In a surprising twist to her usual television courtroom drama, “Judge Judy” Sheindlin has taken legal action against the publisher of the National Enquirer, Accelerate360, for defamation.
This lawsuit stems from an article that incorrectly claimed she was seeking a retrial for the convicted Menendez brothers. The claim was described by Ms. Sheindlin as “unequivocally false.”
The legal action, initiated by Ms. Sheindlin and her attorney Eric M. George, was filed in a state court in Florida. The suit aims for unspecified damages and requests a jury trial, signaling that TV’s “Judge Judy” is not merely looking for a symbolic victory.
“When you fabricate stories about me in order to make money for yourselves with no regard for the truth or the reputation I’ve spent a lifetime cultivating, it’s going to cost you,” she told Deadline on Monday. “When you’ve done it multiple times, it’s unconscionable and will be expensive. It has to be expensive so that you will stop.”
The InTouch and National Enquirer articles published last month claimed she believed Lyle and Erik Menéndez had not received fair justice in their 1996 second trial for the murder of their parents in 1989.
The brothers’ case returned to the spotlight following revelations by Roy Rossello, a former Menudo band member.
Mr. Rossello alleged in the Peacock documentary “Menendez + Menudo: Boys Betrayed” that the Menendez brothers were victims of sexual abuse by their father, Jose Enrique Menendez, an accusation that has reignited interest in their long-standing claims and led to new legal attempts to overturn their 1996 convictions.
This renewed interest has prompted Netflix to announce a documentary on the brothers, while acclaimed producer Ryan Murphy is set to explore the case in the second installment of his “Monster” series.
The defamation lawsuit highlights the disconnect between media speculation and the reality of Judge Judy’s involvement — or lack thereof — in the Menendez legal saga. With the case now proceeding in court, the focus returns to the standards of journalistic accuracy and the impact of false reporting on individuals’ reputations.
“The article was unequivocally false,” proclaims the 20-page filing Monday by attorney George for Ms. Sheindlin.
“It entirely misquoted its source material, which identified the speaker of the challenged statements by name — an individual identified onscreen in the docuseries as ‘Judi Zamos,’ and as an ‘Alternate Juror, First Trial,’” this morning’s filing says of the InTouch article. “Judge Sheindlin has never gone by the name Judi Zamos, nor was she an alternate juror in the Menendez trial.”
• Staff can be reached at 202-636-3000.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.