Menendez brothers eligible for parole after 35 years in prison

Lyle and Erik Menendez, convicted for killing their parents in 1989, have been declared eligible for parole after 35 years in prison following a re-sentencing under California’s youthful offender law.

Lyle and Erik Menendez, who have served 35 years for the 1989 murders of their parents in Beverly Hills, were ruled eligible for parole on Tuesday during a re-sentencing hearing in Los Angeles. The decision was made under California’s youthful offender statute, which allows parole consideration for individuals who committed crimes before age 26 and have served at least half of their sentence.

The brothers, now aged 57 and 54, had been serving life without the possibility of parole following their 1996 conviction. The re-sentencing, led by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic, replaced their original terms with new sentences of 50 years to life.

Judge Jesic described the original crime as “absolutely horrific” but noted the brothers’ rehabilitation in prison as “amazing,” citing their behaviour and contributions while incarcerated. Both expressed remorse during the hearing and accepted full responsibility for the killings.

The Menendez brothers were found guilty of first-degree murder for fatally shooting their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, as they watched television in August 1989. The prosecution argued the motive was financial gain, while the defence maintained that the brothers acted out of fear following years of sexual and emotional abuse.

Recent evidence, including a letter Erik allegedly wrote to a cousin and new claims from a former member of the 1980s pop band Menudo, was presented to support the abuse allegations. These claims were also the subject of renewed public interest through recent documentaries and dramatizations.

The parole decision now rests with the California parole board and Governor Gavin Newsom. A separate parole board hearing is scheduled for June 13 to review clemency petitions.

While the defence pointed to rehabilitation and family forgiveness, the prosecution maintained opposition, questioning whether the brothers had genuinely taken responsibility and arguing that they remain untrustworthy.

Copied