A judge is expected Friday to hear the defense’s motion to kick the entire Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office off the case of Erik and Lyle Menendez, who are seeking re-sentencing for the 1989 shotgun killings of their parents at their Beverly Hills mansion.
Attorneys representing Erik Menendez, 54, and his older brother, Lyle, now 57, contend in a recent court filing that “absent recusal, a conflict of interest would render it likely that the defendants will receive neither a fair hearing nor fair treatment through all related proceedings.”
In a court filing this week, Assistant Head Deputy Habib Balian and Deputy District Attorneys Seth Carmack and Ethan Milius countered, “In this case, there is absolutely no evidence or articulable explanation for any impermissible bias, let alone a conflict of interest.”
Mark Geragos, Cliff Gardner and Alexandra Kazarian — who are representing the brothers — and numerous Menendez family members have been at odds with District Attorney Nathan Hochman, who has said he opposes re-sentencing for the brothers and contends they have not “accepted complete responsibility for their actions.”
The brothers are serving life prison sentences without the possibility of parole for the Aug. 20, 1989, shotgun killings of their parents, Jose and Mary Louise “Kitty” Menendez.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic refused last month to allow the District Attorney’s Office to withdraw a motion filed under prior District Attorney George Gascón’s administration that sought re-sentencing for the brothers. That motion is still pending, with the defense noting that it will ask the judge to impose a lesser sentence that could allow the brothers to either be released or become eligible for parole.
“Erik and Lyle Menendez are entitled to a fair re-sentencing process,” the brothers’ attorneys wrote in their motion seeking to have the District Attorney’s Office thrown off the case. “Jose and Kitty Menendez’s family members — regardless of what position they take as to re-sentencing — are all entitled to a fair sentencing process. The public is entitled to a process that appears fair.”
Prosecutors wrote in their filing, “… Other than the fact that they do not agree with, or like, the current legal position of the District Attorney’s Office, the defense has completely failed to articulate any legitimate conflict of interest which would create a likelihood that the defendants would be treated unfairly.”
The California Attorney General’s Office has also opposed the defense’s motion to recuse the District Attorney’s Office, writing in court papers this week that the defendants “have failed to identify a disqualifying conflict that demonstrates a reasonable possibility that the assigned prosecutors may not exercise discretionary functions in an even-handed manner, nor have they established that any alleged conflict is so grave as to render it more likely than not they will receive unfair treatment if the case continues to be handled by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.”
The filing by the Attorney General’s Office added that the transfers of two prosecutors who had supported the re-sentencing and the office’s hiring of an attorney who had previously represented a Menendez family member who opposed the re-sentencing and has subsequently been “walled off” from the case in her role as the head of the office’s Victim Services did not create a “disabling conflict of interest.”
In a statement released Thursday on behalf of a family-led initiative advocating for the brothers to be released from prison, the Justice for Erik and Lyle Coalition said it knows that the process for recusal is “incredibly stringent and narrow,” adding that the defense’s recusal motion is “about accountability and ensuring (District Attorney) Nathan Hochman’s office stops crossing ethical lines and starts respecting our rights as victims under Marsy’s Law.”
At the end of an April 17 hearing that was crowded with Menendez family members, the judge also said he wants attorneys on Friday to discuss the admissibility of a state parole board risk-assessment report involving the brothers.
The Menendez brothers — who claim the killings were committed after years of abuse, including alleged sexual abuse by their father — watched last month’s hearing via Zoom from the San Diego prison where they are incarcerated, but made no statements.
No new dates for a re-sentencing hearing have been set yet.
Meanwhile, state parole boards are set to conduct separate hearings June 13 for the brothers, then send their reports to Gov. Gavin Newsom to help him decide whether the two should receive clemency.
In a 2023 court petition, attorneys for the brothers pointed to two new pieces of evidence they contend corroborate the brothers’ allegations of long-term sexual abuse at the hands of their father — a letter allegedly written by Erik Menendez to his cousin Andy Cano in early 1989 or late 1988, and recent allegations by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the Puerto Rican boy band Menudo, that he too was sexually abused by Jose Menendez as a teenager.
Interest in the case surged following the release of a recent Netflix documentary and dramatic series.
The governor said that with the exception of brief clips on social media, he has not watched dramatizations of the Menendez case or documentaries on it “because I don’t want to be influenced by them.”
“I just want to be influenced by the facts,” Newsom said.