What to know as Menendez brothers ask for freedom in resentencing hearing

After decades spent in prison by Erik and Lyle Menendez – and months of contentious court fights – a judge will hear arguments on whether the brothers should be resentenced, in a murder case that still divides America.

The pair are serving life in prison for killing their parents, Kitty and Jose Menendez, in 1989, when they were 21 and 18. Their case gained renewed attention after a popular Netflix series last year.

Thursday’s resentencing hearing will determine whether the pair should be resentenced to a lesser penalty. If approved, the brothers could become eligible for parole – potentially allowing their freedom.

Prosecutors at the time argued Erik and Lyle meticulously planned the killings so they could access their parents’ fortune. The current Los Angeles District Attorney says the brothers have continued to cling to lies about the case.

But the brothers’ lawyers have long argued the killings were an act of self-defence and claimed their father abused them for years. They have also pointed to court filings detailing their rehabilitation during their years behind bars.

Here is what to expect from the hearing – and a recap of how we got here.

The brothers shot and killed their parents with shotguns at their Beverly Hills mansion. There has long been a debate over their motive.

Prosecutors painted them during their trials as spoiled rich kids who wanted to access their parents’ $14m (£10.7m) fortune. They argued that the duo methodically bought shotguns and opened fire on their parents 13 times as the couple watched TV – before going gambling, to parties and on shopping sprees.

The brothers ultimately admitted to the killings – but argued they acted out of self-defence after years of emotional, physical and sexual abuse by their father Jose, a high-powered record label executive.

The brothers’ trial in 1993 was one of the first high-profile murder cases to be shown live on television, gripping audiences in the US and globally.

It ended deadlocked, but in 1996, the brothers were convicted of first-degree murder in a second trial during which the judge barred many of their claims of sexual abuse. They are imprisoned near San Diego.

A judge will look at evidence, hear from witnesses, and ultimately determine whether Erik and Lyle should be resentenced.

It will not be a re-trial, and guilt will not be a question. Much of the focus could instead be on what the brothers have done during their 30 years in prison.

The hearing – which will not be televised – will start Thursday in Los Angeles and is scheduled to also go into Friday, though it could wrap up in a single day.

Both sides – lawyers for the Menendez brothers and the district attorney’s office – will present arguments on why the brothers should or should not be resentenced.

They will also be able to call people to testify. This could include a wide variety of individuals, from people involved in prosecuting the brothers in the 1990s or prison officials talking about the brothers’ last 30 years behind bars.

We are likely to hear from members of the Menendez family, many of whom have become outspoken advocates for Erik and Lyle’s release. But at least one member of the family has been a fierce critic of the effort to free them.

Milton Anderson, who is Kitty Menendez’s brother, has called the brothers “cold-blooded” and has argued the pair should remain behind bars for the “heinous act”.

That is unclear. If they did, it would mark a significant moment in the case, and would leave them open to questions from prosecutors who oppose their release.

The pair have previously appeared remotely at hearings by video link. The BBC has asked whether they will appear in person, and if they will testify.

On a recent episode of his podcast, lawyer Mark Geragos said he had not decided whether to call them to the stand.

“I know right now that I’m going to put family members on the stand,” Mr Geragos said. “I know right now, I’ll put correctional officers on the stand. I know right now I may put behavioural scientists on the stand.”

The district attorney’s office has similarly not said who it plans to call to testify.

After the two-day hearing, Los Angeles County Judge Michael Jesic will rule on whether the brothers should be resentenced.

But it is not clear if that will come at the conclusion of the hearing, or later.

Even if Judge Jesic rules in favour of the brothers being resentenced, they will not be immediately released.

What happens next will depend on what type of sentence the judge offers the brothers. There is a chance they could be given a new, lesser sentence that would make them immediately eligible for parole.

But eligibility does not guarantee release; they would still need to convince a state parole board they are no longer a danger to society.

Or the judge could opt for a modified sentence that reduces their punishment but does not immediately open the door to parole. In that case, the brothers could face several more years behind bars before becoming eligible.

The Menendez brothers filed a motion in 2023 detailing new evidence alleging childhood sexual abuse by their father, and requesting their convictions be vacated.

The evidence included an allegation of rape from a former member of boy band Menudo, Roy Rosselló, and a letter Erik Menendez wrote to a cousin eight months before the murders, which detailed the alleged abuse.

The top LA prosecutor at the time, George Gascón, announced that he was supporting the resentencing bid, days before an election in November 2024. He denied the announcement was political and argued it was a long time coming.

Gascón’s announcement came shortly after a popular Netflix documentary and TV drama welcomed a new generation to the case. Many of the brothers’ supporters suggest that if they were put on trial today, their allegations of abuse would be taken more seriously – potentially leading to a very different outcome.

After Gascón lost his re-election bid, Nathan Hochman took over the his office and the Menendez case. Hochman came out forcefully against their resentencing request, and said the brothers continued to stick by a litany of “lies”.

“They have not shown full insight into their crimes,” he said. But Hochman was rebuked by a judge who allowed the resentencing request to move forward.

The brothers have been following three paths in an effort to win their freedom. The other two are:

1. Clemency from the governor of California: This could mean a reduced sentence or even a pardon, but would not overturn the brothers’ convictions. Governor Gavin Newsom has ordered the parole board to conduct a risk assessment to determine if they pose a danger to society. A hearing is scheduled in June to discuss findings
2. A new trial: The brothers’ lawyers have also asked for a new trial, pointing to the alleged abuse by their father and arguing that jurors should be able to consider a lesser sentence, such as manslaughter. Hochman opposes this