A long-awaited resentencing hearing on Tuesday is set to determine whether two brothers who killed their wealthy parents in their Beverly Hills mansion could be freed from prison after three decades.
After months of delays, a judge will begin hearing two days of arguments both for and against Erik and Lyle Menendez’s bid to receive a lesser sentence – which could ultimately lead to their paroled release.
Prosecutors have argued the brothers meticulously planned the 1989 killings to access their parents’ fortune, still have not taken accountability and should not be released. The brothers have said they acted out of self-defence after years of abuse.
The notorious case, which has prompted books, documentaries and dramas, still divides America.
During the two-day hearing, will not be televised or streamed, the judge is expected to look at evidence, hear testimony from witnesses and ultimately determine whether the brothers, who were sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole, should receive a lesser sentence.
It is expected to include testimony from a variety of people, including members of the Menendez family and potentially those involved with the original case.
Erik and Lyle could even take the stand, although such a move would open them up to questioning from prosecutors who oppose their release. The BBC has asked whether they will testify or who else might be called to testify.
On an episode of his podcast, their 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 not said who it plans to call to testify.
The hearing will not be a re-trial and the brothers’ guilt will not be questioned.
Instead, much of the focus is likely to be on what they have done during their 30 years in prison and whether they have been rehabilitated.
During their trials, prosecutors painted them as entitled and eager to access their parents’ $14m (£10.7m) fortune.
They argued that the duo methodically planned the killings, buying shotguns and opening 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 film and 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.
Their first trial ended in a deadlock, but in 1996, the brothers were convicted of first-degree murder in a retrial. Many of their claims of sexual abuse were not allowed as part of the proceedings.
The hearing comes after a Netflix drama thrust the case back into the spotlight, and support for resentencing them has notably come from the previous Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón.
His replacement, Nathan Hochman, has vehemently opposed the brothers’ efforts to be freed and argued they have not “demonstrated true accountability” and instead have clung to a litany of “lies” about the case.
