Wednesday, July 7, 2004







In the matter of the Life Term Parole Consideration Hearing of:
CDC Number: W-08314

JULY 7, 2004
3:00 P.M.

AL ANGELE, Presiding Commissioner
BILL KEENAN, Deputy Commissioner

DONALD BARTELL, Attorney for Inmate
STEVEN KAY, Deputy District Attorney
DEBRA TATE, Victim's Next-of-kin
JOHN DESANTIS, Victim's Next-of-kin
LEWIS SMALEINO, Victim's Next-of-kin
ANTHONY DIMORIA, Victim's Next-of-kin
JUNE JONES, Observer
TED KINDEL, Observer


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: This will be a Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing for Patricia Krenwinkel, CDC Number W-08314. Today's date, July 7, 2004, time is approximately 3:00 p.m. located at CIW. Inmate received on April 28th, 1971 from Los Angeles County, charged with murder in the first degree in the case of A, Adam, 23156, that would be counts one through seven, 187 of the Penal Code, single term of life, with a (indiscernible) of 2/16/77. Miss Krenwinkel, before we go any further, this hearing is to be tape-recorded. For the purpose of the Board's identification, each of us give our first and our last name, spelling our last name. When it comes to your turn, after spelling your last name, give us your CDC number. We will first go around the table, then we'll go around the room. I'm Al Angele, A-N-G-E-L-E, Commissioner, Board of Prisoner Terms.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Bill Keenan, K-E-E N-A-N, Deputy Commissioner.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY KAY: Steven Kay, Head Deputy District Attorney of Los Angeles County, K-A-Y.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: Yes, Donald Bartell, Attorney for Miss Krenwinkel, last name is spelled B, as in boy, A-R-T-E-L-L.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Patricia Krenwinkel, K-R-E N-W-I-N-K-E-L, (inaudible).

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Go around the room and if you will please give us your name, spell your last name in a nice, loud voice.

MR. SMALEINO: Lewis Smaleino.


MR. SMALEINO: Nephew to Leno and Rosemary LaBianca.

MS. TATE: Debra Tate, T-A-T-E, sister to Sharon Tate.

MR. DESANTIS: John Desantis, D-E-S-A-N-T-I-S, nephew to Leno and Rosemary LaBianca.

MR. KINDEL: I'm Ted Kindel, with Board of Prison Terms. K-I-N-D-E-L.

MS. JACKSON: Barbara Jackson, J-A-C-K-S-O-N, Secret Service representative of the California Institution for Women.

MS. JONES: June Jones, J-O-N-E-S, psychiatric social worker at CIW.

MR. DIMORIA: Anthony DiMoria, D-I-M-O-R-I-A, nephew of (indiscernible).

MS. BARBERIE: Sally Barberie, B-A-R-B-E-R-I-E, support for Debra Tate.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you. Let the record reflect there is also a correctional officer (indiscernible) purposes who will not be presenting anything at this hearing. Miss Krenwinkel, before we go any further, would you read that paragraph out loud.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: "Prisoner Parole Rights and Self-Identification. The Americans with Disability Act, ADA, is a law to help people with disabilities. Disabilities are problems that make it harder for some people to see, hear, breathe, talk, walk, learn, fake, work, or take care of themselves than it is for others. Nobody can be kept out of public places or activities because of a disability. If you have a disability, you have the right to ask for help to get ready for your BPT hearing, get to the hearing, talk, read forms and papers, and understand the hearing process. BPT will look at what you ask for to make sure you have a disability that is covered by the ADA and that you have asked for the right kind of help. If you do not get help, or if you do not think you got the kind of help you need, ask for BPT 1074 grievance form. You can also get help in filling out the form."

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Do you understand what your rights are under the ABA?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Now, the record reflects that you signed BPT Form 1074 February 26th, 2004, and that's a reasonable accommodation notice and request in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act indicating that you do not -- that you do have a disability as defined under the ADA. That's what the report says. Do you recall that?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: The counselor checked that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: It does indicate (indiscernible) doing your claim that you do not; is that correct? Okay, thank you. Do you have any problems walking up and down stairs or for distances of 100 yards or more?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: You need glasses or (indiscernible) or read documents?




PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: On occasion? Were those glasses available for you when you did your Olson Review?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: And when you read your counseling report and your psychologic evaluation?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: You (inaudible) Triple CMS or UOP programs?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Do you know what they are?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, I do know what they are.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Ever taken any psychotropic medications either in prison or prior to coming to prison?




PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: How far did you get in school on the outside?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I have one semester of college.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. (indiscernible) taken special education classes such as remedial classes?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right. Do you suffer from any disabilities the prevents you from participating in today's hearing?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. This hearing is being conducted pursuant to Penal Code Sections 3041 and 3042 and the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Prison Terms governing Parole Consideration Hearings for life prisoners. Purpose of today's hearing is once again consider your suitability for parole and in doing so, we will consider crimes you are committed for, your prior criminal and social history, and your behavior (indiscernible) since your commitment. You've had the opportunity to read your Central File and prior transcripts and you will have the opportunity to clarify the record. We will consider your progress since your last hearing, your new psychiatric reports, and any other information that (indiscernible) on your suitability for parole. (Indiscernible) parole plans to be brought to our attention. We will reach a decision today and inform you whether or not we find you suitable and the reasons for our decision. If you are found suitable, the length of your confinement will be explained to you. Before we recess for deliberations by the District Attorney, your attorney, yourself and the next of kin will have an opportunity to make a final statement regarding parole suitability and length of confinement. Once that is done, we will recess, clear the room to deliberate. When we have completed our deliberations, we will resume the hearing and announce our decision. California Code of Regulations state that "A life inmate, regardless of time served, shall be found suitable for or denied parole in the opinion of this panel, your realistic goals and (indiscernible) the public safety." You have certain rights, Miss Krenwinkel. You have the right to both a timely notice of this hearing and right to review the Central File and right to (indiscernible), the right to present all the documents. Mr. Bartell, have those rights been met so far?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: In addition to the rights you have, is to have an impartial panel. Any objections to either member of this Panel?



ATTORNEY BARTELL: No objections.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: You will receive a copy of the written tentative decision today. Your decision becomes final within 120 days (indiscernible) transcript. There has been a major change in your ability to appeal the Board of Prison Terms decisions directed to the Board. Are you aware of the change?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Sections 2050 through 2056 have been repealed and you will now find the new rules in the Administrative Policy that's in the prison law library. You are aware of that?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: You will not have to discuss your offense with us, you do not have to admit your offense. However, this Panel will accept as true findings of the court. Any confidential material to be used today, Commissioner Keenan?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right, I am passing the written checklist marked Exhibit One to your attorney. If you would compare your other sheet to your offense sheet in your file.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: Yes, we have all these documents. The only one that I would add is there's a recent chrono that just was, I don't know if it's in the C-File or not, but she just got it on June 8th.


DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY KAY: I'm sure I have everything.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you. Any additional documents (indiscernible)?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Are there any preliminary procedural objections?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Will the inmate be speaking with us today?

ATTORNEY BARTELL: The inmate will be testifying, yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. As best you can, raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you will be giving at this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you. Mr. Bartell, if there is no objection, I'd like to incorporate by reference the Statement of Fact. I'm going to take this from the Board Report which is dated June, 2004, pages one and two.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: Yeah, there are no objections.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Miss Krenwinkel, you are serving multiple life terms for the murders of several individuals. This occurred on August the 9th and August 10th of 1969; is that true?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: For the record, the individuals included Abigail Ann Folger, Wojicieck Frykowski, I'll spell the name, W-O-J-I-C I-N-E-C-K, last name, F-R-Y-K-O-W-S-K-I, Steven Earl Parent, Sharon Marie Polanski, Jay Sebring, that was, occurred 1050 Cielo in Los Angeles, on August the 9th of 1969, two additional break-ins on August the 10th of 1969 at 3131 Whitley Drive in Los Angeles, Leno B. LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca. In reading all the documents, I understand you (indiscernible) person stabbing Abigail Folger; is that true?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Also the person stabbing Mr. LaBianca and Mrs. LaBianca.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: And why did you commit this crime?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Excuse me, you're soft spoken and I'm not sure my tape recorder is getting all of this. You need to speak up.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Where were you on that particular night, (indiscernible) the files to understand what was going on, but I guess the reason why you actually participated?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I participated because Mr. Manson came into a trailer where I was taking care of the children and he told me to come out to come to the ranch. When I came up to the front of the ranch there was a car and Mr. Watson was there and Miss Atkins was there and Miss Kasabian was there and Mr. Manson told me to go with Mr. Watson and do whatever he said.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: As a result you went to the rear of San Vincente Drive, and climbed over the wall.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: After you (indiscernible).

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I was in the bushes with Miss Kasabian and Miss Atkins and we were staying in the bushes where Mr. Watson asked us to stay. He went up the driveway and then we heard the shots.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: What do you think, once you're inside the residence, what do you think started the murders instead of the robbery (indiscernible)? You know that people were asking where the money was and searching the bedroom.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Mr. Watson determined that that's the way the scene would go. He told us that he was there to (indiscernible) in front of everyone. Debra and I were (indiscernible) and a lot of people die, and this is after they had already spoken it, and he said that there was just -- we were looking for money and he had made many statements prior to that particular statement while we were inside the house.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right. That night you were with Tom Watson, Susan Atkins and Linda Kasabian.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: The next night, where did you drive in Los Angeles, you (indiscernible) broke into (indiscernible) Tex Watson and Linda Kasabian, and both Mr. and Mrs. LaBianca were murdered.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Were you also involved in the writing the statements on the walls?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes (inaudible) the walls.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: This is a extremely heinous crime, not even considering the amount of presence received, we're talking about certain people were murdered for practically no reason whatsoever. I just wonder how you feel about this happening.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I don't believe there are any words to say what I have done. I take full responsibility for the death of every person in both those residences. I came on as I was -- I was wanted someone to love me and that's how I got involved with Mr. Manson. From there on (indiscernible) situation that (indiscernible) with continually living with them. I became I got to the point where I didn't feel I could make any decisions. I was so caught up in pressure and the peer pressure is the drugs that we were cause (indiscernible) and living in the situation which was controlled and manipulated and directed by Mr. Manson who's perceived himself as some second coming. That I could clearly go along with everything, with the violence, with the -- with the acts that continued at the ranch that were not anything that I had ever had in my past or was used to. There was from the time I met that man, the introduction of violence, mistreatment of women, the mistreatment of everyone. I just was absolutely a coward. As I became more connected, I did not feel that I could -- I needed to somehow make a change and I kept hoping things would get better. The longer I stayed, the more I kept believing things would somehow get better. Because from the beginning, when I met Mr. Manson, he told me that if I just came with him that, you know, we could have a good time together, basically, like a couple. And from that he continued to have more people in his demands work at them.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Do you ever try to get away or want to get away?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: A couple of times I had left and he came and got me from the place that I had gone. And that's my man, that I had went to his home, he came and got me from that home.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Well, on the day of the murder on Cielo Drive, you and Susan the ones that were alone while Tex Watson first climbed over the wall.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: That's correct.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. Did you have any idea at that point that you wanted to get away and could have gone home? You weren't being held against your will.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I never thought about leaving.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. Between the deaths on August the 9th and August the 10th, did you have any kind of remorse that you didn't want to get involved among some other murders?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: After the -- well, even at the first residence, at that point I felt, I started to feel absolutely anxious and scared and I was filled with -- I just felt sick. I was -- and I was trying to somehow contain the emotions that were all going crazy, but I had no word and I had no way of knowing how to move. I've never -- I couldn't seem to -- I didn't seem to know how to make a decision, an independent decision to be able to move myself out of the confusion and the numbness and the paralysis that I was feeling inside.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Had you been abusing any sort of a controlled substance?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I had been using drugs for many years.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. On the day of the murders, on either the 9th or the 10th of August, had you been under the influence of any sort of controlled substance?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Not that I remember.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Are you responsible for these crimes?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Absolutely. I take full responsibility for being there, for allowing it to happen, for never taking any kind of measure to stop it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right. Your prior criminality shows nothing as a juvenile. Apparently as an adult, on June of 1968 in Ukiah, possession of a dangerous drug and possession of marijuana. Apparently it was dismissed, but I'm intrigued by the statement that it says with a prior. And I don't show any priors on your wrap sheet. Was there a prior arrest to the (indiscernible)?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I don't remember. I don't know.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Then this says possession of dangerous drugs with prior and possession of marijuana. Once again, dismissed. Another one in the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, you had a grand theft auto. That charge apparently was dropped due to your arrest on the murder. Do you recall that?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Now, you were arrested in Mobile, Alabama on December the 5th of 1969, true?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, that's true.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. Then back in Los Angeles you had a grand jury indictment, as a result you were convicted of seven counts of first degree murder and one count of conspiracy, and in April the 19th you were found guilty in all counts. Originally given the death penalty. And as a result of the Supreme Court's decision on death penalty your crime was reverted to life with the possibility of parole (indiscernible) a crime at that particular time. An option. In your personal history, you were born on December the 3, 1947 in Los Angeles, the marriage of Dorothy Huber, H-U-B-E-R, and Joseph Krenwinkel. You had a step-sister, Charleen Lowell, L-O-W-E-L-L, raised primarily in Westchester, California. Parents divorced when they were -- about the age of 15, you lived with your mother through high school, graduating University High School, and then left to Mobile, Alabama with your mother, attended a private college, a Catholic college there, left Mobile and started living with your father, for about five months, along with the step-sister.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: It was just a just my stepsister.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. And you met Mr. Manson and other members of the gang, or the group. You indicate problem with alcohol from age of 14 to 17 and started using Benzedrine and reds, which are barbiturates, whites, LSD on a fairly regular basis. Also used psychedelic drugs, you were talking about LSD.






PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: You don't recall? You indicated you never used heroin, any injectibles at all?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: No injectibles.



PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Your plans upon release. Where do you plan to go?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: What I had done is I had contacted Crossroads Halfway House.




INMATE KRENWINKEL: And they have a house in Pomona and (indiscernible) and I was accepted by Sister Terry Dodge, because I know I (indiscernible) as I am of the need to have (indiscernible).

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: There are a number of letters of support in your file and (indiscernible). First of all, there's a letter signed by Sister Terry Dodge from Crossroads, indicating that there is a place of residence upon your release from prison, they are located in Claremont. A letter here from a Chris Zern, Z-E-R-N, which is a letter of support for your release. She says she does not believe you will commit any further violent crimes. Letter from Kurt Rowlett, R-O-W-L-E-T-T, indicating that you've been in general population and been a model prisoner. A letter from K.F., indicating that they sent a letter that they want to disregard because of typos. Then there's a letter here from Canada, actually British Columbia, this is signed by Kathleen Faith, Ph.D., believes you have been fully rehabilitated. She states you were seduced and brainwashed by Charles Manson, speaks of the time you've been in prison and been a model prisoner, does not believe you are at risk for harming others. Letter from Josephine Ehrlich, E-H-R-L-I-C-H, indicates that you are family to her, when the day comes for you to be released, she'll be there for you whatever assistance you need; for example, shelter, financial help, transportation, et cetera. She will support you through the entire transition. However, she resides in Hayden, H-A-Y-D-E-N, Lake, Idaho. Letter from Carol Roquemore, R-O-Q-U-E-M-O-R-E. This letter that is actually a thank you for the canine support teams in the prison program. Another one of the letters of support, here, for you and I will (indiscernible) in a moment, but I want to go first into some letters that we have that were also received that are in opposition to your parole suitability. The first is a response to a 3042 notice, and that's a notice that goes out to agencies that have a direct interest in your case. This letter is sent in by the Los Angeles Police Department, dated June 17th, 2004, sent by Gray Hall, H-A-L-L, on behalf of William J. Bratton, Chief of Police. This talks about the crime itself, talks about the recommendation that parole be denied, as the department position to adamantly oppose the release of this inmate back into the community. They believe that the inmate should remain segregated from society. There is also a list of 50 letters that have been received from individuals all in opposition to release. They come not only from California, but from some other states. I believe one is from Pennsylvania, at least a couple other states, but they all basically say the same thing, some in long paragraphs, some in short paragraphs, but they believe that you should not be released into the community. Although I don't have a letter in the file from the District Attorney's Office, there's a representative here today from that office who I'm sure will make a statement regarding parole suitability prior to the conclusion of this hearing. But there are some other letters in support that were received today. One is from a Sandra Reeves, R-E-E-V-E-S, this is your cousin, and that once again is a letter of support. She's in San Bernardino. There's a letter from a Mike or Mickie, M-I-C-K-I-E, (indiscernible) in Los Angeles, this is a letter once again supporting your release. I have a letter, here, from Marilyn Montenago, this is from the National Association of Social Workers, this is supporting your release. This is a letter from a Joseph Thomas in Charlotte, North Carolina, a citizen who supports your release. Letter from -- I won't even try the last name. I can't really read it. Etta, A-L-L something, I can't tell. This is from Deep Water, Missouri. It is a letter that supports your release, as is a letter from Dorothy Huber, H-U-B-E-R, which is your mother, and she's in San Bernardino, and I believe she's residing, is she not, with --


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Your cousin. Okay. That should be Sandra Reeves, correct?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, that's correct.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Another one, here, from Kay Kersey, K-E-R-S-E-Y, it's also once again a letter that supports your release. Anything else in regards to parole plans? Have we covered all the letters?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, as far as I know.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. All right, moving on to post-conviction factors, please, Commissioner Keenan.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: All right. Miss Krenwinkel, (indiscernible) placement score of 28 and prior to that, classification score of zero, going back to '88. 9-6 of '88. And focusing on the Board Report prepared for this hearing by R. Aguirre, A-G-U-I-R-R-E, Correctional Counselor I, dated 3-23-04, focusing on his section under Post-Conviction Factors, he notes you were received at CIW on 4-28-71. Since that time, says during the 34 days of confinement she's worked in various job assignments. Worked in culinary, painter, janitorial services, clerk, teacher's aid, hobby craft clerk, recreation clerk, inmate assignment yard worker, and various volunteer assignments. All her work supervisors' reports are exceptional, dating back to her first work evaluation report. "She is very capable, self-motivated worker, she shares a talent with participants by instructing various book binding techniques." A section on self-help in therapy that refers me to the post conviction progress report, and I'll get to that shortly. The section on disciplinary history, noting that you have no disciplinary history, no 115s, no 128(a)'s. Accurate?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay. Section entitled, "Other" indicates schedule for your subsequent hearing on May 23rd '02, you waived your hearing for two years, that was because your previous attorney moved to Nevada and you were concerned about the psychiatric evaluation which you heard earlier. Okay. Section entitled "Assessment," says: "Miss Krenwinkel's institutional adjustment had been excellent. She's remained disciplinary-free since her reception and has utilized her time and talent in a productive manner by helping others while in prison. She has no enemies at CIW, there are no holds or warrants, her excellent institutional adjustment is an indication of a favorable adjustment in the community." Summary section indicates, "In reviewing her archives and C-File, Miss Krenwinkel should be commended for positive behavior." Board Supervisor Report from all supervisors she has received are exemplary. "It appears that during her incarceration she's taken steps to be productive and develop alternatives to cope with her crime. This writer believes the prisoner would probably pose a low degree of threat to the public if released from prison. Prior to release Inmate Krenwinkel could benefit from remaining disciplinary free and continuing to participate in self-help therapy programs." Focusing on the attached post-conviction progress reports he mentions initially your history of being assigned to vocational classes, he goes down a list: mural painter, vocational electronics, hobby craft clerk, vocational data processing, history of clerical positions. Have you completed any vocations?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: The electronic (indiscernible) processing and currently I'm in graphic arts.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Vocational electronics, the data processing, both have been completed.


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Not just a certificate here and there, but the entire program.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yeah, the program that they had at the time.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay. And you're in graphic arts now?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: All right. How far along are you in that?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I just started this week.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay. All right, and there's a section, here, entitled "Academics." Indicates, "None noted this reporting period. Miss Krenwinkel has obtained an Associate of Arts degree in general studies on 3/28/80 from the University of Laverne. Says on 10/6/81 she also obtained a Bachelor of Science majoring in human services." Laverne?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, from Laverne.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: "These degrees were obtained during her incarceration by way of correspondence." Then there are several chronos. One to Voices from Within, "Exceptional, demonstrates considerable diligence, organized and conscientious," and then several more spanning from '01 to '03, with a few from Voices from Within clerk position, indicating exceptional job performance. Hobby craft clerk, four of those, again noting exceptional work. Following page, period '03 through '04, again, hobby craft clerk, again very positive comments there. Another section on group activities, says, member of AA/NA from 8/2/00 to 11/19/03. Women in Anger, attended seven sections from 2/11/01 through 4/1/01. Co-facilitator for Co Dependents Anonymous Twelve-Step study group from 1/24/00 through 5/1/00. Active participant in the African American Women's Business Association, Drug Awareness Counseling and Relapse Prevention Program from 3/2/01 to 10/27/03, and active member in the Bible Studies Group from 8/9/01 through 5/1/03. 1/18/02, Mexican American Resource Association thanks Miss Krenwinkel for working on Adopt A School Project; 1/31/02, Voices From Within, a community- based service program acknowledges Miss Krenwinkel for producing audiotapes to the blind and visually impaired persons in the community. She volunteered 36 hours of her time. 2/9/02, participated in the Victim Services Seminar; 3/6/02 attended two-hour seminar sponsored by Convicted Women Against Abuse, entitled, "Domestic Violence." Also, she has attended Toxic Relationships on 9/23/02; 5/10/03, Prison Puppy Program commends her for dedicating her time in raising and training puppies. Or I guess that would be "a" puppy. She has been an active member from September 2002 to the present and chairperson of the Puppy Program. 10/4/03, Long Termers Organization thanks her for participating in the LTO banquet, which was a great success. And section "Other Prisoner Behavior" indicating: "Miss Krenwinkel's institutional adjustment could be considered exceptional. During the interview she displayed a mature attitude in dealing with the crime. She's considered an excellent student, worker in her assignments. The work reports indicate that she's dependable and she gets along well with staff and peers. One can say that Miss Krenwinkel's prison behavior can be considered above-average and continues to be a role model at California Institution for Women." And also goes on to say: "During the interview on 3/10/04 she appeared to be honest and sincerely accepted responsibility for her involvement in the crimes. Her recent laudatory chronos and certificates of participation demonstrate her commitment to better other inmates and herself." And there are some additional post-conviction progress reports from the hearing you had back in '97. Prior to your denial back in '97, and then from that point up until you had the stipulated denial there's some more post-conviction progress reports. Just scanning through these I see more participation in the Convicted Women Against Abuse, Mexican American Resource Association, thanks to you for the Sharing Our Stitches Program, thanks from Voices From Within, Long Termer's Organization, Sharing Our Stitches again, couple chronos on those, and another chrono thanking you for your participation in Voices From Within Program, commended for dedication to Al-Anon, AA/NA, and CODA, and the notes continue. Participation in AA/NA, CODA, Al-Anon. Is that something you're still doing?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Oh, yes. I'm still participating in AA and NA.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay. And 12/3/97 Miss Krenwinkel completed 12 groups in Dr. Lee's advanced therapy group. Everything (indiscernible) accurate so far?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: And I think I may be missing a chrono. I'm sorry, this isn't the most recent, and it may not be included. This is June 8 of '04, authored by Molika Culverson, AAWPA sponsor, and thanking for your participation in the Drug Awareness Counseling and Relapse Prevention Program which was sponsored by AAWPA and this group: "Women research topic there present will provide worksheets and other raw materials. During the years this program has evolved into a complete participant interaction. Discussions are candid with free participation, the members range from long-term sobriety to women new to the program. Some topics covered include dysfunctional family, addictive relationships, anger, self-esteem, and how each of these areas become triggers if not handled in a candid and truthful manner utilizing the 12-Step Program." Again, "Patricia, I thank you for your contribution to the program. Your honesty helped everyone in keeping it real. Your input was appreciated." This group started December 1 of '03 and will finish June 21, '04. Okay. All right. Anything else to add to that report or any comment on the report?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay, then focusing on the most recent psychiatric evaluation, I think the one that preceded this one was in '97 and this would be the most current. And this was authored by Peter Hu, H-U, staff psychiatrist, dated 3/30/04. In his report he looks at different things. Review of the life crime, current progress while in the institution, including medical information, mental health information, substance abuse, work structure programs, parole plans, mental status of the examination and assessment of dangerousness. I'm not going to read all of this into the record, but couple of things I wanted to comment on them. The review of the life crime. He notes first page, bottom paragraph, "Throughout the description of the crimes that lead to her incarceration, the inmate demonstrated no emotion. Although she acknowledged the fact that she accepted responsibility for endangering the victims' lives and that she was in part responsible for the numerous injuries that the victims incurred, I am unable to detect any remorse or regret expressed by this inmate regarding the crime. The inmate acknowledged that she knew the difference between right and wrong at the time of the commission of the crime; however, she felt overwhelmed and mortified by Mr. Charles Manson such that she felt that she had not committed the crime she would have been killed for refusing Mr. Manson's directive." A section on substance abuse history, indicating that he acknowledged a history of substance abuse and that you have diligently attended AA and NA. And member of Al-Anon, CODA, ACOA. "Inmate demonstrated good grasp of her abstinent skills and demonstrated her vigilance in the prevention of a relapse." On the mental status examination, from what I can tell there was nothing that looked to be a problem. And he indicates under "diagnosis": Axis I and Axis II, no diagnosis. He has a section on assessment of dangerousness and states: "The inmate is a 56-year-old Caucasian female who indicated that she had been brainwashed by Charles Manson and who in essence took over control of her actions. She stated that despite her mortal fear that she would be killed by Mr. Manson, she was still unable to accomplish the instructions he gave her regarding killing the victims. Although she has not demonstrated herself to be dangerous within the past interval, I have some concerns with respect to her ability for parole. She has yet to demonstrate an insight regarding her actions. She has yet to demonstrate remorse or regret for her actions and has not been able to recognize the loss that the victims' families suffered over the years. It is my opinion that she has maintained a habitual pattern of diffusing the intensity and severity of the crime by acknowledging in a subtle manner that it was Mr. Manson who was ultimately responsible for the commission of these crimes. There is no current evidence of cult behavior or predatory type of the like relationships that she had in the past. I do believe that her violence potential outside of controlled setting is less in comparison to the time of the instant offense. I believe her willingness to adhere to the rules and regulations of society and the years of maturity that causes risk factor to decrease." Is there anything that you'd like to say about that report?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay. Turn back to the Chairperson.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you. I wanted to go back over the letters of opposition received; Actually, there's roughly 30 plus a letter from LAPD and we will put them on the record. The letters are from Yvonne Scott, Page Griffin, (indiscernible) -P--P-Y--E, Marilyn Foley, Kenneth, looks like Rust, Donna Mumery, initial S. Moritz, M O-R-I-T-Z, Stewart Morris, Alexander Petrovich, Monica Bradley, William Campbell, Paul Whiteman, Lisa Brennan, can't read the first name, last name looks like Demerchant, D-E-M-E-R C-H-A-N-T, Pamela Richardson, Bob Sebring, Lindsey Eatherage-Keesee, that's E-A-T-H-E-R-A-G-E hyphen K-E-E-S-E-E, and Colleen Hollar, H-O-L-L-A-R. There are initial nine letters that the name has either been partially redacted or I can't read it or I can't read the signatures on all the (indiscernible) in the file (indiscernible) or I can't read. But there are nine other letters of opposition, and those are all in addition to the letter from the Los Angeles Police Department. Any other questions of Commissioner Keenan?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Any questions from the District Attorney?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Any questions of your client?

ATTORNEY BARTELL: Yes. I just wanted to ask about the circumstances of the crime. You indicated that you felt responsible (indiscernible)


ATTORNEY BARTELL: You also indicated to the Board, though, that you felt that you had the circumstances you were living in with Mr. Manson was also something that you were afraid of him; is that right?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Were you living with Mr. Manson at the time that these crimes were committed?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, I was. I lived with him for about two years.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Could I get you to maybe speak a little louder into the microphone?



ATTORNEY BARTELL: I was asking that, you indicated that you understood that you were responsible. I think one of the Board commissioners asked you whether or not you could have left. You never left; is that right?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: That's correct.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: You also indicated that you were afraid of Mr. Manson; is that right?


ATTORNEY BARTELL: And then I asked you during the commission of these crimes, had you been living with Mr. Manson.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, I lived with him for two years.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. And that was in a domestic type of relationship, although somewhat different than maybe the norm?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: And can you just tell the Board what it was that you were afraid of? I mean, what did he -- what fears did he put into you?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: When I had first met Mr. Manson I thought, I guess I was very needy and I wanted someone to help me escape the situation I was in and I wanted him to love me. And so he had led me to believe that there was somehow, (indiscernible) unfair between two of us, and when we started traveling together what began to happen is there was two other women that were involved in this, too. We started to little by little turn anything, anything that I even had to say had no meaning. He began to do things like grab me by the hip. I remember when I laughed at him once and he jerked me by the hair and said, "You won't ever laugh at me again." And then I started watching him beat Mary Breuner, who was with us, and threatening to do that to anyone who ever had a problem with him. And one of the things that he -- I know at times he, when we were out in the woods there was this thing of trust that we had that he wanted to develop this thing of well, you had to have total trust in him. Like standing up against a tree and he threw knives over my head, he threw hatchets over my head into a tree. And if there was any time that you questioned or I questioned anything he had to say, He would in some way humiliate you, degrade me. He at times gave me to other people to use for sex. He treated me in ways that I realize I kept believing somehow that because I felt guilty (indiscernible) little by little I began to feel I was just -- that if I just had to somehow make this work out. I couldn't have been so wrong, because I cut off my family. I had given up everything (indiscernible) with this man. And that's -- and little by little developed into giving up myself and do the drugs and crawling on floor and baaing like a lamb or whatever that day suited. And the constant never knowing exactly what was going to happen, you see. So it constantly changed and constantly changed what was going to -- got into a car with him you'd probably go to 100 miles an hour around a 15-mile curve. And the idea was to let you know that he always had that control. And at first, when I first met him, someone that seemed in control like that, with someone like myself who was needy and sad and felt totally out of control in my life, I felt like somehow he had answers. And I, between the drugs and the violence and my inability to make the correct decisions and to take my own life, get some self-respect back and just leave, I didn't.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Then, you've heard the Commissioner talk about Dr. Hu's psychiatric report where it indicated that somehow you felt that you had not indicated any remorse. You've also seen the previous psych reports, I think, the 1997 one which indicates back as early as 1993 if not longer that you had told other people you had remorse with respect to this matter; is that correct?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: That is correct.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Do you understand that there are many people in this room who have suffered mightily because of what you Did? Is there anything you want to tell them?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: She's not allowed to speak to the next of kin.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Okay, I'm sorry. With respect to that, how do you feel? Do you understand what harm you've caused to them?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Well, I think one of the things that happens with me is that I feel like once -- and I do, when I start feeling things, that I just get so overwhelmed. So I have put a lot of it at a distance so I can deal with it and talk with it, talk about it, because I just constantly am frightened that once I get going that I don't stop. Because it has happened like that. It's -- I don't know how to make what has happened right. And it's like I just keep going around in circles, say well, how do I turn this around? And I cannot. So all I am left with is the absolute abhorrence of what I allowed to take place, what I allowed my own hands to do and what other people set up, what other people have done.

(Thereupon the tape was turned over.)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Back on record, side two.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: And I'll just wrap up with that question. Maybe on something that -- some of your institutional adjustments in here, one of the Commissioners indicated that you had graduated from college; is that right? Was that -- how did you do that? I mean, was that an easy task for you to do? Did you have to go to one college? How did that work?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: The first college class that was brought back to death row by Dr. Carley (indiscernible) letters from Santa Cruz, it started about 1971-72 when Nixon was president. During that time, to complete this education, it continued on through the years, because different programs were brought in and I was also taken off of death row, taken to another unit and then eventually on to the main yard. And as that happened, and as classes where available, I started to take them. And I started to expand the program and different colleges actually came in. Some was correspondence, but most of it was not responding the yard on Chafey and then Laverne and it went all the way through to the '80s when I completed it.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: I don't have any other questions at this time. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: I've got another question. Now that (indiscernible) take some interest in you. You just indicated that you still (indiscernible) well?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Do you have any controls over that at all?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes, I do. I just -- hard to do, is just cry. But I know that that's all I can do. And it seems it is so little. How does that repair anything? How do tears make it better?



PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Is there any one that is most important to you?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Well, my higher power.


INMATE KRENWINKEL: Is Eight a list of all the - people that I've caused harm to? Yes I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: And who is on top of the list?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: Probably myself, first.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: And the last question to you is you indicated that a lot of drugs were being used, is that correct, with the group?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Were you being influenced by the drugs, or by Mr. Manson? Or a combination of both?

INMATE KRENWINKEL: It was a combination, because the acid trips were directed and there was a (indiscernible) and he was -- when you take acid and he would direct them. And we would do whatever he said. Mostly what he wanted us to do was lie down and die because we were supposed to give up our egos so that we would be able to spout back to him his philosophy, his delusions, his craziness.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right. Mr. Kay, does that bring up any other questions you have?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Okay. Mr. Bartell, any other questions of your client?

ATTORNEY BARTELL: No, thank you.


DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY KAY: Yes. I think that Miss Krenwinkel and her attorney Mr. Bartell correctly realize that this probation -- or psychiatric report by Dr. Hu is devastating to Miss Krenwinkel. In this assessment of dangerousness, remember that he's talking about a woman who has been in custody for almost 34 years and he says, "She has no insight regarding her actions." Now, of course, she and her attorney have read this report and they knew that they had to answer it today, so she's a little mellower now and oh, she abhors the murders, but in her conversation with Dr. Hu, it didn't come across. He said he could detect no regret or remorse from her actions and that she didn't recognize the loss that the family members of the victims had suffered over the years. She says one thing in there, which I would like to address. She talks about brainwashing, and yes, she has said that before that Manson brainwashed her, but this idea, this new idea that she's never said before, that she was afraid of Charles Manson is absolutely false. She was very close to Manson, Manson often told other members of the family that Patricia Krenwinkel was a complete reflection of him, that she was more like him than any other member of the family. And had she wanted to go, she could have gone. Obviously, nobody stopped her when she fled after the murder. She fled to Alabama and we had to extradite her from Alabama, but she and Mr. Manson had a very, very close relationship, and I am not aware of any time where he threatened to kill her if she didn't participate in the murders. Now, one sentence that I'm particularly interested in by Dr. Hu, he says, "Although she has not demonstrated herself to be dangerous within the past interval," which I take meaning from her last hearing in 1997 to today, "I have some concerns with respect to her ability for parole." That's a part that jumped out at me. And I think that he used the wrong word, but you can tell in context what he meant. What he should have written is, "I have some concerns with respect to her suitability for parole." He called it "ability," but obviously it's the suitability. And when the staff psychiatrist who interviews her has to prepare a report for all of you to rely on, if he has concerns about her ability or suitability to be released on parole, I think number one, he's made your job a lot easier because not only do you have the horrible facts of the crime, but I don't think anybody in the world is going to find her suitable for parole after reading Dr. Hu's report. And I believe I heard that she said that oh, in the past she's expressed remorse. And one thing I would like to read, if I can, and to show you where she's really coming from, and this was from the psychiatric report, Ford Psychiatric Report by Dr. Francis in 1988, which isn't that many parole hearings ago when you're talking about somebody who's been in custody for 34 years. And I quote from his report: "She described the events of the offense which brought her conviction and accepted somewhat limited responsibility for it. That is, she accepted responsibility for the murder of Abigail Folger, who she directly stabbed. But she did not accept group responsibility for the murder of seven people of which she was a part. In addition, she is somewhat ambivalent about the person of her victims, stating that Miss Folger could have been something more than she was, more than a drug abuser, and that the murder --" and I quote him quoting her, "may have been a tragedy.' This is to say that Miss Krenwinkel is not flooded by remorse for the senseless murders of seven people, rationalizing that there was a heavy drug involvement and therefore a diminished social validity to the lives of these (indiscernible)." That's Patricia Krenwinkel, the real Patricia Krenwinkel. She had no remorse about these murders. After the first night of murders, when she got back to the car, the only thing she could say was complaining about how much her hand hurt from stabbing the victims with her knife and hitting their bones with her hand. She knew that this was going to be a night of murder; yes, she was told what to do what Tex said, but they all knew this was going to be murder. She was armed with a knife from the time she left Spawn Ranch out in Chatsworth for the hour-long drive to the Tate residence. She saw Tex Watson shoot Steven Parent to death before she entered the residence, and she entered the Tate residence armed with a knife. Susan Atkins had a knife, they both went around looking to see who was in the bedroom, and at knifepoint they got Sharon Tate, who was eight-and-a-half months pregnant, and Jay Sebring, who was sitting at the foot of her bed, they got them out and then they got Abigail Folger, who was in bed reading a book, got her out into the living room and Mr. Sebring was not taking kindly to any of this and he was not going to let anything happen to the women, and he resisted and Watson smashed him in the face with a gun and shot him, and then Miss Krenwinkel and Miss Folger fought inside the house. Miss Folger was trying to get away, she finally did and ran out of the back of the house. Miss Krenwinkel followed her with an upraised knife, caught up to her in the front yard, pounced on her and started repeatedly stabbing her, and Miss Folger was stabbed 28 times. Now, not all of those wounds were inflicted by Miss Krenwinkel, because when Miss Folger wasn't dying fast enough, she called Watson over and he finished off the job. Now, when they got back to the ranch, for the whole next day Miss Krenwinkel, Susan Atkins and Leslie Van Houten watched news accounts of the murders. You know, so everybody knew what was happening. She filled in Leslie Van Houten on what happened at the Tate house. When they went out again the next evening, they all knew what was going to be happening. Manson said, well, you were too messy the first night, so he was going to go along and show you how to do it. They drove around for four hours looking at random for people to murder. And all of these seven people are completely innocent victims, many of them literally butchered in the supposed sanctity of their own home. At the Tate house 102 stab wounds were inflicted; at the LaBianca house, 54 stab wounds were inflicted. When they finally got to the -- and one of the places they stopped was the congregational church in South Pasadena and they were looking for the minister, because they wanted to kill him and string him up to the cross in front of the church upside down like St. Peter had been crucified, but fortunately, it was late and the minister was not there. When they finally ended up in front of the LaBianca house, Manson went in first, tied up the LaBiancas, told them that it was only going to be a robbery, that "he" wasn't going to hurt them. Then he came out and got Krenwinkel and Van Houten and Watson, told them not to cause fear and panic like the night before, and not to let the people know that they were going to kill them. Now, when Watson entered the house he had a bayonet; Miss Krenwinkel and Miss Van Houten were unarmed, Miss Krenwinkel immediately went to the kitchen and got a knife for herself and for Leslie Van Houten. They took Mrs. LaBianca to the bedroom, Leslie Van Houten put a pillowcase over her head, tied a lamp cord from the lamp next to the bed around Rosemary's neck and pushed her down on the bed. Rosemary at that time could hear Leno (sic) getting stabbed to death by Watson in the living room, and she had this super human strength that she was able to bound up from the bed, crying out her husband's name, and she grabbed the cord of the lamp, even though she couldn't see, she swung it in the direction of Van Houten, who knocked it out of her hands and wrestled her down to the bed and pinned her down, at which point Patricia Krenwinkel, with her kitchen knife, stabbed Rosemary with such force that the knife blade, which hit her collar bone, bent. And at that point Leslie ran out to the hallway to get Watson, because she knew that he had a more effective weapon, and then Watson and Van Houten finished out the job. Miss Krenwinkel went out to the living room where Leno LaBianca was and she went to the kitchen, got a carving fork and used this carving fork and plunged it into Mr. LaBianca's abdomen seven times, all the way to the bifurcation of the tines. All the way as far as it could go. So that was fourteen puncture wounds. And by the way, those aren't included in the 54 stab wounds that I told you about at the LaBianca residence. Those are classified as puncture wounds. And then with the tines of the fork she carved in Mr. LaBianca's abdomen the word, "war," W-A-R, because that's what this was supposed to be, this was supposed to be murder that was going to start the Black-White race war. These murders were going to be blamed on Blacks and in retaliation the Whites were going to go kill the Blacks and then there would be this big race war. As a matter fact, Manson took Mrs. LaBianca's wallet and had it planted in what he thought was Pecoima, which at that time was predominantly a Black area. Fortunately, his geography was not good and it ended up getting planted in a gas station bathroom in Sylamar (sic) and was not found for a number of months. I don't know if that says much about how often the restroom was cleaned, but fortunately, no Black person found it and used it. When after the stabbing with the carving fork, she took a rag with Mr. LaBianca' blood and wrote the word "Rise" up above the inside of the front door, "Death to Pigs" on the living room wall, and "Helter Skelter" on the refrigerator. These were, in their twisted way of thinking, these were all related to Beatle songs and the White album and the Beatles were the profits, talked about Revelation Nine that were prophesizing Armageddon and they were giving a message to the Blacks to rise up and start the race war. So all those -- those words all had meaning. The "Death to Pigs" didn't mean police officers, Pigs were White middle class people. And "Helter Skelter" was the name of the Beatles song that talked about people who were in the bottom of the side getting back to the top, and the word "Rise" was from a song called "Blackbirds." Blackbirds singing in the dead of night. And both of these murders were in the dead of night. "Take these broken wings and learn to fly, all your life you've been waiting for this moment to arise." And after these vicious murders, Miss Krenwinkel had no problem leaving her messiah, this person that had so much control over her that he was throwing knives over her head and hatchets over her head, she left. She fled. Most of them stayed. She fled to Alabama, Watson fled first to Hawaii, and then to Texas. But any possible thought that she was being held a prisoner here, she was there of her own volition. She took drugs of her own volition. She had relations with all these people of her own volition. Nobody was keeping her a prisoner. Many hippies came in contact with this group, and they heard what Manson was saying and they ran away as fast as they could. Hippies were flower children. They believed in make love, not war. Mr. Manson was talking about how Adolf Hitler was his hero for what he did to the Jews in World War II and how different people in the family should get together and have babies, because he wanted the babies to look a certain way. Anyway, the bottom line is you could use the facts of this heinous, atrocious crime in and of itself to deny her parole for five years, but now you have this devastating psychiatric report from Dr. Hu, and the combination I think just speaks so loudly to the fact that not only should she be found unsuitable, but she should be given a five-year denial. Thank you very much.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Mr. Bartell, closing, please.

ATTORNEY BARTELL: Yes, thank you very much. I guess I'll maybe just start with a couple responses with respect to the prosecutor's comments. I guess I found it odd that he would cite, of all things to cite, in support of a position, a psychiatric report of Dr. Francis, when he said that there has been no indication of prior claims of abuse or anything like that. I thought it was a matter of common knowledge, but if you were simply to read the report from way back then, back in 1988, you would see those actual statements were made just in case anyone's forgotten. And this is just one of them. I mean, I didn't think there was an open question that certainly she's accepted responsibility, she could have run, she could have done a thousand things. But it was, as she said, there was also these concerns that she had. Not that that excuses her, but for example, in reading from page three, she indicates she recoils (sic) it as physical abuse, referring to Manson, of the women who later became part of this family, and also the ideological -- the abuse, the mind games he played. And then, for example, it goes on to say in addition he deprived them of food while he himself went to town where he ate and also (indiscernible) business negotiations. And then later, of course, would finally feed them. In addition, the females were made into sex objects for men that Manson wanted to impress. He goes on: "Miss Krenwinkel states that because she was so starved for love, he was able to make her feel love. She became one of the family and that she was very bound to the Manson family and subjected to all the Manson directions." She states that he used violence against women. So when someone comes here in a serious matter like this and says this is the shock, the first time he heard it and actually is quoting from the actual document where it exists, I think that would give us pause for concern. The -- I would go through the factors that the Board is going to consider and there's no way we can address the crime itself. I mean, it is an enormous injury to lots of people. I mean, the people that died, their relatives, their families, their friends. And so with respect to the determinative suitability, there was that factor to consider. And it is a very, very serious crime. The other factors that are involved in this matter are a previous record of violence, there is none. These are things she -- criterias the Board (indiscernible) for unsuitability. In fact, I hope at least one will puzzle over the problem how would a person who's never been violent before, never been involved in cruel activity per se before, and never even since, in their entire prison history here, had a single 128(a), not a single 115, nothing. But during this two-year period was involved with one person (indiscernible). She's responsible. She could have left, ten thousand different things. But you have to puzzle and say why would a person who's never been violent before or since in that window do these sort of outrageous things. And then -- so, she's demonstrated for a long period of time that she's not the person -- none of us are the same person. I certainly (indiscernible) I was 34 years ago. I was trying to put it in context, and because it's almost a number that's difficult to grasp, to spend that long in anything and prison. And the way I was looking at it, just if you took the start of World War I, 1941, it appeared that times lapse is almost to the Carter Administration, just to the end of President Ford's administration. That is an enormous period of time. And she can never rectify what she's done. There's an unstable social history is a negative factor, but there isn't one really here until she meets with Mr. Manson. She lived in a fairly common family up to 15, her parents were divorced, which isn't an unusual thing. There's no history or (indiscernible) sexual offenses, there's no history of psychological factors. Prisoner's (indiscernible) to severe mental problems. In fact, if you look at Dr. Hu, there's no diagnosis in Axis I, which you know, sort of the normal sort of problems that people experience, or Axis II, which is the more severe problems. None of those. And then there's a factor, the prisoner's engaged in serious misconduct in prison: nothing. So there is a enormous crime that's been committed, and that is a significant factor, and the Board will, of course, have to weigh that. Circumstances tending to show suitability is no juvenile record. Again, no history. It's just this one window in time that ruined so many people's lives that it's difficult to put in context, but she hasn't been that person before or after her dealings with this person. Stable social history: relatively stable. I think that's a positive thing. Signs of remorse: The thing that we're referring to was actually -- it has -- from Miss Krenwinkel's position, I mean, when you do something so wrong and you live with it every day, when people are always asking you about it for now 35 years, almost, in August, it almost looks I mean, what can you say all the time day after day, I mean, how horrible what it was. What I was referring to is that in the '97 report of the psychiatric report, is that this psychiatric report was referring to the '93 stuff from Dr. (indiscernible), and it was pointing out that he did not believe she posed a threat to violence. The doctor was convinced of her remorse and understanding of the crime. I'm just saying it's been something that's been long ongoing. And so for Dr. Hu has never dealt with it before and relatively new to the institution to say somebody doesn't have any remorse, I mean, when it's been demonstrated throughout the time period. Perhaps she wasn't crying about it at the time, but it doesn't mean for a day that she hasn't, you know, felt it and lived it and expressed it and -- to many other people. So the motivation for the crime, there is no good motivation for the crime. I don't think you can (indiscernible) it a positive, although I will say there was some significant stresses in this person's life. This was not a good living arrangement to be in. In fact, the next criteria is the battered women's syndrome. This person was being threatened and abused and treated. Doesn't excuse it, but puts it in some context where someone who's never done something before or something after. The lack of criminal history, I think we went over that. She has no criminal history other than this time period when she did these horrible things. Her age. We're all familiar with the fact that -- and I was trying to think in my -- just in my own history, if I could recall, I don't know -- I mean, the question, here, for the Board is whether or not -- and I know the pressures of this type of case, but is this person such a person that she poses an unreasonable risk to have her released. And I'm sure there are, but I can't think -- I thought of it two ways. I can't think of a 56-year old woman that I know of, off the top of my hand (sic), that's been in prison for any crime and released that's ever reoffended. Just a natural. There are a few cases I can think of what older people have, the women have like number one, have committed a murder. But nobody that's been inside an institution and has been through this process, age does sort of minimize or reduce a violence potential, it's a known fact, and she is a fairly elderly person, now. She has, as best she can, plans for the future. She's upgraded herself vocational, she's got, you know, two different vocations, completed two different vocational programs. She has a place to live in Los Angeles County, you know, if she were to be paroled. Her institutional behavior, I mean, the record, you know, what she can do; in other words, that's something that we can actually document, that we can actually point to and say Okay. Again, it's interesting that the prosecutor talks about the ADA report, because -- and that report, the ultimate conclusion was what? I mean, the question that's before us today -- not only does it talk about the violence that Manson visited upon her right in the report when he's quoting it, but it actually concludes, the report says: "However, at this time 17 years during which she's been incarcerated, there has been a marked evolution in her such that she's a violent criminal only by history and does not pose a threat that her present level of function in this setting, and it is predicted that she would not, if released into the community at this time. Back as far ago as then that she -- and that's the ultimate question. Someone saying that she wouldn't be a violent person. But with respect to the question the Board has to look at institutional behavior, the word that comes to mind, "while the chronos," if you look at the chronos, every single one of the, virtually, unless I overstated, says, extremely organized. Exceptional job performance. Exceptional, exceptional, exceptional, exceptional. I mean, as much as she can do that we can document and point to and say there's no ambiguity about -- again, 4/2/03, exceptional. 7/2/03, exceptional. Exceptional, exceptional, exceptional. She's done AA from the minute she could after she got out of her custody status change, she's been in it and she's been a facilitator helping other people doing it. But every virtual chrono documented that we could proves that objectably has been exceptional. She hasn't had any violations whatsoever. I think the counselor who might know her the best indicates in the most recent counselor report, Miss Krenwenkel's institutionalism has been excellent. She's remained disciplinary-free, she's productive, she has no enemies, there were no holds or wants, her excellent institutional adjustment is an indication of the favorable adjustment in the community, and it goes on to say that this writer believes the prisoner would pose a low degree of threat to the public if released from prison. That's the current Board report. I would say it's been an enormous time period. She's never going to be able to undue what she's done to these people. But if we ask herself the question does she pose an unreasonable risk for society after 34 years in prison and done virtually everything that she can do objectively that we can point to, I would say no. I think she would make a model person on parole. I would ask that the Board consider giving her a date, and if for some reason the Board decided no to -- that to limit the denial to one year. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you. Miss Krenwinkel, it is your turn, now, to tell this Panel why you believe you're suitable for parole and if you would keep your comments directed toward your suitability, please.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I just -- words cannot express the sorrow that I feel in having filled so many lives with unspeakable grief. To each family member and friend who is denied the love, companionship and devotion of those they held so dear, I apologize. With deepest regret by the acts of my own hands, and the cowardice to stay the acts of others, I know I have created unending pain and anguish. I am ashamed. I'm sorry. I am so terribly sorry. I violated the innermost law of my own being: to do no harm. My heart is haunted by the unforgivable events of my past. Let me assure you with this that no morning comes that I do not awaken and remember the death. Steven Parent, Wojicieck Frykowski, Abigail Folger, Sharon Polanski, Jay Sebring, Leno LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca. Each name is etched upon my soul. I have no way to make the morally reprehensible acts which I committed right. I can only offer my sincere apology for the crushing sorrow that I caused.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Smaleino.

MR. SMALEINO: I would like to thank the Board for allowing me to express my thoughts today. As you know, I'm here to represent the LaBianca family and relate to you our thoughts and sentiments regarding Miss Krenwinkel and her actions on that fateful day. I am before you today and will continue to be here as long as the process requires it, to express our family's concern that Miss Krenwinkel is ever paroled. Her callous disregard for human life, her brutal participation in Leno and Rosemary's murder, and total disregard for the sanctity of life should forever seal her fate as a lifetime prisoner. The murders of my aunt and uncle were carried out for no other reason than the thrill for killing. There was no passion, no mitigating circumstances. She and her clan snuffed out two loving people. They were innocent people who bore no malice toward anyone and were a model for all of us on how to live and treat others. Leno and Rosemary were, to say the least, a very handsome and loving couple devoted to their family and five children. With this in mind, I would like to again remind the Panel that Patricia Krenwinkel is a vicious and uncaring killer who was sentenced to die for her deeds and was saved by an errant court to life in prison. To this day there has been no remorse shown, only a manipulation of the system to get a free pass. Yes, she's worked within the prison system, but these actions are self-serving actions and in no way address the destruction and devastation caused our families. I ask you what has Miss Krenwinkel done to address the anguish caused by our family? What single act has she done to assuage our pain and grief? For her we do not exist and are merely obstacles to her goal being released from prison for murders that many considered the worst of our time. It is inconceivable for me to believe that Miss Krenwinkel can ever be rehabilitated. Like her, I grew up in about the same time frame. While I was living happy days she and her clan were plotting murder, doing drugs and trying to initiate race wars. There's a real evil, here, that no one seems to be addressing. What spiritual awakening or enlightenment has taken place within her? There is none that I can see here today. Her goal today is to say and do anything to get out. But I believe this Panel should look at the facts. No real remorse, no coming clean on her participation in the murders, no spiritual renewal, no concern for victims or their families. Miss Krenwinkel should already be dead, like her victims, for her part in these vicious and unprovoked slayings. I believe society has been most merciful by allowing her to live in peace with all her needs cared for. Leno and Rosemary have been deprived of this and their family has lost the joy and support of their presence in our lives. I again ask in the name of my family and that of a decent and honorable society that you deny parole to Miss Patricia Krenwinkel. Thank you for your consideration.


MS. TATE: Yes. I would like to ask the Board to please consider the fact that Miss Krenwinkel has displayed great discipline and made achievements within the confines of these walls, and only within the confines of these walls. She's only five years older than myself. I don't think that there's a person on earth that is more abused than myself. Perhaps these other folks sitting here with me. She has cost me every member of my family. The grief that is inflicted causes holes in people's souls. I am truly glad that she is making some, some asimile (sic) of a decent life here within the confines of these walls; however, I am not willing to trust that her previous sociopathic nature would not return to her, given the circumstances of the outside world. Furthermore, I would like you to impose on her that she truly must be held accountable for those actions she took at her free will on those days, and if truly she was remorseful or rehabilitated, she would not come into this room today. She would be happy to spend the rest of her natural days in the institution -- if not this one, one similar -- where she can raise service animals, achieve college degrees, live basically an unpressured life, which is not the case for me. Each day these people take a breath it is an abusive act to me, and I don't reach out and act out in the way that they chose to. Therefore, I am going to have to consider from the bottom of my heart that these are less than animals, always have been, and always will be. We don't want them in a free society. Please, I would like you to deny her for five more years. Please.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Thank you for your comments, Miss Tate. We will recess for deliberations. Time is approximately 3:43 p.m.




PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: All right, this is in the matter of Patricia Krenwinkel. Miss Krenwinkel, the Panel has reviewed all the information (indiscernible) following circumstances: We found that you are not again suitable for parole and would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society, or threat to public safety if released from prison. First, the offense occurred in an exceptionally cruel, callous, violent and brutal (indiscernible). The events carried out in (indiscernible) fashion, victims were abused, stabbed numerous times, some shot, some beaten. The offense was carried out in a manner that was determined (indiscernible) an exceptionally callous disregard for human suffering and life. This conclusion was drawn from the Statement of Fact the inmate, along with Tex Watson, Susan Atkins and Linda Kasabian on or about August the 9th, 1969 at 1050 Cielo Drive, Los Angeles, did murder one Abigail Ann Folger, Wojicieck, W-O-J-I-C-I-E-C-K Frykowski, F-R-Y-K-O-W-S-K-I, Steven Earl Parent, and Sharon Marie Tate-Polanski and Jay Sebring. Miss Folger was stabbed numerous times, Mr. Frykowski was shot, stabbed, then force thrown to the head. Mr. Parent was shot multiple times. Miss Tate-Polanski stabbed numerous times, as was Jay Sebring. In addition, on or about August the 10th, 1969 at 3301 Waverly Road in Los Angeles, along with Leslie Van Houten, Steve Grogan, Susan Atkins, Tex Watson and Linda Kasabian did participate in the murders of Leno A. LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca, both suffering multiple stab wounds. The attacks were the culmination of plans by the parties who conspired to commit these murders. The attempt to start a race war between Blacks and Whites; however, that attempt failed. The inmate has a minor record. She's been arrested on two occasions, apparently with no convictions. But we know that she does in fact have a history of unstable relationships. Starting at the age of 14 to 17 she was an abuser of alcohol and drugs. She had lived alone with her mother who had divorced her father, with her father, and later with her step-sister. She then later met Charles Manson, had been residing with him, had been involved in the cult where she once again was abusing drugs. Psychologic evaluation dated 3/30/04 by Peter Hu, H-U, was not supportive of release. The Doctor states an excessive dangerousness. "Inmate is a 56-year-old Caucasian female who indicated that she had been brainwashed by Charles Manson and who in essence had ultimate control of her actions. She stated that despite her moral (sic) fear that she'd be killed by Mr. Manson, she was still unable to accomplish instructions he gave her regarding killing the victims. Although she has not done (indiscernible) dangerous within the past interval, I have some concerns with respect to utility for parole. She has yet to demonstrate an insight regarding her actions, she has yet to demonstrate remorse or regret for her actions and has not been able to recognize the loss of the victims' families suffered over the years. It is my opinion that she has maintained an habitual pattern of (indiscernible) and severity of the crime by acknowledging in a subtle manner that it was Mr. Manson who was ultimately responsible for the commission of these crimes. There is no current evidence of cult behavior or predatory type of like relationships that she had in the past and believe that her violence potential outside a controlled setting is less than the persons (indiscernible) innocent offense. I do believe her willingness to adhere to the rules and regulations of society and her years of maturity have caused the risk factor to decrease." There was also a psychologic evaluation which was done in 1997, would indicate that the inmate, on February 21st of 2002 could stipulate to unsuitability for two years, partially based on the unfavorable psych report which was done in 1997. Inmate does seem to have parole plans in the area of the place she resides. She has been accepted in Crossroads, she does appear to have marketable skills that she could use upon release. Current Panel also responsive 3042 notices indicate (indiscernible) parole suitability, specifically the district attorney of Los Angeles County, and we have a representative present at this hearing to voice opposition of parole suitability. The Los Angeles -- is that Sheriff or Police Department?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Police Department did submit a letter in opposition to parole suitability and members of the victims' families who also spoke in opposition for parole suitability. The Panel finds the inmate needs additional time in order to fully understand and deal with the causation factors have lived to commit the life crime, nevertheless, she should be commended for programming while incarcerated. She has obtained an AA degree and a BS degree through correspondence, she's had not a single 115 or 128 counseling chrono. She received exceptional work reports and she has programmed in a satisfactory manner. However, these positive aspects of her behavior do not outweigh the fact of unsuitability. In a separate decision the Hearing Panel finds that the prisoner has been convicted of murder, not really expect that parole be granted at a hearing for the following three years, (indiscernible) accepts the cruel and callous, violent, brutal manner; specifically, once again, on or about August the 9th, 1969 along with her crime partners, Tex Watson, Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, did go to the residence at 1050 or excuse me, 10050 Cielo Drive in Los Angeles and caused the death of Abigail Ann Folger, Wojicieck, W-O-J-I-C-I-E-C-K, Frykowski, F-R-Y-K-O-W-S-K-I. Steven Earl Parent, Sharon Marie Tate-Polanski and Jay Sebring. Following day, August 10th, 1969, with crime partners Leslie Van Houten, Steve Grogan, Susan Atkins, Tex Watson and Linda Kasabian, they did go to the residence of 3301 Waverly Drive in Los Angeles, along with Mr.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: It's Manson, Watson and Grogan.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: I just lost his name. With Mr. Watson -- or excuse me, with Mr. Manson. Mr. Manson tied the victims up inside, left the residence and the victims Leno LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca were then murdered, stabbed numerous times. There were multiple victims killed (indiscernible) innocence. Victims were abused, mostly being stabbed, shot, beaten. (Indiscernible) exceptionally callous (indiscernible) suffering and life. The prisoner does have a history of unstable relationships, between ages 14 to 17 she was using drugs. Parents divorced, she lived for a time with her mother, with her father and her step-sister. She then (indiscernible) Mr. Manson and lived with him and the drug abuse continued. Recent psychological evaluation dated 3/30/04 -- excuse me, 3/23/04 by Peter Hu, H-U, indicates the need for a longer period of observation and evaluation or treatment. In addition, the L.A. Police Department, District Attorney's Office and next of kin are opposed to the release of the inmate. And additionally, the inmate does not show what this Panel believes is insight and remorse. Question that I asked (indiscernible) Miss Krenwinkel was in regards to Step Eight of the 12-Step Program who was on top of the list --

(Thereupon the tape was turned over.)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KEENAN: Back on the record. Tape two, side one.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Once again, in response to a question I asked you about the 12-Step program and Step Eight, where it says you acknowledge (indiscernible) and those you have harmed, your indication was that you were on top of the list. The ones you harmed, the victims, the next of kin were moved to the (indiscernible). I frankly was surprised at your answer. That does indicate to me lack of insight and it does indicate a lack of remorse. Therefore, a longer period of observation and evaluation of the prisoner is required before the Board to find that she is suitable for parole. Panel makes the following recommendations: The Inmate should remain disciplinary free, available, participate in whatever self-help you can, and to cooperate with (indiscernible) completion of a clinical evaluation and we will be asking for a new evaluation, specifically to discuss the area of insight, remorse, and assessment of dangerousness. That does conclude this reading of the decision. Comments, Commissioner Keenan?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: This concludes this hearing. Panel (indiscernible). I wish you the best of luck.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY KAY: Can I just say something for housekeeping? I notice that one of the notices that the Board sends out is to Paul Fitzgerald, who was her attorney during the trial. He actually passed away a couple years ago, so you don't need to send him notice.