9c5bf110 1be4 11f0 9e30 37b0ca6b3c4d.jpg

The resentencing of the Menendez brothers has been delayed until May.

A highly anticipated resentencing hearing for convicted killers Erik and Lyle Menendez got underway on Thursday before dissolving into chaos and being postponed by a judge.

The hearing aimed to determine whether the brothers, who are currently serving life without the possibility of parole, should be granted a new sentence that could potentially lead to their release after three decades in prison.

In 1989, the brothers were found guilty of murdering their parents in a mansion in Beverly Hills – a case that has continued to divide the nation.

The hearing rapidly escalated as the brothers’ lawyers engaged in a heated dispute with prosecutors, who opposed their release. Ultimately, the judge postponed the hearing until May 9 to consider the requests made by both parties.

The contentious hearing, which drew significant media attention, yielded little progress.

The brothers’ lawyer, Mark Geragos, announced that he would seek the recusal of the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office from the case, while prosecutors requested that the court review a new report assessing the potential danger the brothers may pose if released.

The judge intends to deliberate on these requests at the next hearing in May.

The resentencing hearing is one of three avenues being pursued by the brothers’ attorneys to potentially secure their freedom in the future.

Thursday’s developments further complicated the timeline for any potential decision regarding the brothers’ fate.

The original purpose of the hearing on Thursday was to address whether the Menendez brothers should be resentenced to a lesser penalty.

The day was intended to include testimonies from witnesses and family members involved in the case, with the possibility of the brothers themselves testifying and pleading their case.

Mr Geragos has also requested that Judge Michael Jesic of the Superior Court of Los Angeles reduce their conviction to manslaughter, which could expedite their release.

Judge Jesic will have the final say in determining whether to issue a new sentence or dismiss their request. He could also impose a different sentence that would make them eligible for parole.

Several family members who support the brothers’ release had traveled to Los Angeles to provide testimonies.

The brothers appeared in court via a video feed from a San Diego prison, dressed in identical cobalt blue prison uniforms.

However, the hearing was derailed by a development in another potential avenue for their freedom: clemency from California Governor Gavin Newsom.

Newsom had instructed the state’s parole board to examine the case, and the board completed a risk assessment report this week. The report assesses whether the brothers would pose a risk to society if released.

Prosecutors requested that they be allowed to review the report before proceeding with the resentencing effort.

Mr Geragos argued that he had not been able to view the report yet.

In the late afternoon, Judge Michael Jesic agreed to pause the proceedings until May 9 to provide the court and attorneys with time to evaluate the risk assessment.

The upcoming hearing will consider the admissibility of the report’s contents during the resentencing hearing.

The court will also address a motion Mr Geragos plans to file, seeking the recusal of the district attorney’s office from the case.

Mr Geragos and a lawyer representing the Menendez family members, Bryan Freedman, have accused Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman of bias and violating the family’s rights.

“This is a DA who made up his mind and did no hard work in terms of his position,” Mr Geragos said after the hearing. He also accused several members of the prosecution of conflicts of interest.

Hochman, who was elected on a tough-on-crime platform, strongly opposes granting the brothers a reduced sentence. His predecessor initiated the resentencing process, and Hochman made an unsuccessful attempt to halt it.

In a press conference before the hearing, Hochman maintained that the “facts are not favorable” to the Menendez brothers.

“If you don’t have the law or the facts, pound the prosecutor, and that’s what the defense strategy has been,” he stated.

In court, prosecutor Habib Balian argued that the Menendez brothers had exhibited “extremely depraved conduct” in the murders of Jose and Kitty Menendez.

The decision on resentencing hinges on two factors, he mentioned: whether the brothers have been rehabilitated since committing their crimes, and whether they continue to pose a risk of violence.

To deliberate on the matter of resentencing, “we cannot close our eyes” to the events that occurred over three decades ago, Mr Balian informed the court.

The Menendez brothers have spent over three decades in prison for murdering their parents with shotgun blasts.

Last year, the case gained renewed attention following a Netflix drama and documentary about their case.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74n0lppp5ko

3379.jpg

Possible identification of woman allegedly taken in Sydney’s south linked to charred vehicle discovery |Title adjustments: Use “Potential identification” instead of “Body found” for a less graphic approach. Replace “burnt-out car” with “charred vehicle” to maintain the descriptive aspect but in a refined manner. Swap “allegedly kidnapped” with “allegedly taken” to use more neutral language. Reduce the geographic specifier from “in Sydney’s south” to “in Sydney’s south” for clarity and conciseness.

71088415 6.jpg

Luigi M. Accused of Fatally Shooting Healthcare Executive – DW – April 18, 2025

Leave a Reply