Roughly two years after an effort began to have Erik and Lyle Menendez released from prison, a re-sentencing hearing in the San Fernando Valley will begin Tuesday for the brothers, who are serving life prison terms without the possibility of parole for the 1989 shotgun murders of their parents in their Beverly Hills mansion.
The brothers have spent about 35 years behind bars for the Aug. 20, 1989, killings of Jose and Mary Louise “Kitty” Menendez. The Menendez brothers claim the killings were committed after years of abuse, including alleged sexual abuse by their father.
The hearing is expected to last two days at the Van Nuys Courthouse.
In a 2023 court petition, attorneys for the brothers pointed to two new pieces of evidence they contend corroborate the brothers’ allegations of long-term sexual abuse at the hands of their father — a letter allegedly written by Erik Menendez to his cousin Andy Cano in early 1989 or late 1988, and recent allegations by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the Puerto Rican boy band Menudo, that he too was sexually abused by Jose Menendez as a teenager.
Prosecutors allege the murders were carried out due to greed, to acquire their parents’ money.
Defense attorneys are hoping to win a reduced sentence for the brothers, possibly allowing them to either be released immediately or at least become eligible for parole consideration.
Meanwhile, state parole boards are set to conduct separate hearings June 13 for the brothers, then send their reports to Gov. Gavin Newsom to help him decide whether the two should receive clemency.
Interest in the Menendez case surged following the release of a recent Netflix documentary and dramatic series.
The governor said previously that with the exception of brief clips on social media, he has not watched dramatizations of the Menendez case or documentaries on it “because I don’t want to be influenced by them.”
“I just want to be influenced by the facts,” Newsom said.
In October, then-Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced he was in favor of the brothers being re-sentenced to make them eligible for parole. Since the brothers were under 26 at the time of the murders, they could be eligible for parole through the state’s youthful offender law.
Gascón pointed to the brothers’ work to help other inmates, and officials’ assessment that they present a low risk of re-offending. The former district attorney also cited the possible new evidence about the father’s alleged abusive behavior as additional factors in support of new sentences.
However, when he was elected, new District Attorney Nathan Hochman promised to re-examine the case, saying he did not support re-sentencing. Hochman contends the brothers have not shown “insight” into their crimes during their years of incarceration and continue to lie about the alleged abuse.
Last week, attorneys for Erik and Lyle Menendez withdrew a motion asking that the District Attorney’s Office be removed from the brothers’ case, saying they want to expeditiously move forward with their bid to have the pair re-sentenced.
The brothers watched Friday’s hearing before Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic via video from the San Diego prison where they are both are serving their life prison terms.
Attorneys for Erik Menendez, 54, and his older brother, Lyle, 57, had alleged in the motion that “absent recusal (of the District Attorney’s Office), a conflict of interest would render it likely that the defendants will receive neither a fair hearing nor fair treatment through all related proceedings.”
But in court Friday, the brothers’ defense team dropped its bid to have the D.A.’s office removed from the case, saying they did not want any more delays in the re-sentencing hearing.
“We have not wanted to waive time,” defense attorney Mark Geragos said, noting that Hochman was in the courtroom for the hearing.
Hochman again asked Jesic to withdraw the earlier prosecution motion in support of re-sentencing filed by Gascón. But the judge again denied the request, saying that “nothing’s really changed.”
Hochman — who spoke on behalf of the prosecution for the bulk of Friday’s hearing — reiterated his opposition to re-sentencing for the brothers, arguing they have not “accepted complete responsibility for their actions.” He maintained in court that his decision was not based on a “political whim.”
“… Right now, they are not in a position where we would advocate for re-sentencing,” Hochman told the judge.
Geragos argued that the district attorney presented information in court about a recently completed psychological assessment of the brothers “in violation of the rules and regulations.” He called Hochman’s courtroom presentation a “dog and pony show,” and cited what he called “extraordinary rehabilitation” by the brothers.
Geragos said outside court that Hochman’s decision to speak on behalf of the prosecution during the Friday court hearing “shows the degree of involvement and how personal it is.”
He said the defense has the “utmost faith in Judge Jesic to do the right thing.”