New evidence in Menendez brothers’ case; Search warrant executed in Tupac’s murder – TCD Sidebar
In this episode of True Crime Daily The Sidebar Podcast
Dave Aronberg joins host Joshua Ritter to break down the biggest cases making headlines across the nation. They discuss a suspect arrested in the Gilgo Beach killings, new evidence in the Menendez brothers’ case, and the search of a Las Vegas-area home related to the 1996 shooting of Tupac Shakur.
Tweet your questions for future episodes to Joshua Ritter using the hashtag #TCDSidebar.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:00:10]
Hello and welcome to The Sidebar, presented by True Crime Daily, taking you inside the courtrooms of high profile and notorious cases from across the country. I'm your host, Joshua Ritter. I'm a criminal defense lawyer based in Los Angeles and previously an LA County prosecutor for nearly a decade. You can find me on Instagram and Twitter at @JoshuaRitterESQ or at joshuaritter.com. We're recording this on Friday, July 21st, 2023.
In this week's episode, we have breaking news in a case that had seemingly gone cold after nearly three decades, a search warrant has been executed in connection with the 1996 killing of rapper Tupac Shakur. Also, in another case, nearly 35-years-old, new evidence claiming to corroborate sexual assault claims made by the Menendez brothers surfaces as they look to overturn the convictions for the brutal murders of their parents in 1989. But first, a break in the ten-year investigation surrounding the murder of three escorts found near Long Island's Gilgo Beach.
Today, we are joined by Dave Aronberg, a former member of the Florida Senate and current state attorney for Palm Beach County. David is a legal analyst and commentator you can catch on MSNBC, NewsNation and many other media outlets. Dave, welcome.
David Aronberg:
[00:01:31]
Great to be with you, Josh. Great podcast.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:01:33]
Oh, thank you so much. I have really been looking forward to this, Dave. And I told you this before because I watch you almost nightly on NewsNation. It's become one of my favorite networks to catch the news on, and I really do enjoy when you come on to give your take and view of these cases. So thank you so much for coming on. This is a treat for me personally. And I know that you follow a lot of these things very closely. So I know we're very interested in hearing your thoughts on these cases. But before we jump into them, can you tell us just a little bit about your background and the current work that you do?
David Aronberg:
[00:02:08]
Sure. I'm a state attorney here in Palm Beach County, which is the equivalent of the district attorney. And we're the only state that calls it that. It's state attorney, not state's attorney, like in Illinois, Maryland and other places. No apostrophe, no S And before that, I was a state senator. So I've been at this job for 11 years.
Before that, I was a state senator for eight years, also worked for the attorney general's office for three years, three different stints and most recently as the drugs are. So I went after Purdue Pharma, the makers of OxyContin, and I also helped close down the pill mills that were so ubiquitous in Palm Beach County and in the State of Florida. That's where we had all these unregulated drug dispensaries where they're pushing oxycodone and other opioids run by doctors who are nothing more than drug dealers wearing white coats.
And so, you know, but I'm originally from North Miami, Florida. I went to public schools there, and then I went to Harvard and Harvard Law School and then worked for a big law firm and also got a White House fellowship. So I worked for the Treasury Department for a year and two presidential administrations.
So here I am. I love this job and I love doing the legal analysis on TV, including CNN. You left off CNN there but I do that just as a guest contributor. I'm not employed by any of the stations. And it's just fun to be able to talk about issues, take legal issues and break them down for people who are not lawyers. So I enjoy doing that.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:03:42]
Yeah. And I'm sure it keeps your skills sharpened to kind of analyze these other cases in the work that you do now. Well, we thank you for coming on again and for all your years of public service too. So let's jump into these cases. First, we go to Suffolk County, New York, where law enforcement agencies across the country have now begun to reopen unsolved and missing person cases, looking to establish any possible link to the recent arrest of suspected Gilgo Beach serial killer Rex Heuermann.
Heuermann was indicted by a grand jury on three counts of first-degree and second-degree murder for the deaths of Melissa Barthelemy, Megan Waterman and Amber Costello. Heuermann is also identified in court filings as the chief suspect in a fourth killing of Maureen Brainard-Barnes. The victims, who were reportedly escorts were discovered near Long Island's Gilgo Beach back in 2010.
The case went cold for over a decade until a task force was formed in early 2022, identified Heuermann as a suspect through a vehicle identified by an eyewitness as a first-generation Chevy Avalanche. The task force then subpoenaed tracking data on burner phones that Heuermann allegedly used to arrange meet ups with escorts. Surveillance teams watch Heuermann and his family for months until establishing a DNA link from a pizza crust Heuermann threw in the trash outside of his Manhattan office to a male hair found on the burlap wrapping of one of the victims.
Prosecutors allege that Heuermann worked as an architect, lived a double life, raising his daughter and stepson with his wife while using anonymous devices to meet escorts and search for child pornography. Investigators, with the help of the FBI, are scouring Heuermann's home and vehicles for potential evidence, along with comparing his DNA to that collected in other unsolved cases to see if the alleged serial killer can be positively identified as a suspect in other crimes. Heuermann has pled not guilty to the three murders he is being charged with so far, and his next court appearance is scheduled for August 1st.
All right, Dave, a lot to go through there. So far, we have seen that cell phone data, Internet searches, DNA evidence and surveillance work were all employed in this case. I just want to get your initial impressions about this investigation and the strength of the case as you believe it to be so far.
David Aronberg:
[00:06:11]
Really strong. And for those who say, well, what do you do when you have such an old case, this is not as old of a case as others I've seen. I mean, we just successfully finished a case involving a killer clown that was 33 years old. So this is nothing compared to that. But look, they have a lot of evidence. Not only all the evidence you mentioned, but they had eyewitnesses that said that the killer resembled an ogre, like an evil Shrek. And that's what this guy looks like. Everyone is officially innocent until proven guilty, but I think he'd be hard pressed to even take a plea at this point because the government is going to give him the maximum sentence possible.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:06:51]
Yeah. Yeah, I agree with you. Yeah. On this show, we always talk about, listen, everybody's got a presumption of innocence. We're talking about allegations here. Nothing's been proven in court. I realize all of that. But you have to acknowledge when you see a case that is very strong and I think this is one of those cases. I completely agree with you.
And I really appreciate the amount of police work that went into it because they really left no stone unturned as far as they could go without alerting him to the idea that he was being investigated. And I reviewed some of the documents they filed in court. They even went to the point of in tracking his movement through his cell phones and credit card usage, they were able to determine that at no point did they have the suspect phone having activity where they could put him at a different location.
In other words, there was never an instance where they could point to a fact where he could be shown using his credit card in downtown while the cell phone was being used in Long Island. Every single instance, they matched him up together and thought that was really commendable the amount of work they put into it.
That kind of brings me to my next question here is that my suspicion is that law enforcement saw that he was purchasing another burner phone and they feared that this was the build up to him perhaps planning another murder and that they may have went in to arrest him sooner than they would have planned otherwise. My question to you is, do you think there's any merit to that, my little theory here, and would that be an indication to you of perhaps more indictments being forthcoming? In other words, they had these three locked up, they were investigating others, but they had to make an arrest.
David Aronberg:
[00:08:41]
Yeah. They haven't been able to tie into some other murders that are suspicious that were bodies were buried in the area. The police had enough by the point they made the arrest and the DNA from the hair that was found on the burlap bag, which matched the DNA on the pizza crust was enough.
But law enforcement and prosecutors want to make sure that they cross every T and dot every I because this case is so important. But when they saw that he was getting another burner phone, they thought he could do it again, time to act. But just shows you how law enforcement does such an excellent job of keeping their investigation quiet that this guy felt confident enough to throw a pizza crust out in a public garbage. They didn't need a warrant to get it. It was out there in the public. So this guy let his guard down because the police had such an outstanding job in their investigation.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:09:29]
Along those lines, and the last kind of point I wanted to get to on this was one of the revelations that has come forth was that and this has gotten a lot of attention in the media was the extensive Internet searches for very graphic and disturbing pornography. We're not going to list it here, but it's things are involving, children involving, rape fantasies and violence and everything else, really bad stuff.
But also, he searched specifically for information related to the Gilgo Beach killings in excess of 200 times. And my thought question to you is, how powerful do you think that evidence is? And are you surprised how we continue to see these cases kind of not being solved, but being certainly corroborated with Internet searches nowadays?
David Aronberg:
[00:10:20]
Yeah, it's so much tougher for these suspects to get away with it anymore. Ted Bundy or BTK Killer have been caught much earlier these days because we have the cell phone records. There's some fewer -- there's not many zones of privacy anymore. DNA is prevalent. And you know that you can get these guys and just the technology has increased so rapidly in the last few years.
And so, yeah, I'm with you. I think that the technology helped close the deal pretty quickly here. They could have prolonged it, but they were worried that he was going to strike again. I'm glad that this has finally come to an end. But what's interesting is, is that also the neighbors didn't suspect anything either. They were shocked. It was a quiet life.
Now, as far as the evidence you say about the pornography, it's questionable whether even the searches for child pornography would come in. What will come in if it goes to trial is the searches, the searches for information about the serial killer. That shows conscious of guilt or interest. I mean, it's more than just coincidence. When it comes to the searches for child pornography, that in itself would probably exclude it unless it had some sort of tie to the case. And it may, without knowing more. But it definitely is admissible when you search for information about the killings where you are the main suspect.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:11:41]
You can see the defense coming of, well, he lived in that area. Of course, he's going to be interested in murders that take place in that area, but he's looking at these specific victims that he's now charged with. Like we said, he's got a court date coming up in a few weeks here. We will, of course, keep tracking this case.
Let's move to Los Angeles, California, where 27 years after the murder convictions of Lyle and Erik Menendez, attorneys are asking an appellate court to take another look at the pair's high profile slayings of their parents. A motion filed on behalf of the Menendez brothers seeks to have their sentences vacated or a new evidentiary hearing heard alleging the shootings were not murder, but manslaughter committed out of an honest, though unreasonable belief in the need for self-defense after a lifetime of sexual and physical abuse.
That is a quote from the motion. Specifically, the filing challenges the prosecution's original theory that the boys killed their parents to collect on the family's nearly $14 million estate. New evidence in the brothers' favor includes the discovery of a letter allegedly written by Erik Menendez, alluding to sexual abuse at the hands of his father, Jose Menendez, that was sent to a family member some time before the killings. Also, a former member of the boy band Menudo, has come forward publicly to corroborate the claims of sexual abuse, alleging that he was raped by Jose Menendez, then a record executive with RCA when the band member was 13 or 14 years old.
Notably, the first trial for the Menendez brothers ended with dual hung juries before a second trial convened, where the judge limited the presentation of the abuse allegations, and the brothers were convicted of murder and sentenced to life without parole. All right, Dave, jump right in. In your opinion, do these new revelations move the needle at all? Do you think this is going to alter the outcome for the Menendez brothers?
David Aronberg:
[00:13:41]
It could. I'm not particularly sympathetic to them like some others are. I saw the interview, for example, with Rosie O'Donnell on NewsNation. And like I get it that perhaps if this trial were held, today would be different because of allegations of sexual abuse. It was seen differently 30 years ago when this went to trial and went to trial twice.
But keep in mind, these young men, they grew up in a life of privilege. They murdered. They bought the shotgun that day in advance and they murdered their parents while the parents were eating ice cream, watching TV. And then when they shot the mother, she didn't die. She started to crawl away. And as she was crawling away to try desperately to save her life, they shot her in the head.
And just, it's so horrific. It was so bloody and so awful that the police, when they came, thought it was a mafia hit. There was so much blood. And then they lied about it. And then they went on partying. They were set to inherit all the money and they were living a really good life. Tennis instructors flying around the world and just engaging in really pretty shallow, awful behavior for someone who had just lost their parents.
And then later on, it comes out that there may have been some sexual abuse from the father, Jose. And if that were true, that would mean that the case would probably be more of a manslaughter case than a murder case, and they'd be released from prison right now. But there's one problem with that, because Jose was not the only person murdered that day. He was not the only person killed. What about the mother, the mother who was murdered? I still haven't heard a good excuse for the fact that they slaughtered their mother, who by all accounts, did not participate in any sexual abuse. I heard someone say, well, she knew about it and didn't say anything, didn't prevent it. Not enough to me to justify it to lower the count to manslaughter.
And so I am reluctant to say that they deserve a new trial or should get out early. I do realize that under the new information that's come out, especially the letter from the Menudo band member, that there are now questions that deserve to be answered. And I think those questions will be answered soon.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:16:04]
Yeah. That's a really excellent point that I have not really heard anyone talk about is the mother. You're absolutely right. Everything that they're kind of trying to focus their attention on now are the actions of the father and how there may be this attenuated, imperfect self-defense argument to be made that they wanted to stop the abuse. But you're absolutely right, their mother was also sitting right there. You're absolutely right. They're still going to be guilty of murder when it comes to the mother, even with these arguments. Interesting. I had not thought about it that way.
And just to kind of further crystallize your point being made, too, I think it's a difficult argument on appeal when you're not making the argument of here's new evidence to show I was nowhere near the location of the murders, here's my alibi, or here's new DNA evidence to show someone else was there. They're not trying to say they weren't involved and pulled the triggers. They're just trying to say, here's new evidence to say that there should have been more mitigation heard by the jury to understand their actions. And that's a much more nuanced and difficult argument for an appellate court, I think, to wrap their heads around. No?
David Aronberg:
[00:17:20]
Exactly. No, I agree with everything you said. And this is a cause celeb. I remember when I was younger and watching this on TV and these young boys who were from privilege, who were just milking all their parents' money and just living the good life, after they murdered their parents, who were just sitting on a couch with their backs turned to them, watching TV and eating ice cream, and how they dressed -- the [inaudible] dressed these two boys in these sweaters, in these soft sweaters. It reminded me if you watch Nikolas Cruz, the Parkland mass murderer, they dressed him the same way, and it worked. It worked in the first trial for the Menendez brothers. It worked for Nikolas Cruz. They had these oversized glasses on Cruz. In fact, I've referred to the Nikolas Cruz' sweater as the Menendez brothers' sweater.
And for jurors, something was triggered, and they just did not want to convict them. On the second time, they did. Now, they did not include all the evidence of sexual abuse in the second trial. They limited it. They did include a letter that was written to a cousin about sexual abuse, but they didn't include as much as they did in the first trial. And that's where people are saying, aha, they deserve a new trial. But you correctly point out, Josh, this is different than saying there was a witness who wasn't, you know, new evidence that wasn't heard. This is an appellate issue that I think it's going to be hard for them to reverse it all at this point. Not impossible, but just hard to do.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:18:45]
Yeah. Last point on this, and it's just a hypothetical, but you've alluded to it a few times, we are talking decades later. Our cultural sensibilities, if you want to put it that way, have maybe changed a little bit as it comes to abuse and how people react to abuse and how they behave and the cycle of abuse and all of that. If they were granted a new trial, do you think that if all of this evidence were to come in, would it actually move the needle at all when you're still dealing with kind of a cold-blooded murder of two people's parents?
David Aronberg:
[00:19:25]
Yeah, it could. The first trial was a hung jury, so that could happen. Especially because now we are much more aware of abuse that back then the abuse that was seen as really horrific were father-daughter. But same sex abuse was just not understood, and it was not discussed as much. And nowadays, we see the prevalence of it happening and it is something that is disgusting and appalling. And I think that would resonate with some jurors.
But I think it's still the facts or the facts for the mother, I don't know how you get around that, how you can show that the mother actively enabled it like that. She sent the kids into the room with the father. There was an allegation that she didn't allow people to walk in the hallway where the father's bedroom was. And I mean, that's getting close to it, if that's the case.
But still, the justified murdering your mother from behind. And as she's crawling away and pleading for a life, you finish the job with shots to her head and just I don't know how you get away from that. Now, I guess they're hoping that if it will just be a manslaughter case, then you get 15 years and that's already enough, they'd be out. But we'll see.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:20:42]
Yeah. Yeah. No, the point that you make about the mother I think is exceptionally strong and would still be a problem regardless, if they get a new trial which I still think is a long shot.
Finally, we turn to Las Vegas, Nevada, where in a shocking development over 25 years after the shooting death of Tupac Shakur, authorities have searched a Las Vegas area home looking for clues in the high-profile, unsolved case. On the night of September 7th, 1996, Shakur rode shotgun with Death Row Records co-founder Marion Suge Knight in his black BMW when a white Cadillac pulled up alongside them while they were stopped at a light. Shakur was shot several times, ultimately succumbing to his wounds. Days later, taking the life of the 25 year old rapper in a case that would shock the nation.
In this recent development, Las Vegas homicide detectives executed a search warrant on a home in Henderson, Nevada, on the evening of July 17th, 2023. Among the items recovered were computers, electronics, storage devices, plus photos, movies and CDs surrounding Tupac's killing. We now know that Dwayne Keffe-D, as is his moniker, goes, Davis, 60 years old, was the target of this search warrant. Davis was allegedly involved with the South Side Compton Crips at the time of the murder.
While no charges have yet been filed, the evidence uncovered from the search will be presented in front of a Las Vegas grand jury, though prosecutors have maintained that the investigation is likely to continue for weeks, if not months.
Dave, as a prosecutor, this is what you do. You currently manage a large agency. You have a unique insight, I'm sure, into how significant a development this is. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think this indicates that the charges are forthcoming or is this just kind of another chapter in this case that seems to languish on in the unsolved category?
David Aronberg:
[00:22:44]
Before a search warrant to be executed, you've got to convince a judge that you got probable cause that a crime has occurred, and evidence of a crime will be found at that location. So that's something. But what reports this individual who has written a book, the person whose home was searched, where he talks about the murder, how he talked to police, and they let him go because he came clean on what he knew.
But apparently, it could also be his nephew who could have killed Tupac. His nephew was killed two years later in a separate, unrelated gang shooting in Compton. And so we don't know if the roads will lead to the nephew or to the uncle whose home was searched. So it's still early, but it means that the case never really went totally cold. That's why I think a lot of people think that cold case means it just sits there in an empty file, but it is always being addressed when new evidence comes up. There's always someone assigned to it, especially with a high-profile victim like Tupac, and maybe they're getting closer to justice. We just don't know at this point.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:23:54]
Yeah, yeah, that's a really good point that cold doesn't necessarily mean sitting on a shelf gathering dust. It just means they haven't indicted someone yet. And it also doesn't mean they don't have a suspect. They may have a very strong suspect, that they just feel that they don't have enough to bring to a grand jury. And in my experience, being a DA, that is often times the case, especially when it comes to this kind of what I would call gang related cases.
And oftentimes, you're just waiting for somebody to have the courage to come forward and say, yeah, I'll go on the record. It reminds me, notably in relation to this, Suge Knight was convicted and sentenced to a 28-year prison sentence back in 2017. And it made me wonder if in relation to this case, that might encourage some people to come forward. What do you -- run with me on this. Do you think that that may have pushed things to move a little bit in this case?
David Aronberg:
[00:24:58]
Possibly. Nothing changed your mind like a pair of steel bracelets. You start seeing the next couple of decades of your life in the hoosegow and it starts to make you find religion. So, yeah. So maybe. And there are post-conviction deals. You just lose some leverage once you lie on the stand or once you're convicted of a crime, but you can still make a deal and get out early. It's called a jailhouse snitch, too, if you hear something while you're in there. So, yeah, I'm glad they execute that search warrant. I think it's still too early to speculate, though, whether the homeowner there, the guy whose home was searched, is the target. Yet he could just have evidence pointing to someone else. We just don't know yet.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:25:41]
Yeah. Yeah. Last point on this. Tell us how prosecutorial offices deal with a lot of outside pressure that may not entirely deal with the business of fighting crime and charging people. And what I mean by that is this execution of a search warrant, which happens all the time, every day in every county in the US doesn't get a bunch of national media coverage. Well, this one did. Do you think that's going to put a little bit of pressure on that local agency to actually do something with this information now?
David Aronberg:
[00:26:20]
Yes. But it also put pressure on potential witnesses saying, hey, time to talk is now because walls are closing in. So you want it to be known. I think the police benefit from people knowing that this case is still active. Those who know something are going to get a little nervous right now. And sometimes you do that so that if you get a warrant on the phone, if you get a wiretap on someone's phone, then you wait for that person to make a call. So do you see what happened? And now they're spilling the beans.
So it just depends on the extent of the law enforcement activity. They may have wiretaps on other phones. They may have people in their sights who they're watching to see what happens once word gets out of a search warrant being executed. There's so much new technology these days that, for example, they can get a search warrant of someone's phone so that you know who's calling who right after the search warrant is executed. And I think that this is going to lead to an arrest. I just don't know, an arrest on whom?
Joshua Ritter:
[00:27:20]
Yeah. Yeah. And one of the things they recovered was electronic devices. Who knows where that might lead them to? Perhaps, two other warrants and like you said, ultimately to an arrest. But really fascinating case. I hope they are able to kind of bring some closure to it eventually. But that is our show for this week. Dave, thank you so much for coming on. Where can people find out more about you?
David Aronberg:
[00:27:45]
Well, thank you for having me, Josh. Please follow me on Twitter at @Aronberg, just my last name, A-R-O-N-B-E-R-G or on Instagram and Threads at @DaveAronberg. All one word, Dave Aronberg. On TikTok, at @DaveAronberg. In fact, I think get more hits on my TikTok videos than on the other platforms ironically. Also, I have a Facebook page at Dave Aronberg as well. So look me up.
Joshua Ritter:
[00:28:11]
Absolutely. Please check them out. And I'm your host, Josh Ritter. You can find me on Instagram and Twitter at @JoshuaRitterESQ or at joshuaritter.com. You can find our Sidebar episodes wherever you get your podcasts. And we want to hear from you. If you've got questions or comments you'd like us to address, tweet us your questions with the hashtag #TCDSidebar. And thank you for joining us at The True Crime Daily Sidebar.
