The Los Angeles County District Attorney, Nathan Hochman, stated that Erik and Lyle Menendez expressed a desire to confess all their lies during a conversation with TMZ from jail. However, their attorney, Mark Geragos, argues that the prosecution is fixated on the wrong issues, which hinders the pursuit of justice in this high-profile case that has captured public attention.

On Monday’s episode of “TMZ Live,” both Hochman and Geragos participated in a discussion about the forthcoming resentencing hearing and the implications it holds for the Menendez brothers’ quest for freedom. The stakes are high as this hearing could potentially change the course of their lives after decades of incarceration.

Hochman remains firm in his stance, emphasizing the reasons why both Erik and Lyle Menendez should continue serving their sentences. He highlighted that the Menendez brothers squandered a crucial opportunity to take responsibility for their actions and offer a sincere apology during their recent interview with TMZ, which could have influenced public perception and their legal standing.

The judge ruled in favor of the Menendez brothers, allowing a resentencing hearing that could potentially lead to their release. However, during the Friday hearing, Hochman faced criticism for displaying past crime scene photographs in front of the Menendez family, an act that many found inappropriate and insensitive. In light of this backlash, Hochman has issued an apology, acknowledging the emotional toll it may have taken on the family.

Later in the program, Geragos took the opportunity to rebut Hochman’s arguments, asserting that Hochman is overlooking the essential issue of rehabilitation within the justice system. He emphasized that the focus should shift towards understanding how individuals can be rehabilitated rather than solely punishing them.

Geragos, who is also a co-host on the popular podcast “2 Angry Men,” pointed out that there is a consensus that both Erik and Lyle Menendez have made significant strides towards rehabilitation. This perspective challenges the notion that they should continue to serve lengthy sentences without consideration of their progress as individuals.

In a separate line of questioning, we attempted to probe Mark regarding whether he is representing Diddy in an upcoming trial. However, he cleverly deflected the question, showcasing his adeptness at navigating sensitive topics while maintaining confidentiality.