Menendez Brothers Resentencing Hearing Postponed

Introduction to the Case

A scheduled two-day resentencing hearing for Lyle and Erik Menendez, part of a process that could eventually lead to the brothers’ release from prison, was postponed. The hearing, which had already been delayed due to the January wildfires and a request by the Los Angeles County District Attorney to get up to speed on the process initiated by his predecessor, was put on hold to address two motions that the judge wants to consider before proceeding.

What to Know

• A meeting to discuss two motions that the judge wants to address before the resentencing hearing is scheduled for May 9.
• Attorneys for the brothers, ages 57 and 54, will argue they have served enough of a life prison sentence for the 1989 shotgun murders of their parents at the family’s Beverly Hills mansion.
• LA County prosecutors have opposed resentencing, claiming the brothers killed Jose and Kitty Menendez for a multimillion-dollar inheritance.
• The brothers’ attorneys claim the brothers acted in self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father.

The Postponement

A long-awaited resentencing hearing for Lyle and Erik Menendez ground to a halt Thursday just hours after attorneys arrived at the courthouse in Van Nuys, partly over a matter than was not expected to be part of the proceeding. A motions hearing is now scheduled for May 9 after Judge Michael Jesic postponed the scheduled two-day resentencing hearing.

Dispute Over the District Attorney’s Request

At issue are two motions — one to recuse the LA County District Attorney’s Office from the case and another on whether a comprehensive risk assessment report on the brothers is admissible as part of the resentencing hearing. Judge Jesic said both matters need to be addressed before the resentencing hearing can move forward.

Reaction from the Family

"Today was a little bit disappointing for us as a family," Anamaria Baralt, a cousin of the brothers, said outside the courthouse. "There have been some delays in this process that were unforeseeable, like the wildfires, that, of course, we have great patience for. This is another delay that is not so much, but we will continue to show up as a family."

The Risk Assessment Report

The risk assessment report ordered by Gov. Gavin Newsom was not intended for consideration at this week’s hearing, but quickly took center stage in the courtroom. The confusion began Wednesday night when prosecutors said they had seen the report, which was ordered for a separate June 13 parole board hearing. Neither the judge nor the brothers’ attorneys had seen the governor’s report, leading the judge to call a lengthy midday recess to review the matter.

The Brothers’ Attorneys’ Claims

The brothers’ attorneys claim the brothers served enough time in prison for the 1989 shotgun murders of their parents in the family’s Beverly Hills mansion. Defense attorneys claim the brothers acted in self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father.

The Path to the Hearing

The road to Thursday’s hearing began in October when then-Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón asked a judge to change the brothers’ sentence from life without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life. That would make them immediately eligible for parole because they committed the crime when they were younger than 26.

The District Attorney’s Office Opposition

But Gascón was defeated by Nathan Hochman in the November election. After asking for time to review the case, Hochman made it clear his office would not support resentencing and withdrew his predecessor’s request. At last week’s hearing, Deputy District Attorney Habib Balian said a key issue with Gascón’s resentencing petition was that it did not fully address rehabilitation and missed key elements of the original crime committed.

The Hearing’s Purpose

The hearing is an opportunity for the brothers to demonstrate to a judge that they have lived a life in prison that’s worthy of resentencing as outlined under California law. If the judge agrees, their sentence could be reduced to a penalty less than life without the possibility of parole before their case is considered by a parole board.

Conclusion

The postponement of the resentencing hearing for Lyle and Erik Menendez is a significant development in the case. The brothers’ attorneys will continue to argue that they have served enough time in prison, while the district attorney’s office will oppose resentencing. The outcome of the hearing will depend on the judge’s decision on the two motions and the resentencing hearing.

FAQs

• What is the purpose of the resentencing hearing?
  The purpose of the resentencing hearing is to determine whether Lyle and Erik Menendez have served enough time in prison for the 1989 shotgun murders of their parents.
• Why was the resentencing hearing postponed?
  The resentencing hearing was postponed to address two motions that the judge wants to consider before proceeding.
• What are the two motions that the judge wants to address?
  The two motions are one to recuse the LA County District Attorney’s Office from the case and another on whether a comprehensive risk assessment report on the brothers is admissible as part of the resentencing hearing.
• What is the district attorney’s office position on resentencing?
  The district attorney’s office opposes resentencing, claiming the brothers killed Jose and Kitty Menendez for a multimillion-dollar inheritance.
• What is the next step in the case?
  The next step in the case is a motions hearing scheduled for May 9, which will address the two motions that the judge wants to consider before proceeding with the resentencing hearing.