Why Erik Menendez Was Denied Parole

Erik Menendez was denied parole by a two-member panel of California state parole commissioners after an all-day hearing Thursday.

Commissioners cited repeated prison rule violations—including allegations of cellphone use, alcohol and substance-related abuse, gang activity, fights, and a tax scam—as evidence he continued to pose an unreasonable risk to public safety, The Associated Press reported.

The decision marked the first parole denial for Erik since a judge in May reduced the brothers’ original life-without-parole sentences to 50 years to life, a ruling that made both Erik and his brother Lyle immediately eligible for parole.

Commissioners framed their ruling around Menendez’s conduct behind bars rather than the 1989 killings themselves, allowing him to seek reconsideration in three years.

Why It Matters

The Menendez case remains a high-profile legal and cultural touchstone more than three decades after Jose and Kitty Menendez were shot dead in their Beverly Hills home. The brothers’ resentencing and subsequent parole hearings tested California’s evolving approach to youthful offenders and the role of prison rehabilitation in parole decisions.

The hearings also reopened public debate about accountability, victim impact and the weight parole panels placed on in-custody behavior versus past crimes.

What To Know

The case dates back to 1989, when Erik and his brother Lyle fatally shot their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills home. They were convicted after two trials, with the second ending in 1996, and sentenced to life without parole.

Thursday’s hearing took place over video, with Erik appearing remotely from the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego.

The parole commissioners denied Erik Menendez parole and barred him from reapplying for three years, meaning he will not be eligible again until that time has passed.

Prison Conduct

Much of the hearing focused on Menendez’s conduct behind bars. Commissioners cited incidents involving alcohol use, alleged gang affiliation, and possession of a cellphone.

Asked why he risked using a phone, Menendez said, , “What I got in terms of the phone and my connection with the outside world was far greater than the consequences of me getting caught with the phone.” On substance use, he said, “If I could numb my sadness with alcohol, I was going to do it…I would have taken other drugs to numb that pain…I was looking to ease that sadness within me.”

Menendez said his life began to change in 2013 when he chose sobriety and turned to faith. “From 2013 on I was living for a different purpose. My purpose in life was to be a good person…I asked myself, ‘Who do I want to be when I die?’ I believe I’m going to face a different parole board when I die.”

Relationship With His Father and the Murders

For years, Erik Menendez has said that he was sexually abused by his father. At the parole hearing, he said, “I fantasized about my father not being alive.”

Prosecutors pressed him on why, at 18, he chose to kill his father rather than simply leave the family home. Menendez replied: “In my mind, leaving meant death. There was no consideration. I was totally convinced there was no place I could go.” He also spoke about the constant fear he felt growing up under his father’s control, saying, “It’s difficult to convey how terrifying my father was.”

The parole commissioners questioned Menendez about why his mother was also killed if his father had been the abuser.

He said that discovering his mother knew about the abuse shattered him: “It was the most devastating moment in my entire life. It changed everything for me. I had been protecting her by not telling her.” On the decision to shoot her, he said, “I wish to God I did not do that.”

What People Are Saying

Commissioner Robert Barton said during the hearing: “Two things can be true. They can love and forgive you, and you can still be found unsuitable for parole,” as he explained the board’s focus on in-custody conduct over supporters’ pleas.

“A person can threaten public safety in many ways, through different forms of criminal conduct—including the very violations you engaged in while in prison.”

Erik Menendez spoke about his upbringing and actions: “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 too. The idea that there is a right and wrong that I do not cross because it’s a moral bound was not instilled in me as a teenager.”

Family statements supporting release also weighed into the record. His aunt, Teresita Menendez-Baralt, told the panel that she has fully forgiven him: “Erik carries himself with kindness, integrity and strength that comes from patience and grace,”

Los Angeles Prosecutor Habib Balian asked the board whether Menendez was “truly reformed” and warned that continued minimization of responsibility indicated ongoing danger: “When one continues to diminish their responsibility for a crime and continues to make the same false excuses that they’ve made for 30-plus years, one is still that same dangerous person that they were when they shotgunned their parents.”

What Happens Next

Erik Menendez could request the board to review its decision for procedural errors or await his next scheduled appearance in three years.

Meanwhile, his brother Lyle was scheduled for a separate parole hearing the following day.

The brothers also maintain a pending habeas corpus petition filed in May 2023 that seeks review of their convictions based on newly surfaced evidence concerning alleged sexual abuse by their father; that legal avenue remains active.