In a decision that underscores the tough on crime stance of Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman, his office has moved to withdraw the previous administration’s motion for resentencing in the case of Lyle and Erik Menendez, who were convicted of the 1989 murders of their parents, José and Kitty Menendez.
The resentencing hearing, scheduled for March 20 and 21 before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic, was expected to reconsider whether the brothers’ sentences of life without parole (LWOP) should be reduced to life with the possibility of parole.
The resentencing hearing is scheduled for March 20 and 21 before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic in Van Nuys.
In a statement accompanying the filing, DA Hochman emphasized that his office conducted an extensive review of the case before deciding to request the withdrawal of the resentencing motion.
“After a thorough and exhaustive review of over 10,000 pages of trial transcripts from two months-long trials, thousands of pages of prison records, hundreds of hours of videotaped trial testimony, and all relevant pleadings, exhibits, and statements, the District Attorney’s Office is prepared to proceed forward with the hearing. However, we are requesting that the prior District Attorney’s motion for resentencing be withdrawn,” Hochman stated.
He noted that his office also interviewed victim family members, defense counsel, prior prosecutors, and law enforcement officials before reaching its conclusion.
The core argument behind Hochman’s motion is that the Menendez brothers have never fully accepted responsibility for their crimes. The DA’s office argues that for more than 30 years, the brothers have continued to maintain a false claim of self-defense, asserting they killed their parents out of fear for their lives due to alleged long-term sexual and physical abuse.
“The prior motion did not examine or consider whether the Menendez brothers have exhibited full insight and taken complete responsibility for their crimes. The fact remains that they have continued to lie about their claims of self-defense,” Hochman stated.
The DA’s office contends that the Menendez brothers manufactured false narratives to justify the killings, including claims that their parents planned to kill them the night of the murders. Allegations that José Menendez violently raped Lyle’s girlfriend and that their mother was poisoning the family. Assertions that they attempted to obtain a handgun the day before the killings for self-defense.
Hochman characterized these statements as fabrications and further alleged that the Menendez brothers suborned perjury by coercing friends to testify in support of these claims during trial.
The DA’s filing draws a direct comparison between the Menendez case and Governor Gavin Newsom’s 2022 denial of parole to Sirhan Sirhan, the convicted assassin of Robert F. Kennedy.
In the Sirhan case, despite decades of rehabilitation, a clean prison record, and support from officials and victim family members, Newsom denied parole on the basis that Sirhan had failed to show full insight and responsibility for his crime.
“The Court must consider whether the Menendez brothers’ lack of full insight and lack of complete responsibility for their murders overcomes, like it did in Sirhan Sirhan’s case, other factors that might justify resentencing,” Hochman argued.
The resentencing request, originally filed under former District Attorney George Gascón, sought to change the Menendez brothers’ life without parole sentences to life with the possibility of parole. The DA’s motion stresses that five different appellate courts have reviewed and upheld the original sentence, reinforcing the gravity of overturning such a decision.
While Hochman is firmly opposing resentencing at this stage, he left the door open for reconsideration if the Menendez brothers “come clean” about their actions.
“If they were to finally come forward and unequivocally and sincerely admit and completely accept responsibility for their lies of self-defense and the attempted suborning of perjury they engaged in, then the Court should weigh such new insight into the analysis of rehabilitation and resentencing — as will the People.”
The resentencing hearing before Judge Michael Jesic on March 20 and 21 will determine whether the Court accepts the DA’s request to withdraw the resentencing motion, effectively maintaining the Menendez brothers’ life without parole sentences; or, if the Court decides to proceed with resentencing consideration, despite the DA’s opposition.
