By Elizabeth Wolfe, Matthew Friedman

Los Angeles (CNN) — A California parole board has denied parole for Erik Menendez, who was convicted alongside his brother Lyle of murdering their parents in 1989, delivering a crippling blow to the brothers’ yearslong fight for release.

The decision does not bode well for Lyle Menendez, whose case is set to be heard by the parole board Friday.

Despite the board’s ruling, Erik Menendez still has hope of walking free. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has the rare power to reverse parole decisions, and the brothers are separately seeking clemency and a new trial.

The decision was delivered Thursday after an exceptionally long 10-hour virtual hearing involving statements from the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office, Erik Menendez and about a dozen supportive Menendez relatives – who are also considered victims of the brothers’ crime.

Ultimately, the board decided Erik continues to “pose an unreasonable risk to public safety” if released, listing his teenage criminal history, the brutality of the killings and “serious violations” of prison rules, including possession of contraband cell phones, said parole commissioner Robert Barton. He may become reeligible for parole in three years.

Barton said he was amazed at the level of support Erik has from his relatives, but their statements did not outweigh the other serious factors in Erik’s case.

“Two things can be true. They can love and forgive you, and you can still be found unsuitable for parole,” Barton told Erik while delivering the decision.

The gravity of Erik’s crime is “not a primary reason for this denial,” Barton said. “It’s still your behavior in prison.”

The parole board’s decision is not final; It could undergo an internal review for up to 120 days. After that, Newsom has 30 days to affirm or reverse the decision, if he so chooses.

The brothers became newly eligible for release after a judge resentenced them in May, marking a stunning victory for the Menendezes and their family, who have long been fighting to overturn their original sentences of life without parole.

Though Erik and Lyle Menendez are inextricably linked in the public eye, the pair will have their cases considered independently. There is a possibility Lyle could be granted parole despite Erik’s denial.

It has been 36 years since Erik and Lyle Menendez stormed into the den of their family’s gilded Beverly Hills mansion late on August 20, 1989, and opened fire with a pair of shotguns, killing their parents, José and Kitty Menendez. In the decades that followed, the crime has cast a lasting shadow on the family, not only due to the trauma of the killings, but also disputes over sexual and physical abuse allegations the brothers have leveled against their father.

“I’ve called it a forever crime. It will impact every generation to be born,” Erik Menendez said during the hearing Thursday. “I cannot express sorrow and remorse enough.”

The brothers have spent years vying for new trials, resentencing and release. Their latest fight gained critical momentum in 2023 with the emergence of potential new evidence, the support of a former Los Angeles district attorney and a fervent social media movement driven by the release of a documentary and – later – a fictionalized Netflix show depicting their crime.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman, who has vehemently opposed the brothers’ efforts, celebrated the board’s decision Thursday. Hochman’s office argued against their resentencing in May and opposed Erik’s parole at Thursday’s hearing.

Erik and Lyle Menendez admitted killing their parents, but they have long maintained the crimes were committed in self-defense after enduring years of abuse by their father, which they say their mother knew about and chose to ignore.

However, Hochman has argued the brothers have not accepted full responsibility for their crime and therefore should not be freed. The district attorney accuses Erik and Lyle of lying about their motive and has previously said he believes evidence to corroborate the abuse allegations is “extremely lacking.”

The brothers’ family called the board’s decision “disappointing” in a statement and said they are turning their attention to Lyle’s hearing Friday.

“(Erik’s) remorse, growth, and the positive impact he’s had on others speak for themselves. We will continue to stand by him and hold to the hope he is able to return home soon,” the family’s statement said.

Erik briefly wavers on self-defense claim

A crucial element of the parole board’s assessment is whether Erik and Lyle Menendez have accepted full responsibility for their crimes. While the brothers have admitted to the killings, their motive still remains hotly contested.

Hochman has said he would only support the brothers’ release if they backed down from their claim that they killed out of self-defense – and on Thursday Erik briefly appeared to appeal to the prosecutor’s demands.

During the hearing, parole commissioner Robert Barton cited a document written by Erik in which he said he had “no justification” for the killings. Erik reaffirmed the statement Thursday.

“Is there any part of this which you believe was self-defense?” Barton asked. Erik replied: No.

The admission came in stark contrast to decades of statements from the Menendez brothers claiming their motive was self-defense. But despite the apparent reversal, Erik still seemed to double down on their story that they shot their parents out of fear for their lives.

During the hearing, Erik delved into his teenage mindset at the time of the killings, describing his father as a cruel and domineering figure who, in his words, created an environment in which “running away was inconceivable. Running away meant death.”

He became visibly emotional when recounting the murders. He repeated the story he and his brother told at trial: The killings followed a week of rising tensions and confrontations with their parents over the alleged abuse.

“My purpose in getting the guns was to protect myself in case my father or my mother came at me to kill me – or my father came in the room to rape me. That is why I bought the guns.”

Barton repeatedly asked Erik why he did not consider reporting his father to the authorities or leaving home to protect his safety.

“It’s difficult to convey how terrifying my father was,” Erik told the board. He later said he felt tied to the house by an “absolute belief that I could not get away.”

“Maybe it sounds completely irrational and unreasonable today,” Erik said.

“You do see that there were other choices at that point?” Barton asked Erik. Later, the commissioner told Erik he had the option to flee to other family members or tell the police.

“We recognize and understand that many sexual assault victims find it hard to come forward, especially when the perpetrators are family members,” Barton said, but noted victims don’t often kill their abusers in such a violent way.

Erik’s contraband phone use is ‘selfish,’ board says

Erik’s criminal history before the murders and his track record of prison rule violations came under the microscope during the hearing and became a key determining factor in the board’s decision.

The board laid out Erik’s record of tobacco and marijuana possession in prison and at least nine rule violations between 1997 and 2021. Erik also admitted to using heroin in 1998.

The violations include at least two cell phone violations, as well as physical altercations with other inmates in 1997 and 2011. Barton also said Erik had been connected to a “tax scam” carried out by a prison gang around 2013.

Barton called Erik’s use of cell phones “selfish” and pointed to the hypocrisy of Erik leading rehabilitative groups while knowingly breaking the rules. The parole commissioner said the behavior indicates Erik believes the rules do not apply to him and the “ends justify the means,” a possible indicator of his “dangerousness.”

Erik said he would allow others to use the phones in exchange for holding or hiding the phones when there were searches.

Erik says he was using the phones for “connection with my wife, watching YouTube, listening to music, watching movies, porn. Anything you could do on a phone, I did.” He said the “connection with the outside world was far greater than the consequences of me getting caught with the phone.”

Barton said Erik’s criminal history as a teenager also influenced the board’s decision.

Erik was questioned about traffic violations and a pair of burglaries he committed before his parents’ murders. Erik replied that the crimes were acts of “passive resistance” against his father that were rooted in “deep character failings.”

“I was not raised with a moral foundation … I was raised to lie, to cheat, to steal, steal in the sense, an abstract way. When I was playing tennis, my father would make sure that I cheated at certain times if he told me to,” Erik told the board.

Erik said he has developed a “moral guardrail” while in prison and described 2013 as a turning point.

“I did not like who I was in 2013. I did not like using drugs. I did not like helping the (gang) … it just made me feel ugly and dirty,” Erik said, adding he committed on his mother’s birthday to stop using drugs.

Brutality of mother’s killing played a role

The particularly gruesome nature of the killing of Kitty Menendez, who was shot at close range as she crawled on the floor, influenced how the board viewed Erik’s risk of aggression.

“The manner and the motive for the killings do have some weight in aggravation,” Barton said. “The killing of your mother especially showed a lack of empathy and reason.”

Barton said he found the execution of Kitty to show Erik was “devoid of human compassion” at the time of the killings.

During their trials, Lyle testified that his mother began to crawl away after being shot at several times. Seeing her, Lyle said he ran out to reload his gun and returned to fatally shoot Kitty.

Asked why the brothers chose to kill their mother as well, Erik said he had recently found out that his mother knew about the alleged abuse.

“Step by step, my mom had shown she was united with my dad … But when I found out that she knew (about the abuse),” Erik says he no longer saw any difference between his parents. “On that night I saw them as one person. Had she not been in the room, maybe it would have been different.”

Barton told Erik he struggled to “put myself in your place.”

“I don’t know that I’ve ever had rage to that level, ever. But that is still concerning, especially since it seems she was also a victim herself of the domestic violence,” Barton said.

Relatives say they are ‘proud’ of who Erik is today

About a dozen relatives shared statements Thursday in support of Erik’s release, many of them becoming tearful as they spoke of forgiving Erik despite the violence of the killings and the deep emotional scars they have left on the extended family.

Kitty’s brother, Milton Andersen, was the only known relative to oppose the brothers’ release in recent years. Andersen, who had said he would never forgive his nephews, died earlier this year.

Even those who spoke in favor of Erik acknowledged how difficult their path to reconciliation has been.

“To say that our family has experienced pain does not quite capture what the last 35 years have been like … It has divided us. It has caused us panic and anxiety. It has led to many of us retreating,” said Tiffani Lucero-Pastor, Kitty’s great-niece.

Several also echoed Erik’s belief that Kitty’s lack of intervention contributed to the environment of fear in the Menendez home.

“My Aunt Kitty could not, or did not, intervene, and that absence of protection deepened their fear and confusion,” said Karen Mae Vandermolen-Copley, Kitty’s niece.

Parole would allow some aging family members to unite with Erik before their deaths, the family said. That includes Joan Vandermolen, Kitty’s sister, who is now 93.

“I cannot emphasize enough Joan wants you to know she has forgiven Erik and she wants to see him outside of prison walls. She is proud of who he is today,” Tiffani Lucero-Pastor said, speaking on behalf of Joan.

Gov. Newsom could have the final word

If granted parole, the brothers face a final – and potentially unpredictable – arbiter of their case: the governor.

Under a 1988 state law, Newsom holds the unusual power to approve, deny or modify parole board decisions for people convicted of murder and sentenced to an indeterminate term. He has 30 days from when the board releases its final decision to make his choice.

The governor’s office did not answer CNN’s inquiry about Newsom’s potential decision.

Newsom previously used the power to deny parole for Sirhan Sirhan, the man who assassinated US Sen. Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The governor cited Sirhan’s “refusal to accept responsibility for his crime” and “lack of insight and accountability,” among other reasons.

Hochman, in his efforts to keep the Menendez brothers in prison, has compared their case to Sirhan’s several times, arguing the brothers have “fabricated a story of self defense” and never accepted full responsibility for their crime.

As Newsom weighs the decision, Menendez relatives will be able to express their opinions to the governor’s office through calls, letters and other documents.

CNN’s Taylor Romine contributed to this report.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2025 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.