Menendez brothers are eligible for parole. What we know about the highly publicized case
Menendez brothers are eligible for parole. What we know about the highly publicized case
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Menendez brothers speaking for first time in decades
TMZ's Executive Producer Harvey Levin joins Good Day to discuss the first interview of the Menendez brothers in decades.
Fox - 4 News
A Los Angeles judge resentenced the Menendez brothers, making them eligible for parole after serving prison time for the shotgun murders of their parents at their Beverly Hills, California, home in 1989.
Lyle Menendez, 57, and Erik Menendez, 54, were originally sentenced to life without parole in 1996. The brothers admitted to the killings but insisted they did so out of fear that their parents were about to kill them following years of abuse.
The ruling from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic on May 13 came after a day-long re-sentencing hearing in which relatives, a retired judge, and a former fellow inmate testified in support of the brothers. Jesic reduced the brothers' sentences to 50 years to life, a prison term that will make them eligible for parole under California law.
The case gained renewed attention and support after the popular Netflix show, "Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story," and the documentary "The Menendez Brothers." The brothers will remain incarcerated while the state parole board and California Gov. Gavin Newsom decide whether to release them from prison.
Here's what we know about the highly publicized case:
The shotgun killings of Jose and Kitty Menendez and the subsequent trials captured the public's attention. In August 1989, police discovered the wealthy parents dead in their Beverly Hills mansion.
Both Jose and Kitty Menendez were shot multiple times at close range. At the time of the murders, Lyle Menendez was 21 and Erik Menendez was 18.
The brothers initially denied involvement and tried to make the incident look like an organized crime hit. They later admitted to the killings but claimed it was self-defense and that they acted out of fear due to years of physical and sexual abuse by their father, an entertainment industry executive, and their mother.
After a first trial ended in a hung jury in 1994, the brothers were found guilty by a second jury in 1996 of first-degree murder for fatally shooting their parents. At the time, prosecutors had argued that the brothers were seeking their parents' multi-million-dollar fortune and highlighted their lavish spending spree shortly after the murders.
The brothers' case gained momentum in October 2024 when former Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced his support for their resentencing so they would be immediately eligible for parole. The announcement came amid the rising popularity of the streaming show and documentary about the brothers.
In May 2023, the brothers' attorney submitted new evidence, which included a letter allegedly written by Erik Menendez to his cousin, alluding to abuse by his father, and an affidavit from former boy band member Roy Rossello claiming Jose Menendez sexually abused him in the 1980s.
Rossello, who was a member of the 1980s Puerto Rican boy band Menudo, also alleged in Peacock's 2023 docuseries, 'Menendez + Menudo: Boys Betrayed," that Jose Menendez drugged and raped him when he was a teenager.
Before he was voted out of office, Gascón said the evidence would be reviewed and considered in his recommendation that the brothers be resentenced. The case faced a setback after Nathan J. Hochman was elected as the new Los Angeles County District Attorney in December, who expressed that he did not support the brothers' resentencing.
Menendez brothers case: Menendez brothers eligible for parole in 1989 murders of parents, paving way for possible release
Several members of the Menendez family supported the brothers' release. The brothers' cousin Anamaria Baralt, 54, a leading advocate for their release, said the two "are universally forgiven" by everyone on both sides of their family.
"They are different men from the boys that they were when they committed these crimes," Baralt testified at the hearing.
Baralt previously told USA TODAY that the two deserve to be freed because they have not only expressed remorse for the killings, but also grown substantially as people during their imprisonment.
"We love them so much we miss them," Baralt said. "There is not a family holiday that there is not just a hole in our hearts and a void in our family."
Prosecutor Habib Balian said the brothers were "not trustworthy" and he did not believe they had found redemption. "We know ... what they are capable of doing," he added.
Now that the judge has lowered the brothers' sentences, the siblings will go before the state's parole board, which will recommend whether they are suitable for release. If the parole board signs off on their resentencing, it will be up to Newsom to accept or reject the recommendation.
On his podcast "This is Gavin Newsom," the governor indicated that he is open to reevaluating the case. Newsom also said he has avoided watching the show or documentary about the case.
"I'm obviously familiar with the Menendez brothers, just through the news over the course of many decades," Newsom said on his podcast. "But not to the degree that many others are because of all of these documentaries and all of the attention they've received. So that won't bias my independent and objective review."
Contributing: Christopher Cann, Michael Loria, N'dea Yancey-Bragg, and Karissa Waddick, USA TODAY; Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Harvey Weinstein Doubles Down On Innocence Anthem Ahead Of Retrial Verdict
Harvey Weinstein is standing on business concerning his innocence. The film producer insists he might have been an extremely sexually expressive person, but never did he forcefully have his way with someone of the opposite sex, as his accusers have alleged. Harvey Weinstein was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape in his 2020 trial, receiving a 23-year sentence. Weinstein recently spoke out during the jury's deliberations in his rape retrial, expressing "regrets" about his immoral behavior while maintaining his claim of innocence. In a phone interview conducted at Manhattan's Bellevue Hospital, where he is receiving medical treatment, Weinstein reiterated familiar lines he has used in the past. This interview took place on Thursday with "Good Day New York" host Rosanna Scotto, highlighting his ongoing legal situation while he continues to address various health issues while in custody. The disgraced Hollywood film mogul expressed his regrets about the impact of his actions on his family and friends. He acknowledged the emotional pain he caused his wife and others close to him, describing his behavior as immoral and foolish. Yet, he maintained that he never engaged in anything illegal or criminal. As the jury in his Manhattan retrial for rape and a criminal sexual act began their deliberations after six weeks of testimony, TMZ shared that he admitted to feeling "nervous" about the upcoming verdict. As noted by PEOPLE, Combs and Weinstein have now both been accused of sexual assault by model Crystal McKinney. McKinney, in an amended complaint filed against Weinstein on May 30, alleged that Weinstein raped her and a friend in 2003. McKinney had previously filed a lawsuit in 2024, accusing Combs of drugging and sexually assaulting her. In McKinney's new complaint, she allegedly received a call from an unnamed executive at a modeling agency who arranged a business meeting with Weinstein at a popular lounge in the West Village. McKinney explained that she took a fellow model and roommate with her, hoping that Weinstein might also consider her for an acting role. After waiting at the lounge, they were eventually directed to Weinstein's table. It was there that McKinney noted Weinstein expressed a desire to get to know them better, suggesting they move their meeting to his place, as he deemed the lounge "too loud and crowded" for a discussion about potential acting opportunities. Upon returning to their hotel room, McKinney alleges in her complaint that the film producer excessively provided alcohol, serving multiple bottles of Boulevardier and Dom Pérignon, along with vodka cocktails. She claims that during this incident, Weinstein inappropriately touched her by grabbing her breasts and tearing at her tank top, causing drinks to spill onto her shirt and prompting a quick trip to the bathroom. In her complaint, she stated that her friend had accompanied her when Weinstein entered the bathroom uninvited. He allegedly demanded that the two women strip and join him in the bathtub, where he then exposed himself. McKinney and her friend felt coerced and complied with his demands, fearing retaliation if they resisted his advances. The model further recounted an incident involving Weinstein, where she alleged that he coerced her and her friend into engaging in sexual acts in a bathtub before forcibly dragging them to the bed. She accused him of raping both women and leaving the hotel room abruptly afterward. McKinney described herself as feeling disgusted and frightened at Weinstein's actions and emphasized that she had been heavily intoxicated at the time of the incident. Afterward, she claimed that when she reported the assault to Weinstein's assistant over the phone, instead of addressing her concerns, the assistant instructed her to leave the hotel room immediately. Following this traumatic experience, McKinney reported suffering from a range of mental health issues, including depression, anxiety, anger, self-blame, suicidal thoughts, body image problems, and a sense of demoralization. Since he resumed serving time at the correctional facility, the producer has been exposed to a plethora of illnesses. As noted by The Blast in April, his legal team said that he was battling cancer and diabetes alongside severe coronary artery disease that caused chest pain from reduced blood flow to the heart. He also reportedly struggled with obstructive sleep apnea, thyroid problems, obesity, chronic pain in his lower back and legs, anemia, and hypertension, among other ailments. Some of these illnesses did not happen overnight or on their own; according to his attorney, his living conditions at Rikers Prison did damage to his health. Weinstein reportedly had to survive under freezing temperatures and was made to wear dirty clothes. All this worsened his already failing health, making him susceptible to COVID-19 and double pneumonia. The producer also had to undergo critical surgery to address a fluid buildup in his heart and lungs. His lawyer, Imran Ansari, criticized New York City officials for contributing to his client's suffering. Ansari revealed that he had made multiple attempts to have Weinstein transferred from Rikers Island to Bellevue Hospital, but city officials consistently ignored those requests. He emphasized that this transfer was vital for Weinstein's health, asserting that it could potentially save his life and prevent premature death. The convicted sex offender's attorney also demanded a monetary settlement for their troubles. As noted by The Blast, Weinstein and his attorney requested a $5 million settlement from Bellevue Hospital, which has treated Weinstein multiple times in 2024, including a stay in the ICU. Despite their previous care, Weinstein criticized the hospital for releasing him back to prison before he had fully recovered. His compensation claim extends beyond the hospital; he also demanded remuneration from the City of New York and its agencies. Weinstein alleged that he had suffered both physically and psychologically due to "horrific" treatment and adverse health conditions while incarcerated. His lawyers argued that the prison had severely mismanaged his health and failed to provide optimum medical care. What verdict awaits Harvey Weinstein in his retrial?
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Mass. teacher arrested, accused of faking degrees and military history
A Haverhill teacher was arrested Friday morning and charged with faking her undergraduate and advanced degrees and lying about being a veteran and Purple Heart recipient. Lissa Lagasse, 57, of Lowell, was indicted by an Essex County grand jury and arraigned in Salem Superior Court Friday afternoon, according to the Essex County District Attorney's Office. Prosecutors said Lagasse faked her degrees and claimed to be a combat veteran in order to get jobs in the Haverhill, Lowell and Worcester school districts. Lagasse was charged with three counts of pretending to hold degrees, identity fraud, reckless endangerment of a child, three counts of procurement fraud, two counts of stolen valor, six counts of uttering at common law, intimidation of a witness, three counts of larceny in excess of $1,200 and being a common and notorious thief. She pleaded not guilty to all of the charges in court Friday. A judge set bail at $25,000 and required home confinement with GPS monitoring if Lagasse posts bail. She is expected to return to court on Monday, July 28. Red Sox' Alex Cora gives positive Alex Bregman injury update Mass. weather: Weekend could bring flash floods, thunderstorms in some areas Karen Read trial: Key takeaways from week 7 as the retrial begins to wind down Boston Red Sox starter's sore wrist has no structural damage Recall alert: These window air conditioners could cause mold exposure Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Epstein's Lawyer Reveals Whether The Sex Offender Had 'Damaging Information' On Trump After Elon Musk's Bold Claim
Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer has publicly addressed speculations that the deceased sex offender had compromising information on President Donald Trump. There's been an uproar on social media concerning the nature of Trump's relationship with Epstein after Elon Musk alleged the president was the reason why the files had not yet been released. Donald Trump and Elon Musk have suffered a broken relationship following his controversial One Big Beautiful Bill, and the tech guru has wasted no time in taking swipes at him. A lawyer for Jeffrey Epstein, David Schoen, has addressed speculations suggesting the disgraced financier had some dirt on President Donald Trump. According to TMZ, Schoen revealed that Epstein told him he did not have any dirt on Trump and that he would have used it if he did. Schoen said, "What I can say definitively is that I discussed this subject with Mr. Epstein at a time when it would have been in his best interests to implicate others, and he made clear that Donald Trump did nothing wrong and that he had no damaging information against him." The financier, who had ties to celebrities, politicians, and royalty, was arrested on multiple disturbing charges and was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges before he died by suicide in 2019. Although there are pictures making the rounds on social media in which Trump was seen partying with Epstein, Schoen maintained that he didn't do anything wrong. Taking to his X account, the attorney wrote: "I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein's defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!" In a reply to another tweet restating his claims, Schoen said he can "unequivocally" state that President Trump "never did anything wrong with Jeffrey Epstein." It comes after Elon Musk dropped the "bomb," alleging Trump was on Epstein's list and that was "the real reason they have not been made public." Trump and Musk enjoyed a working relationship prior to the November elections, after which the billionaire tech guru was given the mandate to spearhead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), responsible for cutting federal government spending. However, they have now fallen out with each other following Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill, which Musk has since labeled a "disgusting abomination." "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore," Musk wrote on X. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination." "Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it," the billionaire continued, adding that the bill "will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America [sic] citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt." In another explosive tweet, Musk claimed that Trump couldn't have won the 2024 elections without him. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House, and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk said. He added: "Such ingratitude." Meanwhile, Trump has maintained an unbothered perspective on Musk's disturbing allegations, telling CNN that he won't be speaking to him in the near future. "I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem," Trump said. According to the news outlet, he was asked if he'd been on a call with the SpaceX boss, to which the president replied: "No. I won't be speaking to him for a while, I guess, but I wish him well." Trump previously maintained that he was still on the best of terms with Musk and that the tech billionaire is still a part of his team. "Elon is not really leaving," he said during Musk's send-off party last week. "He's going to be back and forth." The White House has thrown its weight behind the bill that has caused a fallout between Musk and Trump. The "Big, Beautiful Bill" was passed in late May ahead of Memorial Day, but was met with disapproval from two Republicans, citing insufficient spending cuts and rising national debt, per Fox News. "Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a briefing when asked about Musk's criticism. "It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill and he's sticking to it," she added.
