A highly anticipated resentencing hearing for convicted killers Erik and Lyle Menendez kicked off on Thursday before unravelling and being postponed by a judge.
The hearing was set to decide whether the brothers, serving life without the possibility of parole, should receive a new sentence that could allow their freedom after serving three decades in prison.
They were convicted in the 1989 killing of their parents in a Beverly Hills mansion – a case that continues to divide the nation.
The hearing devolved from the start as attorneys for the brothers fought with prosecutors, who oppose their release. The judge ultimately delayed the hearing until 9 May to weigh requests made by both sides.
The contentious hearing, which led to swarms of media, yielded few developments.
The brothers’ attorney Mark Geragos declared he would seek the recusal of the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office from the case and prosecutors asked the court to review a new report about whether the brothers could be a danger to the public if released.
The judge is set to consider those requests at the May hearing date.
The resentencing bid is one of three paths the brothers’ attorneys have been chasing to potentially secure a future release.
Thursday’s developments muddled the timeline for any potential decision on the brothers’ fate.
The hearing on Thursday was supposed to centre on one subject: Should the Menendez brothers be resentenced to a lesser penalty.
The day was set to include testimony from witnesses involved in the case and members of their family. There was even the possibility of the brothers taking the stand and pleading their case.
Mr Geragos has also asked Judge Michael Jesic of the Superior Court of Los Angeles to reduce their conviction to manslaughter, which could pave the way to a faster release.
Judge Jesic will ultimately make the determination about whether to issue a new sentence or reject their request. He could also issue a different sentence that would make them eligible for parole.
Several members of the Menendez family who support their release had travelled to Los Angeles to testify.
The brothers themselves appeared in court via a video feed from a San Diego prison, wearing identical cobalt blue prison uniforms.
But the hearing was derailed by a development in another bid they’ve been chasing for freedom: Clemency from California Gov Gavin Newsom.
Newsom had ordered the state’s parole board to examine the case, and that panel completed a risk assessment report this week. The report examines whether the brothers would be a risk to society if released.
Prosecutors said in court filings that they want to review the report before moving ahead with the resentencing effort.
Mr Geragos argued that he, too, had not been able to view the report yet.
Late in the afternoon, Judge Michael Jesic agreed to pause the proceedings until 9 May to give the court and attorneys time to review the risk assessment.
That hearing will consider what parts of the report, if any, will be admissible during the resentencing hearing.
The court will also consider a motion Mr Geragos intends to file to recuse the district attorney’s office from the case.
Mr Geragos and a lawyer representing the Menendez family members, Bryan Freedman, have accused Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman of bias and violating the family’s rights.
“This is a DA who made up his mind and did no hard work in terms of his position,” Mr Geragos said after the hearing. He also accused several members of the prosecution of conflicts of interest.
Hochman, elected on a tough-on-crime platform, has fiercely opposed giving the brothers a reduced sentence. His predecessor initiated the resentencing process, and Hochman unsuccessfully tried to halt it from continuing.
At a press conference before the hearing, Hochman insisted the “facts are not favourable” to the Menendez brothers.
“If you don’t have the law or the facts, pound the prosecutor, and that’s what the defence strategy has been,” he said.
In court, prosecutor Habib Balian said the Menendez brothers had committed “extremely depraved conduct” in the killings of Jose and Kitty Menendez.
The matter of resentencing rested on two factors, he said: whether the brothers had been rehabilitated since committing their crimes, and whether they still posed a risk of violence.
To decide the resentencing matter, “we cannot close our eyes” to the events that transpired over three decades ago, Mr Balian told the court.
The Menendez brothers have spent over 30 years in prison for murdering their parents with a series of shotgun blasts.
Last year, the case received renewed attention following a Netflix drama and documentary about their case.
