Wednesday, July 1, 2020



In the matter of the Life Term Parole Consideration Hearing of:
CDC Number: B-28302

JULY 1, 2020
8:52 A.M.

NEIL SCHNEIDER, Presiding Commissioner
PATRICK REARDON, Deputy Commissioner

JASON CAMPBELL, Attorney for Inmate
DONNA LEBOWITZ, District Attorney
DEBRA TATE, Victim's Family Representative
CHRIS CAMPION, Victim's Cousin's Support
UNIDENTIFIED, Correctional Officer


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We're on the record, Commissioner. We're on the record, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Good morning, everyone. Today's date is July 1st of 2020. Time now is 8:52 in the morning. We're conducting this hearing by video conference. Mr. Beausoleil, can you hear and see me?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right, thank you. If any time that changes, please alert me so that we can pause and make any necessary adjustments. For the record, I can hear and see you. Deputy Commissioner, can you see and hear Mr. Beausoleil?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I can see him. He's a little faint. So, anything he can do to move as close as he can and speak as loudly as he can would be appreciated.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Is that, is that a little bit better?



PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. All right. This is the 19th subsequent parole suitability hearing for Robert Beausoleil, who is present in the BPH hearing room to the California, uh, Medical Facility. Uh, this is a youth offender parole hearing. Mr. Beausoleil, you committed the controlling offense while under the age of 26 so the panel will give great weight to youthful offender factors in deciding your suitability for parole today. This is also an elderly parole hearing. You are over age 60 and have served at least 25 years, which qualifies you for elderly parole consideration. So the panel will give special consideration to elderly parole factors in deciding your suitability for parole today. This hearing is being audio recorded so for the purpose of voice identification, I will identify the participant and when I do, each person is asked to state your full name and spell your last name. I'm going to go first. Uh, the Deputy Commissioner will immediately follow me. My name is Neil Schneider, S-C-H-N-E-I-D-E-R. Uh, Commissioner, Board of Parole Hearings.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Patrick Reardon, R-E-A- R-D-O-N, Deputy Commissioner, Board of Parole Hearings.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And Mr. Beausoleil, in addition to your first, uh, name spelling, and spelling your last name, please give us your CDCR number and you may go ahead, sir.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Robert Beausoleil, R-O-B-E-R-T, B-E-A-U-S-O-L-E-I-L, B28302.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. And your Attorney.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Jason Campbell, C-A-M-P-B-E-L-L, representing Mr. Robert Beausoleil.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. And the District Attorney.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Donna Lebowitz, L-E-B- O-W-I-T-Z, Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right, thank you. And we have, uh, the victim's next of kin and the representatives here also, uh, in the conference. Uh, Ms. Martley, if you could, uh, identify yourself, spell your last name and give us, uh, uh, your relationship.

VICTIM'S COUSIN HINMAN-MARTLEY: Kaye Hinman- Martley, H-I-N-M-A-N. Uh, Martley, M-A-R-T-L-E-Y, Gary Hinman's cousin.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right, thank you. And, uh, Ms. Tate, the same for you.

VICTIM'S FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE TATE: Debra Tate, D-E-B-R-A T-A-T-E, representative for the Hinman family.


VICTIM'S COUSIN'S SUPPORT CAMPION: Um, I'm Chris Campion, C-A-M-P-I-O-N. I'm the support person for Kaye Hinman-Martley.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Uh, Mr. Beausoleil, were you able to hear all the participants who identified themselves?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right, thank you. And also present in the room are Correctional Officers, uh, for security purposes and also for staff assistance as, uh, they've done a wonderful job assisting us with these, uh, video conference hearings. At this point, we're going to, uh, stop the recording so the Deputy Commissioner can check, check our audio quality.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Uh, thank you. The time now is 9:20 AM and we are back. Uh, as I mentioned, this proceeding is being recorded as mandated by Penal Code Section 3042(b). It will be transcribed the official record of the hearing. But if I got that, all of the parties participating identified themselves? All right. Thank you. Uh, no other recordings are authorized, including a recording available by video conference software. A violation of this provision may result in exclusion from this or future hearings. Mr. Beausoleil, as this hearing is being conducted by video conference, I’m going to notify you of certain rights you have and ensure you want to continue with the hearing. First, you have a right to be present at the hearing and meet with the Board of Parole Hearing panel in person. Do you accept that this video conference satisfies that right?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. You also have a right to be represented by an Attorney at your parole consideration hearing. Do you accept that your Attorney's appearance by video conference and your ability to have privileged communications with your Attorney by telephone satisfy that right?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Furthermore, sir, if at any time during this hearing, you would like to have a privileged communication or a telephone call with your Attorney, just please simply ask us and that'll be granted. All right.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Uh, Mr. Beausoleil, we're not here to reconsider the findings of the trial and appellate courts, nor are we here to retry your case. This panel accepts as true the findings of the courts. The purpose of today's hearing is to find out who you are today, and whether you would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society if released. We will consider many factors, including your criminal history, your behavior, your programming since you came to prison, your parole plans if released, as well as the testimony we hear today. After we have asked you our questions, the Attorneys both have an opportunity to ask clarifying questions, and we will have, uh, closing statements by the Attorneys. Uh, we will have your closing statements, sir, should you choose to make one. And then we will hear from the victim’s next of kin. It is our expectation is that all parties in this hearing will treat all with dignity and respect. Mr. Beausoleil, I strongly encourage you to be, to be completely honest with us today.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Would you raise your right hand, sir, I will swear you in. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give at this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That's true. Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. What is your date of birth, sir?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. And how old were you at the time of this crime?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Thank you. And how old are you today?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I am almost 73. I'm, I’m 72.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: 72? Correct. Okay. You're, you're helping me check my math. Thank you for that. And I have you incarcerated for over, uh, 50 years. Is that true?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: 50 years next, 51 years next month.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Next month. All right. Very good. I know the, I know that you were arrested on August 6th of 1969 according to the records I saw on the file. Uh, the crime PC 187 murder in the first degree occurred on, uh, July 27th of 1969. Uh, you received a sentence of seven years to life. The Minimum Eligible Parole Date on September 1st of 1974, the Youthful Parole Eligibility Date, September 8th of 1986 and the Elderly Parole Eligibility Date, November 6th of 2007. Uh, the victim in this case was Gary Hinman. Uh, Mr. Beausoleil, how, how old was Mr. Hinman at the time of the murder?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I think he was 34.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It might've been, I might not be accurate on that. I'm not exactly sure. He was over, he was in his mid-thirties.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. No, that's fine. I, I just didn't see anything in the record, so I was curious. Okay. Mid-thirties is good. All right. Let's do our ADA review, Americans with Disabilities Act review. Uh, let me look at the BPH 1073 form. Uh, tells me that your total grade placement level is 12.9. Uh, I see, uh, you are wearing your glasses, correct? The Skype thing is, uh, I see them on. Okay, good. Thank you. Um, I think we covered this just last month, correct, sir? Is there, is there, is there any changes in your, in your, uh, in any additional disabilities that we, that we didn't get, that we didn't cover last month?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, you mean last hearing or last—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I think we covered it when we, when we postponed your hearing, we looked and, uh, we did an ADA review, I believe. Let me see.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That's it. We didn’t discuss it but, uh, I have, uh, severe degenerative arthritis that, that's been chronic for a long time. Um, so, and that's pretty much it. I've, you know, um, a little bit of high blood pressure other than that, I'm okay.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And what, and the degenerative arthritis, what does that, what does that surface, where does it impact you at?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, yeah, it's all, all through my body and various joints in my body.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Your joints. All right. I know you have a, a wrist support brace. I saw that. A knee brace, orthotics, is that all, compression stocking, is that all because of, of, uh, of the arthritis?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, the compression stockings are because of the high blood pressure.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don't need it very much, but yeah.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Are you, are you wearing them today by chance?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. No, but you do have them available to you? Um—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Right. I haven't worn them in a year. I haven't needed it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And, and how about the orthotics, do you wear those every day?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, only as needed.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And same thing with the knee brace and wrist support brace?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. So, you have those available, you just don't, you don’t necessarily use them. All right. And you are not part—



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I was going to say that I do yoga and Tai Chi, so I'm able to manage the pain, uh, and keep the symptoms at, at distance. And so, um, and I teach those things by the way. Um, so, that, that helps me so I don't, I, I try to avoid using anything, um, any crutches, so to speak, um, when I don't need them, unless I absolutely need it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. All right. Um, and so, but you're able to continue to walk unsupported then, correct? I mean, without any assistance.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. All right. Uh, and you are, you are not, uh, part of the mental health delivery system, correct?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And so, you're not taking any psychotropic medication, correct?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, you aren’t taking any other kind of medication either maybe or are you, anything that would affect you today?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No. I, I just take anti- inflammatories and Tylenol.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Very good. All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Thank you. Um, let me check in. So, for, for your, uh, accommodations really, we, we put them on the record, but really, uh, you’ve got your glasses. Uh, you have your Attorney as a staff assistant. Uh, we also have Officers there to assist us, uh, staff assistance during these, uh, Skype hearings. Why, why would, why do you, do you know why, uh, it looks like Mr. Muhammad, a Correctional Counselor said that I should have you describe in your own words what was stated to him and I should read and speak slowly and use simple language. Why, why would he put that down?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, I'm not sure. You don’t need to speak slowly.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. I didn’t think so. I appreciate that. I mean, I speak fast at times anyway. I don't need to make any special accommodations regarding my, uh—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I have, I have been hearing and, uh, you know, my mind works okay.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Very good. All right. Thank you for that. Um, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell, any comments regarding your client's ADA?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. Uh, all right. Mr. Beausoleil, the panel has reviewed your Central File and the Comprehensive Risk Assessment. Uh, you're encouraged to correct and clarify the record, record as we go through this hearing. The panel's also reviewed the confidential portion of your Central File. We’ll advise you if we’re getting any confidential information for our decision today. Uh, you last were in front of a panel, uh, a panel on January 3rd of 2019, and you received a grant of parole. Uh, that grant was subsequently, uh, overturned by the Governor, uh, which then created a, a three-year denial and, uh, to my understanding, you are here, uh, after administrative review. Um, and you went back for a, for your 19th hearing. Uh, at the last panel, uh, you and your Attorney did not choose to discuss the life crime. Is that, is, did you want to talk about that today or what would, how do you want to proceed here, Mr. Campbell?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I, I advised Mr. Beausoleil that we are going to rely on prior statements, uh, it's been discussed at length. Um, obviously, the Commissioners have questions that pertain to insight that, that, uh, might be germane to the analysis. That would be fine, but as far as factual questions, uh, related to the commitment offense, I'm advising Mr. Beausoleil not to answer those questions. And, and again, it's, there's plenty ample record, uh, relating to Mr. Beausoleil’s version of events with the understanding, of course, that this, the board is going to rely on, uh, the official statement of facts, uh, as it's been portrayed in the, the court of appeal opinion, et cetera.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. What is it? Is the court of appeal opinion different? That's a different version though, correcting what Mr. Beausoleil told, uh, Dr. Levin and, uh, in 2016, correct?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And we will, we will rely on, uh, Dr. Levin’s recitation of, of Mr. Beausoleil’s version of events.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. (inaudible). That, that was my question. Just point me into which of the record then that way we'll, um, I just have a couple, uh, questions regarding prior to the life crime and, and not necessarily, I’m understanding Mr. Beausoleil’s criminal record. We could talk about that, but I understand he's a, he is a youth, he was, we just discussed 21 years old and his growing up and, uh, that kind of stuff. But I had a couple of questions regarding the relationship with the Straight Satans gang and, and whole Charles Manson. I wasn't gonna necessarily discuss the life crime, but, um, up to you guys if you, if you wanna, if you want to answer any of those or not.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: It said that the only real concern would be the, the, the life crime itself and the facts surrounding it. Uh, but, yeah, I believe that it's probably relevant for Mr. Beausoleil to discuss, uh, factors like his relationship with Manson and relationship with the Straight Satans, if, if the Commissioners are interested in that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. So, Mr. Beausoleil, and so I understand that you met, how, you met your, your, uh, immunization, correct? And then you met Manson there.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: May I, actually, may I interrupt, though.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: If, if you're going to get into — I did have, uh, one or two objections I wanted to raise.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, and, and, and if, if for no other reason than just to make a record of it. Let me know when you're ready.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah. No, I'm ready. I’m ready. Yeah, go ahead. I'm sorry. I, I normally don't ask for objections because you have to butt in like you just did, so thank you for that.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Absolutely fine. So, the, the first one is that, um, and, and I, I don't know if this will be a problem here. I know that back when Mr. Beausoleil, uh, was in Oregon and doing his hearings by telephone, frequently, the Commissioners would allow the DA, I think that was, uh, secure at the time to just ask questions directly to Mr. Beausoleil, I'll be objecting to any direct questioning by the DA to Mr. Beausoleil. Um, also, uh, as, as you just pointed out, um, I will be objecting the questions about the factual underpinnings of the life crime. Uh, but we've already discussed that. I am objecting to the, uh, to the consideration of the petition prepared by Debra Tate that was submitted in the 10-day packet. Um, I, I don't know how many signatures it has, uh, has tens of thousands, um, but many of those people are, are, I mean, there's no reference to who those people are, any sort of relationship to anyone associated with this offense. Some of them appear to be foreign nationals. Uh, I think it's just a, it's an irrelevant piece of, uh, documentation that I would ask the panel not to consider. It also has, um, you know, public opinion isn't a valid consideration when it comes to whether Mr. Beausoleil is currently dangerous. So, I, and as much as the panel does intend to consider it in a general sense, I don't think it's at all relevant to the, um, to the analysis today. Um, there's also errors in it in terms of the presentation of the, of the facts that people believe they were signing on to, uh, and also miss, Ms. Tate’s relationship to that petition itself, would I believe create the false impression that Mr. Beausoleil was involved in the murder of Sharon Tate when he was not, he was in custody at the time and had no knowledge or participation in that, uh, that crime. Um, so that would be my objection to that petition. I would also, I objected last time that I would continue to object to the presence of Ms. Martley and Ms. Tate. Um, Ms. Marley, uh, has identified herself as the cousin of the, uh, of the victim, Gary Hinman. Um, uh, you know, I, assuming that that's accurate, I've never seen documentation that proves that accurate, but assuming that's accurate, uh, under the, under, uh, the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 28, uh, victim and their, uh, and the, the, the relatives that are entitled to represent the victim at these hearings only list spouse, children, parents, siblings, grandchildren, and grandparents. There's no reference to cousins as being, uh, a cognizable group to participate in these hearings so I would object to her presence in that, uh, in that, um, capacity. Um, I would also object to Ms. Tate's presence. Uh, Ms. Tate obviously, uh, is the sister of Sharon Tate who, uh, you know, this is a related offense, but, uh, again, Mr. Beausoleil had nothing to do with that, uh, with that crime. And I think it's, it's very prejudicetic to have her, uh, involved in this. I also think, um, there’s a concern to me because for many years, neither Ms. Tate, nor Ms. Martley participated in Mr. Beausoleil’s, uh, hearings at all. And then only in the last decade decided to, uh, start attending, uh, meanwhile, they're also going in the media, they are, uh, producing, uh, these petitions being very disruptive to the issue that the only issue that we're looking at is whether Mr. Beausoleil is currently dangerous and all these theatrics I believe are very distracting from that core consideration. So, that would be my objection to their presence. Um, I don't think Ms. Tate to the extent that the panel is willing to, uh, to let her, uh, participate. I don't think she has, under the law, I don't think there's any basis for her to give any statements. Um, I don't see she's listed here today as the representative of the Hinman family. I would like to see documentation as to what, uh, who within the Hinman family has authorized her to appear on their behalf, if she's appearing as a support person, which is how she appeared last time, uh, that would not entitle her the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Hinman family. So, if she intends to, to appear, I mean, and as, as we see, Mr. Campion is here as a support person. So, I, it seems to me, they're trying to shoehorn in additional people at every hearing. And, and I don't think that that's, uh, appropriate here. So, um, and I think, uh, I would object. So, going on to the next objection, I would object to the use of any confidential evidence. Uh, if the board intends to rely on any, uh, juvenile’s unreliability and it, uh, precluding any sort of meaningful opportunity to challenge it. And I would also, uh, just make, uh, an ongoing, you know, ex post facto, uh, challenge to the application of Marsy's law.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. I've got about, and maybe I, uh, if you have it, you have it numbered or did I—



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I got seven objections.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: That, uh, that seems, I'm sorry.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I’ve, I’ve said that some of those, I think you might be dividing up the, um, the objection to Ms. Tate and the objection to Ms. Martley. Those could be considered separate.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Do you want me to address that, Commissioner?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: All right. So, as for the first objection, objection to direct questioning from the District Attorney, um, that, that's granted. We don't allow direct questionings. All, all questions from the District Attorney's Office will go through the panel for the purpose of clarifying something for the panel. If the panel doesn't think it clarifies anything, then it won't be allowed. If we think it's information we could use and we'll allow it. So, as to, as to objection one’s granted. Objection two was, um, questioning inmate about the life crime. Absolutely, um, granted. Uh, the inmate’s, uh, the, the law’s clear, they may under no responsibility to talk at all or talk however he wants to so, uh, that, that objection is granted. Um, but be aware, we might ask questions. There's not a real bright line. We'll ask questions and if we bump up against that line, you let us know. But, but that objection is also, uh, is granted cause the inmate's not required to discuss anything, let alone the life crime. Um, the third one was objection to the petition. Um, a little more problematic, but I'll say this, we'll review it and consider it and give it the weight it deserves. If we find that your allegations are true, I know it contains hundreds and hundreds of names, but at some point, um, we might just take that document to be, um, some form of opposition, uh, to Mr. Beausoleil’s release. But I, we can't say at this point, we're going to ignore it. We'll review it and we'll give it the weight that it deserves. That might be very, very little weight, it might be a little more weight, but it's hard to say at this point, until we review in the context of the hearing, but we note your concerns about the petition. So, at this point, it's, it's conditionally denied unless something comes up further, which will let you know about, okay?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Objection for presence of, um, Ms. Martley, correct?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: That's correct.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Um, it's my understanding she's been vetted by victim services. Is that your understanding, Commissioner?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah, I was going to state that that'd be my, that, that she has been vetted by Katie James, who is the assistant chief of the Office of Victim and Survivor Rights and Services so all Ms. Martley, Ms. Tate, and, uh, Mr. Campion have been, uh, uh, vetted and allowed to be here, uh, by them so this panel will give them the, uh, the rights of, uh, of victims.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And if you have an issue with that, I believe you could take it up with victim services, but for purposes of today, that objection is denied as to both Ms. Tate and Ms. Martley. Um, let's see. Then we have the, the use of any confidential information. The current regulations allow, require the panel to use any relevant and reliable information to that extent. That's the current state of the law. We know that there is legislation pending, but for now the current state of the law allows us to use any confidential information that we consider reliable and relevant and we’ll, we’ll do so and if we do decide to use confidential, we'll let you know, but that's the current state of the law. So that objection is denied. And lastly, Marsy's law, um, that's pretty much the same decision there. Um, it survived ex post facto objections in court. It's the current law. Uh, so we will be following Marsy's law objection. Is there anything else you wanted on the record, uh, Counselor?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: No, that was it. Thank you for letting me make those objections and, uh, let's, let's proceed. Thank you.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: They’ll all, they’ll all be on the record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah. You know, and, and furthermore, uh, Mr. Campbell, so you understand the, the weight that we are going to be giving, uh, that petition, as we looked at it, I did also, uh, scan through it, uh, prior to are, are, are June, uh, and I'll note that, uh, at least at that time, I believe it was, uh, which page on the file, I've written down page 2,346, what a gentleman from Orlando, Florida in this petition states that Gary Hinman is a murderer and he deserves the death penalty. So, again, that is the kind of weight as this panel looks at that, that that we will, uh, we will get that answer so thank you for that.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, can I just ask, uh, and mentioned that it reminded me, I know yesterday there was a, a copy of the 10 day packet that was sent out that had the, uh, the petition in there and a couple of other recent documents that I've submitted to, to the CDCR, but didn't have the original, um, I wrote a memorandum that had a lot of attached supporting documents, I believe it was like 75, 76 pages total. Um, I spoke with, I believe her name was a Tiara or Tiera yesterday.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And she went ahead and updated it and I believe sent it around again, but I just want to make sure that, uh, the, that the panel has the documentation I submitted, um, previously, which was a memorandum in letter form with a series of attachments, uh, exhibits A through something rather.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Uh, yeah. Tiera, Tiera Deech sent that out yesterday—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yeah. That's your May 28th letter, Mr. Campbell?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Yes. That's right. I just wanted to make sure cause yesterday—




ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. I want to make sure.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah, we did, we did, we did receive that, uh, Tuesday, actually, we got that.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, which would be yesterday.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. Very good. All right. Thank you.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And I had submitted prior to our originally scheduled hearing, so, I, I mean, you would have had it in the previous—


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: —10-day packet.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And Commissioner, this might be the time to put on record a couple of facts. Um, number one, the fact that we are working off of a risk assessment from 2016, and it's currently the policy of the board that these risk assessments are good up to seven years, that a new risk assessment wasn't provided so we're going to be working off of that. The second thing that should be on the record is that there is a relatively recent RVR rules violation that has been filed, but not heard and that we made arrangements to have both the inmate Attorney and the DA get copies of that prior to the start of the hearing and Mr. Campbell's allowed to discuss that with his client. Is that accurate, Mr. Campbell?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Uh, that is accurate. Um, as far as the risk assessment, we discussed that when we previously convened, um, as I said then, it wasn't my preference necessarily that they didn't, uh, conduct a new one, particularly in light of the, the Governor's reference to that risk assessment in his, uh, in his reversal, um, but we are willing to go forward with that risk assessment. Um—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And once again, Mr. Campbell, it goes to the weight that the panel will give that document, given what you say about and what the District Attorney says about it.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Exactly. Okay. Thank you. And then, uh, as far as the, the, um, the RVR, yes, I have now received what I believe is the, the complete documentation, or at least what I've been, uh, told from, from you guys, the complete documentation. Uh, and I have, um, gone over that with Mr. Beausoleil.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's everything that we have at this point.



PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Very good. Thank you. All right. Could, could you, Mr. Beausoleil, so the, one of the questions I had then, uh, and again, I really appreciate, um, spot on what the Commissioner Reardon say, I, I do not want to intrude upon your rights to not discuss the life crime so this is clearly, and if I do then, uh, please, please let me know. I guess we're curious as to the relationship between this motorcycle gang, uh, and, um, I guess the Charles Manson group for lack of a better term, um, that affiliation, if you can explain some of that.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Um, before I do that, if I can just make a comment about your, uh, wanting to question me about the crime or whatever. If I could just say it, um, that if there is something that we haven't covered previously, that isn't, you know, then done and done and done, I would be, uh, more than willing to answer any question that you have on, you know, new information or new, uh, and new, new, um, perspectives on that, uh, information. I want, I want to be forthcoming. That's what I'm saying. I just want to, I want to, want you to know that my intention is to be forthcoming. I don't want to cover the same route we've covered so many times. Um, but I, I do know that you need answers. Um, and I’m, I'm going to do the best that I can to, um, to respond. Um—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Mr. Beausoleil, you have the right not to discuss that. You don't have to explain to the panel why you chose to exercise that right. Right? So, you don't have to explain to us if you don't want to. You have absolute right not to discuss anything. I just want you to be aware of that. We're not, we're not expecting you to do, to do that. That's, that's completely up to you.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And I'll, I’ll still lodge objections where I feel it's appropriate, uh if, if need be so.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Perfect. All right. Um, so, Mr. Schneider, uh, Commissioner Schneider, I, uh, which do you want to know about first? The Straight Satans or Charles Manson?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Uh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. It’s right, it looks like both of those, you were, I, I, I understand that, that, and maybe, correct me if I'm wrong. As I read about this life crime, I understand that you were both, um, falling under the influence of each of these people as a young man. So, I was just confused about the intersection or why was there was an intersection in between these different groups and, um, really, that’s all. I mean, I mean, who are the Straight Satans? I never heard them. Uh, the Hell’s Angels, I don't know what they are. I, I know very little about, uh, (inaudible).

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: They are, uh, they were a motorcycle club now defunct, um, that, uh, was hanging out with Charlie at the ranch. There were some of them, uh, living there and some of them visiting. Um, at the time, um, and this was prior to, uh, the, um, what happened with, at Gary's prior to the murder, um, a few weeks and, um, I was involved with them to some extent, I was, I don’t know, I was looking up to them. I thought they were about something. Uh, and I was, um, uh, thinking that, I, I, I, let me just say that I was romanticizing what they were and, and, uh, I thought that I wanted to have their acceptance and, um, and so that played into, uh, events that occurred later. Charles Manson, I had known for a little while longer. I had known him for about a year and a half. Um, he was, uh, he was into music, um, and I was trying to help him get some good recordings of his music and that was the nature of our relationship. I was not part of his group. Um, I wasn’t part of the commune and I was not a follower. Um—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Commissioner Schneider, could, maybe I'm—


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Mr. Beausoleil. Were you asking about what the relationship was between the motorcycle gang and Charles Manson? That's how I interpreted your question. I think Mr. Beausoleil is, is answering what his relationship was each of the groups. I wasn't sure, um, if I, if, if he was misinterpreting your question.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, he, I, I, I believe he was answering it. I mean, I, I, I thought, I thought they were two separate, uh, as I read this, I thought the Straight Satans were a separate entity entirely, but now when he tells me that, yes, they were hanging out at the ranch, uh, and they were kind of intertwined, I guess that's, that'd be my next question. I mean, cause that's, I'm just curious as to, because as this, as I understand the life crime, you were brokering a deal. You, you volunteered to be a drug dealer, uh, on behalf of the Straight Satans to get them some psychedelics or what kind of drug were you trying to get from Mr. Hinman or did you get, or do you thought you got?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, it’s called Mescaline, but Mescaline is actually a tea that's made from the peyote cactus.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, and, uh, and then, sometimes people boil the tea down to a powder and that's what Gary had.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And I had supplied that to the Straight Satans, this was prior to the murder and, you know, I, I want to say that this is, had nothing to do with why I killed Gary. It had to do with circumstances leading up to my being there and trying to get money back from him. So, I, you know, it, it wasn't, in other words, that relationship with the Straight Satans was not the motive for the murder. It was, you know, the circumstances that were leading up to, um, to that confrontation that happened.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, without the Straight Satans, this would never happen. Is that true or both?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, yes. Yes, it is. Well, without Charles Manson, this would not, the murder would not have happened. Charles Manson showed up at Gary’s place.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I think, I, Mr. Beausoleil, I'm going to, I'm going to object. My, my preference would be not to get into these sorts of, uh, questions. I do believe that, that this has been covered, uh, extensively in prior hearings and in the, the, um, psych evaluation. Uh, my preference is, uh, and my advice to Mr. Beausoleil is that we, we not go into these details regarding that other than, than insight and or it, uh, and I think Mr. Beausoleil has touched on that with his, uh, statements about looking up to the Straight Satans and looking up to, to, um, his relationship with Mr. Manson and that sort of stuff I think is, is perfectly relevant.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. That's fine. I'm going to move on. I'm just going to state, uh, without further questioning and that's fine. Uh, I, I'm not, I, I'm a simple guy. Okay. And I think, and I think that's the best thing. So, I can understand easily how a, a young man enamored with a bunch of bad asses or motorcycle gangs, or even a guy like Charlie Manson. I, I don't know much about any of this stuff quite frankly, uh, wants to, uh, curry favor, wants to be an influence, wants to show he's got what it takes so he goes and brokers a deal, which I find becoming more than an in between, I, I find that as I go getter, I find that guy can get you, get you biker guys, a bunch of, uh, uh, Mescaline or whatever it is. You go over to Gary. Gary is your friend or acquaintance. He know you either way. Uh, you make a, a transaction as I read the, the file, a transaction is made. Gary somehow sells you bunk as I understand it, uh, false product, the, uh, the motorcycle gang must not be happy. Uh, and if, if a friend of mine sold me some bunk, I don't, I, I just am curious as to why you wouldn't tell Gary to make it right. That's what I would do, uh, versus all that occurred, but that's okay. I'm gonna move on and I'm gonna, I don't have any other questions. I'm going to turn it over to, uh, the Deputy Commissioner and we can begin discussing post-conviction.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Thank you, Commissioner. All right, Mr. Beausoleil. We're gonna be talking about post-conviction factors. We know that you had a hearing on January 30th, 2019. It was a grant reversed by the Governor on April 26, 2019. This is about, this looks to be your 20th hearing, an initial and 19 subsequent hearings. As your Attorney pointed out, just everything has been talked about, um, your record consists of your Central File and all the documents that were submitted. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel here, um, but know that if it's relevant and reliable, it's in your Central File or submitted, we've reviewed it and we'll give it as much weight as it appears. Um, but were going to talk about things that we think are still important today. We all know and it's the current state of the law that, uh, a life crime, no matter how horrendous loses its probative value as far as, uh, current dangerous goes, the more, the more distant in time it is so, um, that could be the case with your case. Um, clearly, you've upgraded educationally. That, that's clear. That's in your Central File. We're not gonna spend time talking about that. You've upgraded vocationally, electronics printing. Uh, we know you have some art skills, which we're going to be talking about today. You got a good work history. So those aren't an issue today. We're not going to talk about those. Your existing disciplinary record. I think I counted nine, but you haven't had one since, uh, it looks like, was 1988 your last one? Cause that one in 2015, ‘16 got voided, right?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, that business deal voided, so we don't, if it's voided and you're found not guilty about it, we don't, we don't talk about it. So, your disciplinary record, uh, past disciplinary record, not an issue today. Um, the ones you did have, you had, you had the marijuana ’98 and ‘88, uh, some, uh, razorblades, no, no violence, um, no alcohol. You had marijuana ‘81. So, overall, your disciplinary record doesn't appear to be the main issue today. Our main focus today on whether it is going to be on whether or not you, if there are any existing risk factors and, and risk factors is a fancy way of saying, you know, what got you in trouble on the street? What brought you to prison? What got you in trouble in prison? Have you identified and addressed those things? We're trying to determine if there's been sufficient offender change, such that you no longer pose a current unreasonable risk of danger to the public, not necessarily violence, but danger to the public. That's where we're going to focus our thoughts today. Does that make sense?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. And back in 2016, the Doctor had some concerns about your lack of insight into substance abuse. You haven't had any marijuana since, since ’88. The Doctor—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, that was ’99.



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Oh, ’99. Okay. I might have missed that one. The Doctor had, had the response to treatment and supervision, a lack of insight in your predatory antisocial motivations for life crime, especially your willingness to engage in violence and achieve, to achieve your goals. On the good side factors that the Doctor didn't think aggravated your risk, you've been behaviorally stable. You didn't have any, no recent violence. This was 2016 but haven’t had violence since then. You've accepted full responsibility. You had decent parole plans. You got a good support network. So, let's talk about your prison behavior. And specifically, we're going to focus on this whole side business deal, the artwork and everything else. All right?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's what we're going to be talking about today. It looks like this, this dates back to 1985, right? You got a, an RVR in 1985 for a side business, right? Private enterprise.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: When you, when you were at CMC, right? You got a 115 in 1985 for selling your drawings.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. And, and you know, you were told that in prison, you're not allowed to have a side house, so you're not allowed to have a side business, you're allowed arts and crafts, but you're not allowed to sell things. Correct?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, actually that's not true, um, sir.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, well, I have sought and received approvals to sell my art and to sell my music.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: When did you get that? Cause, cause I didn't see that.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, 1985 and that was a, that was a mistake I made, I didn't know that there was such a rule. Um, and so, uh, I would call down that it was, it was dropped to an administrative, I think, uh—




INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Ever since then, I did have approval to do my music prior to that, uh, and I did a soundtrack at, at, um, at Tracy. I started publishing in the seventies. Um, and I've been publishing—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: But what happened, what happened in 2015, this whole thing about you selling art and then you had the, uh, a third level appeal and have the investigation. Um, are you saying that in 2015, you, you had permission to, to sell your, your work for money?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Uh, and actually, if I might interrupt, uh, Mr. Commissioner Reardon, I have, this is actually the approval, I, it's in his C-File. Uh, you know, we, we, I've, I've made a, a, a number of arguments about this. I wrote a letter at the time when Mr. Beausoleil was, was brought back from Oregon. He was brought back on this, on false pretenses that he was operating in business without permission. This is, uh, signed by the, the, um, it's from the Department of Corrections, Oregon State Penitentiary. It says it's giving him permission to, says you will be allowed to send at your expense, your artwork and music compositions to another party to pen and copyright, publish and you could sell—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: What, what year is that, what, what year is that, Mr. Campbell?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Was, uh, this is from 2012.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Did CDC — All right. I understand. Did CDCR ever give permission to do that though? California?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Well, the reason why I bring that up is if you look at, uh, CDCR 3024, it says, uh, permission by the, uh, the administrator of the prison itself. It doesn't require a CDCR permission. 3024 is very clear that it requires the warden’s permission.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: When he's in Oregon. What I'm asking about, I’m talking about California, though. Did you get permission from CDCR California to sell your artwork?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, not at the time. No, I wasn't in, (inaudible) in Oregon.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: How about now? How about right now? Do you have permission right now to sell your artwork?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Now I, I sought, I sought an approval, um, a couple of years ago to publish a coffee table art book. I was denied.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. Is that 2015? Is that what you're talking about? 2015?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No. No, no, that was earlier. I mean, uh, later than that. That was just, uh, I think it was probably 2017. It might've been 2018. I'm not sure. 2017 or 2018. I requested, I had a letter from a publisher, uh, requesting the ability to, uh, publish a book of my artwork, a collection of my artwork it’s the coffee table.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Did you think that as of, did you think that as of 2015, when you were in CDCR that you had CDCR permission to sell your, your artwork or your, your art pieces?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Not here. No. I didn't—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, why are you, why are you, I mean, it appears from the documentation we have that in the recent, that recent RVR was based on a report that's not confidential, that you, you're selling artwork and that somebody's putting money in your JPay account. That sounds like a signed business.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Yeah. I understand what you're saying, sir. Um, one thing that's missing, probably because it was dismissed as a disciplinary that I received in 2016—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It was, um, it was cause, it was discussed in the 2016 hearing.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, it hadn't, it was the same type of the situation on the same type of stuff that this is about the, the new one. It's exactly, it's a rerun of what happened before. And, um, that write up was heard. Um, and it was dismissed in the interest of justice, uh, based on the fact that I had the appropriate approvals to produce the work that was published. I have not published any new work since I've been back in California. I've only published the work that was approved for publication at the time in Oregon.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I think that, that it's been missing here what, Commissioner Reardon, if I could interject. Mr. Beausoleil hasn't published anything new, the money that he is still receiving pertains to work that's been done and most of it done to the soundtrack that Mr. Beausoleil referred to, which was recorded with the permission of Tracy Prison back in the seventies. So, these are, these are ongoing publication rights that have been already out in the world and that's where this is coming from and there's a mistaken belief that he continues to produce and sell new work, which is not true.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, you’re testifying under oath that these, these deposits of thousand dollars that were made in 2020 are for items that were produced when?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Back, mostly back in the seventies. The, the film soundtrack that I produced in the 1970s that was published in 1979, um, has been, um, has been something that has been of interest to people out there all the time since. Um, and it has been, you know, been reissued and, and issued CDs, LPs, has been, uh, digital downloads and all of that has been in circulation. I was told when they, when they had the hearing on that write up that I received in 2016 that those things did not have to be unpublished because—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, you see, here's the, here's the rap there, Mr. Beausoleil, because it, it puts the panel in a difficult position, because if you are correct, that I would expect the pending 115 to go your way. Right? And if, if what you're saying is true that you only sold artwork that was authorized at the time, then maybe that, maybe that is appropriate, but it's hard for this panel to determine that today.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, may I ask a question, uh, to my, on, on camera, uh, to, uh, Mr. Campbell?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, that's between you and him. I don't want to hear any Attorney-Client privilege information.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Jason, if you could, do you have a copy of the RVR that you could maybe, uh, send over?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: From, from (inaudible)? I don't have it. Easily accessible right now but the RVR from (inaudible).




DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Well, if I can interject, I think we're talking about two different things. There's a different issue between the music which was produced in the seventies and there's a different issue that was with the art that was produced in, in this decade, not 2020, but within the last few years, since he's returned from Oregon. So, I think we have to separate these issues.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: (inaudible) Ms. Lebowitz, I don't think that she has a role in, in this, you know, this argument here regarding the, um, this pen. I mean, there's a problem with his disciplinary, uh, has just been filed yesterday—


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: —because there's, there's, there's, there’s been a recurring issue every time Mr. Beausoleil has a hearing, there's some sort of investigation in the weeks before the hearing and we get sandbagged by this information and it's the exact same complaint that's been lodged multiple times now and he's, he's explained himself repeatedly, uh—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: But you'd understand, Mr. Campbell, that almost whatever, um, $2,300 deposited in the last couple of weeks is, is at least a cause for further investigation about the source of those funds, correct?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I, if, if, if that's what the CDCR believes, then sure. They can go ahead and investigate it. Mr. Beausoleil hasn't produced any new content. What Ms. Lebowitz is saying regarding a painting, but, you know, the, the, the RVR mentioned a $50 payment for a painting. That painting was done. Mr. Beausoleil hadn't done any new paintings since he's been in, uh, in, uh, the, back in California. He had the permission in Oregon as we've explained, I even, I have a letter that I received from the, the, the apprehension publisher who wanted to publish the, the, um, the art book, uh, Tyler Davis, he wrote to me and said that he is, he's taking that, you know, out, he's not going to do it, it's pending, if Mr. Beausoleil is ever released, or if he gets permission from, uh, the, the CDCR to publish the book, he will do so. So, he had, you know, he's following the rules. That, that he, he went for, he asked for permission to, to publish this book—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: From Oregon. From Oregon, right?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: No. This, this, this is, this is more recent. So, following the, the, his return back to California, he was contacted by this publisher, uh, Tyler, whose name is Tyler Davis, about doing a book of his artwork. He went through the proper channels, submitted a request, the request is actually pending, uh, when we had the, um, the hearing in 2017, I believe, that his, he had already put in the request to do that book. It was denied. And so the book isn't being done because he's following the rules and that's, that's the, the, the problem here is that all of the information that, or all the, the, the paintings and the, uh, music, everything that has been published was all created in Oregon. Nothing has been done here, but there's, there's no way to, to, to show that because they, they come into his cell, uh, the, you know, a few days before the hearing, and now we're stuck with this RVR and, and I, I would also point out in the RVR, Mr. Beausoleil’s totally candid. He says, yes, I'm getting payment and there's no, there's no attempt to obfuscate what's going on. He's perfectly honest with these, uh, with the investigators but now—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: All right. I got it, Mr. Campbell. So, so, Mr. Beausoleil, so we're crystal clear here. Um, your allegation is that all those payments set forth in that pending RVR, that, that's goes from 2015, 2020 are for artwork or music that you created in Oregon and you had permission, is that what you're telling us?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yes. And, and prior to my being, uh, I went to Oregon in 1994. Uh, and there, you know, there was the soundtrack which has, um, you know, it's never really died in terms of interest, um, from people out there. And so, that's, most of the royalties that I received is for that soundtrack. I do get a little bit from art. Uh, I get—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, so, help, help us out here. So, this, this, these $999 and 99 cents, I don’t know why it's one pinion or a thousand, but who, who knows? What was that for? June 16, 20 20? What was that for? From Beth Hall.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That was from, uh, the account where, which is in the RVR, the account that is kept by a person who assists me, uh, stent some money for me to buy canteen with. And, um, you know, so it's—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: What did it, what did it represent though? What does that money represent?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It's from royalties that I have received for things that I have published in the past.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: But anything new, again, it's, you know, all the artwork that's up there on that gallery was produced in Oregon. All of them.



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I understand. So, so, give us a second. Commissioner, I'd like to, uh, uh, take a pause and, and talk to you privately.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Yeah, absolutely. Uh, let’s pause. It’s about, it’s 10:09 AM.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: All right. We're back, we're back on the record, Commissioner.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: All right. Um, we took the break. We were talking about, um, your business dealings while you're in prison. Um…


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Mr. Beausoleil, is there, is there currently a, a website that you're aware of?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Bobby, yes, yes. It's been up there for, uh, close to 25 years.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, this is, yeah.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I am so totally up front with everything I'm doing, Mr. Reardon. I, I—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: This works better at Mr. Beausoleil. Mr. Beausoleil, just answer my questions. It works better, okay?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: All right. So, what's, what's your participation in this, in this website?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, well, I, I approve it and, and that’s, I don't have any participation in his design, um, in terms of maintenance or any of that sort of thing, I don't have access to the kind of equipment that I would need to do that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Who gets approval to sell a piece of artwork? I mean, if somebody wants to buy something who approves it?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, it goes through the publisher. If they’re a piece of artwork, it's only available as prints, uh, or cards, and that goes through Fine Art America, which is, uh, the, uh, person who, uh, with, with whom my work is published.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, the investigation is not confidential apparently because it was in the BPH tab of, of, erm, says part of that website includes something, “click to contact Bobby directly.” Do you get contacted directly from people?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I, uh, I don't know if that's exactly the right words. Is that, are you sure that's what the, the words say?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's in quotation so I'm assuming I'm going to say yes.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. So, uh, there's a, a link where you can, uh, where someone who goes to the website can send an email. The email gets forwarded to me as hard copy.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, in the regular mail, which is, which is by the rules.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, and if there's, if a response is needed, I write on the back of it and send it back to, uh, my friend who assists me and she sends the email to that person.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And that does not sound like you're participating in the sale of items from that website?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No, I don't need to do that. I don't, I, I don't—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I, I didn’t ask if you need to do it, I asked you if you did it, if you do it. You never got any emails or you hard copies of any emails?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Oh, I get, I get them.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yes. Not as emails.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: How is that, how is that not participating in the sale of your artwork or your, your publishing?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I'm not really, I'm not, when, I, there's two different things here. Evidently, you're asking me if I get an email about somebody who wants to buy something.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don't get that.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That's not what I'm talking about.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: What emails do you get?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Most of the communication is people complimenting me on my work. Uh, they’re, um, I'm, I’m hearing an echo with myself—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I am too. So, is everybody on mute? All right. Try it again.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: That's better. What kind of emails do you get?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, I get, you know, fan mail. I really like your artwork. I really like your music. Uh, I just got one from a woman who said that, uh, uh, she found great solace in some of my recordings after her son was killed in a car accident. You know, I get things like that. And I responded to that. As far as the actual running of the business, I have no connection with any, any direct connection with any of the sales part of it. Uh, I have an assistant who manage, who receives the royalties and puts them into an account that's in her name—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: But why is your, why is your name even on that website?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, because it's about my work.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: It's about selling your work, right?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Not necessarily. Okay. So, all of my artwork is up there for free, for anybody to look at and—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, if it's up there for free, if it's up there for free, where is all this money coming from? You, you got, uh, you got almost $2,300 just in, just in 2020. So, if, no, if people are, if you're giving it away, somebody is paying something.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, yeah, the royalties that come in from the publishers go into an account. Um, my, uh, assistant, the person who assists me has my Power of Attorney. That's how, what the rules say you're supposed to do. You're, the rule that you're supposed to turn in the operations of the business. If you come into prison with a business, you have to turn the operations of the business over to a, a third party, someone out there and that's what I've done. I, uh—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I’ve been told I’ve been doing the right way.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Does Beth Hall, does she give you like an accounting on a monthly or bimonthly or basis?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No, not really. Uh, she gives me an accounting if I asked her how much is in the account, but that's about it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: How much is in the account?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don't know. I haven't asked her in a while.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Probably a couple thousand dollars.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: What’s significant about these $999 and 99 cents? That seems an odd amount. It's here, it's here like four times. What?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That's what JPay does.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: So, every, they, they draw the line that, that you can't do a thousand. So, um—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: When I ask — yeah. So, I get along to, to draw from for canteen. That's all it's for. So, every, maybe six, eight months, I get a, a lump sum from, uh, through JPay to, to buy canteen with.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So let me, let me see if I understand this So, I could go on there. I could look at your artwork, correct?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And if I was interested in something or if I wanted to talk to you about what a piece meant to me or what music meant to me, I could generate an email that would find itself to, find its way to you and you would respond.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. That, I mean, maybe it's just me, but that, that sounds like you're participating in the process. Right? Because I might say, you know what? I liked that piece, but I talked to the author, he explained it to me or explained the words to me or what the, what the art meant and now I really, really understand it. I really, really want to buy it.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: But again, the issue here is that these are previously published works that are still in circulation—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Mr. Campbell, we, Mr. Campbell, we understand your argument, right? You're argument is that when it was—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: That’s multiple times. I don't understand why this coming up.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Because we're not talking about what it was created, we're talking about when it was sold and, and your client's involvement in the sale of, of those items. That's what we're talking about.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Mr. Reardon, may I, may I offer some information about that?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: From my perspective, from my experience in this?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Because I've been dealing with this, I went through the RVR in 2016. I was found not guilty based on a preponderance of, of the evidence, uh, no violation due to the fact that it was authorized for sale at the time that it was created, uh, in the, in an institution that had approved it. I was told that I did not have to unpublish anything because that would be pretty much impossible anyway. I don't know how anyone, there is no unpublish button once you publish your work. It goes out into distribution. Publishers are handling it. Um, so, you know, so I, I rely on the, on the fact that it was approved, uh, when the hearings, the Senior Hearing Officer, uh, looked at that information, I took all of my CDs. I took art prints. I took cards. I showed I was totally open about it. Um, and I was told that the material that was created at an institution that had approved it is still good to go. It still can be remain in circulation and I—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Can, can I interrupt for a moment? Can I interrupt for a moment, sir? All right. Let's, let's, let's be clear what we're talking about here first off, all right? I mean, this 2016 RVR, am I looking at the same thing here? Uh, where, uh, the, uh, Hearing Officer finds there is sufficient evidence in charge of subject with unauthorized business dealing, a serious offense. However, the subject being forthcoming about his business dealings months prior to being charged in his attempt to seek permission for his dealings, a finding for a serious RVR is not warranted. Due to the aforementioned, the Hearing Officer finds the subject guilty of a lesser included charge of unauthorized business dealings, and less it to reduce administrative RVR, is that what we're talking about here?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. No, because that was dismissed later and then, uh, reheard. That RVR, which, um, Mr. Campbell has a copy of the results and he could provide it to you, I was found not guilty based on a preponderance of the evidence, uh, in the interest of justice, because there had been no violation of the rule. If I—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, let's, let’s see, the, the rule, the rule is rather clear, so I'm really confused about it because the rule, as, as you know, is California Code of Regulations 3024 states inmates shall not engage actively in a business or profession except as authorized by the institution head. And we clearly have a third level appeal dated September 10th of 2018, which is not authorizing you to conduct a business, uh, from, uh, J. Dominguez appeals examiner office of appeals. So, I, I mean, a lot of this to, and for me as a layman, as a distinction without a difference. Uh, you know that you're not supposed to be doing this. You don't have to, you could, you could allow your material to be free. Uh, you don't have to make money off of it. And your, your art would still go forth throughout the world. Instead, there is a profit element to what is going on, which is what places you in violation of 3024 in my opinion.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. So, there, there are two rules that actually apply to this and, you know, I've been very cautious in how I've approached this and I think that I followed the rules, uh, and the Senior Hearing Officer agreed that I had followed the rules appropriately in publishing my work. Penal Code 2600 and 2601 grants prisoners the right to sell, to convey and sell personal property, including their written work, drawings, paintings, inventions, um, and so on. Um, and you know, that is, that's, there is a, a rule that references that, um, Penal Code Section, but then there is also a rule that says, in order to engage in business dealings related to that, you need approval from the institution head, the warden or, or, uh, designate. So, um, I was not able to get, I was not able to get an approval to do anything at this institution as yet and I just stopped trying, I, I haven't done anything new and I'm not selling anything new. I was told that the material that was, uh, had the right approvals to convey and sell at the time of the approval was still good to go, was still good to be distributed, um, because I don't, I don’t even know how I went unpublished. If publishing is like, you know, you publish a book and then you've got publishers involved and printers and so on, how do you dial that back? If a person gets an approval at one institution, and then gets transferred to another institution, do they then, well, that's all rescinded? I don't, I don't think that's how it works. I was told that's not how it works. I was told by the Senior Hearing Officer, you're, if you're at one institution and you get an approval from the superintendent to be able to publish that, that, that work is then approved for publication.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, well, I mean, why, why, why are you, why do you desire to make a profit? If you, if you put it out there for everybody at no, at no cost, how, how would, that's, that would be the, that'd be the same as.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It is out there for no cost. If you go to the website, you can go to the music page, all the music is up on SoundCloud. Anybody can play it. If somebody wants to own something, if they want to record, then there's overhead involved and they have to, you know, there has to be a purchase involved for that, for them to be able to purchase—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: The overhead is flying, it's coming right to you through to JPay.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And, and I, I would like to point out this—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It doesn't come directly to me, sir. It goes to an assistant who puts it into an account. Every once in a while, I say, I'm out of funds, I need some canteen money and then I get some in, in the mail or JPay.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And, and Mr. Beausoleil’s, uh, 2017 hearing, this was discussed at length because that's when, that's when this, this, uh, disciplinary was pending at the time. And the panel at that time suggested that things that Mr. Beausoleil should consider are making it available for free so that, so if someone wants to listen to the music, it's out there. They want to buy a physical copy, that's a different thing, but if they want to listen to the music, there's no, he's not hoarding it and saying you can't have access to it. And also, they said that he should consider what he would do with the funds and he's made donations to the, the music department at CMF, and he's made donations to charitable organizations as well. These were things that the previous panel looked at in the context of this exact same issue. And he has, uh, Mr. Beausoleil has tried to follow every recommendations input before him.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Mr. Beausoleil, in 2017, where you, were you, uh, involved with that website, were people emailing you in 2017?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: They were also emailing you in 2017?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I've, I’ve been receiving emails through the mail, um, for over two decades.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: From this, from this same website?



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I'm not engaged in, I'm not using that as to, as a way of like promoting my work. You know, most of it is, um, communication with, communicating with friends, you know, people I've developed relationship, uh, relationships with, but every once in a while I, I hear from somebody new and they're a fan of my work and they want to compliment me and I thank them and I, you know, that's pretty much it, that's the name of the, uh, you know, that’s being friendly to, to my fans. You know, it's interesting, uh, Mr. Reardon, uh, and Mr. Schneider, I, last hearing, um, and the hearing before, uh, with Mr. Labon and Mr. Grounds was in tenants, uh, as a Commissioner too. There were two Commissioners on that panel. And, um, you know, we've talked at length about my work and I was commended for how responsible I had been in the way that I had been handling, uh, once they understood what I was doing and, um, uh, even with the pending writeup, um, they were, they saw the, the benefits of what I was doing in terms of, um, going inside of myself and bringing, bringing this work out. Um, Mr. Grounds said, um, we, you know, we commend you for the work that you've done, um, and I would like you to think about creating a nexus between you and your work and the victim. And so, I've done that. I've been doing that—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —and I take that to heart.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: When Beth sells things, does she call you, let you know if she's selling things?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, no, not really. It's just comes in from, it comes in from the publishers. Um, I don't really, you know.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Does, does Beth ever tell you though?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don’t need to know the (inaudible).

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: How often do you talk to Beth on, in a, in a week or in a month?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Usually a couple of times a week.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: A couple of times a week? And what do you talk about when you talk to her?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: All kinds of things. She's a friend. So, um, and we're not talking about all that, you know, I don't, you know, she knows what to do, so I don't need to, to try to tell her, um, you know, specifically, you know, anything.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Who sets the, who sets the prices for these items?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: The publishers.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: You don't have anything to do with that?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No, that's their, their pricing structure.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: But, you know, once I, there's, there's one thing you should know. I hardly ever sell any artwork of that website, hardly ever. It's just, it’s there, um, it, people can look at it, they can zoom in on it, they can, you know, maybe even make a copy of it, print it out. But, um, the main thing for me is to be able to share it. Yeah, I'm a Buddhist. And, and one of the things, um, uh, as Gary was by the way, um, one of the things about Buddhism is Dharma. Dharma is very important principle in Buddhism. Dharma is one’s purpose in life, what are you brought here in the world to do and once you find what your calling is and what you're supposed to, to do, you're supposed to give it to the world. You're supposed to make it available. Um, and that's basically what I do. I make it available for free. There is a business component because there's overhead involved. Um, but I have, in the day to day operations, I have no involvement in that. I don't need to have any involvement in it. I did what the rule says, which is the sign over the Power of Attorney to a person on the outside to handle all those, those, uh, incidental, uh, issues concerning, uh, the business aspects of this work. But I, I think that I'm doing the right thing. I mean, um, I sent you a song in this packet, you know, that I, I wrote in honor of Gary Hinman.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. Commissioner, I don't have any other questions about, about post- conviction factors or about the whole website.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Um, let me just give you some of my take on us and you feel free to answer it or do not. It's not even a question, but you feel free to respond to if you, if you choose to. Uh, as I read the file, you, you have, you have tried to disassociate yourself from the whole Manson thing. But then I look at, I look at, um, issues like this, and I think, well, the reason that people care about you is because of this whole Manson, um, um, I don't know what the word is, but there are people that are, um, I can’t think of the word, but there are people that are, uh—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Connection, affiliation?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Uh, something, but it's, it's, it's almost that, uh, prurient interest in the whole Manson thing. And at, at age 21, you were making music and nobody gave a damn about Bobby Beausoleil, but then you get involved with Manson and now you, here you are, uh, you got people like, oh, I love, like you said, I love your music, it really helps you with my soul. Uh, it's very, it's disturbing. Uh, I, I find you as a profiteer of the whole Manson thing. Uh, there’s, there's thousands of inmates that have talent. You have talent, no doubt about it. They aren't running a website. They aren't, they aren't able to sell their wares. They gotta throw their stuff, I guess, at the prison gift shop or something you talked about. The third level appeal from 2018, which is not 2016, uh, discusses the Penal Code, it brings everything into appeal and says, this is wrong. You cannot do this. And the prison doesn't do anything about it and that's fine, I guess. They don't seem to care about it. September 10th of 2018, your third level appeal. The prison likes you to do it. I guess I'm okay with that, because they don't have to, be like sitting here saying here's some cell phones are against the rules and then you pick up a cell phone and use it. Well, that's, you know what, you know what better is, better as you've been told that this is not acceptable, that's what a third level appeal did. And so, I'm not really sure why, why we're trying to carve out what I would call distinctions without differences. Um, you know, I, I just see you as profiteering off the whole Manson thing. And I don't, I didn't, I don't, I can't go on the internet. I don't get to do all that stuff so I'm at loss as much as your Attorney and Ms. Lebowitz is at a loss from confidential file, which I think there's nothing in there that were even to be relevant today. Uh, I'm at a loss, cause I don't get to go on my own little searches outside of, of the material I'm given, uh, to conduct a hearing. So, uh, yeah.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I would like to respond, sir.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Um, you said that you were, you were saying that you have a concern that I am, that you think that I'm profiteering on the whole Manson thing. Um, and that is simply untrue. I don't promote any work that I have done with Manson's name or the name of the victim or my crime. I make it very clear if you go to the website and you go to the about page, the pack I sent you, um, I, through my Attorney, I sent a, uh, uh, a printout from, uh, the website that explains, um, and I, I would invite you to look at it because it, it, it’s very clear in what the website is intended to do. I have no, um, interest in my work being appreciated on the basis of some association with Manson. That's not who I am and people who write to me are not interested in that. I’m not—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I interrupt just to say that just last year, uh, Mr. Beausoleil contacted me, there was a, a gallery because last year being the 50th anniversary of, of, uh, of the Manson murders and, and perhaps, uh, Ms. Lebowitz was aware of it because it was in Los Angeles. There's a gallery that did a big, big exhibition. And Mr. Beausoleil found out that they had put on, they, they initially contacted Mr. Beausoleil to, uh, participate in this gallery. He said, no. And they went ahead and put in some pieces of things that were privately owned. And I wrote a cease and desist letter, had them all taken down, I had someone go to Los Angeles and go to the, the, the event to make sure that there were no pieces out. This is all, you know, Mr. Beausoleil were, were in contact regarding this. We wanted to make sure that there was absolutely no involvement. Uh, and, and Mr., Mr. Beausoleil had no involvement in this, this was profiteering. No question. This was profiteering. Mr. Beausoleil, I have submitted numerous letters about, about, for people who, who look at Mr. Beausoleil’s art as art and his music, his music. Lucifer Rising, that soundtrack was originally done by Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin and the filmmaker who's very famous, this isn't, this isn't someone who was famous because of Manson, he didn't know Mr. Manson. The filmmaker, Kenneth Anger is very famous, this is taught in film schools, he rejected Jimmy Page's soundtrack in favor of Mr. Beausoleil's, if that's any indicator of the level of talent that Mr. Beausoleil has. Uh, you know, it's a famous musician was, was given the boot because of Mr. Beausoleil’s artwork. That's why it's so popular. It's not because of the, the, the Manson association that Mr. Beausoleil has a fan base.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, part of your story demonstrated the issue because, um, I mean, I would guarantee if I walked out on the street corner of LA Verne asking people, you know Bobby Beausoleil is, I'm gonna, I'm going to be pretty darn sure that when I do find somebody who knows Bobby Beausoleil, they're not going to say, oh, do you mean the artist? You mean the guy who wrote this fantastic soundtrack? You know.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Surprised of how many people know him.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I guess I would. I’m, I'm not allowed to do that.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: (inaudible) Mr. Beausoleil was first before anyway. So, I mean, I, I don't, I think that's a misperception that you have. I don't know what — I mean, surely there are people who, who, uh, are, who are interested in this. I mean, of course there are people who are interested in Mr. Beausoleil because of his, uh, his crime. That's impossible to, he cannot divorce the public from that, uh, that perception, but he's, he's done everything, and we've done everything, we've been in these hearings—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, Mr., Mr. Campbell, I think your comments are, are more appropriate for your closing statement, argue that the Commissioner is wrong and he's profiteering. I think they might be more appropriate there. This is a time of the hearing where we're talking to Mr. Beausoleil about whether or not he’s suitable so, uh—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Understood. I apologize. I, I just wanted to bring up that one because I didn't submit it. The, the cease and desist, I apologize. You're right. All right. Uh—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yeah. If you disagree with the Commissioner in your closing statement, you can say why you think the Commissioner is wrong or why that's not relevant, but that, that should be more at the end I think than during the actual hearing itself.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: No, you’re, you're correct, Commissioner Reardon. I think that's a better, a, uh, um, a better, this is one of the Commissioner than it is of, uh, uh, Mr. Campbell. Thank, thank you, sir. Uh, again, I just, I just get perplexed, uh, by some of that, uh, and I, I know, I know, I know it's not my job to give you advice on what you should do with your, with your company or your business dealings. It just seems to me that it was clearly pointed out on September 10th of 2018. Uh, I guess the good news for you is you will get graph, gets it litigated again which you receive a pending RVR for that, which is not a concern of this panel, uh, because it's, it’s not. I mean, I, I, we have the facts we’ve discussed, and you've been very forthcoming about it. I don't have any additional questions.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, Mr. Schneider, may I ask something?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Um, in regards to the disciplinary, the, the final findings of the disciplinary that was issued on business dealings prior, would you be interested? I know it's not in the file because they remove all that stuff, but, um, Mr. Campbell has copies of it and, uh, if you read the findings and you read the statement, um, and the findings of the Senior Hearing Officer, I think it will help to clarify a lot of what we're talking about, because I was told that I'm acting legally, um, and, and, and morally, uh, grounded in the way that I'm going about this. You know, I've, I’ve been really cautious if you look at the website, I know you can't, but you looked at the website, um, it's wholesale. It is not pandering to people who are interested in, in Manson. I won't have anything to do with that. I won't allow somebody to, to put any of my work in a, in a gallery show or a magazine or anything if they're trying to promote something to do with Manson, I just will not do it. And, uh, uh, you know, but at the same time, I am an artist by nature. I am a musician by nature. I have produced work that resonates with people in a positive way. I think it's an asset, not a liability. You know, if, if I had not been cleared by the hearings of Senior Hearings Officer, I would have done whatever I had to do to get right, to make it—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, my, all right. Well then, my question is, how do we, how do we square the third level appeal decision dated September 10th of 2018?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That's not the write up. That, that appeal—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, because they chose not to write you up for it doesn't, doesn't change, uh, the body of work that, uh, to J. Dominguez.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That’s not what I was in. That appeal had nothing to do with that.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: That, that appeal was about him asking for permission to do new work. That appeal wasn't, uh, wasn't related to, the one that I have is from 2017, which isn't, isn't, isn't a, it's an appeal based upon a disciplinary. The one you were looking at wasn't in response to the disciplinary. Am I, am I correct, Mr. Beausoleil? Was, that was in response—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: That’s, that’s correct.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Mr. Beausoleil, that's what I've mentioned before about the coffee table book of his art. He, he asked for permission and he appealed that and ultimately the, the, the appellate, uh, decision rejected that, but it wasn't a disciplinary. I, I, I could be mistaken, mindless that you know.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: No, no, no, I, I'm sure you're right. I'm sure relevant from the 602. But what I'm saying is the reasoning in this body of work as through the appellate decision is the same exact reasoning that should apply regardless. Uh, so it, it confuses me because clearly, uh, these are not new pictures. They're just old pictures that were going to be put into a book. So, I, I, so what is the difference again between selling your art currently and putting it in a single book and selling it as a, as a collection? I don't, I don't understand. I, it's, it's all work that he has done prior to, uh, when he received permission on Oregon, apparently, and I’m, I'm unfamiliar with much of this, Mr. Campbell. Uh, and I apologize. You've been his Attorney of record for a long time. Uh, I, I could still be reading every transcript and everything done on this case, if I, and there's, there's no, there's, there's, there's no way I can only prepare, uh, so much and I did, I did a lot of diligence and I pointed out earlier about the ridiculous and I will call it the ridiculous petition thing, where you got people writing in there when they don’t know what they’re writing in about, um, so I understand that piece. Uh, I don't have, again, I don't have any further questions. Thank you, Mr. Beausoleil and Mr. Campbell, and I'm going to turn it back over to Commissioner Reardon.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. Um, what I didn't touch on was, um, you have participated in, in self-help programming. Uh, there's this whole issue with what we just got done discussing. Um, it's not, it's not only the content, but it's, it's whether or not your behavior violated CDCR policies, you and your lawyers say, no, Senior Hearing Officer says, no, at least it looks like in 2017, um, there, there's, there's a lot of information here so that's, that is one of the issues. As far as your parole plans go, the, at least in 2016, they were, they were acceptable. Um, one thing we didn't touch on was in 2016, you, you wrote this, what? Manifesto, right? You remember that? You remember writing that manifesto in 2016?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, not for my hearing.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I wrote it, a manifesto about being an artist in prison. It was an excellent, I didn't, that was not documentation for my hearing. I remember—



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: That, that's where you, that's where I think you talked about that publishing or selling of your work could be a threat to your safety, or could keep you from getting out but that didn't matter because it's something that you had to do, do you remember that?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, if you're paraphrasing, I don't think I wouldn't put it in quite that start with the term but, um—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm going to find it so I can read it exactly cause it was, it was interesting.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: If you can read it now, uh, what you're, if there's a reference so I can try and find that as well.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: It, it was called manifesto, it's from November 2016.



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, Mr. Reardon, do you have my current, um, parole plans?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I submitted to, to Mr. Campbell, to the documents that were submitted to Mr. Campbell, there’s, there are—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. So, here's the, um, here's the manifesto. We’ll get to that, Mr. Beausoleil. So, this is, this is something that's in your Central File. I, it’s under the, it was, it's, at least it's, it’s not dated, but it has an entry date, I think in November 2016. Manifesto of an artist in prison. And this is what you said on the second page. You might ask if publishing my work has become a threat to my wellbeing and the potential of me being released from prison at some point, why keep doing that? The answer is simple. Because I must. I made a promise and a result of keeping that promise has so far, literally been my saving grace. Expressing in the creative arts as a form of worship, sharing it with everyone who may find something to appreciate it, it is also a form of worship. It would seem that the wisest course is to keep the faith and see it through. So, right? I mean, that's, that's what you said in 2016. Does that refresh your memory?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yes, it does. Yeah. I'm familiar with the document.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. Did you think at 2016 that doing this might keep you from ever getting a date?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, there are people who think that that's what should happen. There are people who promote this idea—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I'm asking, I’m asking you though. I'm interested in what you think.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I, um, what I'm saying there is, I made a promise. Do you understand what I mean when I said that?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, Mr. Beausoleil, I asked you a question. You wrote that this could prevent you from being, being, ever getting a date, and I'm asking you if that's what you believe when you wrote it in 2016.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I, what I was saying is that I recognized the potential of risk involved and a case in point is what we're doing today. I mean, just a few days before my hearing, I'm suddenly, you know, bushwhacked with this RVR and some, you know, I almost identical to one that had been dismissed earlier—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —by the interest of justice.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, we didn't, we didn't file that RVR 115. We're just dealing with whatever information they put in front of us so—


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: —you know, I don't know what to tell you about that.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I’m not sure, you know, I'm not sure where, what initiated it, but, you know, I, um, I know that there has been objections, uh, from Ms., Ms. Tate and Ms. Lebowitz in regards to that in the past about this belief that I'm doing something I shouldn't be doing by publishing my work, but I'm, as far as I know, following the rules.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: You know, I was, when I went to my hearing on that issue of, um, you know, selling my work of, of it being published and the, the work that was done prior to my transfer to California, I was told that it was legitimate.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. We've been through that, so I don't, I don't want to go over that again. We've—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —(inaudible) violation to the rule.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We've discussed that at length.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And there was, there was no retroactive, um, request from the, from the superintendent or the warden or the institution to unpublish my stuff.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: They weren't doing that.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: They were just saying they, they were not approving any new stuff, which is new publishing so I’m, I'm trying to follow the rules.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And I made a promise, I made a promise at them, I, since you, you have called it that suction from the manifesto, I would like to have an opportunity to explain what I meant by that and why it's important for me to, um, to put myself out there despite the proposal for risk or misunderstanding.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, the only reason I asked you is because if I, when I read that, it applied to me that you thought there could be consequences for your trying get your work out there. That's what I got out of it and that's what I asked you about.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: There is the potential for that. I had, that was 2016, I think and that was when I received that, that writeup and I was dealing with the, um, the issues concerning that. So yes, I'm, I'm looking at that and I think that I'm doing everything by the law. I'm going by the rules. Um, the Senior Hearing Officer affirmed that, that I was going by the rules, dismissed the writeup. So, I'm, I'm believing that I'm doing the right thing.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, I, I'm not trying to be in flagrant, you know, do, do something and just, you know—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: No, I will give you that. You're not, you're not trying to hide anything so either you don't care or you think you're doing the right thing and, and you're following the rules because it doesn't appear you're trying to hide hardly anything at all. So, I agree with you on that. So, let's talk about your parole plans. Go ahead.



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, do you, do you have my parole plans?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Yeah. Yeah. So, I got your relapse prevention plan. We have all this. Uh, about the marijuana, in 2016, though, the Doctor was concerned about marijuana. Uh, that's been a long time. Uh, you got numerous support letters. You got that very impressive support letter from that, uh, prison official in Oregon. You have, that's from CDC Officer Greer in Oregon, we've looked at that. You got a letter of acceptance from the Francisco Homes. Um, so when you get out, you're going to go to the Francisco Homes, that's where you're going to go?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, there's two, uh, I have acceptance letters from. D&J in Santa Barbara County.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And another one in, in, um, and another one in, uh, Los Angeles San Francisco Homes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, after that, you said you have, you have some family members you could go stay with, I believe.



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I'm a little concerned about halfway houses in the middle of the pandemic.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: My plan in terms of where I'm going to go and where I'm going to live on parole, uh, I'm going to do what Parole Authorities tell me to do.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. And you have a lot of support letters. There's a lot of opposition letters, you know, like that was mentioned that 10 days got, I don’t know, 2,000, 2,500 pages, one’s a petition. Um, at some point, we acknowledged the opposition and why they're opposed to your release. We acknowledged whether or not you seem to have, uh, a personal support network. You have personal support in appearance that you do, whether that can be established by one or two letters or 50 letters or a hundred letters, clearly there are people opposed to your release and we have some of those people present today, and there are people in support of your release so that's something that we have in front of us and that we'll weigh and consider, uh, during our deliberations. Is there anything else you wanted to add about your, about your parole plans?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, well, I, do you want to talk about it, would you like me to, to express them or, or—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: No. Other than what we just talked about, is there anything else you want to add? Cause it's part of the record. You don't have to submit it and then tell us about it if we have it here in front of us.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, you know, the, the issue that we were just talking about in terms of my art and music is all related to my work in multimedia, which is my employment plan.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Multimedia, I don't, I'm not going to go out and get, try to be a rock star. Um, and I'm, you know, I'm not going to try to make it on the basis of being a painter, but I do have a, as Mr. Geer has expressed, um, uh, he was my supervisor for over 20 years and, uh, he has, as he has expressed, I have a good deal of talents in this area and I have job offers—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —and people who are willing to purchase my skills.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Here’s the thing. You know, I, I believe that you are talented, that the Doctor didn't think that it was that good to put all those eggs in that basket, because you could be a starving artist, but clearly you have talent. You also have other skills. So, we make a determination whether or not you're gonna be able to support yourself. And it appears that you would be able to. That's what we look at. Do you have skills to support yourself? You're not the, I mean, we wrote down your age here. I forgot how old you were. You're not the youngest inmate we've seen this week, but you got job skills. You have creative skills. We want to know what you have a way of supporting yourself. My last question to you is going to be this. If you did get a date and three or four months from now, you're on the street walking around, have you thought about anything that could get you in trouble, violate your parole or send you back to prison?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, if I were to get into drugs, but I have absolutely no attraction to, um, to anything. Um, the only drug that as I explained in my, um, um, relapse prevention plan, uh, the only, uh, substance I've ever had any real issues with was marijuana, I haven't smoked any in 21 years. I don't have any interest in it. I think Mr., uh, Dr. Levin was a little bit, um, uh, he thought maybe I was being too cavalier about it, that I didn't, uh, um, you know, I, that I thought it was going to be easier that he thought it was going to be, um, but the fact is I just don't have any attraction to it. I thought it made me more, um, that it made me more, uh, inspired if I smoked it, but I found that that was not actually true. I'm more inspired and more prolific when I don't. So, I just, you know, the thing that, that had been an attraction to me is no longer an attraction.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, what's going to happen if you get a date and people find out you're out and that this whole generation wants to get to you and talk about Charlie Manson, that whole thing, what's going to happen there?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, I'm not going to have anything to do with them. I'm not, I'm not interested in that. You know, I, you know, that's not who I am. I, I was never a member of the Manson family, that's known at the board of prison terms, um, uh, back in ‘85, investigated that and, um, uh, where, uh, they looked into the level of my involvement.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: No, I'm not talking about that. People, people on the street don't care about the BPH. They just, all they know is that you are related, related to it and they might want to get to you and talk about that and make that part of, of, of, of your life. So, that's what I was asking.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Right. I understand. And there's no difference between that. Somebody coming up out there and someone coming up in here is, you know, there are a lot of people who will approach me and say, hey, I heard you were associated with Manson, and, uh, I would say, yeah, that was, uh, uh, that's ancient history.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It’s not who I am.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Leave me alone. I will just leave it, leave it at that. I, I don't engage with people about that. Um, except to the extent that I have to own my own behavior from back then and, um, and be responsible for what I did and be responsible for who I chose to associate back then. So, in those, in that respect, I own it and, um, I tried to, um, express in retrospect about all of that in a way that’s responsible.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Okay. So, we have all your submissions, your remorse letters. We have all that. We know there's opposition. We have some victims who might be, uh, testifying today. Um, I can't speak for these victims, but some victims when they participate in these hearings, they want to know if the inmate’s rehabilitated. They want to know if the inmate’s behave themselves when they've been in prison. Have you been a good inmate?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Have you been behaving and following the rules in prison?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I believe I have, yes. I, I, I realized there's a pending RVR. Um, I had, it hasn't been heard. It's the same that was dismissed, the same issues that was dismissed several years ago or a couple of years ago and, uh, you know, I’ve, I've been following those guidelines—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —ever since, and now it's an issue again—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —that’s the same issue and I was told that I was doing, following the rules and doing everything right.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: So, um, uh, let me ask you, in regards to victims, I submitted several letters I've written to victims—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We, we have your letters of remorse. We have those here.




DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And then those are reviewed as part of the deliberation, okay? All right, then, uh, thank you, Mr. Beausoleil. Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Uh, briefly. Um, it is the same risk assessment as Commissioner Reardon throw on the record. It is a low risk assessment and we’ll also note that the previous risk assessment from 2013 was also a low risk assessment. Uh, but everything has been talked about, uh, today that is of concern to this panel. If there's something of concern to others, please, uh, include that in your closing statement. Uh, what I'd like to do now assuming that Commissioner has no additional questions, do you, sir?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Uh, would we have questions by, uh, Ms. Lebowitz and, uh, and as stated earlier by Mr. Campbell, uh, please, please ensure that we run these questions. These, these are questions asked of Panel by the Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney, and whenever you're ready, Ms. Lebowitz.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: And Ms., Mr. Beausoleil, don't answer until you get the green light from the Commissioner, please.


DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Thank you. Um, can the panel please ask the inmate if he approves of all the content on his Facebook page, his Bobby Beausoleil Facebook page?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Right. Is there a Bobby Beausoleil Facebook page, sir?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yeah, there's a Facebook page devoted to buy art and music. Yes. And, uh, occasionally I comment on it if somebody's, uh, my, the person who assists me, uh, sends me a comment and occasionally I'll, I'll comment on it. Uh—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Now— go ahead. I'm sorry. I, I didn't mean to cut you off. Go ahead.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: So, rephrase the question, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, the Bobby Beausoleil Facebook page, you know, you don't administer that and you have, you have passwords to that Facebook page?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And if, if somebody asks you a question, then, then you communicate with, is it Beth that you communicate with?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And how do you communicate with her?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, mail or telephone. But I don't do anything related to Facebook over the phone so—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: No, not that, but I mean, like if it's a question, would you, would you talk on it on a telephone or would you email her your response or how, how do you, what is your access?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I would, I would hand write it and send it in a, in a letter, you know, letter envelope.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, if it shows up on, if it shows up on your Facebook page from you, it, it truly is something that Beth would have then transcribed onto there and saying it’s from you?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And how long has that Facebook page been in operation?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Oh, um, I think 10 years, roughly.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. And what is the purpose of that Facebook page?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It’s to, uh, it's for people to make comments about my work if they want to. Um, primarily, uh, I try to avoid getting into anything having to do with my case or anything in relation to that, um, people, you know, make comments and, um, uh, you know, they were, there, there have been a number of comments made in regards to my parole grant last year. Um, so, yeah, but it's mostly its, its purpose is to, um, to have a way for fans to engage, uh, and with each other primarily about my work.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: How many fans do you think you have?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don't know. Um, I have, there are people all over the world who I hear from, uh, in regards to work on the soundtrack and some of my visual art. Um, uh, I don't, it’s, it's not a huge number of people. Um, it's, but there are, well, it’s very diverse and spread across a large area. Um—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Do you have followers? Is that what you, that what you have on Facebook as followers? How many followers do you have?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It's a couple of thousand I think.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Least, least a couple thousand fans now. Okay.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And, and, and so, so we're clear. I mean, I mean, and I understand there are people that just have, that may want to make comments on your art or something, but it also is a platform to assist you and, and, and in selling or spreading out your art or your music, correct?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, not for me personally, but yeah, if, it's a discussion, you know, it's an open forum in regards to my work.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I mean, I mean, right. I mean, you're, I guess I would agree. You're somewhat limited in how you can access it and do it, but it, it is in best interest to, um, get the interest in you up, correct? I mean, what's her, what's her cut?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Her cut. No, Beth’s cut. Well, I don't know. You tell me, you got, you said you're very transparent so what is it?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yeah. She, uh, received $11 an hour for any work that she does for me.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: She pays herself $11 for her work.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. And how many hours does she work?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Oh, it varies. Um, 20 hours maybe, um, a month, maybe 30, if, if there's other stuff going on. I don't know. You know, it just depends on, you know, when I was in preparations for my hearing, she does a lot of typing and transcribing so there was more this past month or two, than normally.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: That's what she does so she's not getting rich off of you then or nothing like that, correct?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No, no, no. Not by any means. There's not a lot of money. Commissioner, Mr. Schneider, I don't make very much money. Here's the, here's the issue, uh, with all of this. If you're giving away the milk free, who's gonna buy the cow? There's an assumption that I'm making a bunch of money and I am not because I give it all away for free. All the music is on SoundCloud. There's like 80 songs and you can go to the website or you can go to SoundCloud and you can play them for hours for free. So, nobody buys this stuff, you know, uh, except very rarely. So, whatever little residuals coming in from, from royalties, which are, as far as I know, legal, at least that's what the Senior Hearing Officer told me. As long as it's stuff that was done before I came here or came back to California, um, then, um, I, you know, it's just not a lot of money and, and it's a, it's a small amount of money. I'm able to support myself. I'm able to make donations to, um, to, uh, an Institute in the name of Gary Hinman. Um, and that was part of what, when Mr. Grounds said, you find a nexus between what you're doing with your work and, um, and emphasize that nexus between what you're doing with your work and, uh, and, and your relationship with the victim, uh, Gary Hinman. And so, that's what I do. I, I, I make donations, I've earmarked certain royalties to go to, to go to this institute. I've, uh, Gary was a musician too, um, and I made donations to the William James association, uh, and benefit to music programs in prison because I think that's extremely valuable. I have changed my life. I have changed the trajectory of my life by investing all of my energies in my work, in my art and music and sharing it with the world. I think it's an asset. I think it's a positive thing. I, you know, this is a, it seems to be like this, um, uh, you know, this has been, this come up, it has been dealt with, it has been, now it's come up again. Exactly the same thing. I mean—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Okay. All right. I know, I'm not, I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying there, okay? I'm not disagreeing at all. I appreciate you saying you're bushwhack. That was not this panel’s doing, uh, for sure. I was actually amazed when Commissioner Reardon told me about that this morning. I did not know there was a pending RVR. Uh, next question, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Thank you. I'd like to still continue with this Facebook page. Uh, can the panel please ask the inmate if he responds to comments on the Facebook page about Facebook posts made on the Facebook page?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Um, so I think we kind of covered that, but I guess there's more specifics so if there's a comment, what do you, do you see the Facebook page? Are you able to go to your Facebook page and see it?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I receive printouts. When people make comments, I get a printout of the, screenshot of the page.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And if there’s a, if there is a, a comment made that I feel I need to respond to for whatever reason, uh, if it's just to thank somebody for their interest or, um, you know, I, I have responded to a couple of trolls, uh, before deleting their there, you know, I, I delete the trolls, um, or I request to Beth that she—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —delete the trolls because I don't want that. Um, um, but other than that, yeah, I, I do make a few comments and thank people for their interest and, you know, they ask me if I'm okay, I say I'm okay.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Yes, Ms. Lebowitz, next question.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Can the panel please ask the inmate if he responded to comments about the post, about his interview with the Rolling Stone Magazine, with Legs McNeil and Gillian?


DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Yeah. Legs McNeil and Gillian McCain.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I don't, I don’t know anything about the Rolling Stone interview. What's the Rolling Stone Interview, uh, Mr. Beausoleil?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, that was an interview with a couple of authors. And I, um, I don't recall making any comment on a Facebook page in relation.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Ms. Lebowitz, can you give us some context?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I may have but I just don’t recall.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Can you give us some context or offer of, of what it is we're supposed to get out of this? Cause this is to help us clarify things—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Uh, she's going somewhere.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Yeah. See, the problem is I think that you don't have access to the internet and these things weren't provided to you. I didn't provide you with screenshots of this stuff because, A, I thought you had internet access, but B, the whole, it wouldn't make any sense out of context, but in this particular situation that I'm, these, uh, questions that I'm asking, there was a Facebook page, strike that, there was a Facebook post on Bobby Beausoleil’s Facebook page on August 21st, 2019, announcing his interview in Rolling Stone Magazine with people who he interviewed with Legs McCain, I'm sorry, Legs, L-E-G-S, McNeil, and Gillian McCain, who were interviewing him about the oral history of Charles Manson. And there were comments made about this announcement, you know, it was made on the Facebook page about this, uh, Rolling Stones Interview that I think is being made into a movie actually. And so, um, people commented about it and, and my offer of proof is that the inmate commented that these people who were posting wouldn’t be disappointed with the interview. And the interview is about Charles Manson and, and his history with Charles Manson. So, what I'm trying to get at is that he has more interaction with his Facebook page than he's really letting on to you, Commissioners.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, that would be helpful if you just ask the Commissioner to ask him, did you interview with Rolling Stone Magazine about, about Charlie Manson? That, that, that would seem like what you're trying to get out, right?

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Well that, yes, but I got stuck on the Facebook page, but I have other, I have other, um—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, but I'm curious now about this Rolling Stone Interview. What, what does that put up again, sir?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Are you talking to me?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah. Yes, please. Yes, Mr. Beausoleil, the, the Rolling Stone Interview, did it occur on, was there an interview on August 21st of 2019?

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: That was the Facebook page.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: There was an interview with the authors of a book that I was interviewed for, and it's not a book on the, on the, you know, on Charles Manson necessarily. It's a book on the, uh, West Coast Music Scene from the early sixties until the late sixties, which includes some of the stories in, in relation to what happened with Manson. Um, I was interviewed for that, but the, the interviews go way back to when I was involved in San Francisco, in the music scene, uh, early years in Los Angeles, while, you know, I had, which had nothing to do with Manson, and I did make some comments in relation to, uh, what, um, what I knew of him back in those days for that book. There was no, um, there was, there was no financial incentive in relation to that. Um, so I, I mean, it's just, you know, uh, asking, answering questions that they asked me about, um, about that music scene, about the music scene in, in, on the West Coast of San Diego, Los Angeles—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: And, and when, when, when was that?



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, the, um, years ago, I, I did some interviews while I was in Oregon with them. So—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Why, and why would Ms. Lebowitz mention August 21st of 2019? I'm confused then.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I, I'm confused too, because I don't really see the relevance of this, you know, but I, I'm trying to be forthcoming and, you know, um, she's saying that I made a comment to, in relation to, um, uh, the book and the comment if I heard her correctly was that, um, I don't remember making it, but she said that I said, uh, you won't be disappointed in the interview, uh, or the book, uh, or something. I'm not sure. I, so I, if she says I said that, I guess I did. I’m not sure—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Well, what would you, what would you mean by that? I mean, I mean, what would you mean by that?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, the authors that are doing this oral history are very good authors and I expect it to be very good. And I think if somebody is really wanting to know what happened in the sixties, I think they're going to be very interested in that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I see that's that, that's that prurient interest piece that I'm talking about, where people are fascinated with the whole Manson thing and, and you, you say you weren't part of it or not part of it, yet you are, yet you are, uh, you have relevant, relevant information, I guess that people want to hear from you about.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Just to be sure, I’ve, I've actually seen these, these interviews, those authors are very well respected. They've done a number of oral histories related to music scenes. There's a very famous one called Please Kill Me. It's about the punk rock scene in the seventies and eighties that I think is the film that, that, that there was a discussion of cause that's been, there's been a discussion about making that book into a film for year. So, this is a, a reputable, these are reputable journalists who are interviewing Mr. Beausoleil out of the totality of the sixties, and then, in other people too, it's an oral history style book where they're interviewing dozens of different figures and taking pieces and putting them together from everything from the music scene, uh, to, you know, Altman, to the Manson family, all of the things that were significant in the, the sixties are covered in this and, and Mr. Beausoleil’s interview is very broad taking over the course of multiple sessions, uh, over time and, and I looked at these, I've seen the interviews. They took place predominantly I, I believe maybe entirely six years ago or something like that. Um, it's, it’s a work in progress that these authors have been dealing with for a long, long time. So, uh, you know, for, for what that's worth, if there was an announcement in Rolling Stone about it, that's just probably because of the book is nearing completion or something.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Well, the issue is not the interview per se. The issue is the discussion about it on the Facebook page that is approved by the inmate, Bobby Beausoleil and the discussion about, uh, I can't help but wonder what they'd say about Charles Watson, who was one of the main perpetrators of the crime.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: So, so once again, Ms. Lebowitz, Mr. Campbell, I appreciate those arguments, but these are clarifying questions. We ask them questions to help us, if you want to argue during your closing, the relevance or the no, not, the non-relevance of a Rolling Stone interview. We'll listen to it, but this isn't that time.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Well, I, I would just say that I, I, and I, I absolutely agree with you, uh, Commissioner Reardon, but I also think that it's, uh, rather unfair to have this, uh, something that I have no familiarity with being brought up at this last minute by Ms. Lebowitz when there was plenty of time for her to submit this to the panel and, uh, submit it to me, submit it to Mr. Beausoleil, and then to just bring it up at the last minute, I think is inappropriate. So, I would object to any reference to it whatsoever.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Well, in a perfect world, it would have been better to have before 10 days before the hearing so we can all have it, but she didn't so let's try to just stick to the clarifying questions so we can, um, those, those arguments can be addressed as far as relevance of, of, of Mr. Beausoleil’s answers during your closing.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: That's fine. Mr. Beausoleil, I'm looking at your visitor in history and in August of, August 28th of 2019, August 27, 2019, Mr. Eric Hedegaard, a news reporter came and visited you, and these are approved visits, uh, by CDCR I'm guessing. What, what was the topic there?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, he was doing a profile on me. An article.




INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It was published in Rolling Stone, in a magazine article.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Maybe that's closer. Maybe that's closer to what is being talked about right now than anything else. I don't know. Okay.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yeah, it probably is. I think I, I'm not, at the questions that are coming to me, that you're feeling to me from Ms. Lebowitz seemed to be, um, uh, you know, strange potshots at me or something that are hard to respond to, you know, and so—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I, I understand. Well, she is, she is an Attorney and that's kind of what she does, uh—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And that’s (inaudible)—


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: —she's, she's a prosecutor and she's, and I feel like I'm being prosecuted. Uh, so let me be clear. I am out front out of context of trying to promote my music or whatever. I do respond to an appropriate line of questioning from authors and writers, because I feel like I owe that. I owe that to Gary. I owe it to the people who were hurt by this, by my crime and by people that I was involved with and to the extent that I can bring some illumination to that, uh, and own in public what I did, you know, to a man, um, who was, you know, frankly, a better man than I was at that time. You know, I took a man's life who, uh—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. I understand that. That'll be something you, you can tell us at you're closing too. I think Mr. Reardon is doing a good job trying to keep, uh, this Commissioner on course.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I am forthcoming. I am forthcoming outside of the, uh—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I understand. Okay. All right. Let, let's, let's go up, Ms. Lebowitz, I'm going to take a break at about 11:30, so I will see if, uh, and she hasn't finished her questions about any of the way I'm just going to, I'm letting you know I'm breaking at 11:30. Go ahead. Next question, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Can the panel please ask the inmate if he approves all of the content of his YouTube channel?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. So, apparently, you have a YouTube channel also, correct, uh, Mr. Beausoleil?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, yeah. I, I don't have anything to do with it, but yeah, there is, there is one and, uh, there, there are more than one. I don't, uh, I don't have control of what goes up on YouTube sometimes, but there is a channel that has my name on it. Um, and if, if Ms. Lebowitz is talking about that channel, then I'm aware of what's on there.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: What am, I, I guess, I guess, do you, do you see any of this? I mean, so if you were a family of the victim, do you see any of this as hurtful in a way, or do you see this just as how you're expressing your artistic endeavors?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I don't see how it could be hurtful, but you, it, you know, I, I can't say how someone may experience it, but I can say that I'm being very careful, uh, to honor in everything that I do to honor the memory of Gary Hinman. I'm not, you know, at all cavalier. You know, Gary is not just somebody I killed. You know, he was a good man, he was a friend, which, you know, adds to, adds to my shame, uh, you know, and has added to my shame, um, for having killed him. You know, I just felt, so I feel like my, my work, um, devoting my work, devoting myself to, to creative, uh, work, devoting my life to that and promoting it with other people, promoting it by, by, by what I mean is, what I mean by that is, um, promoting it to other inmates who are trying to find a way out of our own darkness. You know, I've been encouraged all the way down the line from a lot of staff, uh, and a lot of people on the outside to pursue my work in the arts. And now suddenly it's a liability. You know, two days before my hearing, one day before my hearing, actually for me, the day before my hearing, um, the day of my hearing, I find out that I’ve got an RVR, based on that. So—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. So, all right. All right. All right. I got it. Uh, what else, Mr. Beausoleil is going to surprise me? Do you have a, uh, are you involved in Pinterest or, uh, Snapchat or any of the other amazing social media platforms that are out there that I may not be aware of that she's going to surprise me with next? No, just face, Facebook, YouTube and, and the regular internet, correct? Okay. Next question, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Can the panel please ask the inmate who approves his content on his webpage, the Internet Movie Database in his name?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, here you go. IMDB. Internet Movie Database. Is there, give a page on that or something?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yes. Yeah, there is a page devoted to me. I don't have control of that. Um, I, I've read it though and it, it seems to be pretty accurate.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Why do you have a, why do you have a page on that?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Uh, Ms. Lebowitz is bringing in things that we've had no opportunity to prepare for. It's a crowd source page like Wikipedia that no one has specific control over. I mean—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. All right. I'll tell you what, we're going to take a break cause it's 11:30 and, uh, take about a 10-minute break and then we'll come back and we'll, uh, get Ms. Lebowitz’s questions answered, I hope.



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We’re, we are on the record, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Time is 11:51 AM. Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Thank you. Could the panel please ask the inmate how much he got paid for the use of his music in the Netflix documentary about Lady Gaga’s life.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: How much did you make off that, sir?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I'm not seeing you, uh, Mr. Schneider, by the way. Um, uh, I made, I don't recall how much, uh, the fee was. It goes through an agency called rumble fish where, um, that, you know, distributes, um, uh, licenses, um, you know, when music was published, it went automatically to rumble fish and so I think it was, I think about $1,100 for that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Could I be so bold as to ask what, do you know how much is in your account? Your private account that’s being managed?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I don’t really, I haven't checked lately. I think it's two or 3000 maybe.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: You know, of royalties.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I think that's important because clearly people are going to start thinking that you're, you’re getting millions of dollars in there. Um…

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, no, um, I, um, I've been saving it and that's the only reason why there's that much really. I've been saving it because of the possibility of a parole and so, uh, instead of usually I, I, uh, I make donations in Gary's name to that institute, that Buddhist Hospice Institute. And, um, and so, but I've stopped doing that temporarily because I thought I might need it to get my feet on the ground.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Makes sense. All right. Next question, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Could the panel please ask the inmate how much money he was paid for his voice contribution to the TV movie, Manson: The Lost Tapes, in 2018.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: That echo’s back. We should pause. I’m going to pause for a bit, I’m going to get that figured out, Commissioner.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We're back on the record. We seem to got our feedback issue resolved for now.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. 11:54. The question was, uh, on 2018, what, what, I forgot what the question was. It was, it was again about cash.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Voice contribution to the TV movie, Manson: The Lost Tapes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Yeah. How much do you make money on that, sir? What was, what was your role in that?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I was interviewed for, uh, they used a couple of comments in relation to the Gary Hinman crime, uh, in which I owned what I did. Um, I was not paid for that. I have done interviews. I, I don't receive money for interviews. I don't ask for it and I don't want, you know, um, I feel that if somebody is, uh, offering you money to interview you, that, um, you know, they're trying to exploit somebody. So, I, I just, from an ethical standpoint, I don't do that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Very good. Next question, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Can the panel please ask the inmate how the inmate was Viola Bonaldi, B-O-N-A- L-D-I, materialized for the Italian magazine Salmuria, S- A-L-M-U-R-I-A.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: What is the question, I'm sorry, about these magazines?

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: How did the, how did the interview materialize for an Italian magazine?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Have you seen that, those, those Italian magazines and you're, did you get interviewed for those magazines, sir?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, it's an online magazine so I haven't really seen it online. I have seen a printout of the interview. I get an interview via correspondence. The article itself says, so, uh, that it was an exchange of, of written correspondence between myself and the author.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: You know, what's, what are the articles, what are the articles about?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: It's, it’s about my life, my art and my music. Most of the interviews that I do are about that, you know, that topic. That’s, it was not a Manson, you know, related thing. Um, there's usually something mentioned that I, I was associated in the past, but, um, people really, in my case, maybe in other peoples, in my experience, most people really aren't interested in that part of things.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: So, why, why, why would the author feel the need to put that in there then in these, in these articles?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Because, because, uh, some people are going to say that there was an oversight if you don't include the fact that I'm in prison, that I was associated with Manson. Um, so I, I don't mind if it's done that way, um, uh, you know, to get that part out of the way, but the topics of the interviews are typically about my work, my philosophy, my heart, um, my music, uh, and my process in terms of creating that stuff.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. Next question.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Can the panel please ask the inmate, how was the interview for the Russian magazine Mintin, M-I-N-T-I-N, materialized?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Do you have a bunch of these, Ms. Lebowitz—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: At some point, we got to know what it is you're trying to accomplish here, what you’re clarifying for us. If you're telling us that Mr. Beausoleil interviewed with 20 magazines and talked about Manson, I get that, but I'm not understanding what it is were you trying to clarify for us at this point.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Well, I'm trying to clarify that his interviews do talk about Manson despite his protestations that he doesn't. And I was trying to establish a financial space because of his parole plans, which I'll talk about in my interview and my, um, closing statement.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: First of all, Ms. Lebowitz hasn't provided any information this, these interviews have been about Manson, nor has she provided any information that he had, he's receiving any financial compensation for this and he said he hasn't. And again, this is constant barrage of, of information, which I have not been provided any advance notice of. I'm familiar with these interviews, but I, and I don't have them in front of me and I can't, uh, address them because Ms. Lebowitz didn't adhere to the 10- day rule and submit this in advance.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. I’ll, I'll just ask her to include those in her closing statements if she has, uh, presumptions about them and that's, that would be the place because, uh, the panel is aware of, uh, not aware of these magazine articles, but we're, uh, aware of his, uh, social media presence and you've made us aware of other, uh, interviews he's, he's conducted. Even though he didn't get paid, it's clear that something titled Manson: The Lost Tapes. I mean, that's the title of it, but that's okay. He did not get paid for it and he states he explained his role in the murder of Mr. Hinman. And again, this was information that the panel doesn't necessarily have. So, uh, can we, can we move topics? They're not clarifying anything for the panel, uh, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: I have no further questions.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Campbell.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Good. Thank you. Um… So, um, regarding, so previously, you mentioned, uh, wanting to honor Gary's legacy, uh, and you also mentioned, um, using your music to do so. What, so since that came up in the hearing in 2017, what have you done that you believe has, has resulted in honoring his legacy through your art?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, well, one is to establish a relationship with, uh, the hospices to the Buddhist Hospice Institute, um, and to, um, make some donations in his name. Um, uh, and I've, you know, I've written a song recently, but really, uh, Gary informs everything I do. You know, um, I owe Gary a great debt. Um, as I said, he was a friend and, and having killed a friend is a horrible thing to have to live with. Um, Gary took up residence in my conscience at that time when I killed him and he's never left and it was, it was extremely painful, but I've learned to process it through creative work and in, in my, um, in my mind, what I'm doing in doubling down on my work and, and putting, I’m, I’m trying to bring some gifts to the world that he's not here to bring. I deprived the world or whatever gifts that he would have brought in the fullness of his life so I feel like I need to really, um, be a lot more prolific than it would be maybe otherwise if it was just me and, and I didn't have that debt. Uh, I just feel like, um, I want to honor him in my work and, and in my speech and, uh, when I talk to people about the events that happened, uh, you know, the events from 50 years ago, um, to, to be, to honor him and to own what I did without, um, without trying to, um, you know, be cavalier or, or pretend that it's not something extremely, um, deep in my life. And so, uh, recently I wrote a song. I, or actually, I completed a song, uh, that is in his honor and it's, um, I've, uh, submitted a copy of it to you, uh, Jason and, uh, and asked that you send a copy of it to, um, to the panel. Uh, and that, now, this is not my closing remarks so I'll, I'll hold off on, uh, more of that, but, you know, that is, those are some of the ways that I do my best to honor him and I, and it's really across the board. It's how I relate to other people. It's being in hospice and, uh, you know, being a peer visitor in hospice and being there for men who are dying, um, and in a way that I was not there for Gary. You know, it's, it’s, I feel like I have an obligation to, to be present for other people and, and I do that in all of my relationships. I have, I think because of that long- lasting relationship of, you know, I have friendships that have survived decades and decades. And so that's, I, I tried to honor Gary's memory in everything that I do. He's, he's with me. He's not somebody that is just someone in my past. This is, this is an ongoing kind of relationship.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And do you feel, um, that your practice of Buddhism creates a, some sort of like bridge to, uh, the man whose life you took in 1969?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Oh, yeah, absolutely. You know, at the time, uh, when he adopted Buddhism, he, he, he’d, uh, it, it just been two or three months since he adopted Buddhism before his death. And I didn't really know that much about it at the time. I thought it was kind of weird. Uh, you know, there, a lot of things were, this is the sixties, there was Hari Christians and Buddhists and different things that were, you know, sort of hippie cookie kind of things and, um, uh, so I didn't really give it the value that I should have, but he was really onto something and, um, you know, the tradition, the teachings of the tradition, um, have been a profound influence in my life and it, there is a nexus, uh, through that tradition between Gary and myself for that reason.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, it hasn't, uh, I know at the last hearing you read a letter, uh, an open letter to Mr. Hinman's family. Um, we haven't really discussed it. Uh, the, the, the panel has said they have your, your prior letters, but is there anything you wish to say today, uh, to, um, add to the, the remorse that you previously expressed?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, to Gary's family?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, yes. Yeah, there is. I, in fact, um, I would like to even, you know, to address Debra Tate as well. Is she with us? Is she participating?


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Um, yeah, I, I would like to, uh, you know, your, your objections notwithstanding, um, you know, you're protecting my, my legal rights and, and your comments are, are what they are and, and I agree with you from that standpoint, but I, as I told you, going at this hearing, I disagree with you as far as the involvement of, uh, Debra, uh, and, and Ms. Martley, um, because they are people who have been injured and been hurt by the events that happened in ‘69. And I feel a debt to them. I feel an obligation and I feel sympathy. Um, you know, I, I had nothing to do with, with, uh, Debra Tate's sister being murdered. Uh, I would not have had anything to do with that under any circumstances. Um, I saw an interview with Ms. Tate in which she said she, or was said that she was 14 years old when that murder happened and I, I think about that and, um, how devastating that must have been for Ms. Tate to have lost a sister to such a horrible crime, um, at that age to be a child and have to deal with that. Um, and then on top of that, for Ms. Tate, due to the, the public fascination with, you know, a beautiful starlet having been murdered, um, and the way that Sharon Tate has been exploited all these years and never been allowed the dignity of being remembered for who she truly was, you know, as a beautiful, vibrant human being, that's a tragedy. And, uh, you know, if I put myself in Debra Tate's place and how would I feel about things, um, I think, I, I think I would feel going back to 51 years and when that, all that happened, I was, if I was 14 years old, I would want everybody just a burn in hell for that, you know, to, you know, I, it would be really, really hard to, to recover from such a horrible trauma. I've known some trauma in my life and so I feel, I feel, um, compassion, um, for Ms. Tate and I, I, I pray for her healing.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, to Ms. Martley, I, I, I wanted you to address Ms. Martley. Now—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: But, sir, you're addressing the, the panel, but, you know, I…

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yeah, no, I want to make some comments in relation to Ms. Martley and, and her being the cousin of Gary—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Is that his closing statement or is that, is that something you’re trying to clarify for us?

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Yeah. If there's something quick that you want to say, but there's no need to, I just wanted to give you the opportunity if there was something you wanted to say beyond what was said in your previous letters, just because it hadn't come up yet. So that was my—

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. I’m just trying to answer the question, Mr. Reardon. I am not trying to make a closing statement now, but, um, this is a topic that I think is important so, um, I'm probably being more verbose than I need to be.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. Well, we'll, you can come back to it in your closing. Um, another thing, uh, you know, we've, you submitted a new, uh, uh, relapse prevention plan. Uh, what, what does your relapse prevention, and what does your current relapse prevention plan entail, and how do you anticipate that you will navigate, uh, the, the, if you're out, you'll navigate the world in which, you know, now marijuana is legal, it's prevalent. Um, how will you, uh, avoid any potential temptation, uh, should you have that temptation, uh, when, when you're outside?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, I will have a 12-step sponsor. Uh, I will be continuing in the 12 step program, even though I don't really, um, uh, I can't relate entirely to all of the steps in the way that, that might've been intended, uh, by the, by the founders. Um, certain things don't apply in my case because I've, I've never been physiologically addicted to anything, but I did have a psychological addiction to marijuana. If I feel an attraction, I'm going to talk to my sponsor. Uh, I will be going to meetings because I like the fellowship. I like being around people who are working on themselves, uh, and addressing their own needs and I want to be a support to them. Um, but that is primarily how, um, I will, if I feel, you know, a sudden urge, which I don't really anticipate because it's around me all the time now, and, you know, on a fairly regular basis, and I have no, no attraction whatsoever to, um, to wanting to, you know, go back to it. I, I like who I am. The best triad I know of is, is just being who I am in a natural way.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Now, um, obviously Governor Newsome referenced, uh, a line from the, uh, your last, um, your last, uh, psych evaluation relating to the use of marijuana and you said in your relapse prevention plan that you, you recognize the validity of his concerns, um, his concern was how some marijuana, you know, played into your getting wrapped up in this, this awful situation with awful people. Um, how, how do you want to elaborate on that?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, maybe a little bit. Um, uh, I don't think that Mr., uh, that Governor Newsome knew that Dr. Levin was talking about marijuana. I think that's a, there's a good possibility he didn't. And so, he, Mr. Levin was talking about substance abuse in a very general way, which, you know, brings in a sort of typical view of what a prisoner, uh, or someone who's committed a crime where drugs was related. You know, certainly, marijuana was a part of my lifestyle back in the day, uh, back in the sixties and it was Gary's too and, uh, and that was, uh, uh, something that, you know, was, was part of our relationship. Um, I recognize that so I do, and I did say in my response, in the relapse prevention plan that I do recognize, um, uh, Governor Newsome's concern, uh, and I do recognize the concern of Dr. Levin, if he's looking at it in a way that my saying that, uh, I feel very strongly that, um, uh, I had no attraction to the substance anymore that, uh, you know, he, he may thought, he may have thought I was being cavalier and I think maybe that's where that, that statement that Mr., that Governor Newsome relied on and had come from. But I do recognize that, um, that was part of my lifestyle, smoking marijuana, being with people who did as part of my lifestyle. So that is something I had, um, removed from my life and will do anything I need to do to keep that distance.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And when you say it as part of your lifestyle, do you mean it fed into, and it was part of this sort of more general, um, antisocial kind of behavior that you were involved in at the time?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, yeah, it was part of the, uh, you know, the so-called counterculture, the, uh youth movement, and I, and I had picked it up in that being involved in that, um, for lack of a better word, I, although I hate the term hippie, the hippie culture. Um, so yes, it was part of that. Gary was part of that, uh, Charlie and his people were part of it, uh, the Straight Satans were part of it, a lot of people that I knew at that time were, you know, smoking marijuana and, uh, so that was, it was part of that, of that lifestyle and I had been smoking it since I was about 16. So, um, and didn't really think that much of it at the time, I didn't smoke that much, but, um, I didn't think it was a big deal at the time, but now, I'm very conscious of the fact that, um, I don't want to recreate that kind of environment around me. Um, so, um, I'm going to be extremely defensive when it comes to, uh, having anyone around who's using, excuse me, who's using anything.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: When was the last time you felt, uh, an urge or compulsion to use marijuana?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, I've never felt the compulsion to use it. Uh, we're having echoes again. Whatever, whatever, just dinged, I think something happened.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: All right. Can you go again?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: All right. I guess I'm not, I didn't hear what it was—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: It, it seems to be gone now.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Good. All right. Um, so I've never had a compulsion to use anything. Uh—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Well, I mean not necessarily composure. When's the last time you felt the desire?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Um, after I gave it up, I gave it up in, uh, 1999. Um, um, after I gave it up, I, you know, monitored myself very carefully and, you know, I would feel, uh, a mild attraction when I would smell it, somebody else would have it around me or offer me some, but that went away very quickly. I just, um, you know, if it's something that I had been physiologically addicted to, I'm sure it would have been different, but that's just not the kind of relationship, uh, that I had with it. Once I realized that my, my work didn't suffer, uh, from not smoking it, uh, basically just done, you know.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Well, I think it's safe to say that after, you know, 50 plus years in prison, when you get out, you're going to deal with new forms of stress you haven't, uh, you haven't felt in a long time. What methods do you have at your disposal to cope with that type of stress that you might feel when you get out?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, let me just say that I'm living in an environment that's very stressful. And I meditate, um, I do yoga, I do Tai Chi, um, I keep myself in a physical centered, um, place and a mental centered place by using those practices. I go to 12 step, uh, with COVID-19, uh, that's been shut down for the time being, but I go to 12-step, um, uh, meetings and, um, I get a lot of, um, um, a lot of reinforcement from being around people who don't use. And, uh, so I intend to surround myself with people that don't use it.


INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Including people that (inaudible).

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, something I touched on earlier, but I'd like to just make sure that we discuss it a little bit. Um, back in, let me find my paper. Back, uh, about a year ago in 2019, about a year ago in 2019, did you learn that there was a gallery that was taking place in Los Angeles, uh, related to the Manson family?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And had they previously, uh, had they previously contacted you about using any of your pieces of art or, or, uh, or something, uh, related to your music in it?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, one of the persons who was going to contribute some work had a couple of originals of mine, and he said he would, he was thinking about putting them in the show, um, and I wrote him back immediately. I asked him, please don't have put my work in anything related to, uh, those people in any, any sort of pandering. I don't do pandering to that, um, to that group of people who are interested in, um, you know, the Manson thing, it's just not, it’s not what my work is about. It's not what I'm about. And so, um, uh, I wrote to them and, and I asked you, uh, to, uh, to write to them and ask them to please not, um, put any of my work in the show.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And, and I wrote a, a letter that you approved, uh, that said the exhibition you were promoting appears to be in bad chase, glorifying the legacy of Manson and the murders associated with him and Mr. Beausoleil, uh, goes to great lengths to disassociate his artwork from the heinous crimes of the Manson family and you approved of that cease and desist letter that I sent.



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: And I, I received a response from the curator and, uh, they apologized, um, for having put up the work without asking me, uh, and they told me, they assured me that it would not be, I would not be represented in the show.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And, um, okay. I just wanted to make sure that we covered that. Um… Is your, the music that you've created, uh, in recent years, does it have any relationship to, uh, Charles Manson or to, uh, anything of that nature?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And have you, what are, what are some of the subject matter, um, like for instance, uh, the, the recording Dancing Hearts Of Fire, what did you, uh, what did you what's that about?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, that is, uh, a long music composition, uh, that I composed for my wife after she passed away, um, in 2012, uh, it was, uh, uh, I did, I was having a real, real hard time, um, after she, uh, after she died. She died of an aneurysm and, uh, was gone so quick. I didn't even get a chance to say goodbye and, uh, and so I, uh, I had been working with her on a, um, on a, she was, she's a, she was a dance instructor and led a dance troupe, uh, in American primal dance style, which a folk art style and, uh, she wanted me to compose music for, um, uh, a piece that she was going to choreograph and so, uh, I composed some drum patterns, uh, tribal like drum patterns and when she died—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. Bobby, just, I don't think we need to go into absolute depth. I just wanted to make clear that, that piece was about your, it was a tribute to your, your ex-wife or your, your, your late wife. Um—


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And you've also done music that's purpose is to provide a sonic background for meditation. Is that sure?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Yes. There's, uh, a recording called mantra, which is a meditation CD. It's actually one of my, my best, my, uh, most popular pieces.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. And, um, and so nothing in your, in your music hearkens back to, uh, the, the, the commitment offense or, or anything that you did other than perhaps, you know, the sense of atonement, but nothing in terms of glorifying that, right?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No. Not at all. The only thing he is, uh, and it's not glorifying anything, but the song that I wrote, uh, or that I completed recently, uh, have, having to do with people who have died in my life, which would include Gary, um, and, and, and dedicating this song to him. That's the only thing that, anything that has had, of anything I've recorded, that it has any relation whatsoever to, um, to those events back in ’69.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: You, when's the last time you formally released a new piece of music?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, 2015 before I was transferred.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And you had recorded and released no music since that time?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Okay. And, um, likewise, with you're an art, when was the last time you created a new piece of artwork for sale?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Uh, at same time, 2015. Might have been 2014 cause I didn't, I didn't do anything last year, uh, that I can recall. I have done some new art that, uh, is up on the gallery side, but it's not monetized. Um, and that's, you know, work that is work that I've done since I've been back to since I've been here at CMF. Um, but it's, like I said, it's, it's displayed, but it's not monetized.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, in terms of your, your post release plans, uh, you have a new halfway house called D&J that, that we didn't submit before that you looked into on your own initiative. Uh, and why was that that you sought that out?

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Well, when I was granted a parole date, uh, in my last hearing, there was an objection to me going back to Los Angeles. Uh, I think it was a mistake. I'm not positive about that, but it, it came through, I think Ms. Lebowitz, uh, said something about it. So, um, so I sought a second, uh, halfway house, uh, in another County, Santa Barbara County where I was, I was born and raised.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Um, it might be all I have. Oh, one thing I did want to touch on that was, was brought up before, before the commitment offense, uh, you had, you were beginning to achieve a degree of success with your music, uh, would you say?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Uh, you were — sorry. Go on.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: ‘69 was a bad time for up and coming musicians. You know, it was a good time for some that had already landed contracts, but it was a difficult time.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And you were in a band called — I'm sorry.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: You were in a band called the Grassroots, right?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And that later came a very successful band called Love?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: So, you, you were associating with some, some well-recognized and, and serious musicians at the time?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And your, your music has continued to resonate with people throughout the world, through, through the decades, right?



INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: There was a, I recorded a, additional recordings with a band that I put together called The Orchestra in San Francisco, um, which was an instrumental, um, an electric instrumental band using unusual instruments. And that's become really, um, is next to Lucifer Rising is the most popular recording, um, that I have out there published. That, that was I, that was in San Francisco, that was in 1966 and ‘67.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: And that work has remained in publication also just like Lucifer Rising since it was created?


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I, I don't have any further questions right now.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you. Then we'll move to closing statements. Uh, let's do our best to keep it at 10 minutes, please. And then whenever you're ready, Ms. Lebowitz.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Thank you. Thank you. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office opposes on finding of suitability for this inmate. One of the reasons, uh, that the Governor cited in his letter requesting reversal was that the inmate lacked insight into his underlying motives for committing such extraordinary violence. I'd like to direct the panel to some of the areas that highlight and illustrate the inmate’s lack of insight. Number one, the inmate’s stated reason about his need for acceptance by the Straight Satans is intertwined with his present day need for acceptance. And that is shown on all of his social media websites. The inmate lacks insight into his consistent, repeated and constant references to the association with Charles Manson, but is affiliated with all of his visual art and all of his musical art projects and sales. Despite his denials and protestations, he uses this association with Manson as a marketing tool, ultimately profiting off the murder. He fails to understand that he does it, and he disputes that he does it. Now, I did not provide screenshots to the panel because it was impossible for the panel to understand the magnitude of the inmate’s method of inner spurring his music with the story of Charles Manson. Some of the questions that I asked about were directly gotten from the inmate’s website,, who he told the panel, he monitors it, approves it, writes comments about it. And he told the panel that he doesn't pander to what he calls the Manson thing, which is disrespectful in and of itself. And he only cited a portion of what he spoke about on his website, because the various—

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I have to interject, your honor, there’s, this isn't anything that's been covered in this hearing whatsoever. There's no reference to this on that website, she's arguing about things that don't exist and pretending that that was in front of the panel and it's just not.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Let her continue, sir. It’s her closing statement.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: It’s not evidence. It's argument.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Because it’s an improper statement, cause she's, she's arguing about this (inaudible).

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: That’s fine. I’m, I'm going to let her continue and you can argue that, uh, later. Go ahead, ma’am.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: The very first link on is a link to his biography. And it talks about, it, it refers the reader to read, read the essay that the panel talked about, Manifesto of An Artist in Prison. And it also talks about his association with Charles Manson. Beausoleil met aspiring singer song writer, Charles Manson, beginning a sporadic association over the next year and a half. Beausoleil, like Dennis Wilson, drummer in the Beachboys and others involved in the Los Angeles music scene saw Manson a unique raw music talent. He agreed to help Manson record some demo tapes, showcasing Manson’s songs. In unrelated circumstances, Beausoleil became caught up in events that led to the murder of another friend and associate of Manson and his communal following, some of whom were involved in the murder. When he speaks of the crime at all, Beausoleil describes it as a tragedy that arose out of desperate paranoia and a series of bumbling misjudgments. Beausoleil was arrested for the crime and sitting in jail when Manson and his members of his commune committed the infamous murders of the group would be, would become known for greatly exacerbating the conditions of Beausoleil’s confinement over the subsequent decades. And then it talks about how he spent time on death row. And this is the very first link on his Bobby Beausoleil website that also provides links to all of the sites that will provide his music for profit. The Anja offensive,, rumble fish, It is all intertwined. He also invites the readers to visit his Facebook page where his Facebook page talks about and has several posts about items that are related to Charles Manson. Now, on the Facebook page, on the side, on the right, on the right- hand side, there is a window. And the window—

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: Hold on. We lost somebody, Commissioner. I think we lost Mr. Campion.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Is entitled related pages. And it provides links to books, written about the murders at the Tate residence and the LaBianca residence and websites dedicated to the posts about the murders and other Manson family members. So, all of this is intertwined whether or not the inmate admits or refuses to admit he is using the Manson story and the murders, the story of the murders to profit by selling his music and art. Shaputis, S-H-A-P-U-T-I-S, one and two dictate that if despite years of rehabilitative programming, the inmate still lacks insight into the offense, this constitutes some evidence that he is still a threat to public safety. The inmate also says that he is aware of what's on the YouTube page. And the YouTube page also contains a biography about the inmate that talks about his associations with Charles Manson. And I can't, I can't even count the number of times the inmate has said I don't pander to the “Manson thing,” but all of this in effect panders to what he calls disrespectfully, the Manson thing. One of the posts on the, uh, Facebook page. ”We need to get this out of the way right off the bat. Bobby Beausoleil was an associate of Charles Manson and he murdered Gary Hinman, a crime for which he was sentenced to death.” How is that not pandering to the Manson association? On the YouTube channel. Kenneth, for the biography, Kenneth — strike that. Robert Kenneth Beausoleil is an American murderer who was given the death sentence for killing his friend, Gary Hinman, a fellow associate of Charles Manson and members of his communal family on July 27th, 1969 and then it goes on. Almost every link that you click on, on every website associated with this inmate that he claims to know about, approve, respond to, has references to Charles Manson and his association. And by doing that, he is using that as a marketing method to make a profit. Even if his association wasn't mentioned, the inmate includes photos of himself making music, making music in prison. This is 2020. Google is a powerful tool. Siri is a powerful tool. Alexa is a powerful tool. People are going to look. A common expression that we learned in law school, you can't un- ring the bell. The inmate is running a business from prison. He's selling his story. He tells you that he's not receiving any money from these interviews, but he is acting as a consultant. He is getting paid indirectly by his associations with his art and music that he sells. It's all related. You cannot separate that. He gave an interview for a TV movie, Manson: The Lost Tapes. Another voice contribution, Charles Manson: The Final Words. And all of his interviews that he gives. And I actually, I would invite the panel to ask for an investigation into all of this. It's not uncommon for the panel to ask, to continue a hearing and to ask for an investigation, because if the panel does not have access to the internet and cannot see it for themselves, then maybe the investigators can provide screenshots in a way that the panel can understand how this is all interrelated. One interview, maybe not a business, one voiceover, maybe not a business, but you will see on all of his social media posts, his IMDB page about all of the recent works that he has done, all intertwined and dispersed, interspersed with his music and his art. Now, this isn't really only about the, the violation of the rules of operating a business from prison. It also shows lack of insight into the harm that it causes to Gary Hinman’s family and his family is not just Kaye Hinman-Martley that appears at this hearing. The inmate doesn't see his participation in these media projects as harmful to the victim's family. He sees it as sharing his story and he tells the panel that the Dharma requires him to share his talents. But is that working? In the last hearing, Deputy Commissioner James Andres talked about on page 79 and 80—

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Can you get to your final thoughts, Ms. Lebowitz?

DISTRICT ATTORNEY LEBOWITZ: Yes. The inmate’s, well, there's many things that, that link the inmate to a nexus to current dangerousness, including his implausible denial. As a whole, I think the inmate lacks insight and the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office opposes of finding suitability at this time.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Campbell, your closing statement, sir.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Thank you. First of all, uh, Ms. Lebowitz’s, uh, references to various social media sites, et cetera, I have no bearing on the inter — I mean, she's, uh, grabbing onto that her own interpretation that any mere mention of Charles Manson is some exploitive reference to it and that's simply not true. It would be absurd to think that Mr. Beausoleil can present himself in the world as, as, as, uh, as Ms. Lebowitz pointed out, anyone can Google his name, anyone can find this information about him. He can't go forward and, and expect someone to interview him and are expected to, to, to, you know, put himself out there and not have to address this issue. It's the biggest thing in his life and he's tried as long as he can, as hard as he can to distance himself from it by making music and art that is prosocial, it's a beneficial thing, it’s advantageous not only to him, but to the people who love him, to the people who, who derive enjoyment from his music, for the people who admire his quest to, to continue to express himself, despite the circumstances he's find, he's found himself in. And that's, there's nothing wrong with that. That's not exploiting. He's, he made some meager amount of money off of this by any measure, if, if he were to get out and this was his, his soul, I mean, he has, I, I want to point out that he does have very good, uh, job opportunities if he's released. But if he expected to live off of this meager amount that he gets from a few paintings that have been sold over the years and a, and a few, uh, pieces of music, he couldn't do it. The point is he has a broad, a broad, um, range of skills. This is one of them, and this is part of his, this is, this is part of his road, it’s part of his rehabilitation and it's unfair to use this against him now. It doesn't have anything to do with whether he's currently dangerous. That's, that's the, the point that’s been missed from all of this discussion today is why, why is it that he, that him making positive music and putting it into the world, how does that make him dangerous? It doesn't. He is not a dangerous man. He should have been released decades ago. If you look at the, the panel pointed out, Dr. Levin’s psych evaluation was very positive overall. And even before that, the, the 2000, uh, the, the 2015, 2013 one. Um, says that, uh, that he, his, the individual exam today is controlled, remorseful, consistently productive, altruistic individual who has been identified by the Oregon Department of Corrections as a force of good in our community. That's a quote. As a results of violence risk assessments iterated above indicate, he poses essentially no risk for violent or general recidivism now or in the foreseeable future. And now, and this goes on back. There's a similar comment in the 2008, uh, evaluation back in, in 2000, 20 years ago, the results of today's exam are consistent with other findings in recent years, indicating that the maladaptive personality characteristics, which predisposed subject to commission of the sentencing offense are now in remission. He does therefore pose no substantial threat to the safety and welfare of the community as long as he continues to pursue a productive lifestyle and maintain total sole, sole absence from any psychoactive substances. And these, these go back, these same, uh, comments, go back all the way to, to, to the eighties where they're saying he's not a danger. first thing, as long as he's productive. If you take away his art, you take away his music, you make it more dangerous. He was brought back to California on false pretenses. It's been, it was infuriating to me then, it's infuriating to me now because he had family there and he had the ability to, to do, uh, music and art and he had the ability to do things that were positive. He was working with the, the, the Oregon, um, Corrections, uh, Corrections Department to make these videos that were designed to help, uh, help children of inmates out in the public. He's used his, his, his talents for good for the last 50 years. And it's, and, and yet they're being thrown in his face as if he's doing something wrong. And this, this is who he is. He's an artist and that's what he, he's doing and he's trying to promote his, the, the positive aspects of who he is through his art and music and, and that's been recognized by, psychiatrists has been recognized by, uh, by, um, employees of like Randy, since you mentioned, uh, Randy Geer's, uh, series of letters that he, that he, um, uh, presented to, uh, he’s always, you know, uh, filed in support. I mean, it's, it’s extraordinary. You know, and now we're looking at a situation where Mr. Beausoleil, 73 years old, he said he has high blood pressure, he's potentially a high risk, uh, candidate for COVID-19, you know, he's, he's, in prison. He should have been released. I mean, the, the, the matrix, I think, uh, under pursuant to the matrix should have been really, you know, 17 years is the base, uh, the base sentence. He's had positive evaluations and no history of violence since he's been in prison. This, you know, all these other things is, there, these constantly being tracked, there's constantly trying to trip him up with something related to business, which is pennies essentially. I mean, this is, this is a meager amount of money. He's simply, these are old items that have been in production, the Tracy Prison, he was given permission to create Lucifer Rising that's been the most popular piece of music. It's, that film is taught in film schools. The soundtrack is universally acclaimed as being a powerful piece of music set to a powerful piece of film. It's an art film. Um, there's, there's no, uh, there is no doubt that Mr. Beausoleil has genuine talent and that there are people in this world who appreciate him for his talent, irrespective of his relationship, uh, his former relationship with Mr. Manson, that was 51 years ago. You know, the, the, the, the idea, and, and even as Ms. Lebowitz pointed out to the extent he's giving interviews that touch on the, the history of the Manson family. This is again, part of who he is. Anyone who wants to talk about him is going to have to reckon with that. He has to reckon with it, and he's not, he's not, uh, shirking responsibility, he’s not being disrespectful. Obviously, we all understand that it, it could be difficult for members of the family when something like this comes up and they encounter it. Uh, you know, perhaps it brings up emotions, but, you know, members of his family are sitting here, Mr. Hinman's family are sitting here right now, you know, voluntarily, uh, subjecting themselves to this. I, I don't think there's anything, there's been nothing disrespectful about anything that Ms. Leebowitz has pointed out in terms of trying, showing disrespect to Mr. Hinman or his family, if anything, it's quite the opposite. Mr. Beausoleil has only speak about Mr. Hinman in uniformly positive terms, only speaks about his role in this, uh, in this awful crime is, is a moment of shame as, as an act of, of cowardice and an act of, of, uh, selfish violence. And, you know, he's gone, in terms of his insight, he's repeatedly discussed the way, just like any, he's like a member of a gang, trying to impress other gang members, which we all see, you know, that's a common garden variety situation someone gets himself in. Mr. Beausoleil was 21, the youth offender, uh, uh, uh, youth offender, um, protocol requires that we look at that and we think about what's the 21-year-old mind, who's he trying to impress, who is important to a 21 year old, and you have a biker gang, and you have these, uh, you, you have someone, another musician who's older, Charles Manson was, and Charles Manson, whether, whatever we think about him now was receiving attention from, from other musicians. You know, Dennis Wilson of the Beachboys was, was a, a hanger on at all times. Neil young was, was associated with Charles Manson. This isn't someone who was a, you know, he's, he's ridiculed now because of what happened. But at the time, there were legitimate people in the music scene, flocking to, to Charles Manson and Bobby Beausoleil was substantially younger than Charles Manson and looked up to him and this, that’s, and these are the factors that led to this awful situation where Mr. Beausoleil took another man's life and he's been paying for it for 51 years. He's not dangerous anymore. That's the, that's the core inquiry here, is he dangerous? And he is, he's simply not, you know, and he has the, I mean, this is how long it's been. These are, these are letters from his, his, uh, um, his step grandkids who in 1983, 1981, they were writing letters for him. They're adults now. This is from like, uh, 10 years ago, or so. I mean, that's him with his, his step grandkids who still write letters of support for him. They still, these aren't even his biological children. These are people whose lives he's touched like tremendously while he's been in prison and when he was brought back to California and taken away from Oregon, he was stripped of the opportunity to maintain these, these relationships, at least in as much as he can't see them in person anymore, you know, that was, that was stripped from him and even though the, you know, there was no justification for it. You know, he has all the attributes of someone who will not only be able to succeed if he's released but will actually benefit other people. As it's, as I said, he's altruistic. He's been donating time to, to, to helping people in hospice, he’s donated money to the, the Metta Institute. He's donated money to the, the prison program in a, in a prison, um, which is a positive thing for many inmates, not just him. I mean, this is something that if he leaves, the, the, the, the, the, the, you know, he's left something behind for other inmates. I mean, this is, this is, it's, it's categorically, uh, just absolutely unfair to treat his, his passion for music and art as something that would make him dangerous. That's what makes him positive. That's what makes him a good man now. That's what makes him no longer dangerous. And I, I, I really urge the board to do, uh, to, to follow the footsteps of what the, the previous panel did when they found that that Mr. Beausoleil is not dangerous. And again, um, I know it's, it's all the more important right now with, you know, the, the situation that's happening in, in San Quentin and the, the pandemic that we find ourselves under the habits of sitting in our homes and doing this, this, uh, hearing from our homes. I mean, it's all the more reason to really look at this man and say, is he honestly dangerous? And there's, I just don't believe there's any other conclusions you can come to other than it, a resounding no. He’s absolutely not. And, um, and that's all I have to say.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you, sir. Mr. Beausoleil, closing statement.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Um, I want to, um, I wanted to say to Ms. Martley that I am deeply sorry.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: You have to address us directly, Mr. Beausoleil.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I wanted to say, uh, through the panel, uh, that, uh, um, though I can't direct it to her directly, uh, I do want Ms. Martley to know that I am deeply sorry for having taken her cousin from her. Um, I, I, I, to be honest, I don't really know, um, anything about Gary, Gary's family, other than his sister and his daughter who wrote to me, um, and I have given you letters that I've written to the Hinman family so that you can kind of see, um, how I have approached, um, making, trying to make amends to the extent that it might, that it may be possible with the Hinman family. I was assured, uh, in 2016 that a copy of the letter that I wrote for the panel, I think it was 2016 or 2017, uh, when I wrote a letter and read it into the record, um, uh, that a copy of it would get to Ms. Martley. Um, I, uh, I, I just wish I could, I could do more, uh, in relation to, um, making up for the, the loss to, to the Hinman family. The best thing that I was able to come up with throughout my incarceration early on was to find a way to re-channel who I am, who, how I express myself in the world and do it in a way that I think honors Gary. He was a creative person. He was a, a musician. He taught piano. Uh, he played piano for the dance group at, um, at UCLA. Uh, his daughter, um, uh, Anna wrote to me. I don't know that she's actually, uh, his daughter, to be honest, and I have to accept at face value, just like I have to have said that Ms. Martley is his cousin at face value and, and respond accordingly that this, that these people are legitimate. I don't, I have really no choice. I want to believe that they are, because I don't want to have what I say be in vain. You know, I really want them to kind of understand that my efforts in regards to expressing myself creatively are inspired by Gary to a considerable extent, to, to honor his, his life by, by allowing my gifts expressed in the world to be representative of him as well. I, I try to bring him into everything that I do without exploiting him. I don't want to exploit the crime so I have to, you know, it's like everything else in my life, it's a fine balance that I have to strike, uh, to try to be honest about my past and at the same time, uh, have it not, you know, be something that someone thinks I'm trying to profit off the Manson name. Um, I assure you nobody really, um, would buy anything from me on the basis of that in any case. I'm very familiar with that fact. It's just, um, when, when I had, um, when I was released to San Quentin in 19, uh, late 1972 from death row, I was still acting in ways that, um, that were in alignment with what I was doing on the outside, looking up to other people, trying to impress them, trying to be accepted, uh, in this fraternity of tough guys. And, uh, I got into a situation defending a friend who was, was threatened and, um, I wound up in the infirmary with a broken hand, uh, a broken jaw, I have broken five places. My cheek bone was broken, uh, had to wear an eyepatch for six months, cause I was seeing double, uh, due to the cheekbones (inaudible). Um, and, uh, I gave myself a good talking to. I realized that if I kept going down that path, that destructive path of, uh, trying to find acceptance among people who are, um, dangerous and, uh, and going nowhere, um, and not worth my attention, that I would wind up where they're going and I would be either dead or buried, so far in the system I'd never see daylight. So, I made a commitment. I made a promise, that promise I put in that manifesto, uh, uh, piece that I wrote. Um, I made a vow that I would devote my life to creative expression, to the arts, I would be, I would devote my life to being an artist, um, and forgo all attention to anything destructive and violent. I have lived by that credo ever since. I've been encouraged by psychologists, by staff, by counselors, by employers, in all the work that I've done, including the publishing. Now, when, when Mr. Reese, the warden, approved me to do that soundtrack, his exact words were exact words. Uh, his name was Robert Reese. He, they called him the bear. Uh, and, and when I pitched my idea to him, his, his exact words were, I'm not going to stand in the way of a guy who wants to make a buck. That's not what I was in it for. I was doing it because I wanted to do a story about redemption and music and that's what that song, that piece of music is about. That's why it resonates with so many people. You know, it starts in a dark place, but it ends up hopeful and, and uplifting, you know, uh, it's, it's, uh, you know, um, it's, it's a long instrumental piece so I can't give you any lyrics, but it, um, it was about redemption. I was using that piece of music to find a path for me out of darkness. And I've been doing that ever since. And now, it's like, you know, the day of my hearing, it's a liability. I was commended for it my last hearing. I was commended for it in the hearing before, even though it was then again, another pending write up just like, like this. So, I don't know what to say to that. I don't know what kind of thing that's, I, you know, I, I kind of understand it, but, um, you know. If distinguishing myself as something other than Manson, distinguishing myself through my work and learning how to make a living with it and learning how to support other causes that I believe in, learning how to honor Gary Hinman through it is something wrong, then I, I just don't get it. You know, I just don't get it. Um, I hope you can see my sincerity. I hope you can see that the very thing that some people are criticizing me about is in fact, the thing that makes me not dangerous to anyone. Gary, as I said earlier, I, I alluded to, uh, to Gary being, having taken up residence in my conscience. That's a very real thing. I was not, I was not able to really look myself in the mirror for a long time after that. My years on death row were years spent in shame, in shame and utter shame. From the moment, from the moment I stabbed him, I was traumatized beyond belief and shame is when not one of those things that you can, you can do anything with, it's debilitating. You know, you can get insane, insight from shame. Shame is, shame is a, you know, it's a lot like PTSD. A lot of, there's a lot of shame involved with PTSD in most cases. You know, people who have killed people then feel terrible about it, or their, their buddy was killed and in the service and, and they weren't there for them and they couldn't help them, you know, there's, uh, and that kind of it's, there's a trauma there that is something that can do anything about, you can't medicate it away, you can't, you know, psychoanalyze it away because it's, it's, shame is, it's like a wound that's too painful to touch. You can't touch it. You have to wait until you can get past that a little bit, get to the guilt and then be able to bring your intellect to it. So now, um, you know, Gary’s still with me, he's still in my conscience. I don't have the shame anymore. I worked through that. I, through, through my efforts, through bringing a positive force into the world with him in mind, I feel like, um, I have honored him and that I have reinforced, you know, the, the goodness that was in him. He is still an inspiration to me. I found myself in the same once I started studying the Asian traditions, I found myself in the same tradition that he had adopted. And he knew, he knew, he would have known them where I didn't know that delusion is the, is the root of all suffering. To the Buddhist, delusion is, is the underlying component of all violence in the world. He would have understood that. So, at the time, yeah, I was completely diluted. I killed a better man than myself. I, and I knew it right after it happened, but I was so desperate to be free of that situation I put myself into and I did put myself into it, even though things got out of control while I was there and I wound up having to figure out what, what I could do, having the responsibility of a wounded man on my hands and the thing that I should have done and I've known it all along, ever since then, is that I should have taken him to the hospital to get his, his room nursed and, um, and dealt with whatever fallout, whatever consequences. Um, if I was really trying to be a man, that's what I should've done. That is what I should have done. But my sense of responsibility in those days was stunted and, and my empathy was, um, fell short. It's been, um, having to learn to embrace my terrible failure to a good man is the basis of the life that I have lived since. I hope you can see that. You know, I don't want you to take pity on me and okay, we'll give him a parole cause COVID-19, we got all these concerns. I don't want you to do it for that reason. I want you to see that I'm not dangerous. That's what I want. I want you to see that I'm not dangerous because I'm not. I can't, I can't control everything that's out on the internet. I can't control things that people say out there and try to associate with things that I'm doing. I can't control people having objections, uh, and trying to find something, uh, bad about what I'm doing. Um, trying to make it like I'm a rule violator or something, even though I've been told that I wasn't violating the rule very clearly, I would never flagrantly, um, uh, not follow the rules. Why did it take to the day of my hearing for it to become an issue, uh once again? So, please see the nexus between my work, the work that I've put out there in the world, and, and with, with heart, with joy, with intention to live, intention to encourage people to meditate, intention to encourage people to treat one another well. And that was all of the work that I did 21 years in Oregon, you know, making, you know, videos and media productions for the Oregon Department of Corrections was all about uplifting other people and my art and my music were key in all of that, played a huge role as Mr. Geer said in his letter. It's not, I, I don't know how I can make my life at 70th and now that I'm almost 73, how can I make all these years I've invested in being this person, this artist with good intentions and, and bringing, trying to bring beauty and moving through the world that how can I say that now this is something that no longer supports me? I don't, I don't, I don't, I'm not sure what I could do. You know, I, if, if I'm told that it doesn't matter what the right, what the findings were in that write up, I’m told that, and, you know, you have to figure out how to take everything down, I don't know how to do it. You know, it's really hard to unpublish. There's no unpublish button. I've just been as myself in the business operations as much as I possibly could. And, um, you know, sort of monitoring everything to make sure that people are not exploiting, making sure that the person who is doing the job of managing the royalties and so on is doing so in a responsible way and that she's properly compensated, other than that, I have no involvement in it. You know, I, if someone tells me if, if even though I was found not guilty before and the same exact kind of write up happens again, and I get found guilty, what am I going to do? I don't know what I'm going to do. I, I'm, I'm going to follow the rules. I've always followed the rules. There's never been a time when I did not have an authorization to sell and convey my work. When I got here, I no longer had that for new work, but I was told that the previous work that had been authorized for publication was good to go. So, um, I wrote a song, I'm not gonna, I actually brought my guitar. I was, I don't want to impose my mediocre singing voice on you, but, um, I wanted to be prepared for any contingency and what happened I wasn't prepared for it all as it turned out. Um, uh, so I, I, I wrote a song and it's a song and I hope you have a copy of it, and I hope you look at it. It's a song, uh, that I wrote for the dead. And it's, it's for Gary. It’s for, um, it’s for my wife, it’s for all the men I have sat with while they were dying, um, I’m putting myself into their position and their, um, into what I, I perceived they were going through and what that passage was like for them. And I've dedicated that song to Gary Hinman and if I ever get a chance to record it, any proceeds will go to the Metta Institute in his name, um, for that song. Um, have, have I gone over my time, Mr. Schneider?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: You’re muted, Commissioner.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: I can't hear you, sir. You're, you're muted, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: I see that. I generally don't give a, uh, inmates time. I want you to have a complete closing statement, so I didn't give you time. If you felt you said all you wanted to say, that's fine.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. Well, I got my guitar here. If you want to, you'll have to say you want to hear it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: No, no, it's not, it's not necessary, I appreciate that though.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: Okay. All right. I, um, or I could recite the lyrics to you if you're interested, but I did provide a copy of it to you. I provided copies of my artwork so you can see it. You can see on the about page what I, what my expectations are, people who appreciate my work. Um, and my statement on the about page is, you know, please, um, uh, appreciate my work or not on the basis of his merits as, as art. You know, if you want to know, um, about, you know, my past history, you know, the shadows in my past, there are plenty of places where they can read about that. I don't put that kind of thing on that, on the website. And, um, you know, so that's all I can, all I can say about it. I can't say that there isn't some length where there's some mention of Manson somewhere. Um, but it isn't in a context that could be interpreted, um, that, you know, I'm still somehow trading on his name to sell my sell my stuff because, um, you know, in my experience, nobody really cares about him as far as that part of it, nobody wants to appreciate or buy my work because I used to know him. Right? It's just isn't, that there's an assumption on some, on the parts of some people that, uh, that that's what's going on. But, um, I can't help that. All I can do is guard against it as best I can and, um, and be as honorable as I can in all of my dealings with, uh, with other people and follow the rules. I, I thought I was following the rules, sir. I hope you understand that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. All right. Thank you, sir. Uh, I’d like to hear now from the victim’s next of kin. I don’t know, uh, if we, if we have two speakers.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. And, uh, when you begin just to identify yourself and then you may begin.

VICTIM'S COUSIN HINMAN-MARTLEY: Okay. Uh, good day. I am Kaye Hinman-Martley, H-I-N-M-A-N, Martley, M-A- R-T-L-E-Y, and Gary Hinman was my cousin. He was two years older than me. We grew up in the state of Colorado. I would like you to picture who Gary was, a musician, a teacher, and working towards a doctorate in social work, a practicing Buddhist more than a couple of months who was kind and gentle soul. He offered food and lodging to those who were struggling in the music world. He worked, he paid taxes, he owned his home and two owned cars. Gary was brought up in a loving and stable home with a background in a family-owned businesses in ranching and construction and serving in the Colorado legislature. His mother died within a year of Gary's death from heartbreak and the circumstances of his death. Gary's father and mother had to deal with the cleaning and selling of the home. Bobby Beausoleil receives food, clothing, housing, medical care, all at the expense of the tax paying public. He has a Facebook page, several websites to sell music and art from which he receives royalties, all of which he’s been allowed to create in prison. In 2019, Bobby Beausoleil was asked by Commissioner Dobbs if he was currently conducting business, his answer was, I'm not conducting business myself. I receive royalties from my music and art. On one of the website, it says, contact for business matters I find it appalling that the prison system allows inmates to earn large sums of money. Uh, this man was over 21 at the time of Gary’s murder. He had no consistent income or residence and he was able to do this by manipulating people to his needs. Beausoleil chose to enter Gary’s home, calling Gary a friend. He then tortured and beat Gary for three days and then proceeded to stab him to death. He left Gary to literally rot in the summer heat with maggots feeding on his body. The walls of the house had words written on them with Gary's blood. He made Gary sign the sales slips for the two cars. Gary begged for his life, but to no avail. Beausoleil has many of the traits of a psychopath. He is cunning, manipulative, and example is the development of art and music for financial gain, ignoring prison rules, a pathological liar, another example is justifying the murder of Gary because Gary hadn't paid a debt, totally untrue, and that he was only following Manson's instructions. Beausoleil said in 2019 hearing that he was in the process of setting up a foundation in Gary's name with some of the royalties, which to my knowledge has never occurred. Is this a person you want released in the society? He was given the death sentence for the gruesome and heartless murder of Gary Hinman. The sentence was committed to life imprisonment. The goal of imprisonment for murder is for the offender to be incarcerated for the lifetime in punishment for taking a life. This goal would be undermined if the offender would be released. Just because 50 plus years has passed, it does not erase Beausoleil’s crime, nor to my knowledge, to make changes in his personality that committed the crime. Beausoleil keeps talking and keeps denying that he aligned himself with the Manson name. He refers to Manson on many of these websites that are also dark and grim topics. I resent that my validity is in question as a member of the Hinman family. A letter from Gary's sister, Carol Romberg, um, who is now deceased, appointed me as the spokesperson for the Hinman family. And that's on file with the Victim's Assistance, uh, Office. Uh, Gary never had children. I don't know who Mr. Beausoleil is communicating with, but it certainly isn't Gary's daughter. Beausoleil has listed his internet site so that you can link to all his other sites. It's on, on Facebook is the way it, it shows that otherwise, uh, probably people would know that he had a website if that was it on that Facebook page. He uses money to support himself? I thought the prison supported him. If it's not a business, why is the prices on his works? I have never received any money from any interviews. Why doesn't he give all his, um, money put, not put money on any of his work if he wants the public to have them free of charge and no money involved? Who knows the impulses that led Beausoleil to murder Gary won't return once he is exposed to the stresses of society? Are we safe? Can you guarantee that? His reason, his reversal of the death sentence to life sentence is a sentence I feel is fair consequences of his actions. To this day, our family has had to endure the negative notoriety of Bobby Beausoleil and the Manson family. Bobby Beausoleil does not fit the role of a contributing member of society, let alone the safety of our society. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Thank you, ma'am. And, uh, Ms. Tate, when you're ready.



VICTIM'S FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE TATE: How about that? Does that work?





VICTIM'S FAMILY REPRESENTATIVE TATE: Hello, Commissioners. My name is Debra Tate. Uh, my last name is spelled T-A-T-E. I am a family representative for the Hinman family. I am also the sister of slain actress, Sharon Tate. I do a lot of unpaid work with thousands and thousands of people that have been victimized, uh, let's say the second way, the living relative, uh, of, of murder victims and I have talked with Kaye Hinman-Martley as well as other family members, living family members and have discussed into great length some of the points that I'm going to specifically cut to the chase and bring up to you. I also would like to state that I personally, I'm sure we're all very aware, I know exactly the pain that these people feel, and I'm not just talking about victims of the Manson family. I'm talking about living members of, of murder in general. In the case of Bobby Beausoleil, I would like to dismiss or dispel a few of the answers that were made, not only here today, but, uh, in the last parole hearing that are not, um, not reliable. Perhaps his recollection and the facts are a little bit different so for the record, these are things that, that the Hinman family and I go over again and again and again as, and have to question whether or not this man could possibly be considered rehabilitated by a, uh, board, a responsible board or, or even medical participant. Uh, the medical participants have questioned, uh, several things in each of his previous, um, hearings, which were read into public record. You know what they are, I know what they are. Uh, Bobby has a tendency to rationalize or go back and clarify himself, which is very self-serving and is a sign of arrogance. He's also very self-righteous in the fact that he thinks rules don't apply. He's under the very clear impression which we addressed here today that the California prison objecting to him running businesses do not count. They have clearly stated that it does count at this point in time, and that he needs to suspend everything which should include not interfacing with the public, which should include not paying an employee $11 an hour. That's clearly a business transaction. He's rebellious in stating that some of the 12 step programs do not apply to him. It’s, I'm of the opinion that if there are 12 steps, there are 12 steps. You can't pick and choose which ones you are going to, uh, adhere to or dismiss, uh, egotistical. He's thinking that his art is going to support him. Well, he has some interests, but it's a pretty competitive world out here today and he may not be as appreciated as he thinks. Um, uh, he lies to himself and I would like to refer to the 2019, uh, article in Rolling Stone. Um, the, the author of that article, there were clearly two articles, there was some confusion on that. One done by Legs. What's the people’s name — I'm sorry. I wrote it down, now I’m not. Um, the article was released in September of 2019 in Rolling Stone. The author was Eric Haggard. Bobby goes on and on about his Manson involvement. Um, the other, uh, articles work and the book that he quoted are purely on the Manson family, not the music scene, et cetera, et cetera so under that hospice, he's still lying to himself, which ultimately means he has lack of control of himself or lack of insight to himself on multiple levels. I don't know, I personally have a question as does everybody else. If you don't want to be associated with your past publicly, why not just let your art stand on its own and use a (inaudible)? Uh, that would clearly be a way to avoid this problem, because what transpires in this hearing room between your lawyer, the Commissioners, Kaye and myself, is pretty much private. If, if it wasn't made public, that is a way of removing that problem, once again, displaying lack of insight. All of these things, which are rubbed in the Hinman family’s face over and over and over again, as well as — Commissioner, I'm sorry, I'm losing my voice. As well as the number of individuals that signed that ridiculous petition. One, thinking, stating that Gary should die, by the way, that one, they were only going along with what the jury had quoted the, uh, back when Gary was sentenced, it wasn't, anybody stating that they were going to do him harm. These are the amount of people that currently object and are fearful of what might transpire should this man be released into society. This amount of people have put their name on a document to state that they have doubt. These people have read the transcripts of the hearing, the words that come out of Gary's mouth and fell, I'm sorry, Bobby, not hearing — my mistake, strike that from the record. Bobby Beausoleil out himself and have come to their own conclusion. I, myself am a forgiving person if I thought that there was redemption of any kind, I might be inclined to say stuff honestly, but I just have nagging questions and a tremendous amount of doubt that is reflected pieces of public work and the way Gary is still — I'm sorry. Bobby is still conducting business that he even today stated that he doesn't think that the rules apply to him and that the prison is not enforcing for God only knows what reason. I certainly can't come up with that. In other words, gentlemen, we still have lots of questions and lots of doubt and just for the record, sir, I share a birthday with Bobby. He is only five years older than me. I don't harbor any hate or wish anybody to burn in hell. I wish them all to live productive lives within the confines of the prison system, where they can be segregated from society so none of us ever have to have concerns like the ones that the Hinman family and myself and the rest of the Manson victims have every single day of our life. Thank you, sirs.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Thank you very much, Ms. Tate. Uh, the time is now 1:25 PM. We'll recess for deliberation.



DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: We are on the record, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. Today's date is July 1st of 2020. Time now is 2:01 PM. We are resuming the suitability hearing of Mr. Robert Beausoleil. And Mr. Beausoleil, today you'll be denied parole for a period of three years. I will explain. Uh, this panel follows the legal standards must determine inmate continues to pose an unreasonable risk to public safety and a denial of parole should be based on evidence in the record of the inmate’s current dangerousness. You are a youth offender, so the law requires us to give great weight to the mitigating effects, diminished culpability of youth as compared to adults, hallmark features of youth, and any subsequent growth and increased maturity to determine your suitability for parole. You also qualify for elderly parole. We're required to give special consideration to your age, your long-term confinement and your diminished physical condition. Uh, today, sir, we considered your Central File, also The Comprehensive Risk Assessment, the additional documents that were submitted, uh, very recently, uh, not quite during the hearing, but very close and we looked at all of those. Uh, your testimony sir was very valuable as well as the input from your Attorney, uh, and the input from the District Attorney and also the input from the victim's next of kin. Uh, we did not use any confidential information in our, in our denial of parole today. Uh, based on the legal standards and evidence considered, we find you pose an unreasonable risk to public safety and are therefore not suitable for parole. To determine suitability, we look at factors that mitigate risks and we look at factors that aggravate. Uh, who is the mitigating would be decreasing. Aggravating would be increasing. Uh, to your credit, you do have, uh, a good, a good, uh, measure of, uh, uh, data or items on the mitigation side. Your Comprehensive Risk Assessment is a, is a low risk assessment and although it was in 2016, there was no indication that it wouldn't have gotten any higher that time. I mean, low is low and you also have 2013, a low risk. Uh, the programming, um, no, no issues there, you would, that, that, that you have talked about that at length. We've seen that that's been part of your file. Uh, we did not really talk today, but I, I really appreciate the letter from, uh, Jay Hallman, your supervisor who has known you, if you could thank that person for that, um, because that, to me as a Commissioner, that is current. Uh, Mr. Greer, I appreciate his efforts, but this, this is someone currently talking about he's known you for three years, at least I believe in, in the, in the effort that you've put in, uh, for the good, for the good of the institution and I think, I think that, that is, that is, that is very important. Um, your release plan, uh, yes, you have a relapse prevention plan. You've talked about that at length. Uh, I, I, and I appreciate the Governor's concerns regarding, uh, marijuana. That's not this panel is concern, uh, quite frankly, but I think that's important to have, I appreciate the effort to get an additional transitional home, uh, so that, that I, I found that all good and, and, and multiple letters, uh, of support, uh, from family members. We look at the youth offender factors, uh, and it's clear, sir, you're 21 years old at the, at the time of this time and, and even by your own, by the record reflecting as we didn’t pretty much talk about it, but there is ample stuff, uh, ample items on the record, as your Attorney pointed out, uh, you were very immature at the time, the diminished culpability of youth as compared to adults, at the time of the crime, parts of your brain were not fully matured which was lack of impulse control, and ability to plan ahead and ability to avoid risks. Uh, very immature thinking. Um, we look at, uh, the hallmark features of youth, at the time of the crime, you exhibit the hallmark features of youth and incomplete brain development.

ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: I'm sorry. Mr. Schneider, I apologize. I'm having trouble hearing you because you're going a little fast. I was just worried you could slow down just slightly.


ATTORNEY CAMPBELL: Just for the record of it too afterwards, I'm sorry.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: All right. No, it's okay. It's good. That, that is one of my, uh, character defects at times on some of this stuff where I just have to get through it. Um, again, the, the panelists is, is giving, uh, Mr. Beausoleil, great weight. There is no argument with this panel that he has, that he was a youth defendant at the time of this crime and it does lend towards an explanation for much, for much of what occurred, uh, meaning and I was about to state the peer pressure, which, which he found the antisocial peers that he picked out and selected as perhaps role models or people he wanted to impress, i.e. this motorcycle group, uh, and, or, uh, uh, Manson. And, and we see all that. And we saw that really as a driver and even in the risk assessment, I believe he talked about, he was, he was looking for something and he kind of talked about, uh, what he was looking for and, and I see all that, uh, as a youth and, and, and this panel is able to look at that and, and that does provide, uh, somewhat an explanation, it provides an explanation for much of this crime, uh, age alone. Uh, as a youth offender, you are more capable of changing as an adult and your actions as a youth are less likely to be evidenced your (inaudible) character and had you committed them as an adult and (inaudible) increased ability to change. And we have seen this, he was growing growth and increased maturity. Um, your considered reflection is going to tend to think about the reasons for the impact of your actions. Uh, I appreciate it, even though you state yourself, Mr. Beausoleil, you're, you're somewhat verbose, but I, I was listening and, um, for what you had to say, and I thought you made some really good points that show, uh, uh, the subsequent growth, uh, the maturity of judgment, uh, I found the manifesto, um, from this Commissioner's perspective, as a promise to yourself that violence was not going to be part of you ever again. Uh, and I think that, and to me, that, that was important. Um, I enjoyed your conversation, sir, about, uh, the shame you carried for the, uh, murder of the victim and how you had to work through that shame and how you connect and shame up with PTSD and many inmates have PTSD. So that’s clear, you've given that some thought. Um, before this hearing, I, I was questioning about your remorse cause there’s might, things literally throughout the record regarding your remorse, your remorse rather, I do find, I do find that credible. Uh, elderly, parole consideration, uh, we gave you that, I really, I even hear that, hey, don't let me out because of, uh, cause of COVID that, you know, that charity case here, I kind of heard you say, I mean, I appreciate that. It's important to know that yeah, you suffered from arthritis, but you have cognitive abilities and your skills, and they are very much present, and they were on display today. I think that's positive and I think that the long-term incarceration has given you a, a different way to, uh, view where you are. Uh, however, we find that the factors that mitigate your current risk are outweighed by factors that aggravate your current risk, we find this by giving great weight to youth offender factors. However, factors that aggravate your current risk by getting special consideration, your age length of incarceration, diminished physical condition are outweighed by factors that aggravate your current risk. We look at your criminal and parole history. I mean, it, it was some, uh, as far as a kind of petty crimes up to, but this crime here, you, you really is, is a horrible, horrible crime. You're able to, uh, just about check every box you could in the Penal Code, uh, as far as, uh, assault with a gun, assault with a knife, a hostage or ransom who knows, a burglary, a torture, a torture, you even said so yourself that you had just so many chances to walk away, to not do this crime and you recognize that now, uh, however, you, you, you didn't allow yourself to do that or did not do that. Um, we see at the end, it's primarily because of the lack of self-control and the youth one that you had the negative peer pressure, uh, I mean, you had to have, uh, Manson and the other character come over there and, uh, bolster you up and kind of try to get you to man up or something like that and it was just your, I imagine your fear of rejection from them, your need to belong, your need for acceptance, uh, led to this tremendous callousness on a, uh, a man who had never really wronged you and that was kind of, I was hoping I could, I could understand that piece. We didn't go there today and led to this, uh, this, this real criminal attitude with somebody who you look back on now or on, or, and immediately saying that he was a way better man, uh, than you were. Um, the institutional behavior is what, is what, uh, I find, the panel actually finds troubling, and it's not the pending RVR because this hearing was set to go a few weeks back in June, as you recall and I, and I had all the same information, pretty much that I had then that, that was then that I had now. I'm still scratching my head as to why the previous 2019 panel didn't discuss it. But the law to me, uh, is very clear. Uh, and, um, this third level review lays the law out, even though I agree it was about a 602 from a coffee table book that we had talked about, but already espoused the law out and it says that, uh, these usually exactly in accordance with the California Code of Regulations and the Penal Code in not allowing the appellant to actively engage in a business for self-profit. Uh, that, uh, uh, covering the Regulations 3024 states inmates are not actively, engage actively in a business or profession except as authorized by the institution head or as provided in Section 30104 for the purpose of this section, businesses demands any revenue generating or profit making activity. Uh, in addition, uh, let me see, 2600 and 2601, confirming the appellant does not have the right to sell his personal property as he claims. And, and for the life of me, I, I understand the dilemma you feel that you're in, you feel that you were in some kind of catch 22 situation. Um, and this panel did not see it that way. This panel sees this as really a, a, a straight up, full on this is the law, uh, please apply the law to yourself. Um, and this was authored by, uh, J. Dominguez, the appeals examiner, the Office of Appeals, uh, and I guess it was, and, and boom, it was written by (inaudible) too, I don’t know, a couple of them were on their Chief Office of Appeals, and this was dated September 10th of 2018. So that strikes this panel with a lot of clarity, and, and we are somewhat confused by your, I appreciate your forthcoming explanation, uh, this panel really does, but it's, it’s not understanding why we worked out having conversations about somebody trying to thread a needle or thread this needle, or I see blurred lines, I see okay so why are the lines gotta be so blurred that this looks like a pretty, to me, this looks like a pretty, uh, bright line, uh, rule here, and we take into effect all the different, uh, methods of, uh, websites and ACE book and everything else and it is all designed to, um, to further, to further your, uh, to further, to further the sale. Now, I did accuse you of being a profiteer. I, I do resend that comment, uh, because it's not quite a profiteer as much as I had thought since you were very forthcoming with what you think the money’s are, but there's an element of that there. And I also, uh, but, but then you talk about the word altruism and I'd say, ah-ah, that's not happening either. Uh, that I, I didn't see a bunch of altruism going on, quite frankly, sir and I mean for the, to have a, a desire to there's a book I read several years ago called The Hearts of Altruism. Uh, when I think of altruism, that's the book that I look at and read and understand what altruism really is. Uh, many people think they are altruist and they, uh, nah, they're just, uh, they just want their name in the headlines. They just want to be recognized and they want to donate and they want to act like they're, there's something they are for, for various reasons than altruism. Uh, I was also reminded of a different, uh, classical saying, I guess, uh, you can't have your cake and eat it too. And it seemed like a lot of that is going on too. And I think you need to really sit down and, uh, and do a deep dive. Um, as you, as you say, yeah, I'm honoring Gary's legacy, but are you really, or is it your legacy? Who's, who's coming first and, and, and that's kind of the offender change that, that this panel is looking to see, because I, I believe I, I don't want you to not do your music, not do, you're an artist, that's, that's who you are and I think that is an excellent outlet. Uh, this panel just has concerns about how you, um, uh, I'm at a loss for words again, but to that, but how you, a part of that is a bad name, but how, how, how you exercise that, that outlet, what, what the immense talents, uh, that you appear, appear to have. Uh, I need to hear from the Deputy Commissioner now, please.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REARDON: I have nothing further to add, Commissioner. It's a joint decision. I agreed that it's a rather narrow decision that focuses on institutional misconduct, but I concur that for those reasons today, Mr. Beausoleil is unsuitable.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER: Okay. And as I think you, I think you were saying that, that's the Deputy Commissioner, I have talked about how narrow the decision really is, which I think is a positive hearing. We, I think we've gotten beyond a lot of other things that we can get mucked up in and then we, and we went right to this, um, and, and if this is an intricate law, or intricate policy at CDCR, I don't see it that way. Uh, if it is, then I, I think it's important that, uh, that society also has intricate laws. And, and, and the nexus is that you've got to be 100% law abiding, and even follow the spirit of law and not, uh, caught up with your own, uh, interpretation, if you will, of policies and our laws. Uh, based on these findings, we conclude that you pose an unreasonable risk to public safety. Accordingly, the panel finds you unsuitable for parole. Denial is a, a three-year denial as I stated earlier, uh, we consider 15 year denials, 10 year denials as Marsy's law drags us to, but you in no way, uh, qualify or even, even considered denial of that length, uh, because of, uh, the things we previously stated, those factors in mitigation, uh, is a minimum denial length of three years by this panel. Uh, that does mean in effect that, uh, one year from today, uh, uh, you will be subject to administrator review, a paper review if you continue, uh, to be discipline free, uh, continue to program, and continue the good work, uh, getting the chronos that you're getting and just displaying, uh, the good, the good things you do for the institution. I, I would expect you will be back to this within 18 months. I, for some reason that does not happen, uh, feel free to put in a petition to advance. Uh, you can get that from your Correctional Counselor, a form that, uh, you can make a request to come back to the board sooner. Uh, our decision today is not final. It will be reviewed by the board for 120 days. You’ll be notified in writing if there are any changes in this decision. I want to thank everyone who participated in this hearing today. Uh, the time now is 2:17 PM. Thank you.


Parole Denied Three Years