday to two years of probation after pleading guilty to two charges against him relating to a girl he had met online and who attended one of his concerts in Cleveland in 2017. More

  • in

    A Film Tries to Make a Difference for Domestic Violence Survivors

    “And So I Stayed” examines how the courts treat women who kill their abusers. The movie played a role in one case that resulted in freedom after a conviction.In 2013, Tanisha Davis, a 26-year-old woman from Rochester, N.Y., was sentenced to 14 years in prison for killing her boyfriend, at whose hands she suffered, she said, nearly seven years of abuse, including choking, death threats and a beating on the night he died. The judge agreed that she was a victim of domestic violence but said her response did not merit leniency. “You handled the situation all wrong,” he told her. “You could have left.”In 2021, because of a new law that allows survivors of domestic violence more nuanced consideration in the courts, the same judge released Davis, thanks in part to a documentary that helped frame her case.It’s not uncommon for documentary projects to have an impact on legal proceedings, once they’ve found an audience and built public attention. But the film that helped Davis, “And So I Stayed,” was not yet released — it wasn’t even finished — when the filmmakers, Natalie Pattillo and Daniel A. Nelson, put together a short video for the court, describing her life.“You could see the strength of the ties she had to her family and the strength of the support she would have” if she were released, said Angela N. Ellis, one of her lawyers. The prosecutor and judge both mentioned watching the footage when they agreed, in March, to set her free.In her eight years in prison, Davis, 34, spoke to her son, now 15, every day. Now that she’s home, “I can just call him in the next room,” she said. “I can’t even explain that joy. I cry happy tears all the time.”For the filmmakers, it was an unexpectedly bright ending to an often heartbreaking and troubling film. “And So I Stayed,” which will have its premiere Saturday at the Brooklyn Film Festival (viewable online through June 13), is personal for Pattillo, who is a survivor herself and whose sister was killed by a boyfriend in 2010. The documentary grew out of her thesis project at Columbia Journalism School, where she met Nelson, her co-director.The filmmaker Natalie Pattillo is a domestic-violence survivor.Gwen Capistran“I didn’t realize how common it was, the gravity of women being incarcerated for defending themselves or their children,” Pattillo said. “Once I found out, I couldn’t stop reporting,” in an effort to show just how misunderstood, and punitive, these cases are within the justice system.The film’s first focus was Kim Dadou Brown, who served 17 years in prison for killing her abusive boyfriend. She became an advocate, traveling to Albany to needle New York lawmakers about the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, the long-simmering legislation that eventually helped free Davis. Introduced in 2011, it was finally passed in 2019, after Democrats flipped the State Senate.The act is among the few laws in the country that grant judges more leniency in sentencing domestic violence victims who commit crimes against their abusers. It follows a growing, research-backed understanding of the patterns of abusive relationships, and the unique hold they have on people within them.“Leaving is the hardest part,” and the most dangerous, Dadou Brown said. “I thought that all men hit, and so I stayed with mine, so I knew which way the blows would come.”After Dadou Brown, a Rochester native and former health-care worker, was paroled in 2008, she volunteered with survivors and crisscrossed the state for rallies — even when money was tight because her felony status made jobs hard to find, she said. With 17 earrings (one for each year of her incarceration) and her signature false eyelashes, “she’s just a force,” Pattillo said. “It’s pure tenacity. That’s Kim.”Dadou Brown has become a fierce advocate for the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, which was finally passed in 2019.Libby March for The New York TimesWhen the bill passed, there was elation among its supporters and the filmmakers. But they kept their cameras rolling.One case that was considered a surefire test of the act was that of Nicole Addimando, a young mother of two in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., who in 2017 fatally shot Christopher Grover, her live-in boyfriend and the children’s father. The film includes police camera footage of that night, when she was found disoriented and driving around in the wee hours, her 4- and 2-year-olds in the back seat.Her case made national headlines because of the severity of the abuse she said she endured: bites and black eyes; bruises and burns to her body, including while she was pregnant, that were documented by medical professionals; rapes that Grover videotaped and uploaded to a porn site. In the film, a social worker calls it not just assault, but “sexual torture.” In 2020, Addimando was sentenced to 19 years to life for second-degree manslaughter; the judge denied that the survivors justice act was applicable.“I felt like we failed her,” said Dadou Brown, who was at the sentencing.The film looks at the case of Nicole Addimando, who was sentenced to 19 years to life for killing her abuser. A judge ruled that the new law didn’t apply to her.Daniel A. NelsonIn the film, Addimando is heard mostly as a voice on the phone from prison; in one call, her mother tries to console her that at least she’s alive, that she escaped the abuse. “I’m still not free,” she replies, weeping.Though there are no nationwide statistics on the number of women incarcerated after defending themselves against abusers, federal research suggests that about half of the women in prison have experienced past physical abuse or sexual violence, a majority from romantic partners. Black women are disproportionately victimized through both intimate partner violence and the justice system: They are the most likely to be killed by a romantic partner and more likely to end up in prison, according to Bernadine Waller, a scholar at Adelphi University.In bringing stories like these to the screen, said Nelson, the filmmaker, the aim was not to dispute who pulled a trigger, but to contextualize those convicted. “The legal system forces you to create the perfect victim,” he said, “and a prosecutor will do everything in their power to characterize a survivor into not fitting into that box.” (In Addimando’s case, the judge said she “reluctantly consented” to the sexual abuse.)Garrard Beeney, a lawyer for Addimando, who is awaiting a decision on her appeal, said the documentary’s examination of the way the judicial system treats survivors is “a necessary, but I also think, not sufficient step,” in changing the process. Police, prosecutors, and judges have to be educated on how to think about domestic violence, he said. “We need that kind of retraining more immediately than a gradual process of understanding.”Dadou Brown being filmed by Julian Lim, center, and Daniel A. Nelson. The film grew out of a thesis project. Natalie Pattillo/Grit PicturesFor Pattillo, who had two of her three children while making the film, some moments felt overwhelmingly raw. “There’s survivor’s guilt, always, when you’re dealing with trauma,” she said, adding, in reference to Addimando, “Why did I get to be OK and not Nikki? Why do her kids not get to be tucked in by her every night?”But it was also “very healing,” she added, “to have a hand in making sure the survivors feel seen and heard and believed through this film.”It originally ended on a dark note, at a vigil for Addimando. Then came the Davis case. The filmmakers were there on the day she was released from Bedford Hills Correctional Facility. Reacclimating to life outside — during a pandemic — is still challenging, Davis said last week. But she wanted her story told as a warning for victims, and a beacon. The filmmakers plan to make the documentary available to those in the legal system — “a tool kit,” Nelson said, on how to employ the new law.Dadou Brown was also at Bedford Hills; she drove Davis’s family there. Her advocacy, Dadou Brown said, had become her life’s calling. “I feel so fortunate to have so many dream-come-true moments,” she said. “Even coming home from prison. My next dream-come-true moment will be bringing Nikki home.” More