Menendez brothers fight for freedom in pivotal hearing after 35 years behind bars

Lyle and Erik Menendez, sentenced to life without parole for the 1989 murder of their parents, are appearing in a Los Angeles courtroom on Thursday and Friday for a crucial hearing. The sessions, led by Judge Michael Jesic and starting at 9:30 AM local time, aim to determine whether their life sentences can be revised, potentially making them eligible for immediate release after 35 years in prison. The defense seeks a reduction to a 50-year sentence with parole eligibility, citing new evidence of abuse and the brothers’ exemplary prison records. The case, which captivated the United States in the 1990s, has regained prominence due to recent Netflix productions and growing support from family and the public. However, Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman opposes resentencing, arguing that Lyle, 57, and Erik, 54, have not fully accepted responsibility for the brutal killings of José and Kitty Menendez.

The murders took place on August 20, 1989, in the family’s opulent Beverly Hills mansion, where José, a prominent music industry executive, and Kitty, his wife, were shot multiple times with shotguns. Initially, the brothers, then 21 and 18, claimed the mafia was responsible, leveraging their father’s business connections. However, their confession during the trial shifted the narrative, with the defense arguing that the killings were an act of self-defense after years of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse by José, enabled by Kitty’s neglect. The prosecution countered that the motive was financial, driven by a 14-million-dollar inheritance, equivalent to roughly 82 million reais today. The first trial in 1993 ended in a hung jury, but a second trial in 1996 resulted in convictions for first-degree murder, leading to life sentences without parole.

Renewed interest in the case stems from a 2023 habeas corpus petition that introduced new evidence, including a letter from Erik to his cousin detailing the abuse and a former Menudo band member’s allegations against José Menendez. These developments, combined with a Netflix miniseries and documentary, have fueled public campaigns for the brothers’ release. The current hearing is a critical juncture, though Judge Jesic has indicated that a decision may take days, leaving the brothers, their family, and supporters in anticipation of a ruling that could reshape their future.

• Key facts of the Menendez case:
  • Murder of José and Kitty Menendez on August 20, 1989.
  • Conviction for first-degree murder in 1996.
  • Life sentences without parole.
  • Resentencing hearing on April 17-18, 2025.

Revival of the case and growing support

Efforts to secure a resentencing for Lyle and Erik Menendez intensified in 2023 when their legal team filed a habeas corpus petition with previously undisclosed evidence. A pivotal piece is a letter Erik wrote to his cousin Andy Cano eight months before the murders, describing the sexual abuse he endured from his father. Additionally, Roy Rosselló, a former member of the band Menudo, alleged in a documentary that he was also abused by José Menendez in the 1980s while José worked at RCA Records. These revelations have prompted many to argue that, in today’s more trauma-informed judicial climate, the brothers might have faced lesser charges, such as manslaughter, rather than first-degree murder.

The Netflix miniseries “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story” and a companion documentary, both released in 2024, thrust the case back into the spotlight, sparking widespread public support. Social media campaigns, including hashtags like #JusticeForErikAndLyle, have garnered thousands of posts advocating for the brothers’ release after 35 years. Family members, such as cousin Anamaria Baralt and aunt Joan Andersen VanderMolen, have been vocal advocates, attending hearings and speaking at press conferences. They emphasize the brothers’ rehabilitation, noting their creation of prison programs to support inmates with childhood trauma.

However, District Attorney Nathan Hochman, who took office in December 2024 after defeating George Gascón, has taken a hardline stance. Hochman attempted to withdraw a resentencing motion filed by Gascón but was overruled by Judge Jesic, allowing the hearing to proceed. Hochman argues that the brothers fabricated their self-defense claims and points to inconsistencies, such as their purchase of shotguns with fake IDs and attempts to establish an alibi. Despite opposition, the defense remains optimistic, bolstered by the judge’s decision to move forward with the hearing.

Context of the crime and cultural impact

The Menendez murders were a defining moment in American criminal history, blending wealth, violence, and family dysfunction. The family’s Beverly Hills mansion, valued at 4 million dollars, epitomized their affluent lifestyle. José Menendez, a Cuban-American, rose through the ranks of the entertainment industry, working for RCA Records and later Carolco Pictures. Kitty, a former teacher, struggled with alcoholism and depression, contributing to a strained household. The defense’s allegations of abuse contrasted sharply with the family’s public image, revealing a darker reality behind their wealth.

Initially, Lyle and Erik deflected suspicion by spending lavishly after the murders, purchasing cars, watches, and funding extravagant trips, which the prosecution used to argue greed as the motive. The first trial, broadcast live to millions, featured testimony from relatives about José’s controlling and abusive behavior, including accounts of him isolating the brothers during “private” moments. While these claims swayed some jurors, they were largely excluded in the second trial, leading to the 1996 convictions. The case’s high-profile nature set a precedent for televised trials, paving the way for coverage of cases like O.J. Simpson’s.

Culturally, the Menendez case remains a touchstone in true crime storytelling. Its blend of privilege, tragedy, and moral ambiguity has inspired countless documentaries, podcasts, and dramatizations. The Netflix miniseries, while criticized by some family members for sensationalism, amplified discussions about male sexual abuse and judicial fairness. The case’s enduring fascination lies in its ability to challenge perceptions of guilt and victimhood, making it a lightning rod for debates about justice and trauma.

• Cultural impacts of the Menendez case:
  • Pioneered live courtroom broadcasts in the 1990s.
  • Shaped the true crime genre with documentaries and series.
  • Sparked debates on male sexual abuse and judicial reform.
  • Revived interest through Netflix’s 2024 miniseries and documentary.

The current hearing and arguments at stake

The two-day hearing in Los Angeles is a make-or-break moment for the Menendez brothers. Judge Michael Jesic will hear arguments from the defense, led by attorney Mark Geragos, and the prosecution, represented by Nathan Hochman. The defense invokes a California law allowing resentencing for individuals under 26 at the time of their crime, arguing that the brothers’ brain development and abuse history warrant a reduced sentence. If the sentence is adjusted to 50 years with parole, Lyle and Erik, having served 35 years, could immediately apply for release.

Hochman counters that the brothers lack “full insight” into their crime, a key criterion for resentencing. He highlights their continued reliance on self-defense claims, which he deems fabricated, and cites evidence of premeditation, such as the purchase of shotguns days before the murders and the staging of the crime scene. The prosecution also emphasizes the crime’s brutality: José was shot five times, including a fatal shot to the head, while Kitty, wounded, crawled before being killed with a final blast. These details, Hochman argues, outweigh claims of rehabilitation.

The judge’s decision, expected in the coming days, will have far-reaching implications. A resentencing approval would send the case to the California Parole Board to assess the brothers’ risk to society. Concurrently, Governor Gavin Newsom is reviewing a clemency petition, with a risk assessment due by June 13, 2025. The defense is weighing whether Lyle and Erik should testify in person, a high-risk move that could humanize them but expose them to tough cross-examination. Geragos noted in a recent podcast that this decision remains pending, underscoring the hearing’s stakes.

Rehabilitation and life in prison

Over 35 years in California’s prison system, Lyle and Erik Menendez have demonstrated what their defense calls exemplary behavior. At the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, they developed programs to assist inmates with childhood trauma and rehabilitation. Erik, known for his introspective nature, has engaged in writing and therapy, while Lyle has led support groups, earning praise from prison staff. These efforts, the defense argues, prove their readiness to reintegrate into society.

Life behind bars was not without hardship. For years, the brothers were housed in separate facilities, with Lyle in a maximum-security unit. Their reunion in 2018, after persistent advocacy, was a turning point, strengthening their family’s campaign for release. Aunt Joan VanderMolen, Kitty’s sister, emphasized that the brothers have “paid their debt to society.” However, Hochman questions their rehabilitation, arguing that their refusal to fully confess without the self-defense narrative indicates a lack of accountability. He suggested he might soften his stance if the brothers publicly admitted to lying about the abuse, a demand the defense deems unreasonable given their trauma.

Family members, such as cousin Tamara Goodell, counter that any inconsistencies in the brothers’ early statements stemmed from fear and coercion, not malice. Supporters point to their prison contributions as evidence of growth, noting that Lyle and Erik have mentored younger inmates and advocated for prison reform. These efforts, combined with their clean disciplinary records, form a cornerstone of the defense’s case for resentencing.

Family support and divided opinions

The campaign for the Menendez brothers’ release has strong backing from much of their family. In October 2024, over 20 relatives gathered for a press conference in Los Angeles, urging resentencing. Joan VanderMolen described the brothers as “victims deserving justice,” while Anamaria Baralt criticized Hochman for dismissing evidence of abuse. Tamara Goodell argued that the brothers’ early lies were a product of trauma, not deceit. This unified front has bolstered the legal push, with family members attending hearings and engaging with the media.

Not all relatives agree. Milton Andersen, Kitty’s brother, who passed away recently, vehemently opposed release, denying abuse allegations and calling the murders “cold and calculated.” In court filings, he argued that new evidence, like Erik’s letter, lacks credibility. This rift underscores the case’s complexity, dividing those who see the brothers as survivors of a toxic family and those who view them as greedy killers. The public remains similarly split, with social media reflecting both sympathy and condemnation.

Public support has manifested in protests outside the Los Angeles courthouse, with dozens rallying for the brothers. In March 2025, about 50 supporters marched with signs reading “Justice for Lyle and Erik.” Meghan Trimarchi, an Oregon resident, traveled to join the cause, citing solidarity with abuse survivors, while local Patrick Burke said the case resonated with him after revisiting the trial during the pandemic. These voices amplify the broader call for a reassessment of the brothers’ punishment.

• Key supporters of the Menendez brothers:
  • Joan VanderMolen: Aunt, advocates for release and discusses abuse.
  • Anamaria Baralt: Cousin, challenges prosecution’s dismissal of evidence.
  • Tamara Goodell: Cousin, attributes early lies to trauma.
  • Protesters: Dozens rallying for justice and abuse survivor rights.

Legal pathways and next steps

Beyond the resentencing hearing, the Menendez brothers are pursuing multiple legal avenues. A 2023 habeas corpus petition seeks a new trial based on new abuse evidence, though Hochman argues that the letter and Rosselló’s claims are insufficient. Judge Jesic has yet to rule on this petition, but the current hearing could influence its trajectory. A favorable resentencing decision would shift the case to the Parole Board, which would evaluate the brothers’ societal risk.

Clemency from Governor Gavin Newsom is another possibility. In March 2025, Newsom ordered a Parole Board risk assessment, due by June 13, to inform his decision on commuting the sentence or granting a pardon. Newsom, in his final year as governor, faces political pressure but has signaled he will await a full case review. His decision could override judicial outcomes, making it a critical factor.

The hearing’s outcome hinges on Jesic’s interpretation of the evidence and rehabilitation claims. Options include upholding the life sentences, reducing to 50 years with parole, or deferring to the Parole Board without changes. The defense’s consideration of in-person testimony adds a layer of drama, with Geragos noting its potential to sway the judge but also its risks. The coming days will be pivotal for Lyle and Erik’s decades-long fight for freedom.

• Timeline of the Menendez case:
  • August 20, 1989: José and Kitty Menendez murdered in Beverly Hills.
  • 1993: First trial ends in a hung jury.
  • 1996: Conviction for first-degree murder in second trial.
  • 2023: Habeas corpus petition filed with new abuse evidence.
  • April 17-18, 2025: Resentencing hearing in Los Angeles.
  • June 13, 2025: Parole Board risk assessment due.

Debate on justice and abuse

The Menendez case has reignited discussions about male sexual abuse and its treatment in the justice system. In the 1990s, such allegations were often dismissed, particularly when involving men. Many believe that today’s heightened awareness of trauma and domestic violence could have led to a manslaughter conviction rather than first-degree murder. The defense argues that the second trial’s exclusion of abuse evidence skewed the outcome, denying the jury a complete picture.

Hochman, however, insists the crime’s premeditation and brutality overshadow abuse claims. The purchase of shotguns, use of fake IDs, and staged crime scene are cited as evidence of calculation. He also questions the letter’s authenticity, noting its absence during the original trials. The defense counters that trauma and lack of support at the time prevented its disclosure, a point echoed by family members who describe the brothers’ fear of their father.

This divide reflects broader tensions in the U.S. justice system, from rehabilitation versus punishment to the media’s role in high-profile cases. Supporters view Lyle and Erik as symbols of abuse survivors, while critics see them as manipulative opportunists. The hearing tests the system’s ability to balance compassion with accountability, with implications for how similar cases are handled moving forward.

Expectations and future impact

The April 17-18 hearing is a moment of hope and uncertainty for the Menendez brothers and their supporters. Judge Jesic’s forthcoming decision will determine whether Lyle and Erik can pursue parole or remain incarcerated for life. For their family, gathered in Los Angeles, the hearing is a chance to see the abuse allegations finally acknowledged, though the outcome remains unpredictable.

The case also carries broader significance. California’s resentencing law for young adults reflects evolving views on brain development and rehabilitation. Since 2020, Los Angeles has resentenced over 300 inmates, including 28 convicted of murder, with a reoffending rate of just 4%. This framework supports the defense’s argument that the brothers are rehabilitated. The case’s visibility, amplified by Netflix, ensures continued scrutiny, with social media debates shaping public perception.

Whether the brothers are released or not, their story challenges assumptions about guilt, punishment, and redemption. The hearing is not just about their fate but about how the justice system navigates complex issues of trauma and accountability in an era of heightened awareness. The world watches as Lyle and Erik Menendez await their chance at freedom.

• Potential outcomes of the hearing:
  • Upholding of original life sentences without parole.
  • Reduction to 50 years with parole eligibility.
  • Referral to Parole Board for further evaluation.
  • Clemency decision by Governor Gavin Newsom.