DISCLAIMER: This article discusses matters of sexual abuse and domestic violence. The intention is to provide information. Discretion is advised.
In 1989, the Menendez brothers fatally shot their parents, their own flesh and blood. In 1993, the first trial against Lyle and Erik Menendez began and was broadcast on live television. The media had a field day coming up with theories and speculations about the boys’ motive, character and even Erik’s sexuality. The general public, along with journalists and other prominent voices, had no problem ripping them to shreds. Considering the boys grew up in a mansion worth millions of dollars, many quickly assumed they were motivated by money. The trial revealed the boys’ years of sexual abuse at the hands of their father as they testified through hoarse voices and strained expressions. The jury was unable to reach a verdict, resulting in a mistrial.
Despite their detailed accounts of the horrific abuse, the brothers were convicted of first-degree murder in the second trial in 1996. Even though decades have passed, the interest in this case hasn’t dwindled – it has shifted along with the social climate. Abuse, especially sexual abuse amongst men and boys, was not taken as seriously or studied as much as it is today. The same goes for psychological studies around the effects of trauma on the brain. The sheer possibility of the abuse taking place, or psychological effects occurring as a result of it, was met with disbelief and reluctance. A nasty concoction of patriarchal gender norms, homophobia and ignorance plagued the Menendez brother's case, playing a crucial role in their fate.
This case still holds a prevalence in popular culture and the media. It's 2024 and two series about the trial have come out on Netflix: “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story” and “The Menendez Brothers.” Director Ryan Murphy’s depiction of the pair in “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story” is unflattering, to say the least. His past projects, including “American Horror Story” and “Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” also showcased a flair for the dramatic. The popularity of these projects partially relied on shock factor and the glorification of dark subject matter. He doesn’t shy away from taboo topics, rather embracing them to the fullest extent. Murphy defends the series, stating “If you watch the show, what the show is doing is presenting the points of view and theories from so many people who were involved in the case.”
In his attempt to be objective, he further contributes to the history of the brothers’ story being misrepresented and muddied. Though the show is framed through many perspectives, many of these perspectives include journalists whose ideas were a product of an ignorant and restrictive time period. Therefore, unfounded rumors and bias frame the story. The result is a confusing and conflicted recreation that strays far from the truth. Lyle’s character is depicted as egregiously arrogant, entitled and violent. Erik’s rumored homosexuality is woven into the plot and emphasized throughout the series. There are a few nods towards an incestuous relationship, including an indulgent and unnecessary scene of the two showering together. More prominently, the brothers are shown as the spoiled apathetic brats the media portrayed them as all those years ago.
My question is, why? It’s one thing to create a show based around a serial killer, though insensitive to the victims and the families involved. It’s another thing entirely to exploit real people who are alive today, who faced enough trauma and abuse to motivate them to kill their parents. Erik Menendez has made several statements voicing his distaste for the show’s depiction of them. Despite what the creator's intentions were, their artistic vision shouldn’t take precedence over reality for the sake of entertainment. It’s no secret that we love to glamorize and dramatize true crime in our culture, but where do we draw the line? Is it really necessary to take the darkest moments of one’s life, re-create them with partial accuracy, paint them in vibrant colors and repackage them for the world to indulge in? The perspective of outsiders has always been at the forefront of this case, so why continue to focus on their ideas and conspiracy theories? If the show were to make a clearer distinction between the rumors and reality it may have been somewhat tasteful. Instead, the entire plot is presented as one nondistinguishable cesspool. My concern also lies in the lack of media literacy viewers may have. Those unfamiliar with the story, or the creator's intentions, may mistake this fictional drama as a factual reenactment of these events. It’s a bizarre choice to put this much faith in an audience while handling such a fragile and serious topic. In the best-case scenario, viewers do their research to navigate the show. The worst case scenario? Murphy, along with the other creators of the show, further a dangerously irresponsible and speculative narrative.
Luckily, “The Menendez Brothers” documentary on Netflix was released at the same time, featuring audio interviews of the pair. Lyle and Erik Menendez have spent years recalling their gruesome experiences and spilling their guts to the public, pleading for us to listen to the story directly from the sources that lived it. As far as I’m concerned, they’re the only people with the credentials to do so. Outsiders may have had the upper hand historically, but don’t be mistaken, it was never their place. The line between fiction and reality may be blurred, but in this case, reality is more crucial than ever. New evidence has come out including a letter from Erik to his cousin Andy and allegations against Jose Menendez (father of the Menendez brothers) made by a former band member of Menudo, whom Jose worked with closely. With a second chance at freedom on the line, it would be a shame if the media once again twisted a narrative that never belonged to them in the first place.
Comments