- LA DA lost bid to withdraw past support for re-sentencing
- Brothers seek new sentence with possibility of parole
Erik and Lyle Menendez advanced their bid for resentencing after a California judge ruled Friday that the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office can’t rescind a petition recommending the convicted murderers get a chance at parole.
Judge
“I’m not willing to say because” something wasn’t good enough in the petition, but wasn’t required, that it should be withdrawn, Jesic said.
Prosecutors with the DA’s office implored Jesic to withdraw the petition at a hearing. The brothers are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole for the 1989 murder of their parents.
“The world today believes they pose no danger,” Habib A. Balian said on behalf of the DA’s office. “But what if they do?”
Gascón recommended in October 2024 that they be resentenced to life with parole, making them potentially immediately eligible for parole based on the age of the brothers at the time of the crime.
But current-DA Nathan J. Hochman reversed course in March, citing the brothers’ alleged “lies” about the circumstances behind the murder. He said in a statement Wednesday the court should only recommend resentencing if they “unequivocally, sincerely, and fully accept complete responsibility for all of their criminal actions.”
Balian argued that the brothers are sticking to the same lies they told during their murder trial and went through various contradictory statements the two made. Mark Geragos, the brothers’ attorney with Geragos and Geragos, criticized the prosecution’s presentation, calling it a “Corey Booker-style filibuster” that was intended to “run out the clock” on the hearing.
Balian argued that Gascón’s decision to recommend resentencing had more to do with the timing of his upcoming re-election and his position in the polls. Gascón lost his reelection bid less than two weeks after announcing his intention to recommend resentencing.
But Geragos hit back, arguing it was Hochman’s office who made the resentencing process political. Geragos said he’s been working to litigate a potential resentencing since May 2023 while Hochman’s allegedly hired and promoted people within his office who have expressed unfavorable sentiments about the brothers.
Gascón said that evidence of sexual abuse of the boys by their father led him to make his recommendation. That evidence included a letter sent by Erik to a friend detailing fear of future abuse as well as a sworn declaration by Roy Rosselló, a member of the band Menudo, saying the Menendez’s father assaulted Rosselló when he was 13.
But Hochman said in February that those pieces of evidence were “not credible.” He contended that it is “inconceivable and defies common sense” that the letter wouldn’t have come out during their testimonies during the brothers’ trials. He called the letter a part of a “continuum of lies and deceit and fabricating stories.”
While the brothers have expressed regret for their actions, they’ve demonstrated a “complete lack of insight” into their crimes, Balian said. But Geragos pushed back, contending that “insight” had nothing to do with state law or court precedent.
The prosecution is “not dealing with the law,” Geragos said.
Geragos pointed out that “insight” is included in state parole standards, not the resentencing statute. Nonetheless, Geragos quipped that Lyle Menendez has done “more introspection in the last 30 minutes” than most people do over decades.
“The prosecution didn’t address” any of the good “the brothers have done in the last 35 years,” Geragos said.
Hochman said in a reply brief Wednesday in support of his position to withdraw the recommendation that the court must consider whether the Menendez brothers pose an unreasonable risk of danger to the community. He argued that the brothers’ case for their rehabilitation is “arguably weaker” than that of Robert F. Kennedy’s killer Sirhan Sirhan, who was denied parole by Gov.
The brothers appeared together remotely, donning light blue prison jumpsuits. The two chatted with each other throughout the hearing.
The case is People v. Menendez, Cal. Super. Ct., Nos. BA068880-01 and BA068880-02, 4/11/25.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editor responsible for this story: