Speaker 1: Joe Sclante live from Hollywood. If by Hollywood you mean Burbank.
Speaker 1: This is two hours of the business, end of show business,
Speaker 1: not two hours right now. Though, this is a special
Speaker 1: podcast episode because it is the dol drums of the
Speaker 1: NFL season where we are preempted almost every week, so
Speaker 1: it's going to be podcast only most of the time
Speaker 1: until oh, you know, I'm around the holidays. So we
Speaker 1: are today going to talk about mainly the Menendez thing
Speaker 1: on Netflix. I didn't go to an actual theater this week.
Speaker 1: Some people did. The people that saw Terrifier three made
Speaker 1: it number one, and a lot of people listened to
Speaker 1: my advice and saw Wild Robot, but not enough to
Speaker 1: keep it at number one. Wild Robot. It just can't
Speaker 1: beat it. You just cannot beat it. It's a perfect movie.
Speaker 1: Some people have said, well, I've seen the storyline done
Speaker 1: better or whatever. I don't care. This is a beautiful film,
Speaker 1: you know, and you're gonna love it. The animation is great,
Speaker 1: and animation is just killing it right now. So congratulations
Speaker 1: to Universal for making a better an animated product than
Speaker 1: anything I've seen out at Disney in quite some time.
Speaker 1: And I'm the biggest Disney fan there is, maybe not
Speaker 1: the bigness I biggest. I'm not one of those Disney adults. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm not a pin trader. I'm just you know, I
Speaker 1: grew up in near Disneyland. I went there a lot.
Speaker 1: I used to get in for free early in my youth,
Speaker 1: just hanging out there like it was a you know,
Speaker 1: like the back alleys of the Bowery Boys and just
Speaker 1: causing mischief. Never got kicked out, got in trouble once,
Speaker 1: but never got kicked out, even though I wrote a
Speaker 1: I guess you could call it a hit song, one
Speaker 1: of the Vandals hit song hit song in punk rock
Speaker 1: Pirate's Life, about taking LSD and going on the Pirates
Speaker 1: of the Caribbean ride and being trapped in there because
Speaker 1: you it was an interdimensional experience that was spurred by
Speaker 1: a drug induced fantasy that went wrong. But I never
Speaker 1: did that. I'm just reporting what's out on the streets,
Speaker 1: what's going on in the streets. People are doing that.
Speaker 1: I don't recommend it. You don't need drugs at Disneyland,
Speaker 1: and you shouldn't take drugs at Disneyland because there's a
Speaker 1: lot of heavy machinery and children. So come on, Okay,
Speaker 1: so wild row About. You should see it, and maybe
Speaker 1: they'll have a wild Rowbout ride at Universal Studios that
Speaker 1: might get me to go there. I just went to
Speaker 1: the Universal Studios in Orlando, but in Orlando like ten times,
Speaker 1: kind of Disney World over and over. I love Epcot.
Speaker 1: Never went to Universal. Finally went and I'm like, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's not for me. I mean it's cool, Harry Potter's amazing,
Speaker 1: but I don't know. Okay. So number three is The Joker.
Speaker 1: People say it sucks. I'm not gonna watch it. There's
Speaker 1: no way in hell I'm going to sit down and
Speaker 1: watch The Joker. Beetlejuice. Beetlejuice. Great movie. You should see it.
Speaker 1: Saturday Night Live documentary. A lot of people are going
Speaker 1: to see it from Sony Pictures. But I'm I couldn't
Speaker 1: get myself motivated to go and watch a documentary about
Speaker 1: a TV show in a theater. I couldn't do it.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it. It's not gonna happen. Number six
Speaker 1: is Piece by Piece. I'm not really interested in that one.
Speaker 1: Transformers one again. No Nightmare Before Christmas comes back every year. Great,
Speaker 1: The Apprentice, you don't care, Okay, let's move on to
Speaker 1: what I was going to talk about. First. I'm going
Speaker 1: to talk about, Uh, there's a couple of things. Chapel roone.
Speaker 1: You know her, Do you know who she is? She's
Speaker 1: a transgender queer artist or she's not transgender because she's
Speaker 1: dresses like a girl and she is a girl, but
Speaker 1: her influences are transgendered people and that's her aesthetic. It's
Speaker 1: like I dressed like a dry queen. It's not bad.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, I think if you're a performer,
Speaker 1: I think that's a pretty good one. It's a good one.
Speaker 1: You know, it's theatrical. And yeah. One times I made
Speaker 1: the mistake of like I had an old girlfriend and
Speaker 1: like she'd ask me, oh, do you think that girl's pretty?
Speaker 1: Do you think that girl's pretty? You know? And then
Speaker 1: I made the mistake of answering yes or no. What
Speaker 1: she just shouldn't do You should just say no, one's
Speaker 1: a pretty as you dear. Anyway, after I I told
Speaker 1: her a couple of girls I thought were pretty, one day,
Speaker 1: she goes, you just like girls who look like drag queens.
Speaker 1: And you know you don't want that because then next
Speaker 1: time you're around a girl that looks like a drag
Speaker 1: queen or worse at drag queen, then your girlfriend is
Speaker 1: gonna be suspicious of you. You don't need that, so
Speaker 1: you can't give him information like that. You just can't.
Speaker 1: I only like girls that look like my wife. That's
Speaker 1: problem too, because then there are girls that look like
Speaker 1: my wife, and then she sees them. She goes that
Speaker 1: girl likes me, looks like me. Why he's staring at her.
Speaker 1: But she's not really like that, So I don't have
Speaker 1: to worry about it. But Chapel Roane. I saw her
Speaker 1: at Coachella. She was good. She's an underfire right now
Speaker 1: because Bill Maher is criticizing her, and I'm wondering if
Speaker 1: what happens to her career. Does this help hurt her
Speaker 1: career help her career? I don't know, because it has
Speaker 1: to do with Israel and Gaza and all that stuff.
Speaker 1: And I'm not smart enough to understand what's going on
Speaker 1: over there, and I'm not gonna try. But I do
Speaker 1: know what Bill Maher said. He said, if you were
Speaker 1: in the Mid East, they would throw you off a
Speaker 1: building because that's what they do to queer people. So
Speaker 1: he's trying to tell her give her a fraternal correction.
Speaker 1: Don't get on the Palestinian bandwagon because it makes you
Speaker 1: look like you don't know what they do there to
Speaker 1: queer people. So entertainers always better off just kind of
Speaker 1: being like, hey, you know, I'm next question. Hey, what
Speaker 1: do you think Chapel of what's going on in Israel
Speaker 1: and Gauza? I think all people should be free and
Speaker 1: I'm against war in the end. That's your entertainment advice
Speaker 1: for today. Now there's an actual legal case which is
Speaker 1: kind of fascinating right now. Have you heard of it?
Speaker 1: Limp Biscuit files a lawsuit against Universal alleging they owe
Speaker 1: them to one hundred million dollars in royalties, And you say,
Speaker 1: to yourself, how could that be? I say that to myself,
Speaker 1: how could we How could Limp Biscuit earn two hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars in royalties? Ever, they're big, but wow. Then
Speaker 1: they kind of went away. But then as this nineties
Speaker 1: thing comes back, they have a resurgence. I think last
Speaker 1: time we played the Vandals played with them on a festival.
Speaker 1: They were on one day, We're on the other day.
Speaker 1: The Vandals outdrew them. But since then the nineties thing
Speaker 1: has come back in a big way, and they're the
Speaker 1: poster children for the nineties, so they're I think what happened.
Speaker 1: So they're saying that their their royalties were done wrong,
Speaker 1: and they're they're of course, the lawyer is going to
Speaker 1: say they're purposely calculated to cheat people. I don't know
Speaker 1: if I believe that, but deliberately designed to conceal artists
Speaker 1: royalties so it can pocket the profits. That's a little
Speaker 1: extreme of a charge to make against a the largest
Speaker 1: music company in the world that other people are not suing.
Speaker 1: But so what they were getting, they were getting statements.
Speaker 1: Here's what you get. When you're in the music business
Speaker 1: and you have a record out, you get these statements. Now,
Speaker 1: if you have a sleazy label, they don't even send
Speaker 1: you the statements. But a good label, we're going to
Speaker 1: send you statements either quarterly or bi annually or monthly sometimes,
Speaker 1: and you get these statements and it says mainly you're
Speaker 1: looking at these statements if you're a young rock band,
Speaker 1: to say like are you recouped or not? Are you
Speaker 1: close to getting royalties? Because there's two kinds of royalties
Speaker 1: you would be looking for in your statement. There would
Speaker 1: be a statement for publishing and a statement for album sales.
Speaker 1: We'll call it that now you're publishing. Is the amount
Speaker 1: of money that the record label must pay composers when
Speaker 1: they're mechanically reproducing their copyrights onto a tangible met or
Speaker 1: even a digital medium. A that's caught. Why they call
Speaker 1: it a mechanical royalty. It would be something like just
Speaker 1: I'll just tell you, like I'd be like, let's call
Speaker 1: it seventy cents a record, an album sex six cents
Speaker 1: a song or something like that. They've got to pay
Speaker 1: that to somebody. They pay it to whoever owns the
Speaker 1: composing rights. Who the composer, Maybe he sold his rights,
Speaker 1: maybe he's got a partner. They there's a company called
Speaker 1: Harry Fox that collects that from most people. I don't
Speaker 1: let them collect my money because I can collect my
Speaker 1: own money and I don't want to give them a cut.
Speaker 1: But you were going to if you're a record label,
Speaker 1: every time you mechanically reproduce a record, you got to
Speaker 1: pay that six cents a song. Okay, So you look
Speaker 1: at that, and that goes directly to the band. You
Speaker 1: can't you cannot touch that. You can give it to,
Speaker 1: you give it to the publisher or the band. Sometimes
Speaker 1: a publisher came about and said, hey, fred Durst, let
Speaker 1: me give you a million dollar advance on your publishing.
Speaker 1: Now you're paying it to that guy until it recoops.
Speaker 1: And then it recoops, then you're that guy's got to
Speaker 1: collect the money and start giving it to Fred Durst
Speaker 1: or half of it or or three quarters of it,
Speaker 1: depending on the deal you made and how much money
Speaker 1: of an advance you took. I hope this is not
Speaker 1: putting you to sleep. So that's publishing. That's for songwriting. Now,
Speaker 1: sometimes it goes to a different person because like, if
Speaker 1: you're Elvis, you didn't write your songs, maybe some of them.
Speaker 1: If you're Frank Sinatra, you didn't write any of them.
Speaker 1: So on a Frank Sinatra album, all that money's going to,
Speaker 1: you know, Paul Anka, whoever wrote things like New York,
Speaker 1: New York. That's where that money's going. It's not going
Speaker 1: to Frank Sinatra is only getting the album sales royalties.
Speaker 1: So those are two different things. So when but when
Speaker 1: the Biscuit looks at their statements, their statements all said,
Speaker 1: you're not recouped yet on your album sales, or you're publishing. Actually,
Speaker 1: let's leave publishing a side. Let's just deal with album sales,
Speaker 1: because you're not recouped yet, so we're not paying you anything.
Speaker 1: And then they just kind of got used to that,
Speaker 1: and because well they took says here in this article
Speaker 1: that they got like forty two million dollars in advances
Speaker 1: over their career. Okay, think about that, staggering number. Two
Speaker 1: forty two million dollars. Lord, the Vandals probably got one
Speaker 1: million dollars worth of advances over their entire career. I'm
Speaker 1: going to say five hundred thousand. And we are recouped everywhere,
Speaker 1: everywhere in town, so we get when we get a statement,
Speaker 1: we get actual royalties because we're recouped. Now, if they
Speaker 1: get an advance of one million dollars for their album
Speaker 1: sales from Universal, forget about publishing. They've got to earn
Speaker 1: out that advance before they get a cent. And that
Speaker 1: would be about a dollar to a dollar thirty five
Speaker 1: in Fred durstday, probably a dollar thirty five for each
Speaker 1: CD that was sold. So they got to sell a
Speaker 1: million to recoup a one point three five million dollar advance.
Speaker 1: How many millions of records did they sell? Well, if
Speaker 1: they got a forty two million dollar worth of advance.
Speaker 1: As some of that's probably in publishing. That's a lot
Speaker 1: of records you gotta sell. But over time the streaming
Speaker 1: income started to come in. You know, probably sold some
Speaker 1: songs to some films and evidently the money piled up.
Speaker 1: They were owed a bunch of money and they didn't
Speaker 1: and then finally when they complained about it at all,
Speaker 1: it looks like, according to this article, Universal sent them
Speaker 1: a million dollars to them to fred Durst, and a
Speaker 1: million or to the band, then three million dollars to
Speaker 1: the record label that fred Durst started to put out
Speaker 1: his own records. Because remember for a while he was
Speaker 1: like I got my own record label and directing movies,
Speaker 1: all that kind of stuff. He was a big player.
Speaker 1: So he's getting a good royalty rate because he owns
Speaker 1: a record label. And they did pay him. It's like
Speaker 1: they paid him maybe four million dollars or something like that.
Speaker 1: But his lawyers say, you got two point three million
Speaker 1: to Flawless Records, his company, and one million to him
Speaker 1: in last August. But they filed the lawsuit last week
Speaker 1: and they say there owe two hundred million dollars as
Speaker 1: a lawyer. I heard his name is Quantinets or something
Speaker 1: like that, and he's very colorful and he polls stunts
Speaker 1: and things like that, and he gets in the in
Speaker 1: the public eye and forces things to happen with public pressure.
Speaker 1: That kind of guy. So we're all gonna watch this
Speaker 1: very closely, except for bands, I mean, especially bands that
Speaker 1: have deals with Universal and have had him through the nineties,
Speaker 1: like some bands I won't mention that I'm very interested in.
Speaker 1: So we'll see how that goes. That is limp biscuit
Speaker 1: versus Universal, hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, theoretically,
Speaker 1: we'll see. All right, now, we're gonna get to the
Speaker 1: Menendez thing, because that's the only thing. I mean, I
Speaker 1: just kind of watched it obsessively and didn't go to
Speaker 1: a movie theater and the did you watch it? What
Speaker 1: did you think of it? Put it in my Facebook comments.
Speaker 1: That's the only place you can really get a hold
Speaker 1: of me, or I might respond, Okay, it's nine episodes.
Speaker 1: Nobody's getting nine episodes to do a true crime story.
Speaker 1: But Ryan Murphy. Ry Murphy's one of the most successful
Speaker 1: producers in television, and he's got you know, hits everywhere,
Speaker 1: and he made this huge deal with Netflix and it's
Speaker 1: kind of starting to pay off for Netflix. He did
Speaker 1: the Dammer one, now he's doing this one nine episodes,
Speaker 1: so they really dragged out the story, gave him an
Speaker 1: opportunity to be very artistic with it and to tell
Speaker 1: every side of the story, you know, all these different angles.
Speaker 1: So I some of the parts of it I didn't
Speaker 1: enjoy at all, but in the for the most part
Speaker 1: was I was hooked to I was hooked to it,
Speaker 1: and I enjoyed a lot of it. Is like my
Speaker 1: era of the nineties, you know, when I'm like twenty
Speaker 1: seven in nineteen ninety and this is going on at
Speaker 1: that time, and I'm in law school, and it was.
Speaker 1: It was fascinating back then, still fascinating now if you
Speaker 1: don't know the story. They killed their parents and then
Speaker 1: they seem to have gotten away with it, mainly because
Speaker 1: the Beverly Hills police at that time weren't doing the
Speaker 1: thing that you could pull anyone off the street. Right now,
Speaker 1: there's so much true crime on TV and ask them, Hey,
Speaker 1: if two parents got murdered in Beverly Hills or anywhere,
Speaker 1: who's their and they had two kids. Who's the who's
Speaker 1: the first person you're gonna look at? Well, I look
Speaker 1: at and see if they had any affairs, you know,
Speaker 1: going on, and then I'd look at the kids, you know,
Speaker 1: do they stand again? Who's stand again? Who stand again?
Speaker 1: Of course these kids stood to gain. I mean there's
Speaker 1: some complications about whether they were cut out of the
Speaker 1: wheel or not. But if you're a cop who stands
Speaker 1: to gain, go investigate them. They didn't do anything. They
Speaker 1: let these guys are run around for months selling or
Speaker 1: buying roll x'es and cars, and of course they did
Speaker 1: because they're stupid. And the whole uh the upshot of
Speaker 1: the all the Menendez you know documentaries. There's a documentary
Speaker 1: I watched. First, I thought there's a Menendez thing. I
Speaker 1: went on Netflix and I watched. I thought it was
Speaker 1: everyone was talking about this documentary. I watched that. That
Speaker 1: was pretty good. The Netflix went then I realized, oh,
Speaker 1: there's a narrative, scripted drama here. Let me watch that,
Speaker 1: yep shot of it. These are just two stupid people,
Speaker 1: stupid spoiled chemacos. These guys never had to do anything
Speaker 1: for themselves, and they're there their dad. It seems like
Speaker 1: their dad pretended to say like, I'm gonna be tough
Speaker 1: on you, okay, And then but he's so worried about
Speaker 1: his ego and that these these kids will be show
Speaker 1: pieces for him, and they will go to the best
Speaker 1: schools and they'll be the best tennis players and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. He has to fund it all, and you
Speaker 1: got to worry that. I think, you know one thing,
Speaker 1: if you're a kid like that, you can worry. You
Speaker 1: know what, I don't really need all this stuff. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna dress like a homeless person and see how you
Speaker 1: like that. I'm gonna embarrass you. No, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: don't dress like a homeless person. Here's an unlimited clothing budget,
Speaker 1: you know, that kind of manipulation. So he gave him everything,
Speaker 1: yet he was cruel to them, seems like now, but
Speaker 1: you know, defind cruel when you're trying to raise kids
Speaker 1: who are spoiled brands. I think it comes down to
Speaker 1: his ego. His ego is not letting him raise the
Speaker 1: kids in a normal way. But I don't know how
Speaker 1: to raise kids. Who does. But he raised them in
Speaker 1: a way where they shot him in the face of
Speaker 1: the shotgun. So he obviously I think I can say
Speaker 1: he did a really crappy job. Whatever's method was, it
Speaker 1: didn't work. But after they're arrested, then after a while
Speaker 1: they come up with a story said we killed them
Speaker 1: because we were molested, because they came up with a
Speaker 1: theory where they could argue self defense and avoid the
Speaker 1: death penalty and maybe get out of prison. Because if
Speaker 1: you have an honest, good faith belief that your life
Speaker 1: was in danger and you shot them for that honest,
Speaker 1: good faith belief, you don't get out of jail, but
Speaker 1: you do get to plead to like an involuntary manslaughter
Speaker 1: or a voluntary manslaughter. I think that's what it would be,
Speaker 1: and they cannot charge you with first durg murder if
Speaker 1: you had a good faith belief that your life was
Speaker 1: in danger. So they concocted a story where they had
Speaker 1: a good faith belief that their life was in danger
Speaker 1: because their parents were going to kill them. They basically
Speaker 1: that was part of their thing. They have been molested
Speaker 1: forever and their parents are going to go to kill them,
Speaker 1: that we're going to kill them, And they didn't have
Speaker 1: a very good support for why their mom would kill them.
Speaker 1: And I think that is what the that's one of
Speaker 1: the problems with their case. But in the movie, let's
Speaker 1: talk about the movie. The movie. You watch it, it might
Speaker 1: make you mad sometimes, you know, you say, people never
Speaker 1: say stuff like this or that would never happen. Why
Speaker 1: would they believe this? These people are spoiled brats. But
Speaker 1: you're really seeing this in a Roschmann type scenario where
Speaker 1: different versions of the same story are being told over
Speaker 1: and over and over again, gets a little repetitive. The
Speaker 1: worst is that they keep talking about details of the
Speaker 1: molestation which probably didn't occur, over and over and over
Speaker 1: and over again, the same details over and over and then.
Speaker 1: And my wife at one point was going, Wow, these
Speaker 1: are such detailed molestation stories. How would they even know
Speaker 1: to make this stuff up? And then someone pointed out
Speaker 1: that they were reading all these books about molestation stories,
Speaker 1: so they got really good at it and their life
Speaker 1: was on the line and they put on a performance
Speaker 1: and Okay, no one bought it, and they're in prison
Speaker 1: for the rest of their life. So that's But when
Speaker 1: you're watching this now, you wanna hang Ryan Murphy for
Speaker 1: trying to depict what happened. And sometimes you're mad at him.
Speaker 1: You're like, oh, come on, this why do you do this?
Speaker 1: Why do you do that? But hey, it's an epic
Speaker 1: nine hours. He's got to fill the time, and he
Speaker 1: made I think he did a great job, except for
Speaker 1: repeating the child the pedophile stuff over and over because
Speaker 1: it didn't happen. Most likely it just did not happen.
Speaker 1: They made it up so they could. That's their defense. Hey,
Speaker 1: how we get out of this. Let's make up the story.
Speaker 1: That's the story they made up. It's no different than saying, well,
Speaker 1: I wasn't there, I was over here. I have an alibi.
Speaker 1: It was like, well, I did kill him, but I
Speaker 1: had to because I thought they're going to kill me,
Speaker 1: and you know, they were molested me in my whole life. Okay,
Speaker 1: it's no one bought it, so we don't really have
Speaker 1: to worry about it. But I think you can make
Speaker 1: an argument that if your dad was so mean, you
Speaker 1: had to kill him because you're so freaked out by it.
Speaker 1: And I think the jury could have said, Okay, so
Speaker 1: you killed your dad, we're going to go easy on
Speaker 1: you in that voluntary manslaughter. You were so freaked out
Speaker 1: and so you know, your poor thing. The problem is
Speaker 1: they killed their mom. Okay, so for killing your mom,
Speaker 1: you get the death penalty. No, I'm not really for
Speaker 1: the death penalty, so I'm glad I wasn't around then.
Speaker 1: But you get the maximum penalty for killing your mom,
Speaker 1: which is death. So why are we even talking about it?
Speaker 1: Why coming up with all these excuses about why you
Speaker 1: killed your dad when you killed your mom. No excuses
Speaker 1: for killing your mom. So you get maximum for your mom.
Speaker 1: We can only kill you once. So you killed her,
Speaker 1: you get killed, and we're done. But back then, I
Speaker 1: don't know. I don't know why someone didn't come up
Speaker 1: with that argument. But there's two trials. First trial, they
Speaker 1: give them the benefit of the doubt and they let
Speaker 1: all this stuff in. You're gonna let you plead this
Speaker 1: child molesting thing or whatever, and enough of the jury
Speaker 1: buys it, so they have a hung jury, and so
Speaker 1: they're going to try them again. Second trial, the judge,
Speaker 1: same judge, says, well, I don't want that to happen again,
Speaker 1: so let me manipulate how much evidence comes in, and
Speaker 1: then I know I'll get a guilty verdict, which I
Speaker 1: don't know if that's fair either. So the first one
Speaker 1: was let them say anything and put on a show.
Speaker 1: And the ladies and the jury believed it. The men
Speaker 1: said no way, and then that was unfair because they were,
Speaker 1: you know, just crucifying their parents. There's no evidence for
Speaker 1: this molestation at all. None. There's a couple like people
Speaker 1: that said, well, yeah, I heard, and he told me
Speaker 1: there was something going on. But they also have letters
Speaker 1: of the Menendez kids writing letters to people and telling
Speaker 1: them to come and testify and tell the following lie.
Speaker 1: They call him on the phone, tell the following lie.
Speaker 1: So they have that, so you can't really believe anything
Speaker 1: they say. So basically you have to approach this so
Speaker 1: you can't believe anything they say. But the one funny
Speaker 1: thing is the prosecutor in the first trial says she
Speaker 1: could not find one person to testify favorably for Jose Menendez.
Speaker 1: Could not find one person that would come in and
Speaker 1: say he was a very good guy. Lick, he's been
Speaker 1: murdered in his living room while you're sleeping. No one,
Speaker 1: despite all that sympathy that you might have, she couldn't
Speaker 1: find one person that would come in and say he
Speaker 1: was a nice guy. So that's a problem, and that's
Speaker 1: the problem, you know, that's I guess one of the
Speaker 1: reasons why the trial went on and on and then
Speaker 1: the second So the second one, you know, they didn't
Speaker 1: they weren't allowed to argue the molestations, so they were
Speaker 1: just already it was over before it started, and they're
Speaker 1: serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. Very interesting
Speaker 1: article about Ryan Murphy's version that Eric Menendez has commented
Speaker 1: on it and he said he thinks it's bad. Problem
Speaker 1: is he didn't see it. This is an Entertainment weekly,
Speaker 1: so he's making this big statement about it, but he
Speaker 1: hasn't watched it. So and I go, this is what
Speaker 1: I say to that too. Yeah, TV producers exploit murders
Speaker 1: and victims and all this horrible stuff and they make
Speaker 1: money off it and et cetera. And I think there's
Speaker 1: a lot lot of people that could complain, which are
Speaker 1: you know, victim's families members and things like that. And
Speaker 1: if you have disdain for Ryan Murphy because you think
Speaker 1: he's exploiting your death, okay, fine, valid, valid complaint. But
Speaker 1: for Eric Menendez and Lyle Menendez, once you kill your
Speaker 1: mom for no reason, you don't get to complain about anything.
Speaker 1: So that's just now I don't know if you know this,
Speaker 1: but there's an appeal or a request being made for
Speaker 1: a new trial, because one of the main things is,
Speaker 1: I mean, there's so many there's so many Menendez products
Speaker 1: now on all these streaming service it's literally reigning Menendez
Speaker 1: at the moment. And one of the documentaries shows a
Speaker 1: letter that was written by Eric to his friend a
Speaker 1: couple of weeks before the murders that supposedly proves that
Speaker 1: he was being molested and by his father, and so
Speaker 1: that would change everything. So, I mean, here's what I
Speaker 1: would do, and I would face that if you want
Speaker 1: a retrial, and this is the way I would have
Speaker 1: done the original trial. And I don't know why, and
Speaker 1: they never called me. This would have solved everything. There
Speaker 1: would have been one trial, not two trials, and went over.
Speaker 1: It would have been over in five seconds. I would
Speaker 1: have said, Okay, your dad molested you. All right, I'm
Speaker 1: the DA. I'm gonna I'm not even gonna charge you
Speaker 1: with your dad's murder. Okay, I'm not gonna charge you.
Speaker 1: You're innocent, self defense. I believe you. Good, good for you. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna put you on trial for your mother's murder. Okay,
Speaker 1: did she molest you? No? She didn't. Okay, why did
Speaker 1: you kill her? Oh? Because of this and that that
Speaker 1: she couldn't live without my dad, and she was a
Speaker 1: prisoner too, so we put her out of her misery. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's really bad. That's not a defense. Now you have
Speaker 1: since I let you off for your dad. They were
Speaker 1: convicted anyway of two consecutive there were sentence to two
Speaker 1: consecutive life sentences. All right. Now each of you get
Speaker 1: one life sentence without parole. The other was two without parole.
Speaker 1: Now you get one without parole. Why would the DA's
Speaker 1: office be so interested in convicting them for both murders.
Speaker 1: Just declare them innocent of the father's murder and get
Speaker 1: a life sentence without parole for the mother's murder. No
Speaker 1: one's going to argue with that. And you could do
Speaker 1: the same thing when they come up for appeal. If
Speaker 1: you have half a brain, you would do that. And
Speaker 1: forget trying to convince people that Jose Menendez did not
Speaker 1: molest the two kids. Just throw that one out. They
Speaker 1: only have one life. You have one life sentence without parole,
Speaker 1: and it's done. But nobody calls me. It's just the
Speaker 1: way it goes. But anyway, do I recommend it, Yes,
Speaker 1: I do. Once you see them interviewing them about there,
Speaker 1: they're describing their child abuse, I would just fast forward it.
Speaker 1: I did. You didn't get anything out of that, Ryan
Speaker 1: Murphy maybe did. There's a lot of you know, topless
Speaker 1: men in this thing, a little gratuitous topless bodies in
Speaker 1: this thing. So there's that, you know, and maybe Ryan
Speaker 1: Murphy gets something out of that, or his audience does.
Speaker 1: I don't know. But describing your how you're getting raped
Speaker 1: and stuff when it probably didn't happen, you don't need that.
Speaker 1: So I would fast forward through all that, which you
Speaker 1: can do because the Netflix fast forward thing, the technology
Speaker 1: they are improving it, it gets better and better and better,
Speaker 1: easier to fast forward. It used to be impossible. It's
Speaker 1: just terrible, but it's better. So, like I said, I
Speaker 1: recommend it. But it's uh, it's not for kids, that's
Speaker 1: for sure. All right. I think that's about it. I
Speaker 1: will I'm just brief putting news. The Vandals Christmas Show
Speaker 1: is on sale now December twentieth at the House of Blues,
Speaker 1: San Diego. December twenty, first Saturday Night at the House
Speaker 1: of Blues and I and it's gonna be a lot
Speaker 1: of fun. I hope you will come. It's a big
Speaker 1: tradition for a lot of people. It sells out of
Speaker 1: a year, so get your tickets soon, and I will
Speaker 1: now leave you with just the taste of the greatest
Speaker 1: song I ever written. All O.