1. Of the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of Jude, who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.
2. Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and they were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked them if they were descendants of David, and they confessed that they were. Then he asked them how much property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of them answered that they had only nine thousand denarii, half of which belonged to each of them.
4. And this property did not consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only thirty-nine acres, and from which they raised their taxes and supported themselves by their own labor.
5. Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies and the callousness produced upon their hands by continuous toil as evidence of their own labor.
6. And when they were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works.
7. Upon hearing this, Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of no account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution of the Church.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm
There is some historical nucleus behind this story. Eusebius is moved to admit that the Christians who claimed special relation with Christ in virtue of their greater Jewishness than other Christians, could only give as "evidence" their apocalypticism. No trace of a historical Jesus. Hence stll no gospel under Domitian.
Now, the story is clearly mere invention. But what is curious is that the accusations brought «by some heretics» moved the not-Christians to inquiry about the presumed historicity of Jesus. The position of these heretics is in the middle between the not-Christians and the presumed "brothers of the Lord". On one side they are explicitly against Christians connected someway with proto-historicist belief, on the other side they continue to be Christians. Are they these particular Christians who argued a form of radical docetism as compromise between Pagan skepticism and early historicist belief?