Introduction to the Case
Erik and Lyle Menendez’s resentencing hearings can continue despite opposition from the Los Angeles County district attorney, a judge ruled Friday.
Background of the Case
Former Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón asked a judge last year to change the brothers’ sentence from life without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life. That would have made them immediately eligible for parole because they committed the crime when they were younger than 26.
Recent Developments
But Gascón’s successor reversed course. Nathan Hochman submitted a motion last month to withdraw the resentencing request.
Judge’s Ruling
In light of Hochman’s opposition to resentencing, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic ruled that the court can move forward with the hearing. “Everything you argued today is absolutely fair game for the resentencing hearing next Thursday," he said.
District Attorney’s Office Stance
Hochman’s office said they could not support the brothers’ resentencing because they had not admitted to lies told during their trial about why they killed their parents and did not “fully recognize, acknowledge, and accept complete responsibility” for their crime.
Conditions for Resentencing
Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman explained that his office is ready to move forward with a resentencing hearing for the Menendez brothers as long as they "unequivocally" accept responsibility for their actions.
The Brothers’ Appearance in Court
The brothers appeared in court over Zoom but hadn’t made any public statements through the first few hours of Friday’s proceeding.
The Original Crime
They were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole at ages 18 and 21 after being convicted of murdering their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills home in 1989.
Defense and Prosecution Arguments
While the defense argued they acted out of self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father, prosecutors said the brothers killed their parents for a multimillion-dollar inheritance.
Key Issues with Resentencing Petition
Deputy district attorney Habib Balian said Friday that the key issue with Gascón’s resentencing petition was that it did not fully address rehabilitation and missed key elements of the original crime committed.
Understanding Responsibility
“What does it mean? To learn from your mistakes and truly understand that you were wrong,” Balian said.
Presentation of Evidence
Balian presented evidence and video clips of the brothers’ testimony from the first trial to demonstrate instances where they “hunkered down in their bunker of deceit, lies, and deception.”
Motive for the Crime
He said the brothers killed their parents out of greed when they learned they would be taken out of the will, citing psychiatrist’s notes that he said showed “this was not self-defense.”
Attorney’s Response
The brothers’ attorney, Mark Geragos, called the presentation a “dog and pony show” and said it was “nothing more than political cover” as a result of Hochman defeating Gascón in the district attorney’s race.
Allegations Against the Prosecution
“ They have authorized the denial of sexual abuse,” Geragos said of the prosecution’s presentation.
Legal Basis for Resentencing
Geragos argued the judge had full authority to proceed with resentencing under a California law passed in 2023 that allows a court to recall a sentence and initiate resentencing at any point in time.
Objection to Evidence
Geragos also objected to Balian including a photo of the deceased and bloody Menendez parents in his presentation, which he said “retraumatized” family members and victims. The brothers’ cousin Anamaria Baralt and aunt Terry Baralt were among the family members who were in the courtroom.
Family’s Support and Complaints
The family’s relationship with Hochman has soured. Most of the brothers’ extended family supports their resentencing.
Complaint Against the District Attorney
Tamara Goodall, a cousin of the brothers, submitted a complaint with the state asking that Hochman be removed from the case, citing his bias against the brothers and alleging he violated a law meant to protect victims’ rights.
Allegations of Bias and Intimidation
Hochman had a “hostile, dismissive and patronizing tone” in meetings with the family and created an “intimidating and bullying atmosphere," Goodall wrote.
Questioning the Motives Behind the Withdrawal
In their response to the district attorney’s motion to withdraw the resentencing request, attorneys for the Menendez brothers questioned whether Hochman had legitimate reasons for doing so or was influenced by “a change of political winds.”
Personnel Changes and Lawsuits
The attorneys pointed out that Hochman demoted Nancy Theberge and Brock Lunsford, the two deputy district attorneys who filed the original resentencing motion. Theberge and Lunsford have since filed lawsuits against Hochman alleging harassment, discrimination and retaliation for their work on the Menendez brothers case.
Call for Fairness
“ The law requires fairness, not personal vendettas," Anamaria Baralt, a cousin of the brothers, said in a statement.
Alternative Pathways to Freedom
Without resentencing, the brothers would still have two other pathways to freedom. They have submitted a clemency plea to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has ordered the state parole board to investigate whether the brothers would pose a risk to the public if they are released. The parole board is scheduled to hold its final hearings June 13.
Petition for Habeas Corpus
The brothers also submitted a petition for habeas corpus in May 2023 asking the court to grant them a new trial in light of new evidence presented. Hochman’s office also filed a motion opposing the petition.
Conclusion
The ongoing case of the Menendez brothers highlights the complexities and challenges of the legal system, particularly in cases involving the possibility of resentencing and the pursuit of freedom after lengthy incarceration. The brothers’ fate remains uncertain as they navigate the legal pathways available to them.
FAQs
- Q: What is the current status of the Menendez brothers’ case?
A: The judge has ruled that their resentencing hearings can continue despite the district attorney’s office opposition. - Q: Why did the district attorney’s office initially support resentencing?
A: The initial support was based on a California law that allows for resentencing in certain cases, considering the brothers’ ages at the time of the crime. - Q: What are the alternative pathways to freedom for the Menendez brothers?
A: They have a clemency plea pending with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and a petition for habeas corpus asking for a new trial based on new evidence. - Q: What is the family’s stance on the resentencing?
A: Most of the brothers’ extended family supports their resentencing and has expressed dissatisfaction with the current district attorney’s handling of the case.
