• Fight for Tex Tapes Goes to the Supreme Court

Fight for Tex Tapes Goes to the Supreme Court

Thursday, December 21st, 2017

Dec. 21 – Attorneys representing Leslie Van Houten are asking the California Supreme Court to review a lower court ruling that denied Van Houten access to the Tex tapes.

On Tuesday, Van Houten’s attorney, Richard Pfeiffer, filed a 33-page brief asking the state’s high court to weigh in on the issue of whether or not inmates are entitled to discovery at Franklin Hearings.

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has previously argued that the penal code limits post-conviction discovery to cases carrying sentences of death and life imprisonment.

In September, Superior Court Judge William C. Ryan sided with the District Attorney’s office and denied Van Houten the tapes, adding that the tapes only contained information already well known.

In November, Pfeiffer filed a Writ of Mandate with the appellate court asking them to reverse Ryan’s ruling. The appellate court responded on November 29th, stating that they would reserved judgment until after Governor Jerry Brown ruled on Van Houten’s recent parole recommendation.

The Board of Parole Hearings found Van Houten suitable for parole on September 6 and following a review period, Governor Brown will have until February 3, 2018 to weigh in on the decision.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Fight for Tex Tapes Goes to the Supreme Court

  1. Donna says:

    How is this supposed to help Leslie – the Tex tapes?

  2. James Fulmer says:

    I think it’s because they think in the tapes Tex says he is more responsible for the killings than she is. Apparently, Tex did all the killing and the girls were innocent bystanders, I guess.

  3. Michael says:

    If that’s all her attorneys want, they should just get a copy of Watson’s book “Will You Die for Me?” When recounting the LaBianca murders, he specifically wrote that Leslie was a very unwilling participant who didn’t want to stab anyone but went along with it. That hardly diminishes her guilt, but again, if all they want is his admission that she wasn’t enthusiastic about the killings, it’s all there in his book.

  4. CB says:

    Total BS! Leslie has admitted in on record and in tv interviews that she stabbed Mrs. Labianca 16 times. Tex lied for the sake of creating confusion .

  5. John says:

    I think Leslie has admitted her “part” in committing the crimes mostly because she knows its the right thing to do. Any attempt on her part to tell the complete truth about her association with the “family” and her presence in the LaBianca home – without taking complete responsibility – would be seen as her “not fully understanding” the weight of her crime, and “diminishing” her role in the crimes. As an inmate with a history gleaned mostly from the media and the sensationalism associated with the two nights of “Manson-related” murders, she understands that she is responsible for her actions. Though it is clear to many people that she may not have been asked to participate at ALL, had she not been considered a witness or a weak link whose silence needed to be guaranteed by Tex and Charlie.

  6. Kip says:

    She stabbed a DEAD body 16 times. I don’t feel threatened by her and neither do any of you.

  7. Big Mouth says:

    Here is my argument about the judge’s ruling. Or what he said. He stated that all that is on the tapes is well-documented info. Paraphrasing of course. However, if that is all it is then why withhold them. I find this suspect? I know he would probably say that if he ruled for her then he would be setting a precedent or some garbage such as this. However, any case that involves the Death Penalty, Life Sentences, or very long sentences that basically means life for the defendant should be allowed to access anything and all things even remotely related to their crimes. (I know Leslie is guilty. I fully understand this. However, what I am going to write next has nothing to do with her case it is my reason as to why these things should be able to be accessed by all defendants. There are too many innocent people being sentenced to life or given long sentences. However, we never hear about these people. Because the only crusades being launched are to save the lives of people on Death Row. There is just not enough money for these people to help those with life sentences. And if it would help others who have done horrible things so be it. But, what she did amounts to gross abuse of a corpse. And she has paid her price for being involved with this mess. She was not Susan Adkins telling people she loved killing and making the murders seem more gruesome than they already were. ( of ps I cannot believe she actually had the nerve to even ask for a compassionate release. After what she told Susan about not having any mercy on here. I think these women have also hurt themselves giving tv interviews.

  8. Starblazers says:

    The girls were never innocent bystanders! That is crazy to say that.

  9. Starblazers says:

    She held Rosemary LaBianca while Patricia Krenwinkel stabbed her to death.

  10. Rosie says:

    So you feel Kip that because Rosemary LaBianca may have been dead already, stabbing her 16 times is okay. Grow up. She held Rosemary down while Katie was stabbing her, she wiped the house down, even surfaces they did not touch, she showered in the LaBianca’s bathroom, opened the fridge and ate their food….took a bag of coins, hid under a blanket when the guy who gave them a ride back to the ranch came looking for her….yet to this day continues to try and put the blame in Manson, claims she only stabbed a dead body. Oh please. Leslie Van Houton made her choice in life and rather than being executed she has lived, gotten college degrees, wanted her freedom over and over again while so many people are in their graves never to be released. Kip, you just don’t get it.

  11. rendarch says:

    If that’s all your lawyer wants, get a copy of Watson’s book In counting the murders in LaBianca, he wrote specifically that Leslie was an unwilling participant and did not wish to challenge anyone but left with it.

Leave a Reply

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