Menendez brothers bank on new trial as backup if parole bid fails

The infamous killer Menendez brothers, who brutally slayed their parents with a shotgun inside their Beverly Hills home more than 35 years ago, have an entirely new path to freedom after a judge’s order last week. 

Brian Wice is a Houston-based post-conviction attorney who says that the brothers scored a new victory that is completely separate from their current bid for parole. 

“If habeas relief is granted, this is not a resentencing,” Wice told Fox News Digital. “This is an entirely new trial.”

MENENDEZ BROTHERS SCORE CRUCIAL LEGAL VICTORY IN DECADES-LONG FIGHT AS THEY AWAIT POTENTIAL FREEDOM

“My understanding is that the relief that they have sought is an entirely new trial, because they claim that with this newly discovered, newly available evidence that there’s a reasonable probability, and that’s the test — not a certainty — a reasonable probability the outcome would have been different,” he said.

Erik and Lyle Menendez were convicted and sentenced to life without parole in a bloody shotgun massacre that left their parents, Jose and Mary “Kitty” Menendez dead. Jose was shot six times, and Kitty 10.  

They have spent more than 35 years in jail for the slayings in a case that captivated the world.

In March 2023, the brothers filed a habeas petition claiming that evidence was forbidden from being presented at their trial. That evidence, they say, would have led a jury to find them not guilty. 

MENENDEZ BROTHERS RESENTENCED AS EXPERTS BLAST ‘INDEFENSIBLE’ BID FOR KILLERS’ FREEDOM

About eight months before the double-homicide, Erik allegedly wrote a letter to his cousin, Andy Cano, claiming that Jose had sexually abused him and Lyle. 

Further, an affidavit from Roy Rossello, a member of a boy band called Menudo, claimed Jose, who was a record executive, raped him when he was a 14-year-old boy in 1983 or 1984. Rossello made the claim almost 40 years after the alleged rape. 

If that information had been available to a jury, the brothers claim, they would not have been convicted. They also contend that the letter and the affidavit constitute new evidence that must be considered. 

In an informal response to that petition, filed by Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman’s office in February of this year, prosecutors denied that the letter and the affidavit constituted new evidence. They said that the Cano letter was “untimely.” They also said the Rossello affidavit was “inadmissible, immaterial, and lacks credibility.” 

Still, on July 8, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge William C. Ryan, said that the letter and the affidavit constituted a prima facie showing that the brothers are entitled to habeas relief, and ordered Hochman’s office to respond to the claim and explain why the brothers should not be granted the relief. 

MENENDEZ BROTHERS RESENTENCING: TIMELINE OF KILLERS’ FIGHT OVER FREEDOM IN PARENTS’ MURDERS

Wice stressed that it’s not an easy path forward for the brothers, and that a new trial is the light at the end of a long tunnel. 

“Essentially, this is your last ditch, all hands on deck, let’s see what we can do to create a miracle, kind of context,” he said.

If the trial judge were to grant the habeas petition in favor of the brothers, vacating their conviction, that decision would then be reviewed by the California Court of Appeals, and after that, the California Supreme Court, Wice said. Either of those entities could say the trial judge erred in his or her decision, and refuse the brothers’ opportunity for a new trial. 

“They’re in a position to win, and like I said, in the context of habeas, it’s survive and advance,” Wice said, using a basketball analogy. “They survive and advance to another round. Are they going to cut down? Who knows?”

Meanwhile, the brothers will appear before a parole board and plead their case for freedom in August. They were resentenced from life without parole to fifty years with the possibility of parole in May. 

Fox News Digital reached out to Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman’s office for comment.