The Menendez brothers’ abuse evidence falls into four buckets: their own testimony and that of relatives at the 1993 trial, photographs of bruises introduced as physical corroboration, a December 1988 letter Erik wrote to his cousin Andy Cano eight months before the killings, and a 2024 sworn affidavit from former Menudo member Roy Rosselló accusing Jose Menendez of drugging and raping him as a teenager. The first-trial material helped hang two juries. Most of it was excluded from the 1996 retrial, which produced first-degree murder convictions. The Cano letter and Rosselló affidavit were submitted in a habeas corpus petition that a judge denied in September 2025, though the brothers were separately resentenced in May 2025 to 50 years to life.
The Testimony and Photographs From the First Trial
Erik and Lyle Menendez each testified for hundreds of hours in 1993, describing years of sexual and physical abuse by their father Jose. Cousins and other extended family took the stand to describe extreme discipline and psychological control inside the household. The defense introduced photographs showing bruises on both brothers; Erik testified that one bruise on his arm came from Jose grabbing him, and Lyle gave similar testimony about his own injuries.1Los Angeles County District Attorney. California Court of Appeal Opinion – People v. Lyle Menendez and Erik Menendez
Dr. Ann Burgess, a professor of psychiatric mental health nursing at the University of Pennsylvania, testified that the brothers showed symptoms consistent with childhood sexual abuse. She described a “betrayal bond” between victims and their abusers and explained that sexually abused people often believe they are in danger of death even when the abuser is not actively threatening them.1Los Angeles County District Attorney. California Court of Appeal Opinion – People v. Lyle Menendez and Erik Menendez That expert framing let the defense argue imperfect self-defense: under California law, a killing drops from murder to voluntary manslaughter if the defendant genuinely, though unreasonably, believed deadly force was necessary to survive.2Justia. CALCRIM No. 571 Voluntary Manslaughter Imperfect Self-Defense
The first trial used two separate juries. Neither reached a verdict. On the charges tied to Jose’s killing, both panels split six for voluntary manslaughter and six for murder. On the conspiracy charge, six jurors on each panel voted not guilty. Roughly half the jurors who heard the abuse evidence declined to convict of murder.
The 1988 Letter to Andy Cano
Erik wrote to his cousin Andy Cano in December 1988, about eight months before the killings. The letter alludes to abuse by Jose Menendez and conveys desperation about the family situation.3Los Angeles County District Attorney. Informal Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Its value is timing. Prosecutors long argued the brothers invented the abuse story after their arrests to escape murder convictions, and a document written well before the killings undercuts that theory.
The letter became part of a habeas corpus petition decades later. The judge who reviewed the petition in September 2025 was not persuaded, writing that the letter “contradicts in part the testimony of Erik and Cano” and “only corroborates what was already discussed at length by both witnesses” at trial.
The Roy Rosselló Affidavit
Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, filed a sworn affidavit in 2024 alleging Jose Menendez drugged and raped him when he was 14 or 15. Rosselló stated he went to the Menendez home at his manager’s direction, drank wine, lost control of his body, and was taken to a room where the assault occurred. He also alleged Jose sexually abused him on two other occasions around a Radio City Music Hall performance.3Los Angeles County District Attorney. Informal Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
What set this affidavit apart is that it came from outside the Menendez family. The brothers’ own accounts could be dismissed as self-serving; an unrelated accuser pointed to a pattern. The September 2025 habeas ruling accepted part of that logic and rejected the rest. The judge found the Rosselló declaration “corroborates the general allegation that Jose was sexually abusive of boys and young men, but is not relevant to the Petitioners’ state of mind at the time of the murders.” He accepted Jose as a sexual predator on the record before him. He did not accept that the affidavit spoke to whether the brothers believed they were in imminent danger the night they killed their parents.
Why the 1996 Retrial Reached a Different Verdict
Judge Stanley Weisberg presided over the retrial and issued rulings that barred the jury from hearing testimony about the brothers’ sexual abuse allegations. Much of the psychological expert testimony about trauma and the internal experience of abuse victims was also excluded. Without expert witnesses explaining how years of sexual abuse warp a victim’s perception of danger, the jury had no framework for understanding why two young men would believe their parents posed an imminent lethal threat on a quiet evening at home.
The second jury convicted both brothers of first-degree murder and conspiracy. They were sentenced to life without parole. The gap between the two trials is the clearest measure of what the abuse evidence did: with it, two juries deadlocked; without it, one jury convicted on the most serious charges available.
What the Evidence Has Produced Since 2024
The renewed attention to the case, including the Rosselló affidavit, drove a series of proceedings in 2024 and 2025. The results are mixed, and the brothers remain in prison.
The Resentencing
In October 2024, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón recommended resentencing for both brothers.4Los Angeles County District Attorney. District Attorney Gascón Announces Decision in Resentencing of Erik and Lyle Menendez Gascón lost his reelection bid, and his successor Nathan Hochman moved to withdraw the resentencing motion, arguing the brothers had “failed to show full insight and accept full responsibility for their murders.”5Los Angeles County District Attorney. Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman’s Reply on Menendez Resentencing Motion
Judge Michael Jesic resentenced both brothers anyway on May 13, 2025, changing their sentence from life without parole to 50 years to life. That made them immediately eligible for parole. The judge emphasized he was not suggesting they should be released right away.
The Parole Denial
The parole board held separate hearings for each brother in August 2025 and denied parole to both. Under California law, they can reapply after three years, or request an administrative review after one year that could bring them back before the board in roughly 18 months. Even if parole is eventually granted, the governor has authority to review and potentially reverse the decision.
The Habeas Denial
The habeas corpus petition built on the Cano letter and the Rosselló affidavit was denied on September 16, 2025. California’s habeas statute requires that new evidence be of “such decisive force and value that it would have more likely than not changed the outcome at trial.”6California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 1473 – Writ of Habeas Corpus The judge found that “neither piece of newly discovered evidence is particularly strong.”
That distinction matters. A successful habeas petition could have produced a new trial where the abuse evidence was admitted, potentially yielding a manslaughter conviction or acquittal. The denial leaves the first-degree murder convictions intact. The resentencing changed how long the brothers can be held; the habeas ruling means the underlying guilty verdicts stand, and any release now runs through the parole board.