Leslie Van Houten Granted Parole at 20th Hearing

Thursday, April 14th, 2016

lvh20

Apr. 14 – Leslie Van Houten has been found suitable for parole at her 20th hearing, held today at the California Institute for Women in Corona, California.

Van Houten, was sentenced to death in 1971 for her part in the August 10, 1969 murder deaths of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. The following year, Van Houten saw her sentence commuted to life after the California supreme court outlawed the death penalty, stating it was unconstitutional. In 1976, an appeals court ruled Van Houten was denied a fair trial because her attorney, Ronald Hughes, disappeared while the trial was in progress.

Van Houten was retried in 1977, which resulted in a hung jury. She was retried the following year and again convicted, this time sentenced to life with the possibility of parole.
Because of time served on her original sentence, Van Houten was already eligible for parole when she returned to prison in August of 1978.

Since then, she has been denied parole 19 times. Her last hearing was in June of 2013 and she was given a five year denial. In September of 2015, she filed a petition to advance her hearing date citing self-help programs and other work she had done to address the board’s concerns.

The decision will undergo a 120-day review by the Board of Parole Hearings. Then it will be reviewed by Governor Jerry Brown, who will have from August 12th to September 11th to either confirm, reverse or modify the parole grant.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to Leslie Van Houten Granted Parole at 20th Hearing

  1. April says:

    Heaven help us.

  2. Lee says:

    The bleeding hearts are having a field day!

  3. T says:

    Once a killer, always a killer. I don’t believe she should be paroled. She is a murderer. Keep her locked up until she dies.

  4. Paula says:

    Do NOT release her…where are the families she murdered?? They didn’t get paroled.

  5. Fred Bloggs says:

    For 47 years people have made the point either directly or by implication that the Family members had no regard or respect for the law of the land. And they were right, they didn’t.
    That same law that the Family totally dissed makes provision for prisoners to have the possibility of parole one day, if their jailtime behaviour has warranted it.
    It’s a living irony that those that correctly have observed the Family’s disregard for the law should themselves do likewise in regard to parole.
    I understand Paula’s point of “where are the families she murdered?? They didn’t get paroled” but that is a point that doesn’t go anywhere. It’s stating the obvious. The last 45 years have taken into account the residue left by her murderous involvement.
    Besides, if Guv Brown’s record with Bruce is anything to go by, he’ll probably nix Leslie’s release, which I don’t think is at all fair or right ~ but it’s provision is there in the law.

    • buntline says:

      @ Fred Bloggs . and would you feel the same if she murdered your mother and father, leaving a carving fork in their backs?

      don’t forget LU was offered immunity and was too stupid to accept it. she chose this path.
      she’s lucky she’s still alive. she dodged the death penalty. that’s good enough.

      • Fred Bloggs says:

        buntline says:
        April 15, 2016 at 8:38 pm

        and would you feel the same if she murdered your mother and father, leaving a carving fork in their backs?

        I’ll answer you honestly mate, no, not initially. I am a Christian and have been for 31 years and I know from personal experience on many occasions, forgiveness is not an easy thing. And it doesn’t get easier. So I know that I would struggle with it ¬> but I also know that somewhere along the line I would have to deal with it. I don’t pretend it would be easy but I value my relationship with Christ too much to jeopardize it by refusing to go the way I know God wants me to go. Now, it might take me years, it might take me days, I can’t say.
        But I do believe in forgiveness and I do believe in parole for someone who has shown remorse, tried to turn their life around under the kind of stringent conditions that would floor us on the outside and who has served a good 20~25 years and more in prison.
        Both my parents died indirectly from medical negligence but I do not hold that against those persons. I understand that murder is different and in terms of parole, I don’t feel it should be handed out willy nilly.
        It’s a hard one.

        don’t forget LU was offered immunity and was too stupid to accept it.

        In Karlene Faith’s book “The long prison journey of….” Leslie says she would have felt like Judas if she’d taken the immunity and money she was offered. In that interview with Mike McGann from Nov’69, one can understand why she turned down the immunity offer. At that time, it wasn’t known that she was one of the murderers and even though McGann said the offer stood even if she’d been involved in the killings, it’s easy to see why she would not have gone for it; to do so at the time would be admitting that she was one of the murderers and as she wasn’t on the radar at the time, why admit to it ? She had no problems with the Family but as her statement about being found playing Russian roulette clearly indicates, she felt that she’d be cannon fodder if she turned against the Family.

        she chose this path

        She did.
        I’m not one of the people that has campaigned for Leslie to be released but as the board with responsibility has made their recommendation, I do agree with it. If she took the same kind of stance Charlie has taken, then no way should she have been recommended for it. But she hasn’t.
        Incidentally, as far as I’m concerned, no one “deserves” parole. It’s not something one deserves through some kind of merit.
        Over here in England, parole is more or less built in to every prison sentence and often we go too far the other way, people going in for ten years {or whatever time} are able to calculate how much time they’ll serve and unless they are in trouble every day, they won’t do the ten years or whatever.

        she’s lucky she’s still alive. she dodged the death penalty. that’s good enough

        That’s only partly true for her, unlike the others, because she was retried and retried again and when she was found guilty the final time, she got a life sentence, with the possibility of parole. Her initial conviction, the one where she was sentenced to death, was actually set aside so the 1978 trial was starting from a clean slate.

    • Joe Mama says:

      Why don’t you bleeding hearts have a look at the crime scene photos and tell us again how this c u n t should ever see the outside world again.

  6. Ms. B says:

    @Fred Bloggs – It’s also ironic that you agree with the law which jailed the killers, you agree with the law which allows them the right to apply for parole, but you disagree with the law which allows the Governor to override said parole. Hmmmm

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      Well hang on a minute Ms B. I point out that there is provision in the law that allows for the Guv’nor to block the parole recommendation. I don’t attack the Family members for their anti establishment stance or their disregard of the law; I comment on it. Why I called it ironic was because many people that speak about the Family attack them for their disregard of the law. Some of those people then come out with sentiments like “let them rot in jail” which strikes me as a similar disregard for the law. In other words, the law is to be upheld….until one disagrees with it.
      I don’t disregard the law in America {I’m not American} but I most certainly think that if people whose daily job is to determine suitability for parole conclude that someone is suitable, then someone whose job it is not, be they the Guv’nor or Obama himself, should not be able to nix it. We have the same situation here; sometimes, the Home secretary will interfere in a case that experienced law Lords or judges have ruled on, despite them having none of the experience of the people in the job that they are overruling. It kind of defeats the object of having those people in the jobs that they do.
      It’s a bit like government interference in your parenting {if you have children}. You’re happy for your children to go to bed at 8.30 but then you are told it must be 7.30. Poor example, I know, but you get my drift.
      Turning the situation around, can you imagine the reaction if the board turned down a parole application but the Guv’nor nixed that ?

      • Donna says:

        Good points Fred.

      • Ms. B says:

        Hi Fred, thanks for elaborating. Yes, I do get your point and, put in perspective I understand your response completely. Over here in the states, the government is way too involved in the private lives of American citizens. I can certainly appreciate your viewpoint.

  7. Peyton phillips says:

    Keep her in jail till she’s dead. No mercy. No mercy was shown to the victims and sharing Tate baby got a death sentence before ever living.

    • downgoesbrown says:

      Van Houten didn’t take part in the murder of Sharon Tate or her unborn child and shouldn’t be held accountable for that crime.

      The governor is pandering to the public, shamelessly so in fact. If not for the notoriety of the case, Van Houten, Beausoleil and Davis would’ve been freed years ago.

  8. Susan Leslie says:

    46 years is enough. I hope Leslie is paroled and that some good can yet come out of her life.

    • Kattrinka says:

      I agree. The sentence she received included the possibility of parole. The law provides that so long as she is not a danger to society, she must be granted that parole. I do not believe she poses any danger to the free world. She has served far longer than others not associated with the Manson name would serve for similar crimes and if Brown denies the Board’s recommendation then we really don’t have “life with the possibility of parole” as her sentence stipulates. She’s been a model inmate, having proven herself for 46 years! Grant her parole.

  9. Charles ODell says:

    This time I think she should have to stay in jail lets see what the G
    ov does.

  10. Wiperblade says:

    Let her go. She’s done her time. She was a model prisoner. She was a young, naive, 19 yr old that was fated into an evil family and brainwashed through drugs and the manipulator Manson. In any other time in a different life she would have done well by society. She’s not dangerous. Charlie stays until death. This woman deserves a chance. It was not her doing.

  11. ang says:

    i think if she is let go she should at least be watched for the rest of her life ,

  12. Nan says:

    Need a flood of letters to Gov. Brown asking…demanding…that he block her parole

  13. Marre says:

    If paroled, she’ll have to check in with a parole officer and meet certain criteria and rules.
    She’s been in prison the majority of her life. Life on the outside of prison most likely will prove to be to difficult and will want to go back to what she knows, prison.
    If she does survive on the outside I would think therapy/counciling would be mandatory.
    Such a young mind exposed to such violence and then bein educated in prison life she’ll need assistance of sorts to be a functioning member of society.

  14. Michael Jans says:

    I think what she did was horrible – but she has been served now 46 years and she is totally remorsefull – what else would some more years bring ? she can contribute to society much more outside than inside and I’m convinced that she deeply regrets what happened under wrong influence a long long time ago.
    Everybody who is deeply remorseful for a long time should get a 2nd chance – and not hate and revenge should be the target – but chaning people to the better – knowing what they have done but still are able to give back a lot to society. This is what Christianity means – forgiveness. An Eye for an Eye is back to stone age.

    • nick of bobby Johnson says:

      If that was ur mom or sister u would be saying let her go….but jus cause she is no relation to u she is a monster
      What if ur daughter or mother committed this crime u would probley be happy she is being released and would be talking bad upon the people who is downing her. People are so fucking wrong these days there is such thing as a 2nd change…I bet y’all have been given a 2nd chance before maybe not for this very reason but at least once in lifw …let her have hers…she was 19 years old hell people change jus like me and u…..so leave the lady aalone…..I bet u wouldn’t down her to her face like u do on social media cause she is what y’all say a cold heated killer lmao jus speaking the truth and stateing facks don’t get all offensive over my post lmao

    • Donna says:

      Agree totally.

  15. Jhon Miley says:

    you people who say let her go are sick she was a murderess and she deserves to die like those other people she killed. Not right in the head look at her she got cold eyes she should die like the other one that had brain cancer in jail..This country is screwed up .How can you let these people live ?You would not be saying it if it was your mom are dad are sister..That died..It is wrong and i think she should be slice a little each day to let her feel how they die…

    • Liz Reynolds says:

      I could never begin to imagine what the victims families have gone through. However as a Christian, forgiveness is a must. It’s something that needs to be worked on daily. You may revisit the same event over and over and forgive the same sin over and over. That’s God’s law. Man’s law states,with parole. God also instructs us to follow man laws. With that said, man’s law has now said, “eligible for parole”. That should be honored. No amount of time served can ever justify what has been done. But it’s time to move forward. Living in the past as if it were yesterday is in no way healthy. I pray she can live her life on the outside and at least try to make some things right.

  16. Cameron australia says:

    I don’t really understandAmericans. Christianity for most of you is the preferred religion, a religion that preaches forgiveness. Life with a chance of parole is what she received and for 46 years she has been a model prisoner, as in not one single infraction. The law, your law America, means she gets this right to be freed. If a Christian cannot find it in their hearts to forgive someone after 46 years in prison, then I really do pity you lot and the cold hearts you carry around with you. Let her out.

    • Donna says:

      It is really hypocritical – but you must remember that many Christians are not very nice people. They are fearful, arrogant, and go for the eye for the eye.

  17. Calibabyy21 says:

    NO. WAY. Jerry Brown, please intervene and keep this animal in prison.

  18. MeMyself says:

    Let me be perfectly clear here;
    There seems to be no easy way to discuss this other than in personal or individual terms. You and I have no idea what it is like to be a sociopath-someone that does not care about other people except inasmuch or they serve his turn-or a psychopath-someone who deserves actual delight from inflicting misery on others. But we know that such people exist, and that they must be guarded against. I regard their existence as part of our haphazard evolution and our kinship with a nature that often favors the predator. You do not. Indeed, you apparently adopt the immoral and suicidal doctrine that advocates forgiveness for those who would destroy us. Please take care not to forgive my enemies, or the enemies of society. If I have to call such people “Evil” (and I find I have no other alternative), I do not deduce peaceful coexistence from that observation and do not want you being tender to them when it is my family’s life that is at stake.

    Lulu was young? I was young too and in many street and bar fights… Never once was my intention to KILL my opponent.
    Lulu was on LSD? I took LSD when young and the last thing I thought to do was kill someone, I enjoyed the ride.
    Lulu was impressionable and under Manson’s manipulation…I worked for a religious zealot when very young and when I felt his manipulation was becoming inappropriate… I just left!

    • Donna says:

      There are bio-social-psycho factors involved in an individual’s makeup. So you can’t really compare individual to individual and expect the same outcome.

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      MeMyself says:
      I regard their existence as part of our haphazard evolution and our kinship with a nature that often favors the predator

      Which rather contradicts pretty much everything you’ve said, well put though it was. If sociopaths and psychopaths are simply part of our “haphazard evolution” as you put it, then nature is simply taking it’s course and who are you to determine which part of that course is right or wrong ?
      One of the benefits of knowing God is that if nothing else, you are in little doubt as to what is right or wrong.
      The irony here is that if you actually adopted the religious perspective that you dismiss with such obvious contempt, your overall thrust would be so much stronger and salient to the debate.
      But then, you’d be caught in something of a catch 22 because then you’d have to consider what you call the “immoral and suicidal doctrine that advocates forgiveness for those who would destroy us.” You’d also have to understand it and if you did, you’d know that there is no conflict between forgiving someone and the forgiven person still having to take their lumps, whatever the punishment would be. Take Tex Watson for example. At one point he was forgiven by the daughter of one of his victims. But though she appealed for his parole, last I looked, he was still inside and I don’t think he’ll be going anywhere too soon.

      • MeMyself says:

        Fred Bloggs says:
        “Which rather contradicts pretty much everything you’ve said, well put though it was. If sociopaths and psychopaths are simply part of our “haphazard evolution” as you put it, then nature is simply taking it’s course and who are you to determine which part of that course is right or wrong ?”

        Apparently you have limited your definition of Evolution, and the meaning “right or wrong” has evolved. Once it was proper to sacrifice other humans to the gods…we evolved knowing this was not right, but wrong. Well some of us have anyway. Have you heard Leslie’s tape with her lawyer here at Cielo Drive where she states, “It had to be done”. In Leslie’s mind these people had to be sacrificed and only a psychopathic mind would think such thoughts in today’s world.

        Fred Bloggs says:
        “The irony here is that if you actually adopted the religious perspective that you dismiss with such obvious contempt, your overall thrust would be so much stronger and salient to the debate.”
        … you mean like Jim Jones, the Crusades, the Inquisition, ISIS, terrorism, and yes…Charley himself ??

        For good people to do really horrible things… that takes religion.

  19. MeMyself says:

    There is strength in numbers and any group can be more violent than any one individual on their own, Lulu was a part of such a group encouraging them. She held someone down to let her friend stab them!! She lacks empathy, a personality trait that cannot be taught, one has it or they don’t. Before the murders she was involved with criminal acts, breaking and entering (creepy crawl) stealing credit cards (theft) and others. Also, others were planned and she would have went along as she begged to go and “kill pigs” before this case. She escalated from petty crime to burglary to assisted murder… no doubt she would continued to escalate and murdered the next time.

    And the absolute best reason Lulu should not be released…You people drive like shit out here in LA and the last thing needed is a murdering old hag who has never driven before, getting her license and cruising the highways with a 2,000lb murder weapon.

    • Liz Reynolds says:

      First of all maybe you need to know the facts. She h as driven before. She also lived a crime free life after the murders. That’s right, she lived on the outside for 18 months before finally being convicted and put in prison. She had no necessity the law during that time either. So there goes the theory, once a killer always a killer. If this crime was not so sensationalized by the media, no one would be talking about it 46 years later. Other killers h ave been out living their life after only 20 years, time served. I (unfortunatly) personally knew a person back in the 80’s that murdered an elderly man. It was planned and executed. He was promised 10,000 for the murder. A woman know in the area as the “Black Widow” was a care taker for this elderly wealthy gentleman. She had fraudulently changed his will to be his sole beneficiary. She hired her son and the man I was familiar with to murder him. For 10k they smothered the man in his sleep. They were caught and charged. The man I knew, only served seven years for the murder, that he helped plan and carry out. He was paroled in 7 years. Is that justice? No. But you never even heard of this case before now. I have no contact with this person but we live in a small town. He has lived an exemplary life since this crime. He owns his own construction business and volunteers in several different charities. He has been out for over 25 years now. So there goes your theory of once a killer always a killer.

  20. Leonard benfari says:

    Oh he’ll no nobody wants that crazy woman out she may go back to her old ways again keep her in jail till it’s time to put her in a nursing home

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      Leonard benfari says:
      she may go back to her old ways again

      Vincent Bugliosi made a really interesting point back in 2002 on a TV show about Leslie. He said that he felt that she was doing well in jail and he commended her for the way that she was trying to make good. He added that one thing that bothered him was what had to be inside Leslie that propelled her to murder and in the way she did ? He felt that would always be a question mark and he more or less implied that that kind of thing doesn’t just disappear from a person’s make up.
      That may be true. But the circumstances that give rise to such actions may never again occur. I know a guy that used to be a soldier and when he was in the army, he killed nine men. I know people will say that it’s different but if you are trained to kill, you are trained to kill. But it’s rare that a soldier gets involved in violent crime once they are out of a combat situation, much less murder. The trained instinct to kill when threatened doesn’t necessarily go. Rarely do scenarios arise that push ex soldiers in that direction, however.
      I guess what I’m saying is that we may all actually have the capacity for dark deeds within us but may never find ourselves in the situation that gives rise to those dark capacities coming out.
      I don’t believe Leslie would return to the murderous brutality of her younger days, having spent over 40 years trying to prove to the world that she has distanced herself from it.
      And though it was a long time ago, it’s easy to forget that she was out for six months during her retrials. She’d been inside for around 7 or 8 years at that point.

  21. Leonard benfari says:

    Don’t let her come to see Moines iowa we will kill the bitch don’t let her out of jail

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      So Lenny…..
      You publicly declare that you will kill someone whom you are publicly berating for having shown the desire to go out and kill and who followed it up ?
      There’s a word in the dictionary for that and it’s not a pretty one.

      • MeMyself says:

        And what is that word? Revenge, vengeance, retribution, reprisal, punishment …or an eye for an eye.
        Or maybe just ridding society of a psychopathic personality that has proven the capabilities to harm and murder others, for no good reason at all… I think that is called “Justice”

        • Fred Bloggs says:

          MeMyself says:

          And what is that word? Revenge, vengeance, retribution, reprisal, punishment …or an eye for an eye

          No. The word is hypocrisy.

          MeMyself says:
          Or maybe just ridding society of a psychopathic personality that has proven the capabilities to harm and murder others, for no good reason at all… I think that is called “Justice”

          It might have been justice back in 1971. It might even have been justice back in ’78 after her final trial. It would not be justice if a prisoner is released from jail after 40+ years, is hunted down Lenny of Iowa and killed.
          That would just be another murder from someone who claims the moral high ground currently, but who demonstrates that they are the same as that which they criticize by their intent to kill.
          From wherever I stand, that’s hypocrisy ~ and should be called exactly what it is.
          You possibly do not believe in the notion of rehabilitation. Fortunately, the justice system contains many that do. Of course many cons re~offend. But equally, many don’t. And jail has rid society of Leslie Van Houten. Jail and the loss of liberty has been the instrument of retribution, vengeance, reprisal and punishment. You can’t blame Leslie for the decision of California in ’72 to axe the death penalty or to make it retrospective. You can’t blame her for being protected as a prisoner under the law. You can’t blame her for a life sentence with the possibility of parole.
          A question, friend. Are you genuinely concerned that she may re~offend in the same way ? And do you genuinely believe it is impossible for someone that killed at the age of nearly 20 to change from the mindset that contributed towards them killing in the first place ?
          While I personally believe that many murderers will never change, I believe that that is their choice, not some fixed, inflexible coding in DNA that prevents a person from doing so.

          • Fred Bloggs says:

            Whoops ! That should be “hunted down by Lenny of Iowa.”
            Ha ha, we all make mistakes.

          • MeMyself says:

            Fred Bloggs says:
            “A question, friend. Are you genuinely concerned that she may re~offend in the same way ? And do you genuinely believe it is impossible for someone that killed at the age of nearly 20 to change from the mindset that contributed towards them killing in the first place ?”

            No…I do not think Leslie will re-offend, and I surly believe a 20 year old’s mind is less developed than a mature adult. Ms B explains forgiveness well, and I’ll quote her, “The authority to forgive in this case is beyond any individual or any institution, and lies solely with the eight people he massacred. When people are killed, the privilege of forgiveness from the direct victims is obliterated.”

            No one can forgive but the victim. Should I choose to assault an individual it would be up to them to forgive me, not their family, not the judge, not a priest…only the victim. That would be true forgiveness.
            Millions of people do not murder, heck! dozens in the exact same situation as Leslie at the ranch choose not to murder. These arguments for forgiveness and early release hold no water…Leslie should stay in prison until she takes her last breath.

    • Liz Reynolds says:

      Then you’d be no better than them. I personally could never even think, I would kill anyone. And you’re worried about her? You need to be seen at your local Mental Health.

  22. Barb Dwyer says:

    In this country if you do the crime you do the time.
    Leslie did hers.
    Let her out.

  23. Fred Bloggs says:

    Susan Leslie says:
    46 years is enough

    I think that’s not the right way to look at it. It’s not so much the length of time because Charles Manson has been in the same time {on his last stint} and he did not kill anyone by his own hand during TLB though I think it plainly obvious the murders would not have happened without his involvement.
    Rather, it’s the quality of being during incarceration. Van Houten took the decision to try to help people in jail. I daresay she’ll continue to do so until she dies or gets released. As I said somewhere else, parole isn’t something a person “deserves.” It’s something that is granted, taking into account a series of factors, especially when the offender has murdered.

    T says:
    Once a killer, always a killer

    I’m not so sure that I’d go along with that. The factors and variables that resulted in someone taking a life when they were young simply may not exist some time later, especially if the murderer truly regrets what they did.
    It’s not a popular notion but history and the personal experience of millions demonstrate that people can change for the better ~ if they choose to. Granted, that doesn’t automatically mean that a murderer should get parole, but neither does it mean that they are the same person with the same thoughts that they once had.
    Steve Grogan murdered. He was given death, which the Judge commuted to life, he served about 14 years and was paroled and hasn’t been in any trouble since. His crime was arguably worse than Leslie’s although I think they were both the same ~ murder, murder which was premeditated. For 31 years he has earned a living as a musician and will always be an uncomfortable mirror to those that have the kind of “hang them high and flog them well !” views of an offender.
    Not every offender is identical.

    Peyton phillips says:

    Keep her in jail till she’s dead. No mercy

    There will definitely be some people that should remain in jail until they are dead and not all of them will be murderers. And in those instances, it is public safety that is the number one reason they should remain inside. Certain violent offenders, certain paedophiles, certain rapists, for instance. People who continually re~offend and make no bones about their desire to continue if they were out. If someone gets a 20 year sentence and all the while says they will continue as soon as they get out, when their sentence comes to an end, what are you going to do ? You’re going to let them out.
    Leslie Van Houten simply doesn’t come under that category.
    It’s touch and go whether the Guv’nor will approve the parole recommendation in any case.
    In terms of mercy, it’s rather starkly obvious that if you treat ne’er do wells with no mercy at all, all you are doing is pouring petrol on an already blazing fire. And if you treat prisoners without mercy and consent to it, as far as I’m concerned, whatever moral high ground you think you have is non existent. Yes, they are human beings that have erred, but above and beyond that, they are human beings. Same as you & I.

  24. KC says:

    I absolutely believe in forgiveness. However, forgiveness and reconciliation are not synonyms, nor does any theology or moral code claim they are.

    For example, it is possible to forgive an abuser who has harmed us over and over, but still cut off all contact with that person for the sake of our mental or physical safety. Letting go of anger, even acknowledging someone has changed radically, does not mean one can necessarily mend what has been broken.

    After all, relationships are not one-sided. So one consequence of egregious or criminal action is that the original relationship can be destroyed beyond repair. The new one that forgiveness makes possible will not be the same. It may not even be one that allows physical proximity any longer.

    That is not a lack of forgiveness. It does no one any good to adhere to the fiction that it is always possible to put things back the way they were. It is not always possible to make amends. It is not always possible to make full payment for a crime.

    It is also not always possible for those with life sentences to be granted parole, no matter how much they have changed as human beings.

    Even from a purely secular standpoint: remorse and repentance are intangible and unmeasurable in any objective way. They are matters of conscience, or the spirit, emotion, the soul, mental pathways, pathology, or any or all of those. It is not necessary to believe in a Creator or a Savior in order to believe in forgiveness or redemption. A strong moral code can be sufficient to cause one to feel remorse for wrongdoing. Or the genuine desire to turn away from wrong, and set one’s life moving in a better direction, that constitutes true repentance.

    The problem is: The justice system is a matter of law. It is tangibly and objectively defined by a set of rules, codes, requirements, procedures, the majority of them inflexibly hewing to nothing but the determination of lawful guilt or innocence. Where the overriding and paramount decider is not morality, but a preponderance of the evidence sufficient to convince 12 strangers “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    The court may have latitude to show the legal version of “mercy” by taking the defendant’s life as a whole into account, or even the sincerity of the remorse or repentance they appear to show.

    But the legal equivalents of forgiveness and absolution – a non-guilty verdict, the reduction of a sentence, the granting of parole, etc. – rest on all too tangible evidence and fact, not the unreadable mind or soul of the accused, which neither we nor the court can ever know for certain.

    Human beings forgive. The justice system judges.

    Those personally involved may follow whatever moral or spiritual path they choose. But the justice system – having no mind, spirit, or soul of its own – can only follow the path of judgment, the strictures of law. We are free. It is bound tightly, as it must be.

    I believe in forgiveness with all my heart, and in counseling others to learn how to forgive.

    But it simply is not possible to ask the justice system to do so. It is not an entity that is capable of the true quality of mercy, which it why it demonstrates so little. It may not. We will find no true redemption where there is no heart to offer it.

    In the end, sadly, the reality is the actions we perform, the choices we make, can ruin our lives for good, whether that seems fair or forgiving or not.

    And we publicize this fact over and over, demonstrate it again and again, lock people up for life, deny parole, ignore their remorse or repentance in favor of the victims’ indignation and suffering not only because the law requires it…

    But in the hopes of convincing others not to make those same poor choices in the first place. Praying, in the only way the law can, that those not yet criminals will learn from others’ mistakes.

    The law can and, sadly, must make an example of many criminals. This is not unjust. Because the law does not exist to grant absolution or offer redemption. It exists to protect society from those who have threatened it, or who may do so again.

    Forgiveness, mercy, redemption, salvation…love? Those are up to us. We can not find them in the law. But perhaps those of us commenting here can at least attempt to find them in our hearts.

    No one ever said it was easy. We fail at it all the time. I will never condemn anyone who finds him or herself unable to forgive, because it is so often a hard, hard road to walk, too hard for some.

    But It’s not about the person we choose to forgive, anyway. It’s about us. It is about the change it makes in our own life, mind, spirit, psyche, whatever we call it.

    The very point everyone is making here is how very difficult it IS to change. How some people never can.

    Does that not also include each of us?

  25. Stephen Craig says:

    Despite the fact that Ms. Van Houten has spent the last 46 years in prison, she has clearly beat the system, and in her case, justice has not prevailed. Originally sentenced to death, her life was saved when the death penalty was overturned in 1972; and even though it was reinstated a year later, it was not retroactive, and she, and the others, “slipped through the cracks”, and were actually eligible for parole after 7 years of incarceration. Imagine that! Being convicted of killing/conspiring to kill 7 innocent people, and your eligible for parole after 7 years, an average of one year per person. How is justice? How can the criminal justice system/parole board rationalize their decision? I do agree that Ms. VH has done some remarkable things while incarcerated, but I will also readily admit that she has done some remarkable things while free, including the butchering of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. For me, I don’t care how many degrees you may have earned while in jail, how many self-help courses you may have participated in, etc…Our focus should not be on how she may have bettered herself while in a controlled environment, but the absolute terror her victims must of felt as VH and the others viciously butchered them. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how she (and PK and TW), could have done what they did. These acts are (or should be) unforgivable, and demand (or should) no less than life imprisonment for the defendants. Anything less, would be an affront to the victims and all that they endured at the hands of LV and her co-conspirators.

    • Liz Reynolds says:

      Again, know your facts. Her first conviction with the death penalty was not turned over. She was granted a new trial due to inadequate representation. So, she did not just luck out. Her second trial ended in a hung jury. Why? Because the jury really couldn’t decide if she should even be found guilty on first degree murder. Meaning they could not beyond a reasonable doubt find her guilty of first degree. The third trial she was found guilty. After all those trials,cod you really feel they were fair? It was proven she never actually killed anyone. She admitted to participating by holding down the victim. The victim still was not killed during that time. Text was called in and he finished it. After all was done, she was told she had to get her fingers dirty. Meaning, the previous night at the Tate residence, not everyone killed someone. Linda stood outside. So Manson gave orders to Text this night,that all had to get their hands dirty. So I’m sure out of feelings of fear of retribution when Manson heard she didn’t actually stab anyone, she stabbed. It also was proven that where she stabbed did not cause death and that the stabs she did were after death had occurred. The DA tried her on the fear and hysteria of society. I’m sure for political reasons too. So in many ways none of this was really fair to her. At least she owned up to what she did and has done so over the years.

      • Fred Bloggs says:

        Liz Reynolds says:
        After all those trials,cod you really feel they were fair?
        Most definitely.
        When all is said and done, Leslie was a willing participant in murder. Even if she succeeded in getting a new trial, none of the details actually changed.

        It was proven she never actually killed anyone. She admitted to participating by holding down the victim. The victim still was not killed during that time. Tex was called in and he finished it. After all was done, she was told she had to get her fingers dirty. Meaning, the previous night at the Tate residence, not everyone killed someone. Linda stood outside. So Manson gave orders to Tex this night,that all had to get their hands dirty. So I’m sure out of feelings of fear of retribution when Manson heard she didn’t actually stab anyone, she stabbed. It also was proven that where she stabbed did not cause death and that the stabs she did were after death had occurred.
        The main thrust of what you are saying simply is not true. It was never proven that where she stabbed was not a cause of death because there’s no way that anyone could say with any certainty where she or anyone else stabbed.
        But actually, the opposite of what you say is true. Leslie says she stabbed Rosemary 14 to 16 times. But only 13 of Rosemary’s wounds were post mortem, ie, after death. So even if you were going to say every one of the post mortem wounds were down to Leslie, that still leaves 1~3 wounds that were not post mortem. Which means without a doubt that Rosemary LaBianca had not died when Leslie stabbed her. She may have been still, she may have been silent, but she was not dead.
        Furthermore, by holding down a victim while someone else stabs them, I would argue that you are just as guilty of murder as the actual stabber. Susan Atkins was never proven to have murdered anyone by her own hand. But she held Sharon Tate while Tex stabbed her. She prevented Sharon from getting away. So both Leslie and Susan were serious aiders and abetters.
        Imagine this scene. A gunman breaks into a house but the occupants know that they can possibly escape by the back door before the gunman gets to them. They get to the back door only to discover that an accomplice has removed the handle so they are trapped and cannot get out and the gunman catches up with them and kills them. That accomplice is as responsible as the gunman by dint of the fact that they have incapacitated the house occupants and ensured they can’t escape.
        Ditto Susan and Leslie.
        But they both went further, rounding up the victims, tying up some of the victims, stabbing one of the victims etc.
        I believe in forgiveness, for sure, I don’t go with those that would deny parole to someone that has obviously tried to turn their life around after a 40+ year spell. But let’s not soft soap what Leslie did back in ’69.
        Forgiveness does not make or look for excuses. It lays out plainly what has been done and proceeds from there.

        At least she owned up to what she did and has done so over the years.

        To be fair to Leslie, even back in ’69 before she was ever arrested, she told one of the Family that she had stabbed someone that was already dead. She told Marvin Part that she’s sure Rosemary was dead in Dec ’69 and even in the trial when she was lying during the penalty phase, she spoke of Rosemary just lying there. So it seems to me that she genuinely believed that Rosemary was dead when she began stabbing her.
        But that doesn’t really matter. She wasn’t a doctor or a medical practitioner. She made the same mistake that Charlie made when he shot Bernard Crowe and thought he was dead, that Bobby Beausoleil made when he stabbed Gary Hinman and thought he was dead, only to hear him breathing loud {hence he and the women smothering him with a cushion}, that Tex made when he stabbed, clubbed and shot Wogiciech Frykowski and thought he was dead only to see him crawl away from the bushes and Bruce Davis made when he thought Shorty was dead and cut him with the knife and landed himself a hefty jail sentence in doing so.
        The Family were not a bunch of qualified medical practitioners !

  26. Ms. B says:

    I see several comments about forgiveness. Below is from Anthony DiMaria at one of Tex Watson’s parole hearings. I agree with him wholeheartedly.

    Our family has never desired a letter of remorse from Charles Watson or considered forgiveness for his crimes, because frankly Mr. Watson’s crimes transcend us. The authority to forgive in this case is beyond any individual or any institution, and lies solely with the eight people he massacred. When people are killed, the privilege of forgiveness from the direct victims is obliterated. It is my belief that any consideration of forgiveness on my part beyond those who have suffered directly is moot and self-serving

  27. MamaPoohBear says:

    Let LVH find some peace outside prison walls for whatever time she has left. Just to clarify some of the above comments…LVH did not put the fork in Mr. LaBianco’s stomach. Her crime was participating in the murder of Rosemary.

    No, her one victim…one too many, I agree…will ever get parole. Neither will the FOUR victims killed by that affluenza POS, who has received TWO years for their deaths. Two years for four people; 46 years for one. Let her go.

    • cielodrive.com says:

      Leslie doesn’t have one victim, she had two. She willfully entered a conspiracy to commit murder and she’s just as responsible for Leno’s death as she is Rosemary’s. I don’t understand this need people have to minimize Leslie’s responsibility in this crime. If they were each only held responsible for whom they wielded death blows to, Charles Manson wouldn’t be responsible for any of the Tate LaBianca murders. Atkins would’ve been serving 7 life terms for stabbing Frykowski in the leg. It’s twisted logic.

      • Kat says:

        It is not minimizing though… She “willfully entered the home” yet as chief prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi stated, “these girls would have done nothing if not under control of Charles Manson” that is what is twisted logic when legally you cannot show intent if you are under ones “control” this is not minimizing it, it’s a fact that is what happened. It’s pointless to try and explain to most of the folks here, I get it you feel what you feel and refused to look at any other way that is fine., but mind control is a real. Especially when it is combined with many factors (lsd, The living conditions and preachings etc. ) these are the facts that you arguably call minimizing. she still certainly did wrong- she has admitted that, she has served her time based on the law. Her final sentence, seven years to life with the possibility of parole-…no one here likes to talk about that they like to go to the first trial that does not legally even exist for Leslie. Speaking of willfully, For instance if someone is drinking and driving, gets into a wreck and kill someone-and kills someone they must likely will be charged with vehicle manslaughter. They were friendly drink while driving They made some bad choices.. But per se they likely would not have made a choice to end someone’s life had they been in there “right mind” (sober) Leslie has proven her self to be a productive and responsible nonthreatening individual as she has never done a violent act again before or after that night. She has excelled in everything, not to make up for her past but to do The only thing any human being can do and that is be the best person one can be. After nearly half a century, as the question above says if it was my family member , A common question people like to ask in this case I would have to say in this case, yes. And I say this through personal experience that I could forgive as I do know firsthand what it feels like to lose a loved one through violence. Authorities said she was the least culpable, I guess that’s minimizing, but the fact is her participation was minimal when considering all of the facts, with a careful understanding of the situation. It’s like those type of the people will only look at the pictures in a book and not read to learn anything. Why, because they know it all-of course. Right
        All the same even if she had gone in there and turned stone cold killer just as some ppl will claim, the law still says she’s parole suitable. Her conviction yes was guilty of two people but the reality is she stabbed one lifeless and motionless body after being told to do so. it’s not all black and white I feel bad for those who only see it that way but wish you all well anyway thank you peace.

  28. MeMyself says:

    Liz… the comment is not a mental health issue as there are benefits to violence and murder.

    Let me tell you a true well documented with police reports story. I grew up with four sisters and true to a marauders habit, as each sister became what would be considered sexually desirable to such a predator, in their early teens, we had a peeping-tom problem. I caught two of them at different times to peep on a different sister, called the police on each and went to court. Each one received a slap on the hand for their deeds.

    The next one about a year later, I played differently; I turned on no outside lights to announce my discovery of him and quietly slipped into the darkness with him. I silently searched the area and discovered him perched on a fence pole under the girl’s second floor room looking in, it was after midnight. In the large bedroom were my 17, 15, and 11 year old baby sister.
    I watched for a second and when he made a motion as if he was trying to push the window open, I dropped the baseball bat I was carrying and attacked him, knocking him from the fence pole and proceeded to beat him until he was unconscious…than we called the police, the outside disturbance awoke my family and a neighbor.
    Why the extreme violence? I knew by then that these types of people do not fear the police; they bail out and go about their despicable ways. I wanted him to fear me, I wanted word to get out NOT to peep at THAT house…and it worked. We had not had a peeping problem on our block for years after.

    Also…this same local kid (he was 18 at the time, I was 22) eventually went to prison for breaking and entering, assault and attempted rape… he escalated his petty crimes as FBI profiler John Douglas would years later write in his books. Peeping is no small matter.

    Now I would not use such violence on just anybody, nor for some ridicules reason as Helter Skelter…But as they say in Texas, “Some people just need killin!”
    If a serial rapist was paroled and moved next to me I would find a way to remove him, an even go as far as to start a fight and make it look like his fault. They are a menace to society and cannot change…it is in their nature.

  29. Fred Bloggs says:

    MeMyself says:

    No one can forgive but the victim. Should I choose to assault an individual it would be up to them to forgive me, not their family, not the judge, not a priest…only the victim. That would be true forgiveness

    Although I disagree with much of what you’ve said, I like the fact that you state what you think without descending into petty insults and name calling. I appreciate that because it means there can be a robust exchange of views and we can disagree in adult manner.
    I do disagree with you about forgiveness, in terms of it being only for the victim to dispense. Forgiveness really means not holding an offence against someone any longer, whatever that offence might be. There is nearly always a societal dimension when one person wrongs another or when one group wrongs another or individuals wrong groups or groups wrong individuals. It rarely stays contained to just the victim or participant. For example, if someone attacked my wife, as much as she may continually suffer because of it, I may well too and so could our kids. And we could spend our lives holding it against the perp. But the kids and I could also choose to forgive. And we have the freedom to do that.
    A word about forgiveness; I believe in God and Christ and I believe in forgiveness. Whatever relationship I might have with God is based on God’s love & forgiveness of me. I don’t believe that forgiveness is a must have for society in general though it is a requirement of continuing in a life with Christ. Indeed, I would go as far as to say that forgiveness is not something that comes naturally to human beings, which is why it can be so powerful when a person does forgive. Also, unless the person that is being forgiven is aware of it and wants that forgiveness, in most cases they will not know and may not even care if they did know. Forgiveness as far as God’s concerned is about the forgiver learning to gain freedom through letting go and not allowing themselves to be affected by something that has happened to them or a loved one. There is no societal obligation to forgive. That there was once a God given law revolving around “eye for eye, tooth for tooth” shows that.
    But God has shown a better way and enables those that want it to be able to go that way. To get all biblical for a moment, it’s significant that Christ’s words to his followers were for them, not for every country on earth to include in their laws.
    So when we talk of Leslie and the issues surrounding her suitability for parole, I’m certainly not saying that anyone should forgive her {although it should be pointed out that one of the victims’ children forgave one of the murderers} or that the law has a duty to do so because as was pointed out earlier, that isn’t the function of law.
    Over here in England they have these schemes {restorative justice or RJ for short} where victims and victim’s families meet the offender and they have a certain success. It can’t be broken down into solid percentages because these things are kind of nebulous. Some perps don’t care. Some victims find no resolution. And others on both sides benefit.

    These arguments for forgiveness and early release hold no water…

    They hold no water if people are saying Leslie should be forgiven or released as of right. On the other hand, if a substantial segment of society chooses to forgive her, that is for them and I think it’s going too far to hold it against those people. And if parole boards exist to determine whether someone is suitable and they find them so, well……..
    In the same way that there are many citizens that believe LVH should remain in jail and will freely say so, the vice is also versa.

  30. Fred Bloggs says:

    MeMyself says:

    Lulu was young? I was young too and in many street and bar fights… Never once was my intention to KILL my opponent.
    Lulu was on LSD? I took LSD when young and the last thing I thought to do was kill someone, I enjoyed the ride
    Lulu was impressionable and under Manson’s manipulation…I worked for a religious zealot when very young and when I felt his manipulation was becoming inappropriate… I just left!

    I often find it a weak defence of a point when people say things like “well, I found myself in such and such a situation and I didn’t kill/rob/whatever crime we’re talking about.”
    You aren’t Leslie, you aren’t in the scenario she was in. Even a cursory study of LSD and it’s effects will show that different people were affected in vastly different ways. In the Rolling Stones, it propelled Keith Richards to heavier drugs, it caused Brian Jones to implode and it pushed Mick Jagger to write great lyrics and become a solid business head. With the Beatles, it propelled George Harrison towards Eastern philosophy whereas it almost caused John Lennon total internal collapse while going philosophically from pillar to post. Syd Barrett of The Pink Floyd inwardly collapsed as did Peter Green of Fleetwood Mac. Whereas Lemmy of Motorhead, Phil May of the Pretty Things, Andy Summers of the Police and Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead seemed better for the experience.
    When Paul Fitzgerald called Tate/LaBianca the first of the LSD murders, he, having tripped himself, was making a profound point.
    I don’t think there are excuses for Leslie but to ignore all the ingredients of this soup overall {and for me, there is much paradox afoot} is to miss some vitally important moves and dare I say it, means that you’re not seeing matters as clearly as you could. This {not just Leslie} is a complex case for a number of reasons.

    Now I would not use such violence on just anybody, nor for some ridicules reason as Helter Skelter…But as they say in Texas, “Some people just need killin!”

    Many having read your account would say with certainty that you really should have been put in jail when you were 22. It’s one thing to catch a peeping Tom and subdue him. You were obviously stronger than him and so many would see it as completely unnecessary to beat the guy unconscious. You could easily have gotten him to the cops.
    However, I understand where you were coming from and why. I can’t say I wouldn’t have done similar but I am glad I was never in the situation where I had to find out !

    Apparently you have limited your definition of Evolution

    Perhaps.

    and the meaning “right or wrong” has evolved. Once it was proper to sacrifice other humans to the gods…we evolved knowing this was not right, but wrong

    The meaning of right and wrong having evolved is debatable. Specific things as being right and wrong have definitely evolved, sometimes for the better, sometimes not. The notion itself hasn’t really evolved. What people accept as being right or wrong has.
    You say that once it was right to sacrifice other humans to the gods….for certain peoples, it still is. Furthermore, it was not a universal practice. There have always been peoples that did not go down that route. There are still peoples that do. So where is the evolution ? Even in the bible there are prohibitions against that kind of thing.
    The way you seem to use the term ‘evolution’ implies with it a great deal of convenience, ie what you think as being right is where we happen to be at now. I think the human race has long had a inward sense of right and wrong. Obviously there hasn’t always been agreement on everything but it is fascinating how there seems to have been a general agreement on what things are wrong.

    you mean like Jim Jones, the Crusades, the Inquisition, ISIS, terrorism, and yes…Charley himself ??

    For good people to do really horrible things… that takes religion

    It takes…..life. Few could deny that many people have used religion for evil ends. People have used politics, the law, “love,” business, family, sport, sex, children, education, land, travel, music, money& wealth, poverty, literacy and so much more for evil ends. We’re human beings, mate. We’re flawed.

    • MeMyself says:

      Mr Bloggs, I agree…It is nice to have a civil debate here on the internets. Let me explain my opinion here about religion and forgiveness. First off, religion is an egotistical beliefs, not social…you believe that the creator of the universe (if there is such a thing) actually talks to you, the guy/woman who designed relativity, string theory, gravity, particle matter, has the time to talk to you, and says any illogical thought that enters your head is right, cuz you thought of it and it must come from the great cloud god…there have been many gods, who is to say yours is god??

      But what I have discovered is that religious people can be complete ass-holes 6-days a week, than on Sunday, all loving and forgiving. What if your god takes you on Wednesday?…lots of you people will go to hell, if there is such a place.
      I had a hell of a debate with one of the supporters of the Shanda Sharer murderers (Milinda Loveless) a banker named Charlie Pertrusio who had no problem stealing from poor people five days a week, but attended church every Sunday, and was forgiven. he believe if he could get the most horrific people to convert, he would hold a higher position in heaven (Ego) No regards for the victims, just his agenda and belief.
      When he lost the debate with me, the good christian that he is, out spent me and slandered me over the internet…like the dark ages, “disagree with me and i’ll burn you alive”

      This is the same shit they tried to do to Galileo…

      i will say it again, Leslie lacks empathy, it cannot be taught, Do NOT endanger the rest of us with your forgiveness from those that would destroy us… as Leslie has PROVEN she can and will do.
      Everyone is sorry when imprisoned. But only after the fact.

      Have you ever read anything from John Douglas??

      Do you know about Mike Huckaby and his religious decision to set a serial rapist free simply because he became a preacher in prison…that’s right, he rapped and murdered his next victim one month after his release, because that is what he is!

  31. Leonard benfari says:

    I say let ms van hounten stay in jail nobody wants her out.

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      Nobody ?
      Well, just from reading some of the comments on this page, that clearly isn’t true.
      Come on Lenny, you haven’t yet shown that you’re in a position to speak for everyone.

    • Fred Bloggs says:

      Leonard benfari says:

      I say let ms van hounten stay in jail

      To find some humour here though, you make it sound like she doesn’t want to stay in jail !

    • MeMyself says:

      I agree, the last thing we need is another bad driver out here in California

  32. C word says:

    Brown will not release her!! NO WAY!!!

  33. winona wolf says:

    i am shocked at this! she deserves to rot in hell!

  34. R. Simmons says:

    Off topic I know, but does anyone know what has happened to Truth On Tate LaBianca?

    • James M says:

      I know that there was a death of one of the major contributors to the site. Maybe it wasn’t sustainable after that.

  35. James M says:

    I know this is not the right place for the question, but what happened to TOTLB (http://truthontatelabianca.com/)? Anyone know? Just disappeared without a trace one day?

  36. j says:

    So….which among you who thinks she has been punished enough, is willing to have her move into your neighborhood?

  37. Fred Bloggs says:

    I’d be willing to have her move next door to me because there are lots of questions I’d love to ask her ! I can’t see her flying out to England to make a new life for herself, somehow.
    She wouldn’t worry me. But the Black Widow woman from Canada that marries men that mysteriously die would !

  38. Lorraine Tauson says:

    Let the woman and all of the rest of the Manson family die in prison where they belong. I don’t see the murdered people getting any breaks here since they are all still DEAD and suffered horrific brutality I cannot fathom that was totally not necessary. Killers never, ever change. They only say that they: “turn to Jesus”, as that is all they really have in prison, along with TVS, computers, marriages, conjugal visits with spouses, children conceiving through conjugal visits, and more. It is absolutely disgusting how the justice system can allow such a thing. Those MONSTERS took very young lives away and future lives with them. How dare they even think of paroling such evil people. I was so glad that we had enough signatures to keep that vicious bitch Susan Atkins in prison until she died of brain cancer. She and Tex Watson were the most vicious of the lot and they laughed about what they had done many times afterward. I still remember when these terrifying murders happened in my lifetime and changed the entire world. That is why we began locking our doors, windows and cars. May all Manson convicted murderers die in prison where they belong and with none of this nonsense of special treatment crap.

  39. gripper says:

    i say.. heinous crime.. yes.. more than crime .. she helped take a life or lives.. its true.. she wasnt the same person then.. its a tough call.. my gut tells me the gov. will block it…. and also if freed she will spend the rest of her life looking over her shoulder…. and many nightmarish sleepless nights .. not an easy decision to make by anyone

  40. WINONA WOLF says:

    SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXECUTED!

  41. Marla Singer says:

    I have seen several of her parole hearings. I think she is genuinely remorseful. I can understand making bad decisions when you are 18, not that I understand murdering anyone. I just think she will always live with her bad decisions and she has punished herself as much as any outside entity could ever punish her. She probably wishes she had been executed. It would have been the easier way out.

  42. creepy karpis says:

    At LULU’s first parole hearing she answers most questions with a disrespectful and rude.

    “YEAH.”

    Here 40 some years later and begging for her release from a life sentence she answers

    questions in the same disrespectful and rude manner. “YEAH.”

    WHAT A DUMB ASS!! Saying “YES” is way too difficult. She has not changed at all!

    I keep hearing these Manson girls are so smart. To believe what they claim to believe

    about Manson, living in a hole in the desert, growing angel wings and giving up their lives

    for a con man means they are the most gullible dumb idiots on the planet.

    THEY ARE TOO STUPID TO LET OUT OF JAIL!!!!!!

  43. Terry says:

    There’s no political upside for any future California governor to sign off on her parole, thus I tend to doubt Leslie will ever be released. The legal pretext for denying her parole has been reduced to “she was one of the Manson killers, therefore the particulars of her individual level of participation in the murders and her total compliance with all the prerequisites the penal system requires for parole are irrelevant.” A common refrain among many regarding her continued incarceration centers on her escaping execution when the death penalty was deemed unconstitutional in 1972, so she should be happy that she’s still alive (because she has been shown more mercy than she gave to either of the LaBiancas). However, she has under the law been a viable candidate for parole, she has demonstrated that she has met the requirements for such and her parole has been approved by the parole board. Doubtless had her crime not been as publicized as it had been and continues to be, she’d be out of jail by now.

  44. Zolton Kovacs says:

    I think cleverly lawyers have changed the crux of the matter, being not crime and punishment but rehabilitation. The issue is, has she paid for her crime sufficiently? Otherwise we all can kill and rehab and be released. Lets not forget how lucky she was to not be executed. Her crime was in my opinion number one for a long time and still in the top ten. If she is still alive at 80 then we can forgive and release her.

  45. Zolton Kovacs says:

    The catch 22 is no crime as heinous is unpublicized so in of itself you are right.

Leave a Reply to Donna Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *