梅嫩德斯兄弟有遭受了新的挫折在他们作为一名法官工作了30年后从监狱释放的行动中，周二拒绝了他们的人身保护令申请，以推翻他们的定罪，并根据最近发现的证据接受新的审判。
埃里克和莱尔·梅南德兹的人身保护令申请于2023年提交给尝试获得另一次审判基于最初没有在法庭上提出的新证据。
请愿书提出了两项新证据，包括男孩乐队Menudo的一名前成员的指控，他在2023年的纪录片《梅嫩德斯+ Menudo:男孩背叛》中透露，他被何塞·梅嫩德斯强奸。第二份证据是埃里克·梅嫩德斯在谋杀发生前八个月写给他表弟的一封信，信中详细描述了他被指控的虐待行为;据这对兄弟的律师说，这位堂兄弟在审判中就所谓的虐待作证，但这封本来可以证实堂兄弟证词的信直到几年前才被发现。
法官表示，堂兄安迪·卡诺(Andy Cano)1988年关于虐待指控的信不是很有力，甚至说这与兄弟俩试图重新审判的想法相矛盾。
“新发现的证据都不是特别有力，”法官威廉·瑞安在判决中写道。“卡诺的信部分反驳了埃里克和卡诺的证词。这也只是证实了什么已经讨论了双方证人的长度:这两个讨论何塞的虐待。在最好的情况下，它没有额外告知陪审团在谋杀发生时请愿者所谓的恐惧，在最坏的情况下，它使两个证人的可信度出现裂缝。"
法官还对Menudo成员Roy Rossello的证词的相关性提出质疑。
“至于罗塞罗声明，它证实了何塞对男孩和年轻男子进行性虐待的一般指控，但与谋杀发生时请愿者的精神状态无关，”他继续说这两项证据都没有增加陪审团已经考虑的虐待指控，但发现兄弟俩计划，然后执行计划，杀死他们虐待的父亲和同谋母亲。"
洛杉矶县地方检察官内森·霍奇曼(Nathan Hochman)坚决反对兄弟俩获释，他在本月提交了对人身保护令申请的回应，称他“得出的结论是，这份申请不符合要求重新审判的事实或法律标准。”
“梅嫩德斯兄弟在审判中的主要辩护一直是自卫，而不是性虐待。陪审团驳回了这一自卫辩护，认为他们犯下了可怕的谋杀罪;霍奇曼在一份声明中说:“五个不同的上诉州和联邦法院已经确认了这些定罪，所谓的‘新’证据中没有任何东西挑战这些决定。”“我们反对这种‘万福玛利亚’式的努力，以在30多年后获得新的审判，这表明正义、事实和法律要求定罪站得住脚。”
在周二法官判决后的新闻发布会上，霍奇曼告诉记者，法官的决定相当于对兄弟俩的人身保护令申请的“彻底搁置”。
霍奇曼重复了他的想法，虽然他不认为兄弟俩应该被释放，但现在还为时过早。“不是从来没有，但还不是时候，”他说，兄弟俩从来没有和盘托出他们在案件中的“自卫”。
兄弟俩在上个月的听证会上被拒绝假释，这对他们获得自由是一个重大打击。
今年5月，一名法官重新判处他们50年至终身监禁，使他们立即有资格根据青少年罪犯假释法获得假释。法官说，他被狱警的支持信所感动，并对兄弟俩为改善狱友生活所做的工作感到惊讶。
在单独的听证会上，委员们强调了兄弟俩如何在监狱中多次违反规则，如非法使用手机。
三年后兄弟俩可以再次申请假释。如果在狱中表现良好，等待时间可能会缩短到18个月。
现在释放的最好机会可能是宽大处理，加州州长加文·纽瑟姆可以随时批准。
Judge denies Menendez brothers' petition for a new trial in latest setback
The Menendez brothers havesuffered a new setbackin their move to be released from prison after three decades as a judge on Tuesday denied their habeas corpus petition to throw out their conviction and receive a new trial based on recently discovered evidence.
Erik and Lyle Menendez's habeas corpus petition was submitted in 2023 totry to get another trialbased on new evidence not originally presented in court.
The petition presented two pieces of new evidence, including allegations from a former member of the boy band Menudo, who revealed in the 2023 docuseries "Menendez + Menudo: Boys Betrayed" that he was raped by Jose Menendez. The second piece of evidence was a letter Erik Menendez wrote to his cousin eight months before the murders detailing his alleged abuse; the cousin testified about the alleged abuse at trial, but the letter -- which would have corroborated the cousin's testimony -- wasn't unearthed until several years ago, according to the brothers' attorney.
The judge said the 1988 letter from Andy Cano, the cousin, about alleged abuse was not very strong, even saying it contradicted the brothers' attempts at a new trial.
"Neither piece of newly discover (sic) evidence is particularly strong," Judge William Ryan wrote in the decision. "The Cano Letter contradicts in part the testimony of Erik and Cano. It also only corroborates what was already discussed at length by both witnesses: the two discussed Jose's abuse. At best, it does not additionally inform the jury of Petitioners' alleged fear at the time of the murders, and at worse, it puts a crack in the credibility of both witnesses."
The judge also disputed the relevance of testimony from Roy Rossello, the member of Menudo.
"As for the Rosello Declaration, it 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 continued. "Neither piece of evidence adds to the allegations of abuse that the jury already considered, yet found that the brothers planned, then executed that plan, to kill their abusive father and complicit mother."
Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman, who is firmly opposed to the brothers' release, filed a response to the habeas corpus petition this month, stating that he "concluded that this petition does not come close to meeting the factual or legal standard to warrant a new trial."
"The central defense of the Menendez brothers at trial has always been self-defense, not sexual abuse. The jury rejected this self-defense defense in finding them guilty of the horrific murders they perpetrated; five different appellate state and federal courts have affirmed those convictions, and nothing in the so-called 'new' evidence challenges any of those determinations," Hochman said in a statement. "Our opposition to this 'Hail Mary' effort to obtain a new trial over 30 years later makes clear that justice, the facts, and the law demand the convictions stand."
Speaking at a news conference on Tuesday after the judge's decision, Hochman told reporters the judge's decision amounted to "a full kibosh" on the brothers' habeus petition.
Hochman repeated the idea that while he doesn't think the brothers should never be released, it's still too soon. "Not never, but not yet," he said, saying the brothers have never come clean about their "self-defense" in the case.
The brothers were dealt a major blow to achieving freedom when they were denied parole at hearings last month.
This May, a judge resentenced them to 50 years to life in prison, making them immediately eligible for parole under youth offender parole laws. The judge said he was moved by the supportive letters from prison guards and was amazed by the work the brothers had accomplished to better the lives of their fellow inmates.
In separate hearings, commissioners stressed how the brothers repeatedly broke rules in prison, like illegal cellphone use.
The brothers can apply for parole again in three years. With good behavior in prison, that wait can potentially be shortened to 18 months.
The best chance to release now may be clemency, which California Gov. Gavin Newsom can grant at any time.
