NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
SAN DIEGO — Lyle Menendez, one of the two brothers convicted in the 1989 shotgun slayings of their parents in Beverly Hills, was denied parole by a California review board on Friday in his first appearance before the board.
The decision came after his brother, Erik, was denied parole on Thursday. The brothers will be eligible to go before the parole board again in three years.
The California Board of Parole Hearings recommendation marks a significant development in the decades-long case that drew international attention, with the brothers’ televised trial becoming one of the most infamous of the 1990s. Lyle, now 57, has spent more than 30 years behind bars.
Gov. Gavin Newsom can still review, and potentially veto, the decision.
MENENDEZ BROTHERS’ JUNE HEARING CONVERTED FROM CLEMENCY TO PAROLE AS DECISION LOOMS FOR GOV. NEWSOM
A panel of parole hearing officers evaluated the brothers individually. Similarly to his brother, Lyle Menendez faced the board via video conference from the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego.
“The panel has found today that there are still signs” that Lyle poses a risk to the public, Parole Commissioner Julie Garland said.
“We find your remorse is genuine,” she said. “In many ways, you look like you’ve been a model inmate. You have been a model inmate in many ways who has demonstrated the potential for change. But despite all those outward positives, we see … you still struggle with anti-social personality traits like deception, minimization and rule breaking that lie beneath that positive surface.”
“Don’t ever not have hope … this denial is not … it’s not the end,” Garland added. “It’s a way for you to spend some time to demonstrate, to practice what you preach about who you are, who you want to be.”
Lyle, who cried during his closing remarks, spoke with a strained voice about Aug. 20, the date that he and his brother murdered their parents.
“It’s the anniversary of a crushing day for so many in my family,” he said. “I think about all the phone calls on that day with the shattering news and the loss and the grief.”
The California Board of Parole Hearings (BPH), under the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), has 21 full-time commissioners. Each commissioner is appointed by the Governor of California and confirmed by the state Senate. The commissioners serve three-year terms, with the brothers’ each meeting with 2-3 commissioners.
Next steps
Because the California Board of Parole Hearings did not recommend Lyle Menendez for parole, he will remain incarcerated.
Newsom, while he’ll be unable to reverse the independent board’s decision, will still be able to affirm, reverse, or take no action on the board’s decision. Under California law, he has 30 days to make a decision.
If the governor chooses not to act, the parole board’s decision stands.
MENENDEZ BROTHERS ASK CALIFORNIA GOV. NEWSOM FOR CLEMENCY
During Thursday’s parole board hearing, Erik Menendez was denied a recommendation for parole.
Commissioner Robert Barton emphasized the weight of Erik’s actions and subsequent prison conduct.
“I believe in redemption or I wouldn’t be doing this job … but based on the legal standards, we find that you continue to pose an unreasonable risk to public safety.”
He said that while the family’s forgiveness was “amazing,” forgiveness and parole eligibility were separate matters: “Two things can be true. They can love and forgive you and you can still be found unsuitable for parole.”
Barton raised concerns, not only of the nature of the shotgun killings, but of Erik’s misconduct during his sentence. He pointed to his use of contraband, including a cell phone, drug and alcohol, as well as his role in a prison gang tax scheme.
The decision came on the heels of a bombshell resentencing hearing in Los Angeles Superior Court in May, where Judge Michael Jesic reduced their life-without-parole sentences to 50-to-life, making them eligible for parole consideration.
In a press conference following the ruling on Wednesday, May 14, Newsom explained the multi-layered process of considering the Menendez brothers’ eligibility for release.
The governor explained that, before any decision was finalized, a team of forensic psychologists conducted individualized risk assessments on each brother.
“We thought that would be prudent to do,” he said, saying that those assessments have been “debated” not only by Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman and the victim’s family, but also by the judge “both publicly in another conversation, some of it behind closed doors.”
The topic of the brothers’ Comprehensive Risk Assessments (CRA) has been a sticking point for Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman.
The brothers’ were marked as “moderate risk,” an increase from their previous “low risk” assessment. The moderate risk increase came after each report found that Erik and Lyle, in recent months, had been cited for breaking prison rules for contraband violations, specifically the possession of cell phones.
Hochman shared the findings on Lyle Menendez first, whose “actions perpetrated deceit,” speaking about the contraband phone.
He added that Lyle had “downplayed his rule-breaking” and that his report showed his “entitlement and willingness to meet his own needs.”
MENENDEZ BROTHERS ASK CALIFORNIA GOV. NEWSOM FOR CLEMENCY
Along with the illicit cell phone usage, Erik was flagged for possessing and dealing drugs, as well as helping other inmates with tax fraud. Hochman, who ran on a tough-on-crime platform, has been vocal about the brothers’ lack of rehabilitation.
In August 1989, Beverly Hills socialites José and Kitty Menendez were shot to death in their home.
Hochman previously called the murders “mafia-like hits,” remarking on the violent nature of the repeated rounds that were fired at the parents.
The boys, then 18 and 21, were convicted in 1996.
The defense’s assertion was that the brothers had been driven to violence by years of physical and sexual abuse at their father’s hands.
Despite the first trial resulting in a hung juror, leading to their eventual conviction in 1996, the public has remained divided on whether the brothers acted in greed or in self-defense.
Read the full article here
