By FRED SHUSTER

Roughly two years after an effort began to have Erik and Lyle Menendez released from prison, a re-sentencing hearing got underway Tuesday in the San Fernando Valley with family members testifying that if set free from life prison terms for the 1989 shotgun murders of their parents, the brothers would pose no future risk and could be expected to inspire people with their good deeds.

The brothers have spent about 35 years behind bars without the possibility of parole for the Aug. 20, 1989, killings of Jose and Mary Louise “Kitty” Menendez in their Beverly Hills home. The Menendez brothers claim the killings were committed after years of abuse, including alleged sexual abuse by their father.

The hearing is expected to last two days at the Van Nuys Courthouse.

During the morning session Tuesday, three Menendez family members were called to the stand by the defense to try and convince the judge that the brothers had shown remorse and had great insight into their crimes.

The first witness, Erik and Lyle Menendez’s cousin Anamaria Baralt, was adamant that the brothers have earned their chance at freedom.

“We believe that 35 years is enough,” she told a courtroom crowded with family members, supporters and media, as the Menendez brothers watched via video from the San Diego prison where they are both incarcerated. “They are universally forgiven by our family. They deserve a second chance at life.”

She added that the family has suffered from the “relentless attention” the case has stirred up.

“It’s been torture for decades to live this out in the public eye,” Baralt, 54, said, weeping. “To be the butt of every joke on SNL (“Saturday Night Live”) since (the trial) happened.”

The cousin spoke harshly about “the narrative that they have not completely taken accountability (for their crimes). They feel terrible about it.”

In a 2023 court petition, attorneys for the brothers pointed to two new pieces of evidence they contend corroborate the brothers’ allegations of long-term sexual abuse at the hands of their father — a letter allegedly written by Erik Menendez to his cousin Andy Cano in early 1989 or late 1988, and recent allegations by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, that he too was sexually abused by Jose Menendez as a teenager.

Prosecutors allege the murders were carried out due to greed, to acquire their parents’ money.

Defense attorneys are hoping to win a reduced sentence for the brothers, possibly allowing them to either be released immediately or at least be eligible for parole consideration.

Meanwhile, state parole boards are set to conduct separate hearings June 13 for the brothers, then send their reports to Gov. Gavin Newsom to help him decide whether the two should receive clemency.

Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic said prior to the start of the hearing Tuesday that he had not determined if the Menendez brothers should be re-sentenced at all.

Family members testified that if released, the brothers would assume roles as advocates for victims of childhood sexual trauma, which the brothers contend they are victims of. While behind bars, Baralt said, Erik and Lyle Menendez have been involved in rehabilitation projects for inmates and hospice services.

“They are incredible people,” she told the court. “The work they have done has been inspiring and I hope they have a chance to inspire the world. … They are not the same people they were 35 years ago.”

Another cousin, Tamara Goodell, testified that the brothers “have made every possible effort to rehabilitate themselves. … They now see the world through 35 years of healing. They have created careers for themselves in prison.”

Another witness, Diane Hernandez, niece of Kitty Menendez, called Erik and Lyle Menendez “remarkable human beings. There is absolutely no chance that they would break the law (if released). Their only desire is to do good.”

Interest in the Menendez case surged following the release of a recent Netflix documentary and dramatic series.

In October, then-Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced he was in favor of the brothers being re-sentenced to make them eligible for parole. Since the brothers were under 26 at the time of the murders, they could be eligible for parole through the state’s youthful offender law.

Gascón pointed to the brothers’ work to help other inmates, and officials’ assessment that they present a low risk of re-offending. The now-former district attorney also cited the possible new evidence about the father’s alleged abusive behavior as additional factors in support of new sentences.

However, when he was elected, new District Attorney Nathan Hochman promised to re-examine the case, eventually saying he did not support re-sentencing. Hochman contends the brothers have not shown “insight” into their crimes during their years of incarceration and continue to lie about the alleged abuse.

Last week, attorneys for the brothers withdrew a motion asking that the D.A.’s office be removed from the case, saying they want to expeditiously move forward with their bid to have the pair re-sentenced.

Attorneys for Erik Menendez, 54, and Lyle, 57, had alleged in the motion that “absent recusal (of the District Attorney’s Office), a conflict of interest would render it likely that the defendants will receive neither a fair hearing nor fair treatment through all related proceedings.”

But in court Friday, the brothers’ defense team dropped its bid to have the D.A.’s office removed from the case, saying they did not want any more delays in the re-sentencing hearing.

“We have not wanted to waive time,” defense attorney Mark Geragos said, noting that Hochman was in the courtroom for the hearing.

Hochman again asked Jesic to withdraw the earlier prosecution motion in support of re-sentencing filed by Gascón. But the judge again denied the request, saying that “nothing’s really changed.”

Hochman — who spoke on behalf of the prosecution for the bulk of Friday’s hearing — reiterated his opposition to re-sentencing for the brothers, arguing they have not “accepted complete responsibility for their actions.” He maintained in court that his decision was not based on a “political whim.”

“Right now, they are not in a position where we would advocate for re-sentencing,” Hochman told the judge.

Geragos argued that the district attorney presented information in court about a recently completed psychological assessment of the brothers “in violation of the rules and regulations.” He called Hochman’s courtroom presentation a “dog and pony show,” and cited what he called “extraordinary rehabilitation” by the brothers.

Geragos said outside court that Hochman’s decision to speak on behalf of the prosecution during the Friday court hearing “shows the degree of involvement and how personal it is.”

He said the defense has the “utmost faith in Judge Jesic to do the right thing.”