• Van Houten Requests Resentencing

Van Houten Requests Resentencing

Friday, September 28th, 2018

Leslie Van Houten has requested to be resentenced.

In June, Governor Jerry Brown signed an assembly bill which amended the penal code to allow the Board of Parole Hearings and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation the ability to make recommendations for resentencing, provided the new sentence is no greater than the original.

On Wednesday, Van Houten’s attorney, Richard Pfeiffer filed a motion with the Board of Parole Hearings and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation requesting they recommend Van Houten’s sentence be recalled by the superior court.

Van Houten is still waiting on an appellate court ruling regarding Governor Brown’s reversal of her most recent parole recommendation. Last week, Pfeiffer filed a supplemental petition bringing to light a newly published opinion that he felt bolstered Van Houten’s argument that Brown’s reversal was not supported by the record.

Van Houten’s next parole hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, January 30, 2019

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

62 Responses to Van Houten Requests Resentencing

  1. Mo says:

    Let Leslie go

  2. Lee says:

    No, do not let her go. She participated, with glee, I might add in a deadly home invasion where two innocent people were butchered, slogans were written in human blood and afterwards, she laughed about it. Are you kidding me letting her out? No way!

  3. Faith says:

    This is good news for les.

  4. Cybele Moon says:

    They all should have been given life without parole. She is nearing 70. Whatever the final decision of the court is I can’t imagine she will have an easy life even if she is set free at this very late date. Sadly they all have reaped what they sowed.

  5. Paul says:

    Cybele Whatever her life would be in society does matter if she wishes to seek parole. We parole many murderers and Leslie cannot be singled out because of the notoriety.

  6. Cybele Moon says:

    True Paul, but what I basically said is that we all “reap what we sow. ” For some as in Leslie and the others, the price is heavy. They sadly forfeited the life most of us have had. She will emerge an old woman out of step with the world on the outside today, though I’m sure she will adjust to a point. She may very well be freed according to law, but she will never be free of the notoriety or the guilt of her “willing” participation. It’s obvious people have not forgotten the brutality of these murders for whatever reason.

  7. James S says:

    Oh yes she can.

  8. Paul says:

    No she will not be free of the notoriety around her case but if she is willing to deal with that on the outside, that’s her choice. Its funny how people will remember this particular crime of murders but there are many killers of actions more heinous than that of Leslie’s on the streets that have been paroled serving a much smaller amount of time in prison than Leslie. Of course she won’t be free of her guilt either, that will go to the grave with her.

  9. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul of course you have a point and it’s interesting that this case remained high profile through the years. Of course people do not remember ones that have not been written about or made movies about etc etc. Unfortunately that is just the way it has gone. There were many social reasons for it to be high profile besides the fame of one of the victims. It has been called the death of the sixties, that time when the hippie movement meant peace and love but if you remember many middle class people reviled the hippie movement so when a so called hippie drop out orchestrated brutal murders many of the establishment probably thought “I told you so!” Not to mention middle class sons and daughters who became brutal murderers. Heavy stuff as they say. My feelings remain though that “anyone” who participates in murders as gruesome as these should never get parole and I’m not alone. But different states do things differently.

  10. Paul says:

    But you can’t put the actions of Tex Watson on Leslie, especially since Tex was the main killer. If the Labianca case was unrelated to the Tate case, no one would of been aware of it today. Even though Leslie actions were awful, they are as bad to be seen as one of the most savage acts of murder in history, and also the circumstances are not the same as that of an ordinary murder. Brainwashing was involved and that is a huge difference in this case, which people like to avoid.

  11. Fred Bloggs says:

    Cybele Moon says:
    we all “reap what we sow. ” For some as in Leslie and the others, the price is heavy

    Not undeserved though. I’ve been reading the transcripts of the trial itself and while I do believe Leslie has regretted her killing actions for the last 44 years, I suspect running very closely behind is regret at her behaviour during the trial. Not the laughing and dancing in the corridor, which people like to bring up frequently, but the things she actually said, things she would blurt out when her lawyer was trying to save her neck, things she said to the judge in chambers in private. She’s probably kicked herself many times, metaphorically.

    She will emerge an old woman out of step with the world on the outside today, though I’m sure she will adjust to a point

    I really do wonder. I think anyone that goes away for more than 6 months kind of loses step with the world. But it must also be remembered that she has and has had plenty of relationships with people on the outside and it’s not like she’s been like a hostage in Iraq or something where there is literally no news of what’s happening or any sense of how the world is turning. Older people who haven’t been anywhere near a jail still find themselves having to adjust !

  12. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, I’m not putting Tex’s actions on Leslie- she had her own actions and does it really matter whether you murdered a lot or just murdered a little. Also not sure it is valid to say that if the two cases were unrelated it wouldn’t have mattered as much. The fact is they were related and she went willingly and knew about the other murders.
    Brainwashing- I’m not so sure that is a valid defense of one’s actions- especially seeing it lead to the deliberate and savage deaths of a number of people who had nothing to do with the group. I will always believe that they made a choice to follow Charles Manson which began their journey down his twisted path. There were plenty of warning signs such as his treatment of women from the get go, his violent streak and intimidation tactics. They weren’t brainwashed then. But I suppose no one will ever fully understand the workings of the mind.

    Fred, you are right. Some of us would even rather not be in step in today’s world lol.

  13. Paul says:

    Yes it does matter, especially when deciding her parole suitability, the board will look at this. It is valid because obliviously murders of all magnitude occurred in the 60s which probably hasn’t emerged on the internet before. Its down to notoriety, that is obvious now. That doesn’t make sense, brainwashing can cause people to do anything, especially if drugs like LSD are used, its deforms state of mind, its happened before. Manson had Leslie believe these actions were necessary and “right”, he changed their perception from society on what murder and death actually was. We see people, especially women become controlled by men a lot and they stay, but the topic of murder wasn’t introduced until just before the murders took place. I wouldn’t say there were plenty of warnings as I think the murders would probably been prevented if that was the case.

  14. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul- what? just women- that’s sexist lol. However, what bothers me is that yes people committed mass suicide in cults, or they fought to the death as at Waco but going out and brutally murdering people in their own homes is something totally different. I don’t recall that happening before in so called brainwashed people? Anyway people are bringing that up now: that they had battered woman syndrome, and that they were young and brainwashed, Nevertheless they were deemed to be culpable for their crimes or they wouldn’t still be incarcerated, -and- lucky for them – not executed. The only question now is do they remain in prison or do any of them ever get release.

  15. Paul says:

    But its true, I’m not a big follower of the third wave feminist movement but this is true, and I even I cant deny that. It really it isn’t that different. When people are indoctrinated into different mind patterns it can cause all kinds of issues. It is evident in the Manson family, he was able to make a large group of people believe these murders were right, even the ones that didn’t kill. Yes they were deemed culpable and Leslie has served her time in accordance to what her sentence was, life with parole. If she is deemed fit for parole she should be paroled, which she has been. The governors arguments don’t even consistent. Its funny because I know even the people who don’t want her out know his argument is weak but as long as it keeps her behind bars they don’t care.

  16. Paul says:

    *The governors arguments aren’t even consistent.

  17. Scott Rogers says:

    Leslie is NEVER getting out due to her OWN admission that she KNEW what transpired the night before on Cielo Drive and DESPERATELY WANTED TO PARTICIPATE the next night on Waverly..

  18. Paul says:

    Scott she’s as close as she ever has been to her parole and her attorney won’t give anytime soon.

  19. Michael says:

    I hope she won’t be released because, like Cybele and others here, I don’t think anyone who’s committed such crimes should ever be freed. She was young but an adult; deeply influenced by Manson but still capable of using her own head and free will. No excuses made for her hold any water with me. But questions about her culpability that night are secondary to what the law says about her incarceration. It’s unclear to me how she can be denied parole if she is found to be no threat to society and has served a lengthy sentence already, or if her sentence does get changed. (Long shot) Whatever side you’re on, this is a darned interesting development.

  20. Paul says:

    Again, what do you mean by “such crimes”? If your referring to the entire crime than yes but you can’t keep Leslie behind bars for the actions of Tex Watson and Pat Krenwinkel. We don’t even know if Rosemary was still living when Leslie inflicted her wounds. I saw a case recently which I’ve mentioned here before of a person in the US who got out 10 years after serving his sentence for murder, and he actually killed the person. The difference is Leslie and the others were indoctrinated, this man was in his normal mind set when he committed the murder. Leslie is evidently being kept behind bars for the actions of not just herself but the rest of the family members who went along those nights, including the Cielo Drive murders even though she wasn’t there.

  21. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, I have always totally disagreed with the excuses people have given for Leslie’s actions. Her supporters have used everything they can think of from youth and brainwashing to she may have only stabbed a dead body. Who knows, who cares. She was a very willing participant. She is just as culpable as them all. The other thing that turned me off on the facebook page was the belittling and put down of the victim’s families – as though they were to blame for their precious friend Leslie being incarcerated. That made me realize the mentality of some of the supporters. One who even said it was karma that Debra Tate got breast cancer!!
    However, the only thing you are right on is that the law says she is eligible and has given her that option. I wish they hadn’t and I personally don’t see that as justice for the victims but at this late date in LVH’s life it may be that she has served her time according to the law. I’m sure she is remorseful and it’s unlikely she is a danger today. I only hope she continues to try to make peace and amends and that her victim’s families find peace.

  22. Paul says:

    Whether you agree or not they are valid reasons and you can’t avoid them because of the crimes themselves. So you think Leslie would have killed if Manson had asked her within a month of her being there or without any form of drugs? Its like you just don’t listen or don’t want to here it, well those reasons are important and its a big reason the board granted her parole. Yes she needs to take responsibility which she has but don’t think the brainwashing and Manson teachings aren’t valid points. The only issue I have with any of the family is Debra Tate because she lies over and over. Of course Debra didn’t deserve it but she is irresponsible nethertheless with how she deals with system. Some of the arguments made by the people against her parole have been weak with no relevant points or mention of the law to prove their argument. Their is a difference when you commit murder when you though it was right and necessary and a person who commits murder in their normal minds sets.

  23. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, forgive me, that is just plain nonsense. The reason that they granted her parole was not for those reasons you set forth at all. When she was sentenced they felt she was fully culpable and that is It’s why she has served 48 years along with the rest of them regardless! If your opinion is valid then they were all brainwashed and not able to tell right from wrong no matter how many stab wounds they each inflicted. The parole board feels Leslie is rehabilitated! period. The others also have a shot at parole too. It matters not whether they did it because Manson told them to do it. They did it!!!. Now the parole board thinks she is rehabilitated- and that’s the point, not the mitigating circumstances you and others have put forth or they wouldn’t have kept her or the others in jail for this length of time.
    -But their sentence allowed for parole, not just for Leslie but for all of them. Now she is old and they have amended the rules so that there is a clause about elder parolees and the youth factor of when the crime was committed.
    That is how I look at it anyway.

  24. Cybele Moon says:

    * is why not “that It’s why” – I need a grammar check!

  25. Michael says:

    Crimes committed apart from the LaBianca murders don’t figure into my thinking about Leslie. What Tex and Pat did apart from the LaBianca’s home is a separate matter. For that one night and that night alone, I feel Leslie should never be paroled. She is as guilty whether Mrs. LaBianca was dead when she stabbed her or not, because she actively participated in both hers and Mr. Labianca’s death. It means nothing to me that another man who committed a similar or even worse crime was released after ten years. I think the problem is that he was released, not that Leslie remains incarcerated. As I’ve said before, legally she may be eligible for parole, and for that reason she may be released. And, as I’ve also said before, I believe she is genuinely remorseful for what she did, and I don’t consider her a danger to society. But morally, I think she has no right to walk out.

  26. Paul says:

    If Leslie committed these murders without the involvement of the indoctrination by Manson or the use of drugs, the board would not of let her out at all, it all adds up. Yes they feel she has been rehabilitated but they have been saying her parole was not far of since the 80s. You don’t seriously think they believe she was a danger to society back than do you? of course it matters because Manson deprogrammed their minds and he controlled that family both mentally and physically especially closer towards the crimes. All these points are valid because if Leslie said she went and killed these people, no board would give her a release date or if Manson’s control or the Cielo drive murders weren’t related, she would probably be out anyway because few would actually complain about it. I know you can’t accept her getting out because of the murders, that’s fine but don’t try to discredit the details and the brainwashing because of your moral standards. The people who have the duty to follow the law need to follow the law.

  27. Paul says:

    *All these points are valid because if Leslie said she went and killed these people just for no apparent reason or theft.

  28. Cybele Moon says:

    Michael, Paul is going to go on about Leslie’s diminished responsibility for ever.
    I agree with you that I feel they all should have been given life without parole and we are not alone. In spite of Leslie’s supporters I think most people revile those crimes and those who perpetrated them including Leslie. However, the court now feels she is rehabilitated. All of them were brainwashed but that doesn’t make them any less guilty. They still knew right from wrong according to society’s standards and they were eager to cause chaos for the rest of us.
    Paul, I give you that Leslie may have been guilty of less murder than the others. We will never know what Leslie may have done had the gang not been caught. She admitted in an interview that she may have been able to kill children if Charlie had so ordered. Yes, brainwashed, criminally so, and now remorseful and clear headed. That doesn’t take away their crimes or responsibility. None of them could have done it without the participation of each other. I do not feel that justice has not been served by them all being in prison for 48 years.

  29. Paul says:

    Right because you keep discrediting them when they are important reasons for how these murders were able to happen. Yeah she admitted she would kill children for Manson, that is a great example of the power Manson had over her. I’m not defending her actions in anyway but there are mitigating factors in this case. Never said it took away the responsibility but it does effect the extent of culpability. You can’t expect them all to serve the same prison sentence as the extent of each of the defendants participation in the murder varies, like you can’t expect Leslie to share the same amount of jail time as Tex Watson.

  30. Michael says:

    Yes, Cybele, I think “brainwashed” is a poor justification and not a very clear classification. Exactly how “out of control” is someone who’s brainwashed? If Tex, Pat, Susan, and Leslie were in fact brainwashed, they also still had independent thoughts and even a willingness to defy the direct orders of their brainwasher Manson. Tex was given a direct order from Charlie to go to other houses in the Cielo Drive area, yet he didn’t. Susan and Pat were both ordered by Charlie to do whatever Tex told them to do, yet they both disobeyed direct orders from Tex – Pat, when she disobeyed his order to go to the guest house and kill whoever was in there, and Susan, who disobeyed Tex’s direct order to stab Frykowski and Tate. Leslie did comply with Tex, but with no enthusiasm. If she was fully brainwashed, you would expect her not only to obey, but to also share his vision and zeal for the mission. Clearly, she didn’t. So the “brainwash” angle is unconvincing to me, first because all of them chose to give themselves to the brainwashing, and second, because it does not seem to have been so complete that they lost their ability to make decisions for themselves.

  31. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, you do have a point! But I just feel that today that point is now irrelevant to the legalities of the parole system process that is taking place. We all know about brainwashing etc etc. Those mitigating factors don’t mean anything now. They were found guilty of the crimes. They have all served a lengthy sentence.
    The mitigating factors excuse obviously make her supporters feel better. People would prefer to have sympathy for a poor brainwashed “kid”(at the time)who didn’t fully understand what she was doing and was just “following orders” from Manson (as on a much bigger scale the Nazi’s also said in defense of their actions but were still held culpable). There are also supporters of Tex and Pat who feel they have served their time and were also brainwashed. However, I feel that the time they have served is justified and that they can never pay back the debt ( of a life taken). We all have to accept what the law allows though.

  32. Cybele Moon says:

    Michael, I agree about them still having a mind to make a choice! Other followers of Manson tried to get out once they knew what happened. I suppose most of us will never understand it.This wasn’t mass suicide, or a standoff at Waco or Ruby Ridge. It was the calculated and cruel bloodthirsty murder of innocent people. If they are now clear minded it must be awful to now live with that on your conscience.

  33. Michael says:

    Going on vacation so will be away for a couple weeks, but will be interested to see what develops with this latest challenge. BTW, did any of you see the Lost Manson Tapes special Fox did a few weeks ago? There was some material in there I hadn’t seen before, and it was interesting seeing and hearing Dianne Lake. She seems to have matured into a healthy and responsible woman. Catherine Share, also, presented well. Nice to seem some relatively happy endings come out of all this insanity.

  34. Paul says:

    The parole board go into depth about Manson’s indoctrination and his philosophy even to this day, and power that Manson had on family, they have mentioned this a lot as both Pat Krenwinkel and Leslie’s hearings, so they are still relevant if the board asks about it still. They talk about the changing the atmosphere at the ranch overtime, such as guards that kept family members from leaving unless they got permission by Manson. I don’t feel better about them, there just facts that are still relevant. It just seems because its murder you don’t care whether its relevant or not since you don’t want her out anyway purely because of the crimes which I understand but its you trying to regard these points as irrelevant then they are main reasons these murders took place.

  35. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, Hitler brainwashed Germany. All of us are brainwashed by the media and advertising etc. to some degree. I also think that Trump attempts to brainwash America into a state of fear and paranoia! Most of us thank God do not go out and commit murder. Paul if it was so relevant they would have been released years ago instead of when their lives are almost over. The Parole board was not eager to set them free.
    Now if Leslie is released I accept that as following the law as it stands. So I agree with you on the law. Yes I accept she and the others were brainwashed. The crimes were horrifying and I accept that too and the suffering of the families as much greater than the mitigating circumstances.

    Michael, enjoy your holiday!

  36. Paul says:

    Yes but the circumstances are very different between Hitler and Manson. Hilter made war for wanting power but his soldiers were aware of their actions and also did it for power. Manson himself probably did it in anger and frustration for society but a lot of the family members including Leslie who believed it was a crucial act to protect the natural world and people of the future as crazy as that sounds. The parole board have been telling Leslie she’s been so close to suitability for decades, we know what the game is, its a political and notoriety joke. Prisons are becoming very overcrowded and keeping prisoners like Leslie is ineffective giving she has served more time than most killers serving time for one or two counts of murder. Of course the impacts of the crimes are awful for the people who loved them but we can’t just decide to avoid looking at the mitigating factors because of the crimes and the impacts on families because that becomes double standards. You can’t always satisfy the needs of the families, and you certainly can’t leave it to the family to decide their fate, because Rosemary’s daughter wanted Tex out in the 80s, that’s why we have a law we need to follow and avoid this kind of problem. This is one family, there are thousands of families who have to deal with the fact that were loved ones killers are on the street after serving only 10-15 years for their crimes.

  37. Cybele Moon says:

    I hear you about killers being let out after doing 1/3 of the time they have been given. I don’t agree with that either. But to me that doesn’t mean well those people got out therefore these other people should get out. I’d like to see the law changed on that.
    Manson was a Hitler on a smaller scale that’s all. the German people did what they did to make sure their race would be at the top of the heap too- as did Charlie and his group want to be the survivors of a race war and come out on top. Let’s not romanticize their twisted ideals.
    Yes Leslie may be the only one suitable for parole but here is why I am not as sympathetic as you and her other supporters. Yes she was young but she had a pretty good life up until she rebelled ( and of course many kids rebel). She had not been abused or underprivileged as many throw away or runaway kids have been today. She had a high IQ or intelligence obviously. I do feel pity for many of the kids who have turned to crime that have had physical and sexual abuse, whose lives were severely impoverished, that have bona fide psychological personality disorders or some kind of neuropathy. By all accounts Leslie had been spoiled so to speak. She had an abortion yes, which was traumatic but so have many other young girls. So I don’t feel as much sympathy for her as you do but I do believe she is remorseful today.

  38. Paul says:

    But with the law as it is, there is double standards which is basically corrupting the laws. Not romanticizing their intents either but the soldiers of Hitler and Leslie had different situations as were their intentions. Leslie always said she never wanted to kill, she even told Manson that herself but would do it if necessary. You don’t have to have a terrible childhood or a high IQ to be indoctrinated either. Manson’s initial approach was completely different to what is was in 1969, he made himself to be this loving person who brought people together like a family, it was the 60s, the type movement was very popular than and that’s what the family portrayed themselves as. Leslie does not go into these hearings and make herself look like the victim of her childhood or Manson, she takes responsibility but she still was brainwashed which does change how we look at it against the average murder case.

  39. Paul says:

    it was the 60s, the “hippy” movement was very popular

  40. Cybele Moon says:

    true Paul, but the hippie movement was about peace, love, spirituality and social change, but Manson showed his stripes very early on with violence, stealing, abusing his female followers etc. Of course he portrayed himself as a victim of society and wanted his revenge. Actually he had a very sad beginning it’s true. As for Leslie, I guess I’ll never understand. You are right, she doesn’t make herself a victim. Your belief that she thought murder was necessary to achieve their goals doesn’t make her less responsible in my books She was only in the family for less than a year. She met Manson in late 68. She must have been very weak minded to so totally embrace what he was offering.

  41. Cybele Moon says:

    ps, and of course the hippie movement was about protest as well against the establishment- usually peaceful but there were a few extremist groups like the weathermen- still their intent wasn’t to murder!

  42. Paul says:

    Manson portrayed love and acceptance, that’s how he managed to bring a lot of young people into the commune. That’s a standard story for relationships, a man portrays himself like a good law-abiding gentleman but that changes when your in a romantic relationship or living together, it happens all the time. If I come close to being a victim of domestic abuse I would put a fast end to it but that just doesn’t happen for everyone especially for young women. Many people fell for it, there were many people who either agreed or participated in these murders. Remember Drugs can retune your reality of life especially if someone is feeing you information at the same time, which is what Manson did. What I’m suggesting is that if you look at two murder cases, one were a person may kill in a robbery or kill after sexual assault is different because they know what the impacts of those actions are, Leslie did not necessary realise the impacts because of her mind set at that time, she believed death was really an illusion and that they only killed the shell which was the victims bodies. Again the intent wasn’t murder for the family until years later, Manson formed this group gradually since around 1966 and murder was only on the table in 69, he never showed intention to murder until then so how could they have known?

  43. Cybele Moon says:

    fair enough Paul, but my point was that Leslie came into the group rather late as I said- the end of 68- October according to her bio. Not even a year had passed before she was willing to participate in the murders. I’m just thinking of other cults where members had been involved for many years, some decades before doing anything drastic.
    I do know that drugs can warp your mind but at that time I think most drug users were also into meditation etc and wanted peace and change, not murder and mayhem. As I said it’s not explainable really- or excusable but it happened. Tragic for everyone.

  44. Paul says:

    It does explain a lot. Manson didn’t bring murder into the equation until he thought these people were so indoctrinated and believed in him that they wouldn’t either disagree or try to leave (he had armed guards at this point so he knew to take care of that issue). A year may not be very long but still long nevertheless, living in that place with the same people for a year with no communication with real society or her old friends and family would change you, which it did for many of the family members. There were many reasons Manson was abled to achieve this but the point is that yes, these people needed to be brought to justice which they were, some have been treated unfairly by the system including Van Houten, giving her content false hope for years and refusing her parole for no real apparent reason, you like to talk about the excuses I make for her, the board made dozens of them at her parole hearings.

  45. Cybele Moon says:

    Paul, From your point of view I understand what you mean, but I’m not sure what is fair and what isn’t. Leslie is alive as are the others while their victims lost theirs in a very brutal and terrifying fashion. I can’t imagine what their last moments must have been like in this case. Families lost loved ones to a slaughter. I suppose they have an idea also of what fair is.
    Now maybe after years there can be forgiveness – but fairness? That might depend from which side you look at it.

  46. Paul says:

    But that’s on a moral perceptive. Leslie has been following the parole criteria for years and the board have always agreed but for some reason deny her suitability, it does not add up. I would not want to be in the shoes of the families either but that really isn’t relevant when it comes to the law, its been nearly half a century. The LaBianca’s have been lucky that she’s been kept in jail for so long because she would of been out in the 80s if this case wasn’t so notorious. I know “lucky” may sound extreme but for other families deal with much less harsh sentences. The governor cannot look at it in the way you do which is appears that he is, your can either follow the law and make it fair or pressure the leaders into satisfy the public in which your making a corrupt system. Brown shouldn’t be influenced by the public cries anyway but obviously he is.

  47. Paul says:

    I know you look at it from a moral view and have more sympathy for the victims and families which I do understand, but that doesn’t mean you can manipulate the law to satisfy your moral standards. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

  48. Lee says:

    I have a question for this Paul person. Do you have any sympathy for the victims at all?

  49. Paul says:

    Of course.

  50. Cybele Moon says:

    Lee and Paul. according to Paul and legally Leslie van houten has a right to be paroled after having followed all the recommendations and rules.
    Had their first sentence been carried out we wouldn’t have this “moral” outcry I suppose. So if the public tries to influence the leaders or Governor, that is immoral and corrupt, Paul says and from his point of view he is right.
    I don’t know why people then don’t try to change the law? Life without parole for example for certain crimes. In California they abolished the death penalty (people vs Anderson) and then due to public outcry it was back again. As a result the Manson family managed to escape that sentence. So which is the moral decision?

  51. Cybele Moon says:

    PS: I never understood how they went from the death penalty to- oh now we might let you out in 7 years if your’e good!!

  52. Paul says:

    When the death penalty was abolished everyone on death row in California were given an automatic life sentence with the possibility of parole. Every prisoner serving life in California in those days automatically were eligible for a parole hearing after serving seven years of their sentence. What I dislike about Debra is that instead of asking or advocating for a change in law or legislations, she falsely claims that Leslie is still this big danger which evidently is completely false, she tries to get on the personnel moral side of Brown which he should not allow himself to be influenced in the first place.

  53. Lee says:

    While I do not agree whatsoever with releasing any Manson Family member, they, meaning the “suits” in charge are going to be forced to release this creep one day. It is my opinion that if you choose to participate in a deadly home invasion where two people end up deceased, blood is smeared all over the crime scene and when caught, you laugh, sing, skip and act like its no big deal, you don’t deserve jack shit, except life behind bars like the savage you were. No “start overs” for something like that. With that being said, that stupid law says they must release her if she’s eligble. How nauseating!

  54. Paul says:

    I think the laughing and singing indicates how unstable they were. The fact they were so jolly during the trial and they faced the gas chamber suggests that they weren’t sharing the same reality as the ordinary human being. Its hard to discuss the issue when people prefer to avoid or discredit the gravity of your mind when its being indoctrinated or put into large doses of drugs at the same time, they do change your perception on what reality actually is. Manson had some of these family members believe death was just an illusion and didn’t actually matter. You talk about blood being smeared on the walls, this wasn’t Leslie and when people try to explain to me why Leslie shouldn’t be released, they often bring up parts of the crimes that wasn’t acted on by Leslie, even Sharon’s murder has been put on her for whatever reason.

  55. Cybele Moon says:

    Lee and Paul, I may be closer to the middle of what you both believe. However, I agree with Lee I think they should have been given life without parole. Whether or not they were unstable and thought death was illusion that is small comfort to those whose lives were taken in such a hideous manner or to their families.
    Paul if Leslie gets out and she has a chance I believe it is due the diligence, hard work and persistence of her present lawyer.

  56. Paul says:

    Cybele those are very important factors, they did not see death as how I we see it. I said before you can’t always satisfy the needs of the families, again Rosemary’s daughter wanted Tex out. Yes it would be for the hard work that Leslie has committed to while behind bars and the persistence of her attorney who wont give up on her.

  57. Cybele Moon says:

    You know Paul, there are many philosophies that say life and death are illusions and they don’t then kill people to prove a point. Leslie can never make up for what she did. If she is intelligent and I believe she is, not a day must go by that she doesn’t think about it and regret the choices and actions that have effectively ruined her life and the life of others. It’s unlikely she will re offend at her age now. I think that the danger that everyone talks about is more abstract or philosophical. There is such a mystique surrounding the Manson saga and many who actually idealize them or Manson and his twisted philosophy. They are a symbol in other words of anti establishment etc ( albeit in the extreme). Judging from some websites they do have a following. Some people love outlaws and infamy lol.

  58. Cybele Moon says:

    PS and just the fact that some hold her up as a political prisoner etc tells me that there are those who want to make a heroic figure out of a murderer.

  59. Paul says:

    Well I think you know were not trying to suggest she’s any kind of hero but we are saying that she’s in prison now purely for political reasons. Yes Leslie can never make up for what she did, but has done everything in her ability to contribute to society to make amends ever though it can undo her actions. Leslie hasn’t been a danger since the early 70s, she was out for six months on bond and got a job, and never committed a crime, its got nothing to do with age. I’m not idealising the family or Manson and his philosophy but I’m looking at it through unbiased eyes and since there is a lot more people fighting on your side, I think I need to make up for it, there are two sides, even when murders involved.

  60. Cybele Moon says:

    fair enough, I never said you don’t have some good points.

  61. Adam G says:

    I am a huge supporter of the death penalty, and for life sentences. I think Evil people should die in prison. That being said, I believe that prison has actually reformed Leslie. She has long since denounced Chuck Manson, who I wish had lived much longer in his cage. Leslie never actually killed anyone, she stabbed a dead body, this is supported by both the autopsy, and Tex Watson, himself. She participated in a horrific crime, and I believe she has served her time. She shows remorse for her participation, and rejects the people that haven’t admitted their crimes.

    Prison is supposed to be for rehabilitation, even though this generally fails, I believe, in this one case, it has succeeded, and it is time for Leslie to go free and spend the rest of her life outside a cage.

  62. Fred Bloggs says:

    Adam G says:
    That being said, I believe that prison has actually reformed Leslie

    To a large extent, apart from Manson himself, that is true of all of the convicted Family killers. The thing is, it was a very deliberate policy on the part of the prison authorities because many of the people in the prison system at the time believed in rehabilitation and believed that as damaged as the Family killers were, they weren’t irredeemable. It is to their credit that they did so.

    Leslie never actually killed anyone, she stabbed a dead body

    I’m afraid you are wrong there and this is one of the enduring pieces of misinformation that continues to be propounded when discussion of this case comes up.
    Leslie has said two very significant things about this. While on the stand, she admitted that she might have stabbed Rosemary a couple of times around the neck {where one of the fatal blows was} and the back {where most of the fatal blows were – “I could have done a couple on the back”}. She was unsure about stabbing her chest, she was sure that most of the stabbing was around the buttocks but for the most part, she said she couldn’t remember every stab and spoke of the ones she did remember.
    In fairness to her, even though she was lying during that first trial, she has never been sure whether Rosemary was alive or dead, either in private communication with her lawyer, at the trial, in subsequent parole hearings or interviews.
    The second important thing she said was that she stabbed Rosemary 14-16 times. Now, she may only have stabbed 8 times or 4 times but in her mind, she knows that she stabbed a lot of times, and 14-16 is the consistent figure she has given. From that, we can see that she knows that she just went at it continually, but that it wasn’t a small number. So if we take her own figure of 14-16, and consider that only 13 of Rosemary’s 46 wounds were after she died, then it is not possible to state that Leslie didn’t kill anyone or that she just stabbed a dead body. It’s more correct to say that she stabbed a prostrate, defenceless, inert body that she may have thought was dead because its owner wasn’t moving or speaking. Furthermore, the previous night, Tex went back to 4 of the 5 bodies at Cielo and landed further stab wounds after they had already been rendered powerless. He stabbed Sebring after shooting him and leaving him there, he stabbed and booted Frykowski after he’d already shot and stabbed him, he went for Folger after he’d stabbed her indoors and Susan Atkins said he told her to get out after Sharon Tate had been stabbed and when she came back in, said she was more cut up than she remembered. And he carved WAR on Leno once he’d finished, while Pat stuck a fork in him after he was dead. So what’s to prevent Tex from having administed some of the post mortem blows to Rosemary ? It’s a huge assumption to ascribe them all to Leslie.

    this is supported by both the autopsy, and Tex Watson, himself

    It is not at all supported by the autopsy.
    As for Tex, was he a medical practitioner ?
    Both TJ Walleman and Charles Manson thought Bernard Crowe was dead when Manson shot him. He wasn’t.
    Bobby Beausoleil, Susan Atkins and Mary Brunner all took Gary Hinman for dead when they left his house…..then he started breathing loudly which led to them going back in the house and smothering him with a pillow until it stopped.
    At Cielo as we have seen, when Tex left Wojiciech Fryowski on the lawn, he thought he was dead, then Frykowski started moving and Tex then finished him off.
    So the murdering Family members didn’t have the greatest track record for telling when someone was dead. So how can one be confident in Tex’s medical spotting abilities ?

Leave a Reply

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