The brothers’ lawyer Mark Geragos filed a motion to recuse Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman on April 25. (photo by Tabor Brewster)

A hearing on the potential resentencing of Erik and Lyle Menendez will continue on May 9 at the Van Nuys Courthouse. The hearing, originally scheduled for April 17, was delayed after a report from the governor’s office on the potential parole of the brothers created confusion in the courtroom. Additionally, the brothers’ attorney Mark Geragos filed a motion to recuse Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman and his office from the case.

The brothers were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1989 double murder of their parents, José and Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills home. The ongoing resentencing will assess if the brothers have been rehabilitated.

The hearing on May 9 will determine whether the parole report is admissible in the resentencing and whether to remove the district attorney’s office from the case.

In court, Geragos and defense attorney Bryan Freedman argued that Hochman should be removed from the case because of alleged mistreatment of victims. The district attorney’s office displayed an image of the crime scene without warning while family members of the Menendez brothers were present, to which Geragos objected. Additionally, Freedman alleged that Hochman has a “personal bias,” given his upbringing in Beverly Hills.

“Erik and Lyle Menendez are entitled to a fair resentencing process. José and Kitty Menendez’s family members – regardless of what position they take as to resentencing – are all entitled to a fair sentencing process. The public is entitled to a process that appears fair,” the recusal motion read.

Defense attorneys also argued that the family members have been denied victim services by the district attorney’s office. Geragos highlighted the fact that Hochman hired Kathleen Cady – a former lawyer for the Menendez brothers’ uncle Milton Andersen, the only relative who opposed their release – to lead the victim services department. Andersen died in March at 91 years old.

Hochman filed an opposition to the recusal motion on May 2.

“In the opposition, the district attorney’s office has argued that in a ‘drastic and desperate step,’ the defense has decided to ‘sidestep the central issue of resentencing’ and present an argument ‘devoid of merit’ to recuse the entire district attorney’s office,” Hochman said. “The entire defense argument over recusal boils down to the defense not being happy with the current district attorney’s position on resentencing. While this desperate argument may work in a press interview, it fails in a court of law based on an adversarial system of justice.”

Hochman also reiterated the prosecution’s argument – that the brothers have not been rehabilitated during their time in prison.

“Our position on resentencing is not yet, rather than never, as it depends on the Menendez brothers finally coming clean after 30 years with all the crimes, lies, deceits and cover-up they engaged in and refuse to renounce,” Hochman added. “From lying about their claims of self-defense to trying to get friends to lie about their father being a violent rapist of one of the brother’s girlfriends or the mother trying to poison the family, these continuous lies demonstrate that the Menendez brothers have not shown full insight into their crimes, have not been rehabilitated and continue to constitute a risk of danger to society.”

Separate from the resentencing hearings, the brothers will undergo a comprehensive risk assessment performed by the California Board of Parole Hearings on June 13. The assessment was ordered by Gov. Gavin Newsom, and marks the first step in a potential pardon.

Newsom said there is “no guarantee of outcome,” and noted that the investigation is a necessary step before he can make “any determination” on clemency.