Why Lyle And Erik Menendez Were Denied Parole Again – Key Points You Need To Know

California’s parole board has denied parole for Lyle Menendez, ruling him unsuitable for release nearly 36 years after he and his brother Erik executed their wealthy parents in their Beverly Hills mansion. The decision, delivered on Friday after an exhaustive 12-hour hearing, followed a similar ruling the day before against his younger brother, Erik. Both men must now wait three years before making another bid for parole.  

Menendez Family Pleads for Release but Prosecutors Push Back  

During the lengthy session, family members of Lyle argued he had reformed and shown accountability, while prosecutors insisted he remained a danger to society. The ruling marked a major setback for the brothers’ attorneys, relatives, and supporters, who have campaigned for their freedom in recent years.  

Also Read: US Justice Department Releases Transcripts Of Epstein Confidant Ghislaine Maxwell’s Interview, Know Key Details

“While we are, of course, disappointed by today’s decision as well, we are not discouraged,” the brothers’ family said in a statement.

“The process for parole is exceptionally rigorous, but we are incredibly proud of how Erik and Lyle showed up – with honesty, accountability, and integrity.”  

They added that the ruling “is not the end of the road.”

The statement continued, “both will go before the Board again, and their habeas petition remains under review. In the meantime, we know they will take time to reflect on the Board’s recommendations and will continue to lead, mentor, and build programs that support rehabilitation and hope for others. We know they are good men who have done the work to rehabilitate and are remorseful. We love them unconditionally and will continue to stand by them on the journey ahead.”  

Charges Against Menendez Brothers

The Menendez brothers, who purchased shotguns and killed their parents Jose and Kitty Menendez in the living room of their Beverly Hills estate in 1989, have long argued that the crime was committed in self-defense. They claimed they endured years of sexual abuse at the hands of their father, with the complicity of their mother, and feared their parents would kill them to silence them.  

At the hearings, however, prosecutor Habib Balian rejected that defense, saying their refusal to abandon the claim showed they lacked “insight” into their crimes –  a requirement for parole in California.  

Disciplinary Record in Prison  

Both brothers have faced disciplinary issues while incarcerated. Each was caught with contraband cell phones, and Erik was cited for fights with fellow inmates in 1997 and 2011. Beckman noted that cell phones are considered among the most serious violations in prison, alongside violence and substance abuse.  

“Add to that that cellphones are one of the three big bad rule violations along with violence and substance abuse,” he said.  

The Menendez brothers have been in the public eye since their sensational trials in the 1990s, and renewed attention came last year with a Netflix documentary revisiting the case. Former Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón filed a motion to resentence them, citing newly surfaced evidence of sexual abuse, including a handwritten note from Erik to a cousin describing his father’s actions, written before the murders.  

However, after Nathan Hochman replaced Gascón as District Attorney, he reversed course, moving aggressively to ensure the brothers remained imprisoned.  

Clemency from Governor Newsom?  

Despite pursuing a new trial, the Menendez brothers’ most realistic path to release may now lie in direct clemency from California Governor Gavin Newsom. While Newsom previously ordered a risk assessment of the brothers, he has largely refrained from publicly signaling his stance.  

For now, the parole board’s ruling ensures that Lyle and Erik Menendez will remain in prison, nearly four decades after the killings that shocked the nation.  

Also Read: Epstein, Princess Diana And A Secret London Meeting? Ghislaine Maxwell’s Testimony Raises Questions