Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman will reconsider the Menendez brothers' resentencing only if they acknowledge past lies, as a hearing on their petition approaches on April 11.

As Lyle and Erik Menendez prepare for a critical hearing regarding their resentencing on April 11, District Attorney Nathan Hochman has made it clear that any reconsideration hinges on the brothers admitting to a series of lies he claims they have maintained for 30 years. The outcome of this hearing is pivotal, as it could determine not only the brothers' futures—currently marked by life sentences for the 1989 murders of their parents—but also reflect the growing public support that has mobilized around their case amidst claims of past abuse. Hochman's position raises questions about the credibility of the brothers' self-defense claims and the potential impact on their ongoing appeals.

Hochman outlined a total of 20 alleged lies that the Menendez brothers have perpetuated since the trial, while stating that the brothers have only admitted to four of those discrepancies. This significant disparity has formed the crux of Hochman's argument against their resentencing. He contends that the brothers' claims of self-defense are fundamentally flawed as they are rooted in these unacknowledged deceptions.

The brothers were convicted in 1996 for the brutal murders of their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, and were sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Their case gained notoriety in the media, and in recent years, additional narratives surrounding their childhood experiences and allegations of abuse have shifted public perception. However, Hochman maintains that the defense used during the initial trial did not include these sexual abuse claims, which were only introduced later in their appeals.

As part of the appeal process, a hearing has been scheduled for the prosecution's motion to withdraw the resentencing petition initially filed by former DA George Gascón. That motion will be reviewed on April 11, and potential resentencing hearings are set for April 17 and 18. The retraction of the petition by Hochman is significant, as it signals a critical shift in the prosecution's stance on the brothers' case.

Moreover, Hochman has requested that the court deny the Menendez brothers' habeas corpus petition. He argued that the new evidence presented is lacking in credibility, implying that the arguments for their clemency do not meet the necessary legal standards. This decision reflects a broader prosecutorial strategy that seeks to maintain the original convictions despite the evolving discourse around their past.

In the political arena, California Governor Gavin Newsom has ordered a 90-day comprehensive risk assessment of the Menendez brothers, addressing their clemency request. This assessment will examine various factors that could influence the decision-making process surrounding potential resentencing. The involvement of the governor adds an additional layer of scrutiny and public interest to the brothers' ongoing legal battles.

Supporters of the Menendez brothers have mobilized, organizing rallies outside of Hochman's office to express their support for a reconsideration of the brothers' sentences. These supporters argue that the brothers deserve a fair chance to be heard in light of their claims of childhood trauma and abuse. Their advocacy reflects a growing sentiment in some segments of the public that the original trial did not fully account for the complexities of their circumstances.

While Hochman's stance is adamant regarding the need for the Menendez brothers to acknowledge their past, the situation remains fluid. The upcoming hearings will play a central role in shaping the brothers' futures, as both legal representatives and their supporters prepare to present a multifaceted view of their case. As public awareness increases, the legal and moral dimensions of the Menendez case continue to evolve.

Whether the Menendez brothers could be given a path to resentencing will heavily depend on the outcomes of the upcoming hearings, coupled with any admissions of lying about their actions they might make. The legal proceedings following the April 11 hearing could clarify not only the immediate fates of Erik and Lyle Menendez but also suggest the position of the prosecution regarding their claims of self-defense.