Eric Menendez Denied Parole Amid Family Anguish

State parole officials had not publicly confirmed Eric Menendez’s fate, but by Thursday evening, his family was already aware: the 54-year-old had been denied parole for the shotgun murder of his parents.

Reactions among relatives were a mix of surprise and anger. Social media was ablaze with their responses. Talia Menendez, Eric’s stepdaughter, expressed her frustration on Instagram, questioning how her father could be seen as a threat to society. “This was torture for our family. How long?” she wrote.

In a passionate all-caps post, she denounced the parole board and media, insisting, “You will not have peace until your father is free!!!”

Meanwhile, the hearing for Lyle Menendez, Eric’s brother, began Friday morning, with family members hoping for a more favorable outcome for him.

The brothers, who were sentenced to life without parole at a young age, are now eligible for reconsideration. Their case gained significant attention thanks in part to the Netflix documentary “Monster: The Story of Lyle and Eric Menendez,” which reignited public interest.

In May, the Superior Court had approved a petition for resentencing, leading to this week’s parole hearings.

During Eric Menendez’s hearing, over a dozen family members testified in support of his release. Lyle was also expected to speak. After nearly 10 hours of deliberation, committee member Robert Burton acknowledged the strong support for Menendez but pointed to past violations, including using smuggled cell phones, as reasons for the decision. “You didn’t turn to your support network before committing these murders,” he noted.

Tami Menendez, Eric’s wife, was outraged by the outcome, asserting that Burton had predetermined his decision. “He made up his mind to deny Eric’s parole from the start!” she stated on X.

Anna Maria Baralto, Menendez’s cousin and family spokesperson, attempted to maintain a hopeful tone in an Instagram video, noting that Eric could apply for parole again in three years. “Eric was given the lowest possible rejection time,” she said, expressing disappointment but also pride in his performance during the hearing.

“We knew this was a steep climb,” she acknowledged, reflecting on California’s strict parole standards. “But it’s still a very disappointing thing.”

Research indicates that most individuals who appear before the parole board are typically denied. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, only 14% of 2022 parole hearings led to approval.

The Menendez family released a statement following the hearing, respecting the board’s decision but reaffirming their unwavering belief in Eric. They emphasized his growth and the positive influence he has had on others while incarcerated.

Family and friends have highlighted the brothers’ contributions in prison, including Lyle’s leadership in the Bliss Project and Eric’s organization of art initiatives to aid fellow inmates.

However, the hearing also revealed challenges the brothers faced, such as drug use and conflicts with other prisoners. Parole Board members raised concerns about Eric’s repeated phone use, revealing that he had used it for personal calls as well as watching videos.

Menendez admitted to spending about $1,000 on the phone, rationalizing it by suggesting that others would acquire one if he didn’t. “I knew 50 people were calling,” he explained, justifying his choices.

Despite acknowledging his mistakes, he now sees the potential for freedom and how his past actions affected his life. “The results were important in November 2024,” he told the board, reflecting on how his decisions have led to significant consequences.

Nathan Hochman, the Los Angeles County attorney who opposed the brothers’ parole, commended the board’s decision. He asserted that it upheld justice for the victims, Jose and Kitty Menendez, and expressed concern about Eric’s ongoing risk to the community.

Hochman claimed that, while the brothers had argued self-defense, the brutal nature of the crime was undeniable.

“The board rightly judged that Eric Menendez’s actions conveyed a continued irrational risk,” he remarked, summarizing the hearing’s outcome.