Menendez brothers’ bid for freedom hits roadblock: D.A. Hochman opposes resentencing
- Share via
- Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman is seeking to rescind his predecessor’s request for a court to resentence brothers Erik and Lyle Menendez.
- Hochman raised questions about the brothers’ self-defense claims and presented evidence of attempts to cover their tracks after the 1989 killings of their parents.
- A judge is expected to consider the brothers’ resentencing request, but without support from Hochman the process may be challenging, legal experts say.
Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman announced Monday that he opposes resentencing Lyle and Erik Menendez, the brothers who have served three decades behind bars for the 1989 murders of their parents.
Former Dist. Atty. George Gascón last year recommended to a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge that the court reconsider the brothers’ prior sentences of life without the possibility of parole, instead giving them 50 years to life. The move could have made them eligible for parole as youthful offenders because they committed the crime when they were younger than 26.
Hochman filed a motion in Los Angeles Superior Court to rescind Gascón’s request, presenting an analysis of the facts of the case that is far less favorable to the brothers and raises questions about the validity of their self-defense claims. The motion also lays out evidence of premeditation and the brothers’ attempts to cover their tracks.
Hochman said during a news conference that the brothers lied to police immediately after the killings and crafted an alibi, even going as far as to say the slayings were Mafia hits.
“The Menendez brothers have continued to lie for over 30 years about their self-defense — that is, their purported actual fear that their mother and their father were going to kill them the night of the murders,” Hochman wrote in the motion. “Also, over those 30 years, they have failed to accept responsibility for the vast number of lies they told in connection with that defense.”
In the motion filed Monday, prosecutors argued that the brothers’ taking ownership of their crimes would be “key to a re-sentencing analysis since it significantly helps determine whether an inmate poses an unreasonable risk of a danger to the community.”
In 1989, the Menendez brothers bought a pair of shotguns with cash, walked into their Beverly Hills mansion and shot their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, while they watched a movie in the family living room. Prosecutors said Jose Menendez was struck five times, including in the kneecaps and the back of the head, and Kitty Menendez crawled on the floor wounded before the brothers reloaded and fired a fatal blast.
The brothers were charged with murder after Erik, who was then 18, confessed to the killings to his therapist. During the trial, prosecutors argued the brothers killed their parents to gain access to their multimillion-dollar inheritance. But defense attorneys countered that years of violent sexual abuse by their father preceded the shootings, justifying the slayings as a form of self-defense.
After decades in prison, the brothers are pursuing several possible paths to freedom: clemency, resentencing and a habeas corpus petition based on new evidence.
Newsom on Monday plans to propose a new parole board process that could clear a path for more prisoners to have their sentences shortened via a risk assessment investigation similar to the one currently underway for Erik and Lyle Menendez.
The petition filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2023 pointed to a 1988 letter sent from Erik Menendez to his cousin Andy Cano, saying he had been abused late into his teen years. It also mentioned allegations made by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, who said he had also been raped by Jose Menendez.
Hochman announced last month he opposed granting the brothers a new trial, saying the act of murder was the issue in the conviction — not the sexual abuse allegations. The brothers would have had to have an imminent fear that their parents would kill them over the sexual abuse being reported in order for the murders to be considered self-defense, he said.
During the Monday news conference, Hochman said if the brothers accept complete responsibility for their criminal actions, acknowledge that their parents weren’t going to kill them the night of Aug. 20 and fess up to lies they told after the killings, his office would reconsider whether they should be released.
Until that happens, “they do not meet the standards for resentencing,” Hochman said. “They do not meet the standards for rehabilitation.”
A judge is expected to consider the brothers’ resentencing request, but without support from Hochman the process may be challenging, legal experts say.
“Without the D.A.’s blessing, the Menendez brothers have an uphill battle,” Louis Shapiro, a criminal defense attorney who has not represented the brothers, told The Times.
Still, the brothers have continued to pursue other avenues that could result in their release.
Last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom directed the state parole board to launch a risk assessment into whether the Menendez brothers would pose an unreasonable risk to the public if they were released, a first step in their bid for clemency.
If the brothers were to receive clemency and eventually have a parole hearing, Hochman said he would oppose their release.
The governor said he would make his decision on their clemency request after the board’s investigation, which is expected within 90 days.
Those campaigning for Erik and Lyle’s release said they were frustrated by Hochman’s comments Monday, but remain optimistic about alternative ways to win their freedom.
“I am feeling a little bit deflated but also clear in the knowledge that this is not our only path,” said Anamaria Baralt, a cousin of the siblings. “There is still a habeas and this is still within the hands of the governor. I don’t know how much this truly impacts resentencing at all.”
The killings and the brothers’ highly publicized murder trials sparked documentaries, films and a recent Netflix series that has maintained public interest in the case even decades later. Conversations about how the sexual abuse claims were handled during the trials has prompted public pleas and enhanced legal efforts for the brothers’ freedom.
The first trial ended with hung juries for each brother. In the second, allegations of abuse and supporting testimonies were restricted, and Lyle and Erik Menendez were convicted of first-degree murder.
The Justice for Erik and Lyle Coalition, a family-led initiative advocating for the brothers’ release, said in a statement Monday that Erik and Lyle have apologized for their actions, which were the result of sexual abuse by their father and their mother enabling the abuse.
Family members pointed to the brothers’ work in rehabilitation programs in prison as proof of their atonement.
“District Attorney Hochman made it clear today he is holding Erik, Lyle, and our family hostage. He appears fixated on their trauma-driven response to the killings in 1989 with blinders on to the fact they were repeatedly abused, feared for their lives, and have atoned for their actions,” the family said in a statement. “How many times do we have to hear the same attempts to bury who they are today and rip us back to that painful time?”
Hochman’s relationship with the nearly two dozen Menendez family relatives who want the brothers freed from prison has seemingly cratered since he took office last year.
Last month, the family expressed concern when they learned Hochman had demoted and transferred the two attorneys who argued for the brothers to be resentenced under former Dist. Atty. Gascón. The lawyers, Nancy Theberge and Brock Lunsford, have filed a notice of claim, a precursor to a lawsuit, alleging Hochman punished them because he disagrees with their position on the case. While Hochman has declined to comment on the suit, he made clear Monday that he found their prior work on the case lacking.
“As you see by requesting to withdraw, we believe that [Lunsford] and Ms. Theberge did not focus on the key aspects of the determination of resentencing, so I brought in additional people to focus on that and do a full review on the Menendez case,” he said.
Tamara Goodell, a cousin of the brothers who supports their release, last week lodged a complaint with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the United States Attorney’s Office, alleging that Hochman violated her rights as a victim under Marsy’s Law. She accused Hochman of being biased against the brothers.
Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman said Friday that he’ll revisit the issue of resentencing the brothers, who are serving life terms for killing their parents in 1989.
Goodell wrote that when 20 members of the brothers’ family met with Hochman in January, the district attorney had a “hostile, dismissive and patronizing tone” that “created an intimidating and bullying atmosphere, leaving us, the victims, more distressed and feeling humiliated.”
“Rather than focusing on the trauma and concerns expressed by the family, D.A. Hochman shifted the meeting’s focus onto himself, making it a lecture on how he was being personally treated rather than an opportunity to hear and respect the voices of the victims. The lack of compassion was palpable, and the family left feeling not only ignored but further intimidated and revictimized,” she wrote.
Baralt, who was present for the meeting, said Hochman’s behavior was “so intense” that the brothers’ defense attorney, Mark Geragos, had to intercede.
“His response to me was unbelievably aggressive. He was condescending, he accused me of obviously not listening to his interviews … of course I’ve read every single word he’s ever said about our family,” she said. “It was unreal. I felt absolutely attacked in that room.”
Attorneys representing the Menendez brothers did not respond to a request for comment Monday.
The letter emphasized concerns the family has with the involvement of Kathy Cady, the director of the Bureau of Victims’ Services within the district attorney’s office. Cady previously represented Milton Anderson, Kitty Menendez’s brother, who opposed the brothers’ possible release from prison. Anderson died this month, according to his new attorney, R.J. Drieling.
In the letter, Goodell requests Cady be barred from any participation in the case, Hochman be reprimanded and for the attorney general to take over the case to “ensure fairness and impartiality.” Hochman has said Cady has been “walled off” from any involvement in a decision on the brothers’ fate, and the section of the office she oversees has no hand in resentencing or post-conviction matters.
It is not clear what, if any, effect Goodell’s complaint could have on the case. Neither CDCR nor the U.S. Attorney’s Office would have the authority to remove Hochman from the case. The family would have to file a disqualification motion with a judge, according to former federal prosecutor Laurie Levenson.
By meeting with the family, she said, Hochman complied with Marsy’s Law, which effectively functions as California’s bill of rights for crime victims. There is no part of the law that requires Hochman to be “enthusiastic” toward the family’s wishes, Levenson said.
Hochman said Monday he was not biased against the brothers and had not violated Marsy’s Law, echoing Levenson’s point that he was under no obligation to meet with them.
“If they’ve characterized that meeting in whatever way they’re going to say it, so be it,” he said of the allegations he was aggressive.
Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor, said while the letter provides fascinating insight into the meetings between the Menendez family and Hochman, the complaint is unlikely to spur any action by federal prosecutors.
“The feds aren’t going to get involved in a state case to enforce a state law. And generally speaking, Marsy’s Law allows victims to be heard, but there is no real enforcement mechanism,” Rahmani said.
Times staff writer Salvador Hernandez contributed to this report.
