Menendez Brothers: Why Their Family Still Fights for Their Freedom

Summary

Podcast Summary: Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield

Episode: Menendez Brothers: Why Their Family Still Fights for Their Freedom
Release Date: May 14, 2025
Host: Ashleigh Banfield

---

Introduction

In this emotionally charged episode of Drop Dead Serious, Ashleigh Banfield delves into the ongoing saga of the Menendez brothers, Eric and Lyle, as their family continues to advocate for their release. With over three decades of experience in true crime reporting, Banfield brings depth and personal connection to the discussion, offering listeners an insider’s perspective on the latest developments in the case.

Recent Developments in the Menendez Case

The episode opens with Banfield announcing a significant judicial decision: the judge has approved the brothers' eligibility for resentencing, determining a sentence of 50 years to life. This decision implies an earlier opportunity for parole, with a scheduled meeting with the parole board on June 13th. Banfield emphasizes the importance of this milestone by stating, “The judge just making a decision that they qualify for resentencing and saying 50 to life” (00:00).

Interview with Anna Maria Barold

A central figure in this episode is Anna Maria Barold, a cousin of Eric and Lyle Menendez. Barold, who testified during the latest court proceedings, provides a heartfelt account of her family's stance on the case. She tearfully explains the complexity of their position, highlighting that while the brothers are victims of their crimes, their release is supported by the family who have also suffered losses. Barold shares, “We are family members of Jose and Kitty, the victims” (00:47), underscoring the nuanced emotions involved.

Understanding the Comprehensive Risk Assessment (CRA)

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the Comprehensive Risk Assessment (CRA), a critical component ordered by Governor Gavin Newsom as part of the clemency process. Barold explains that the CRA is a deep dive into the brothers’ behavior in prison, their rehabilitation efforts, and their potential for reintegration into society. “The CRA as a document is not. It's a one sliver of that process” (02:00), Barold clarifies, emphasizing that it’s part of a broader, more comprehensive evaluation.

Banfield underscores the CRA's importance, stating, “the comprehensive risk assessment is that very, very important deep dive” (02:18). Barold further elaborates on the confidentiality of the CRA, noting that it contains sensitive psychological evaluations and is not typically part of the resentencing process. This confidentiality has led to challenges, as only the legal teams have access to the full document, limiting transparency for family members like herself.

Legal Challenges and Delay Tactics

Barold expresses concerns over potential legal roadblocks posed by the District Attorney’s (DA) office, led by Nathan Hockman. She anticipates “a lot of lawyers arguing” (01:36) and criticizes the DA’s approach as potentially obstructive. Barold mentions, “lawyers arguing is what I'm expecting to happen” (01:36), indicating ongoing legal battles that could delay the process.

She also highlights the DA’s attempts to undermine the brothers' defense by challenging their honesty and the validity of their claims of sexual abuse. Barold asserts, “That is not going to happen because that, he wants them to refute” (12:25), defending the brothers’ integrity and the legitimacy of their experiences.

Impact on the Menendez Family

A poignant moment in the episode is Barold’s recounting of her mother’s traumatic reaction to seeing crime scene photos during a courtroom dinner. Her mother, Terry Barold, was visibly shaken, leading to a hospital visit. “She had never seen them. Even though she had been in the courtroom every day of the original trials” (18:14), Barold explains the deep emotional scars that continue to affect the family decades later.

This incident underscores the lasting impact of trauma, both for the victims’ families and, by extension, proponents of the brothers' release. Banfield poignantly reflects, “30 some odd years later, what trauma can do to you… it can land you in the hospital” (20:31), linking it to the broader narrative of the case.

Criminal Justice Reform and Rehabilitation

The conversation shifts to the broader themes of criminal justice reform and the evolution of societal understanding regarding rehabilitation. Barold advocates for the belief that prisons should focus on rehabilitation rather than mere punishment. “Prisons should be about rehabilitation, not just punishment” (07:50), she states, aligning with Governor Newsom’s stance and the ongoing reform efforts.

Banfield adds historical context, noting significant changes in policies and legal precedents over the years, such as the Supreme Court's rulings against life without parole for juveniles. This evolution in understanding supports the argument for the Menendez brothers' potential for reintegration and societal contribution.

Roy Rosello's Civil Lawsuit

A notable development discussed is the civil lawsuit filed by Roy Rosello, a former member of the band Menudo, alleging sexual assault by Jose Menendez and his manager. Barold expresses hope that Rosello’s bravery in coming forward will influence public opinion and, consequently, the legal proceedings. “He’s been very brave to come forward himself about his story” (15:06), highlighting the increasing willingness of victims to speak out, which could shift perceptions and impact the brothers' case.

Parole Board Hearing and Preparation

Looking ahead, Barold details the extensive preparation that Eric and Lyle are undertaking for their upcoming parole board hearings. She describes their involvement in therapy, educational programs, and other rehabilitative efforts aimed at demonstrating their transformation and readiness to rejoin society. “So they are really doing deep dives into their insight statements” (30:34), Barold explains, emphasizing their commitment to rehabilitation.

Banfield summarizes this phase as “prep mode,” involving rigorous meetings and intensive review of the CRA to ensure that the brothers present themselves as reformed individuals ready to contribute positively to society (31:07).

Family Support and Community Perception

Throughout the episode, Barold and her family articulate unwavering support for Eric and Lyle, highlighting that all living family members advocate for their release. This unified stance is unusual, as typically, victims’ families align with the prosecution. Barold hopes that the visible support from the Menendez family will influence the judge’s decision, asserting, “We want everyone to know how much support Lyle and Eric have” (25:38).

Conclusion

Ashleigh Banfield closes the episode by acknowledging the complex emotions and challenges faced by the Menendez family. She commends Barold for her courage and transparency, offering empathy and support for the family's ongoing struggle. The episode encapsulates the intricate balance between seeking justice for past atrocities and advocating for the possibility of redemption and rehabilitation.

Notable Quotes

• Ashleigh Banfield (00:00): “The judge just making a decision that they qualify for resentencing and saying 50 to life.”

• Anna Maria Barold (01:36): “There's going to be a lot of lawyers arguing is what I'm expecting to happen.”

• Anna Maria Barold (02:00): “The CRA as a document is not. It's a one sliver of that process.”

• Anna Maria Barold (12:25): “That is not going to happen because that, he wants them to refute.”

• Anna Maria Barold (15:06): “He’s been very brave to come forward himself about his story.”

• Ashleigh Banfield (20:31): “30 some odd years later, what trauma can do to you… it can land you in the hospital.”

---

Note: This summary is based solely on the provided transcript excerpt and may not cover all nuances of the full podcast episode. For a comprehensive understanding, listeners are encouraged to tune into the episode directly.

Transcript

[Ashley Banfield]

Foreign I'm Ashley Banfield. Welcome to Drop Dead Serious. I have such a treat for you. Massive news, right, happening with the Menendez case. The judge just making a decision that they qualify for resentencing and saying 50 to life, which really means because they were under 26 when the crime happened, that they get a resentment earlier shot of parole and their meeting with the parole board on June 13th. I had these fabulous interviews that I conducted. One of them is with Anna Maria Barold, who testified in the case today where the judge made this decision, tearfully testified how important she feels it is as their first cousin and someone who speaks with them every day. She said that the feelings of the family members are taken into account. The family members are not just family members of Eric and Lyle. The they are family members of Jose and Kitty, the victims. And they say they want the cousins released even though they are victims of the crimes that Eric and Lyle committed against their loved ones. It mattered. Ana Maria had such a great conversation with me about why this has been such a passion project, how she feels about the case, what she's looking forward to and what she knows about the effects on Eric and Lyle. Again, she talks to them every single day. So I do have a bonus episode all about the decision. So make sure you check that out. But in the meantime, here's my conversation with Eric and Lyle Menendez's cousin, Anna Maria Barold. What, what are you expecting to happen?

[Anna Maria Barold]

There's going to be a lot of lawyers arguing is what I'm expecting to happen. And some of it will be in chambers, so it's called in camera where I won't be a part of it. The, any press that is in the courtroom, they won't be a part of it. And that will be an argument about the CRA's. So that's the comprehensive risk assessment part of the risk assessment that was ordered by the governor. And really that's that important.

[Ashley Banfield]

Like, let's, let's make sure that our listeners and viewers know that the comprehensive risk assessment is that very, very important deep dive that the parole board is doing into everything Eric and Lyle, how they've been while they've been in prison, you know, what they might be like when they're out, what kind of support systems they have. And it is comprehensive. It's exactly that kind of.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yes. The actual clemency process is comprehensive. The CRA as a document is not. It's a one sliver of that process. Right. And it has the psych evals. And that's there's a lot of private information in it. Right. And it is not something that is generally done for a resentencing process. Right. This, that it comes later. Right. So let's say Joe Schmo is up for resentencing. They meet in front of the judge and that judge says, yes, I believe in resentencing. I believe that they're going to be allowed to go to parole. Then the parole process starts and that's when the cras are produced. Okay. We happen to have the cras early because of a different track because the governor had initiated this process for clemency. They're not technically part of the resentencing process. That's sort of putting the cart before the horse. That ends it generally that's end up later.

[Ashley Banfield]

Question for you. I know it was in the last time we were in court, it was so secretive, but have you had a chance to. To look at the comprehensive risk assessment?

[Anna Maria Barold]

No, this is. It's confidential. So that's. I haven't seen it all at this point. All of the lawyers have seen it and, and including.

[Ashley Banfield]

Including Eric and Lyle's lawyer.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

So now they can't share it with you guys.

[Anna Maria Barold]

No, no, it's still a con. It's still a confidential document. Right. That said, I have been assured by everybody who has seen it that, that there is nothing in it to be worried about.

[Ashley Banfield]

Like, you're good to go.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Like, this is not something that we are afraid of. The problem. The reason a. That we didn't want it to happen on April 17 is that our lawyers hadn't seen it yet. Right. So only one side had seen it. So as a witness, you know, I would be testifying and I would be getting cross examined by somebody who had seen things that we hadn't seen.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah. Basically like a discovery process that was only half done.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Right. Like, that's not fair. That that was not setting us up for. To have a really honest, truthful discussion about.

[Ashley Banfield]

So this is great. I mean, you and I had a conversation about, about a month ago and things have changed since because you now have the confidence, based on what your lawyers have seen, that this cra. This assessment is not something to fear.

[Anna Maria Barold]

It's not something to fear.

[Ashley Banfield]

Like, what else. What else is a roadblock now at this point?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Well, I mean, Ashley, lord knows the DA's office will come up with more roadblocks. I mean, that there seems to be no shortage of roadblocks and delay tactics.

[Ashley Banfield]

Like you live this, you know.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah. Where this case is concerned. So I hate To, I hate to jinx it and be like, what else could happen? Because I personally.

[Ashley Banfield]

But what's interesting, Anna Maria, just like to get into the weeds a little bit is that, you know, every time Nathan Hockman has brought up what your side would say is a roadblock, what his side would say is a concern. It seems as though it's diminished in its power in this particular process. It doesn't feel as though he has the full weight of what would normally be the DA's office arguing in court. Yeah, he'll be there, but he doesn't have what he doesn't have all the tools that he wants.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Thank goodness. Because if he had the tools that he wanted, this wouldn't, we wouldn't even be there. Right. He has, he has fought pretty hard to sway public opinion, to sway the judge's opinions, to try and take withdraw sentencing, withdraw entirely from the last administration. So I'm, I'm grateful that he seems to be, to use one of his terms, kneecapped a little bit in this process.

[Ashley Banfield]

But how kneecapped? I mean, I guess I'm, what I'm asking is one can never know for sure when you're going into a legal process. Nothing's a slam dunk. Even O.J. you know, told us that.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Absolutely.

[Ashley Banfield]

But what does Mark Garagos, what does the legal team tell you about your.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Moonshot here for the resentencing? Yeah, that's what you're asking. They seem pretty, they seem cautiously confident that at the end of the day the judge is going to have in front of him all of the information. He will in fact have part of the CRA's, which again we're not afraid of. There's nothing in there that is scary from what I have been told. Again, I haven't seen it, you know, and with the judge is going to have all of them information, he's going to know the statute, he's going to know what's involved in resentencing. He's going to see that it's large part of rehabilitation and their life post conviction. Right. It's not a relitigation of the original trial.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right.

[Anna Maria Barold]

So there's a lot of reasons for us to be confident moving into this knowing that it's the judge's decision making and he seems to be a very fair, even handed judge.

[Ashley Banfield]

So then politics always comes into this. Right. Unless you live in a country where judges are appointed for life, there's no elections, politics is always an ugly piece of even the law. So at this point what political downside is there for this judge? I get it. For Gavin Newsom. Right. I get it. Because there is a sizable group of people, like it's almost a 50, 50, if you look at some of the statistics on those who say they should serve out their sentence, life, no parole, and others who say this is ridiculous. This isn't the 90s anymore. So Gavin Newsome has. Has 50% to lose. But what about this judge?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I don't think the judge. Well, I mean, the judge, of course, wants to make the right decision. Right. This is his credibility on the line as a judge. Right. So he's going to make sure that he dots all of the eyes and he crosses all of the T's. I mean, he has his. His career to think of as a judge, as somebody who really is a follower of the law. So that works, I believe, in our favor. And just to note, Gavin Newsom, you're right, this was a political risk for him. He did not have to get involved. He did not have to step forward. He did not have to issue the risk assessment and put them on the clemency track at all. And for that, I really applaud his bravery, because that is political risky. That could be politically risky for him. But he's a really big believer in criminal justice reform, and he's a big believer that prisons should be about rehabilitation, not just punishment. So for him to come forward, this is really putting action behind those words. And so I'm really. I applaud that.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, evolution, you know, you could say criminal justice reform or criminal justice Evolution. Evolution, you know, absolutely. I've been in this business for 38 years. And so over my career, I've seen such colossal changes in how we look at cases and juveniles. I mean, even in my career, the Supreme Court has weighed in saying, no, you can't execute kids. No, you can't put kids behind bars automatically for life, no parole. We've learned more about who we are and scientifically what we are. And so how much of that do you think is actually going to play into Eric and Lyle's case? The fact that we have evolved. It's just that politically, they are such a headline.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I hope a lot, because if you look at the statute for 1172, which is what is being brought forward, that's the resentencing. The DA initiated resentencing statute. Childhood trauma plays a part because of what we know. Right? You're right. There has been an evolution. Brain science is starting to catch up. We're starting to understand that there are actual physical reactions to brains that happen when they're under childhood trauma. Right. And they create sometimes actions that are irrational, but they shouldn't be punished for life. Right. That's why statutes have come along with that. So I hope a lot. I hope that what we know now in science that how the law has evolved will play a huge part, because it should. That's part of the law.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah. I always find it interesting when you have two guys like Eric and Lyle who have been model prisoners. I mean, we don't have to go over their whole, you know, 30 plus years, but they're really exactly what we ask for in, in the, the penal system. Our, our goal is to rehabilitate even those who are in for life, no parole. Our goal is to make them better. Our goal is to make sure that recidivism disappears one day. You know, our goal is not to turn out monsters because their experience has been so catastrophic and they would be, you know, poster kids for that because they have been model prisoners. Where do you think someone could make an argument that they're dangerous to me on the street if they're let out? Like, where, where would that argument even come from? Where have you even heard that? I would love to hear that other side.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I really. I would love to hear that argument. I don't know. I really don't know how you could, how you could make that argument when they have, I mean, Lyle in 35 years of prison, and we're talking maximum security level four. They're not there anymore, but they started there for years.

[Ashley Banfield]

The worst of the worst, the most dangerous.

[Anna Maria Barold]

The worst of the worst, the most violent people has never had one violent infraction in 35 years.

[Ashley Banfield]

Wow.

[Anna Maria Barold]

You're gonna tell me that he's gonna get released and then commit some violent act? It's absurd. It's absurd. If it hadn't happened now for his entire life behind bars, that's not going to happen.

[Ashley Banfield]

Do you think this whole case for Nathan Hockman, the current DA in la, do you think this whole case revolves around his insistence that Eric and Lyle haven't accommodated for lies? He's listed out, you know, a poster of all the lies that he says. They haven't accommodated for these. They haven't made right by these. Is that where this is at? And if Erica, Lyle did do what he wanted, would that change him?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Well, I don't want to get too much into the mind of the district attorney and say what he would or wouldn't do based on what they would or wouldn't do. I will say though, that most of the lies that he's talking about were cross examined. You know, they, they, they were already addressed. I think what he wants them to do is to say that they made up their, their defense completely. That's what he wants them to do. And that is not going to happen because that, he wants them to refute.

[Ashley Banfield]

The fact that they were sexually abused.

[Anna Maria Barold]

That they were sexually abused and that.

[Ashley Banfield]

And that would be. Right, that would be like a crazy suicide because that's the whole case.

[Anna Maria Barold]

And it's not true that for them to say that would be a lie. That is.

[Ashley Banfield]

And it wouldn't get them right. Like it would be a Pyrrhic victory because it wouldn't get them to the end goal. Any. Like you're asking me to say I wasn't sexually abused. Therefore, where are we? Why are we even here for resentencing? Because that's based on the fact that I was young, I was abused and these things happen. So I'm not exactly sure that it almost sounds like Nathan Hockman is asking for something that can't happen.

[Anna Maria Barold]

It. Well, it can't happen all. Mostly it can't happen because they were. And so why would they do that?

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, even if they wanted to, even if they wanted to say, fine, I'll fall on a sword and I'll lie to, to accommodate for what you say is I'll lie.

[Anna Maria Barold]

So. But then that would, I came to clean. Right.

[Ashley Banfield]

But then that would wipe out the process. So what would be the point?

[Anna Maria Barold]

You know, and you, you only have to look at Roy Rossello, who this week, you know, initiated a gigantic lawsuit, civil lawsuit for the sexual assault that he made at the hands of Jose as well as his manager at the time.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right, he did that this week.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah, tell me about it. Like two days ago, I think.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, tell me about it.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I'm not an expert in it. However, I know that he did file, I think it was in the state of Florida. He filed it or New York, I'm not sure. You'll have to, you'll have to go back and research that huge civil lawsuit against his longtime manager, the band of Menudo, and, and also against, you know, posthumously against Jose Menendez for the assault that he, that he endured in his time in Menudo.

[Ashley Banfield]

So is that timed, by the way, is that coincidental that it's this week, the same week as the resentencing hearing.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Or is it just so, I mean, I'm not in touch with Roy Rosello and I don't believe that he's in touch with Lyle and Eric's lawyers at this point. Like, they didn't. They're not on his legal team. So I. I don't know. I am. With lawsuits, they take a kind of a long time to build up. And we didn't know there was going to be a delay. He didn't know there was going to be a delay.

[Ashley Banfield]

So will this be mentioned? Will this lawsuit be mentioned on Friday?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I. I don't know. That would be a question for Mark. You can. Yeah, yeah. You can ask him that. I don't know. I would. I hope at some point people do start talking about Roy Rosello, because he's been very brave to come forward himself about his story. It's very difficult for men to share when they have been assaulted. It's difficult for women. It's much more difficult for men. And so I really. My heart goes out to him, but you only have to look at him to say, how can you possibly look at that and still say, oh, Lyle and Eric were lying the whole time?

[Ashley Banfield]

Has Lyle and Eric's team, whatever team, in the anthology of what they've been through, have they reached out to Ricky Martin about his time with Menudo?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I don't know. I don't. I don't have an answer for that question.

[Ashley Banfield]

Because, boy, would that be, you know, if you're talking about politics, right, and you're talking about public opinion and a behemoth like Ricky Martin, if anything, you know, similar happened to him, that happened to Roy Rosello, that. That would certainly change the needle.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I've heard a lot of chatter online about Ricky Martin and what he may or may not have experienced. I do like to caution people, though, that I want to be careful that if he were a victim of sexual abuse, that is his story to tell on his timeline, and he should not be sort of pressured in any way to come forward. That is very difficult. That is very personal. So I would hope that people would give him space to find that journey on his own.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, yeah. You can never inflict pain on someone for the benefit of others or even for the justice of others. It's, you know, pain and suffering is a very personal thing, and we accommodate for this in the justice system. It's why you can't be necessarily compelled to testify in all cases about even domestic abuse. Sometimes you can, but. But generally speaking, prosecutors recognize that that's not something you can. You can force.

[Anna Maria Barold]

And why Statutes of limitations oftentimes for sexual abuse are longer than other crimes because it Takes people sometimes decades to be able to speak the words or even remember or. Or even remember. That's right.

[Ashley Banfield]

We have pretty powerful little mechanisms in our brains to allow us to, you know, forge forward in life. And sometimes that is like an amnesia. I remember hearing such an aside, Anna Maria, but I remember hearing when I was pregnant 20 years ago and I was so scared about childbirth that there's like some amnesic effect, physiologically speaking, that women go through, so that they' have another one.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yes.

[Ashley Banfield]

I don't know if it's an old wives tale. I'll be honest with you. I must have researched it and forgot.

[Anna Maria Barold]

That's right.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hey, tell me about your mom, Terry Baral. I mean, the, the headline went out that after the last hearing where the prosecutor kind of sprung these crime scene photos on the courtroom unannounced and without any warning to you, the family, the, the victims, family members, she ended up in the hospital. What, what's going on? Is she okay?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah, she's well. She's home in new now, thank goodness. She spent a couple of weeks in and out of the hospital in California before she was able to go home. You know that after that date, right, where we had won, essentially, we were out. I was out to dinner with my mother and my sister and the motion to withdraw the resentencing recommendation had been defeated and we were going to proceed. Right. So for us, it was a little bit of a celebratory dinner. I was in a celebratory mood and I looked over at my mom and she was just white as a ghost. I mean, she was visibly. I. I don't even know what words to use. And I was like, hey, mom, you like what's going on? You okay? And she said, I. I never saw the crime scene photos.

[Ashley Banfield]

She'd never seen them.

[Anna Maria Barold]

She had never seen them. Even though she had been in the courtroom every day of the original trials. The judge, even Judge Weisberg, who was definitely not on our side, had always been careful to tilt those photos to just the jury and to shield the victim's family. Right. And my mom's 85. She's not online. I had seen the photos. I'm online. You know, I had seen them. She'd never seen them. And that was her brother, who she loved very much. And she was visibly shaken. And it was so, it was so, it was so sad.

[Ashley Banfield]

It was what happened, what actually happened the moment that those photos went up on, I'm assuming a big screen. Like, were you sitting beside your mom?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I was sitting next to my sister who was next to my mother.

[Ashley Banfield]

And what happened that moment, you know.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I don't, I didn't look at her again. I had seen the photos. It really, I didn't realize what was happening to my mother. Two seats down. Right. And you know, and it came right after they played a little snippet of my father who passed away in 2020. You know, so it was such an emotional shock to her. But she, you know, at dinner she was like, she just felt like her whole body just went like she was just gutted. Absolutely.

[Ashley Banfield]

Doesn't this sort of prove a point about trauma? Right, yeah. 30, 30 some odd years later, what trauma can do to you, the physiology of trauma, what it can physically do to you, it can land you in the hospital. A memory, a thought about something terrible that happened to your family can put you in the hospital 30 plus years later. That. This sort of proves the point that Eric and Lyle are trying to make as well. That trauma can, can have a physical effect on you, you know.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yes, that's absolutely, that's absolutely right. That's absolutely, that's a perfect way to frame it.

[Ashley Banfield]

And I have a feeling that your eight. Was your mom 86? 87.

[Anna Maria Barold]

She's 85.

[Ashley Banfield]

85. Okay. I have a feeling that your 85 year old mom may not have made those connections so quickly as to, you know, make that happen in the restaurant. You know, my mom is 87. I don't think she would have come up with that kind of a. That's right.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah. She's not up on the latest brain science for sure.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, for sure.

[Anna Maria Barold]

But she was very aware of how she was feeling after it.

[Ashley Banfield]

I'm so sorry. Please pass on our well wishes to her. And so she will not come back to the courtroom.

[Anna Maria Barold]

She's not allowed. I won't let her near. I'm not going to have her in California until this, all this is done.

[Ashley Banfield]

Is that because of, I mean, would she have been here otherwise? If that's.

[Anna Maria Barold]

She wanted to be. She wanted to be. But I, I'm just, I, I'm not going to risk. I, I really don't trust the prosecutors, you know, so you clear? We were clear. They got a little bit reprimanded and then they did it immediately again where they, they, I mean it was, it, it was within 30 seconds of getting reprimanded and then they said something horrible, horrifying. So I, I'm just, I'm not gonna, I wouldn't risk having her in the courtroom again.

[Ashley Banfield]

So, so that I'm Completely clear. Your mom, Terry Baralt, Jose's sister, would have been there this Friday for this resentencing hearing were it not for the trauma she went through the last time. You're now saying, mom, this is, this is just off limits.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah, off limits.

[Ashley Banfield]

Oh, that's so sad.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Off limits. She will attend the parole board hearing because that's virtual. And she will be part of that for sure.

[Ashley Banfield]

Is it a possibility that any of that evidence will be presented at the parole board hearing?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I don't know. I don't know. But it's because it's virtual. She can mute, she can turn it off for a moment and look away.

[Ashley Banfield]

But hopefully, hopefully it doesn't come up quickly. And to that end, I know that you took action against Nathan Hockman and his team for violating as it Marcy's law, where you can't do things that deliberately harm victims, family members. What, what's the status of that action?

[Anna Maria Barold]

So that was, that was simply a complaint after, after they did that. And it was mostly just to get on the record that behavior. We don't have a whole lot of. There's just not a lot of recourse for us with that. Marcy's law violation. Right. Which states very, very specifically that victims and their families of victims are to be treated with respect and dignity at all times through the criminal process.

[Ashley Banfield]

And that's a real nebulous, you know.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Which is, but also the recourse is, is very tenuous at best. Right. There's not a whole lot that can come out of it. But we did want it on record.

[Ashley Banfield]

That they had, you can, you can have a sternly word letter that's certainly worded letter. Exactly.

[Anna Maria Barold]

That's. It amounted to a finger shaking, but we'll take it, you know, so who.

[Ashley Banfield]

All is going to be there? And is there strength in numbers when it comes to family members showing up in the courtroom in front of the judge? I mean, I always say it's like a, it's like a wedding. A courtroom is like a wedding. You have one side that lines up behind defense table, family, friends, et cetera. And you have one side that lines up behind victims table. And, and it is like that kind of a demarcation. I wondered if that's important in a case where it's really a bench hearing. There's no, there's no jury here. Does it have an impact on the judge to see all the Menendez family members, minus Terry, and I'm sorry for that, lined up behind, behind your, you know, Mark Aragos and the team.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I hope so, because the victim's family is supposed to have a voice in this, in this process. So I hope it does make a difference. I mean, this is a really unusual case, right? Because generally speaking, the victim's family is sitting behind the prosecution, not behind the defense. Right. So this is a really different kind of case. But for us, it really matters that. Because this has so much attention on it in a. In a very global way. Right. We really want everyone to know how much support Lyle and Eric have, just how much we as a family have already forgiven them and have all. And we're so proud of the work that they've done. And I think that's really important for people to see that.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right. It's important to know for anybody who's listening or watching right now, and they don't know this one very important fact. There is not one living family member of Eric and Lyle Menendez that does not support them being released there. There was one up until, what is within the last year, I think an uncle died. Right. One of Kitty's brothers died. Yeah, died. And he opposed this. But now there's literally not one living family member, which is so weird because I always tell people when they find themselves thrust into the world of, you know, courtrooms, for whatever awful reason they might, this unwelcome club that many of them belong to, the prosecutors are supposed to be your lawyer. Basically, they're the lawyer for the people, for all of us, to keep us all safe. But they're also primarily a lawyer for the people who've been defected, most. The victims, family members, which is why it's so odd that you're not sitting behind, like you said, Nathan Hockman and the prosecution's team. To that end, is there any line of communication, is there any conversation at all that happens between the Menendez camp and the prosecution?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Not since Nathan Hockman took power.

[Ashley Banfield]

It ended 100%.

[Anna Maria Barold]

It ended. There was one meeting in January 3rd that we pretty much had to beg for an invitation to. Before that, of course, with the previous administration's team, there was communication. We had a victim services person assigned to us with that, you know, because this. It's very difficult. And I think people, they don't understand what a messy, traumatic thing all of this is for us. It is not black and white. This is very hard. This is very difficult. You know, even as I'm getting these words out, like the tears I could cry like that. And because it's this trauma doesn't go away. So Just because we support Eric and Lyle does not mean we are not still victims of this crime. And so the last administration really understood that we had someone who, who was assigned to us that was like, hey, listen, was with us every time we, we had something to go to, even if it was just a matter of sitting with us. Can I get you water? Are you, are you okay? Is there anything. If you have any questions for me about what, what's about to happen, that kind of thing that it was.

[Ashley Banfield]

Do you not have that now? You don't have any victims advocacy?

[Anna Maria Barold]

No.

[Ashley Banfield]

Nothing.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Nothing.

[Ashley Banfield]

It literally ended with the new da. You don't even have a victim's advocate.

[Anna Maria Barold]

No.

[Ashley Banfield]

That seems sort of pretty.

[Anna Maria Barold]

When we sat down with the DA and six other prosecutors from their team, right. Our family came in no victim services.

[Ashley Banfield]

But I just thought those were taxpayer funded services that, that exist no matter who's in office. Why did that end?

[Anna Maria Barold]

I think that I told you, my dog.

[Ashley Banfield]

I. Oh, listen, I'm a big fan. I'm a big fan of puppy dogs and kitty cats making appearances on podcasts. And I always say, Atlas, my 68 pound goldendoodle is right at my feet.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Oh yeah, I got a golden, a one year old golden retriever. He's not that great. Not that great at personal boundaries.

[Ashley Banfield]

But yeah. Why, why do you not have access that every single victim and family member has access to by, by taxpayer funded dollars?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Because I think that it was a very, it's a very inconvenient fact for the DA's office that the victims of this crime are not in their, on their side. You know, that should not rob us of our rights.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right, that's what I'm saying. It seems like a case in itself. Like you could actually petition for that. I suppose you have a lot of fronts that you're busy working on, so it's a little hard to open up a new one. Your latest conversations with Eric and Lyle.

[Anna Maria Barold]

They are busy. So the parole board process is very involved. It's very involved. So they are really doing deep dives into their insight statements so that they can really go through that process with as much information as they can. So they can give the parole board as much information as they can in order for them to make their decisions. So they also, you know, Eric's still in school, they've got their programs that they're running. So they are not sitting around sort of humming and hawing about, you know, delays and stuff like that. They are, they're pretty eager for this to keep moving forward. But at the end of the day, if delays mean justice, then delays are what's.

[Ashley Banfield]

So their meetings, all of their involvement with the parole board and the comprehensive risk assessment. That's all done. That report is done. It's all over but the waiting.

[Anna Maria Barold]

So no. So remember. So that part of it is done. The psych report, that CRA is done. However, they still. We still have a parole board hearing to go to on June 13, which is very involved. It's four to five hours long per brother. Right. Where they are going to be asked a million questions by the commissioners that are involved and where they have to really have clear insight of their crime and what led that led to them and why and the programs they have done and how they are hopefully going to contribute to society once they're out.

[Ashley Banfield]

So they're in prep mode.

[Anna Maria Barold]

So they're in prep mode. Yeah.

[Ashley Banfield]

And what does prep mode involve?

[Anna Maria Barold]

Lots of meetings, lots of writing, lots of. Lots of working the programs, you know, they've been. Eric and Lyle are pretty amazing people. They've gone through a lot of therapy. They've done a lot of programs themselves and this is really their opportunity to show it. Well, I think what his. What's going to be really involved is the part we're not going to see. It's going to be the in chambers dissection of the CRA's, what is allowed in and what is not and coming in and really agreeing on those things and him ruling also based on the governor's input on what can be used and what cannot.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah. Again, CRA seems like it's pretty clean, so. Sure. Dissect.

[Anna Maria Barold]

Yeah, exactly.

[Ashley Banfield]

Bring whatever piece of it that you want that seems to be where, you know, your family side is confident. It's just always great to talk to you. I really appreciate your candor and I'm. And I feel, I feel so sad when I speak with you because sometimes I think that you're very like the child of a marriage where one killed the other and the husband is on trial and he's still your dad and you still love him and you want to support him and he was the person who killed the other most loved being in your world. And that's the same example where you don't know what side to sit on and you don't know where you belong and your heart is at odds with both chambers, either chambers at odds with each other. And I think you're right. I don't think people get that. It's hard to understand. It's hard.

[Anna Maria Barold]

I mean, I don't and without judgment. You know, I wouldn't expect anyone to understand how it feels to be in our family.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, we're. We're intrigued and interested and engaged. And we are hoping the best for your family while still understanding that there is a very large group of people out there who feels very differently. And we have respect for them, too. Let's talk again. Best of luck to you on Friday. And give your mom our best, too.

[Anna Maria Barold]

And thank you for having me, Ashley.