shotgun

A judge has rejected Erik and Lyle Menendez’s petition for a new trial, ruling that additional evidence that they suffered sexual abuse at their father’s hands would not have changed the outcome of the trial that has put them in prison for more than 35 years for gunning down their parents.

The ruling, handed down by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William C. Ryan on Monday, is the latest blow to the brothers’ bid for release. Both were denied parole during lengthy hearings in late August.

A habeas corpus petition filed on behalf of the brothers in 2023 argued they should have been able to present additional evidence at trial that their father, Jose Menendez, was sexually abusive.

The new evidence included a 1988 letter that Erik Menendez sent to his cousin, Andy Cano, saying he was abused into his late teens. There were also allegations made by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, who claimed Jose Menendez raped him.

The brothers have long argued they were in fear for their lives that their father would keep abusing them, and that their parents would kill them to cover up the nightmarish conditions in their Beverly Hills home.

Prosecutors contended the brothers killed their parents with shotguns in 1989 to get access to their massive inheritance, and have repeatedly highlighted Erik and Lyle’s wild spending spree in the months that followed their parents’ deaths. .

“Neither piece of evidence adds to the allegations of abuse the jury already considered, yet found that the brothers planned, then executed that plan to kill their abusive father and complicit mother,” Ryan wrote. “The court finds that these two pieces of evidence presented here would have not have resulted in a hung jury nor in the conviction of a lesser instructed offense.”

Ryan agreed with Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman that the petition should not grant the brothers a new trial because the abuse evidence would not have changed the fact that the brothers planned and carried out the execution-style killings in the family living room.

Ryan wrote the new evidence would not have resulted in the trial court proceeding differently because the brothers could not show they experienced a fear of “imminent peril.”

A spokesperson for the group of more than 30 Menendez relatives who have been fighting for the brothers’ release did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for the district attorney’s office was not immediately available for comment.

The gruesome killings occurred after the brothers used cash to buy the shotguns and attacked their parents while they watched a movie in the family living room.

Prosecutors said Jose Menendez was struck five times with shotgun blasts, including in the back of the head, and Kitty Menendez crawled on the floor wounded before the brothers reloaded and fired a final, fatal blast.

The petition rejected this week was one of three paths the Menendez legal team has pursued in seeking freedom for the brothers. Another judge earlier this year resentenced them to 50 years to life for the murders, making them eligible for parole after they were originally sentenced to life in prison.

Both were denied release at their first parole hearing, but could end up before the state panel again in as soon as 18 months. Clemency petitions are also still pending before Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The first trial ended with hung juries for each brother. In the second, allegations of abuse and supporting testimonies were restricted, and Lyle and Erik Menendez were convicted of first-degree murder in March 1996.

Sept. 6 (UPI) — A federal judge on Friday dismissed Newmax’s lawsuit accusing Fox News of maintaining a monopoly on conservative news broadcasting on cable television.

Newsmax on Wednesday accused the Fox Corp. and Fox News Network of violating the Sherman Act, Florida Antitrust Act and the Florida Deceptive Trade Practices Act by forcing cable services providers to feature Fox News and its less popular news outlets over Newsmax and other providers of conservative-oriented broadcast news.

U.S. District of Southern Florida Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the complaint without prejudice due to a “shotgun pleading” by Newsmax.

The most common type of shotgun pleading is one in which a complaint contains multiple counts that repeat the allegations of preceding counts, Cannon wrote.

Each successive count “adopts the allegations of all preceding counts, causing each successive count to carry all that came before and the last count to be a combination of the entire complaint,” Cannon wrote.

She said the court is obligated to dismiss shotgun pleadings and require the plaintiff to file an amended case for the matter to proceed in court.

Cannon gave Newsmax through Thursday to file an amended complaint, which “must not contain any successive counts that incorporate all prior allegations.”

She said counts one through five can include the same factual allegations without broadly incorporating the allegations of the prior counts.

“Each count must identify the particular legal basis for liability and contain specific factual allegations that support each cause of action within each count,” Cannon said.

If Newsmax does not file sufficiently amended pleadings by the end of the day on Thursday, Cannon said she might dismiss the case without further notice.

Newsmax called the dismissal a “technical matter” and plans to file an amended complaint, a representative told UPI.

“Newsmax cannot sue their way out of their own competitive failures in the marketplace to chase headlines simply because they can’t attract viewers,” Fox News Media told UPI on Thursday.

WASHINGTON — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill.

The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called “suppressors” by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks.

The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns.

Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on 2nd Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport.

“Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn’t stand in the way of protecting American gun owners’ hearing,” said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel.

Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons.

“Parents don’t want silencers on their streets, police don’t want silencers on their streets,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York.

The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants.

Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools.

Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades.

Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called “beautiful.”

“I’m glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the 2nd Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill,” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year.

If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online.

Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. “All it’s ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing-safe levels,” Keane says.

Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores 2nd Amendment rights from “over 90 years of draconian taxes.” Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill “with the purest of motive.”

“Who asked for it? I asked,” said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added.

Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the “mass shooting generation” and said the bill would help “gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.”

Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter.

“There’s a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.

Schumer and other Democrats are trying to persuade the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren’t budget-related.

“Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we’ve got,” Schumer said earlier this month.

Jalonick writes for the Associated Press.