Friday, September 20, 2019

Newsom denies parole to Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten, overruling parole board


By ASSOCIATED PRESS
JUNE 3, 2019 4:49 PM

California Gov. Gavin Newsom overruled a parole board’s decision to free Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten on Monday, marking the third time a governor has stopped the release of the youngest member of Manson’s murderous cult.

Van Houten, 69, is still a threat, Newsom said, though she has spent nearly half a century behind bars and received reports of good behavior and testimonials about her rehabilitation.

"While I commend Ms. Van Houten for her efforts at rehabilitation and acknowledge her youth at the time of the crimes, I am concerned about her role in these killings and her potential for future violence," he wrote in his decision. "Ms. Van Houten was an eager participant in the killing of the LaBiancas and played a significant role."

It was the first time Newsom rejected parole for Van Houten. Former Gov. Jerry Brown denied her release twice.


Van Houten was 19 when she and other cult members stabbed to death wealthy Los Angeles grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, in August 1969. She said they carved up Leno LaBianca’s body and smeared the couple’s blood on the walls.

The slayings came the day after other Manson followers, not including Van Houten, killed pregnant actress Sharon Tate and four others in violence that spread fear throughout Los Angeles and riveted the nation.

No one who took part in the Tate-LaBianca killings has been released from prison.

Earlier this year, Newsom reversed a parole recommendation to free Manson follower Robert Beausoleil for an unrelated murder. Beausoleil was convicted of killing musician Gary Hinman.

At parole hearings, Van Houten described a troubled childhood that led her to use drugs and hang around with outcasts at school. When she was 17, she and a boyfriend ran away to San Francisco during the so-called Summer of Love in 1967.

She later encountered Manson while traveling the coast. Manson had holed up with his "family" at an abandoned movie ranch on the outskirts of Los Angeles when he launched a plan to spark a race war by committing a series of random, terrifying killings.

Despite her youth at the time of the crime, abuse by Manson and more than four decades of good behavior, Brown rejected parole for Van Houten in 2017 because he said that she still blamed the cult leader too much for the killings.

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge upheld Brown’s decision last year, finding that Van Houten posed "an unreasonable risk of danger to society." An appeals court will decide whether to uphold or reject that ruling by the end of July.

Manson and his followers were sentenced to death in 1971, though those punishments were commuted to life in prison after the California Supreme Court ruled capital punishment unconstitutional in 1972.

Van Houten’s case was overturned on appeal and she was later convicted and sentenced to seven years to life in prison.

Tate’s sister, Debra Tate, has routinely shown up to parole and court hearings to oppose the release of any Manson follower. Even though Van Houten didn’t take part in her sister’s killing, Tate said she didn’t deserve release under any circumstances.

Supporters of Van Houten said she had been a model prisoner who mentored dozens of inmates and helped them come to terms with their crimes.

Van Houten’s lawyer said in January after her latest release recommendation that the parole board found she had taken full responsibility for her role in the killings, so Newsom would have a harder time overturning the decision to release her.

"She chose to go with Manson," attorney Rich Pfeiffer said. "She chose to listen to him. And she acknowledges that."

Manson died in 2017 of natural causes at a California hospital while serving a life sentence.

83 comments:

Peter said...

If her name was Leslita Gonzalez or if she had only murdered a cop, California would have put her back on the street years ago.

AstroCreep said...

ouch... further evidence that none of these people will EVER be released... which is a product of their own doing.

orwhut said...

Sharon's mother did her job well. I doubt anyone on this site thought she'd be released.

John said...

Thanks to people like Debra Tate and a surprise decision by ultra-lib Gavin Newsom to keep the parole board from being duped.

cielodrivecom said...

A governor reversing a parole grant of a Manson family member should never be described as a "surprise decision"

Logan said...

Unpopular opinion, but I think bobby & all of the women still living should be paroled. What they did was heinous, awful beyond belief; they destroyed many lives through their violent & selfish decisions. But if they were released, I think it's pretty safe to say that none of them would be a risk or pose a threat to the safety of anyone. They are all nearly senior citizens now and so far removed from their brutal & hateful former selves.
I think it's so cruel that their paroles keep getting pulled out from under them. I don't think that keeping them in confinement helps anyone...it just adds to the human suffering that is the common thread running through this sad saga.

Mon Durphy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mon Durphy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Matthew said...

I say her crime is unforgivable but to consider her a threat to society is crazy. She is a frail old lady. If her crime was not linked to Manson or the Tate murder, she would have been out long ago.

Mon Durphy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mon Durphy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
prefeteria said...

This is loosely related to the last post which questioned whether Manson could be a friendly, "normal" person. Why not? Theoretically one of the purposes of prison is rehabilitation. Would Manson have organized his Healter Skelter brigade of revolutionaries to attack society, had he been paroled? A better question would have been - would he have been able to fend for himself, cope with the outside world and earn an honest living after a lifetime in prison? Would Van Houten?

On second thought they would all be age-eligible for Social Security at this point so perhaps the previous question is moot. And there is zero chance that any CA governor from any political party is going to risk a career scandal on something like this.

starviego said...

Logan said...
"Unpopular opinion, but I think bobby & all of the women still living should be paroled."

Amen to that. Enough is enough!

John Seger said...

Lou Lou horsey face never should get out! None should! Ever!

Robert C said...

I've always wondered what Brown/Newsom see in LVH regarding their belief she's still dangerous that the rest of us may not be privy to ? Like maybe a latest psychiatric report or something that recently happened in jail ? I really don't have a strong lean on LVH's fate but wish the US would dispense with holding political prisoners to a different standard following some secret codes not normally found in any law books.

Charlie Higgins said...

What a joke … She's judged to be a threat to society, and yet yis have a clown for a president who can launch a war on any country at any time that suits his agenda . As an Irish citizen I'm bewildered by your gun culture and when another tragic case of a mass shooting occurs, I usually react to it with laughter … When will you ever learn ? Never … You are a nation of war mongers and your history is based on violence and terror … And still your legal system believes that this poor 69 year old woman would be a danger to your society if released . What a country … What a fucking joke

Fiddy 8 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fiddy 8 said...

Charlie, I never laughed when the IRA resorted to terrorist bombings.

Jenn said...

Peter wrote:

“If her name was Leslita Gonzalez or if she had only murdered a cop, California would have put her back on the street years ago.”

Your comment is misguided.

Charlie Higgins said...

Hey Fiddy ,

Think you will find that defending our country from foreign invaders is a wee bit different to selling weapons of mass destruction in your supermarkets . I don't know how many US presidents I have seen on the news over the years , sympathising with the families of the victims of mass killings and still nothing ever changes … Believe me , when I say I react with laughter, it's not laughter at the act, but laughter at your nations cavalier attitude to the right to bare arms … Your country rejoices in war … I see yis are off to do battle in Iran shortly … More millions to the weapons manufacturers and more misery to the innocent civilians caught up in your desire to rule the world … Any country that has a brain dead psychopath as a president deserves derision... I have plenty of friends in the US and I don't wish any offence, but you really need to " wake up and smell the napalm (oops , sorry , I meant coffee)

Peter said...

Sod off donkey. Go blow up a bus.

Matt said...

Ok, everybody I love every last one of you but let's keep politics off of here. I love a good shitstorm as much as the next guy but we need to keep new readers and lurkers in mind. If you want to argue politics, friend me on FB and we can let it rip there. I'll give you a good run for your money.


Matthew said...

I am not sure why we even bother having a parole board when, for political reasons, the governor will deny release on such lamb reasons as a danger to society. Give me a break. Leslie's sentence was life with parole. She has met all criteria to be eligible for parole. Besides, housing her costs money. Same with Bruce Davis and Bobby. Like I said earlier, if they did the same crime but without the notoriety, they would have been out long ago. Their crimes were horrible and unforgivable but don't hang parole over them if there is no intention of granting it.

AstroCreep said...

Matthew, I agree with you on this: that none of them are a danger to society. If any of them were a neighbor, I wouldn’t feel threatened or be bothered by their past at at all. 100% agree with you.

My only point is that their behavior is the ONLY thing that caused this outcome. Their actions during the trial solidified their fate, they have nobody to blame but themselves.

To the notion that they are “political prisoners”.... No elected official is ever going to let any of them out on his/her watch without an incredible backlash and in that regard, the governor is acting in “the people’s” best interest. If the public were demanding their release, it would be done but so far, a few hundred Manson sympathizers isn’t enough to be representative of what “the people” want.

Matthew said...

I agree that their behavior was a big factor in their fate. However, I would not say the only. The notoriety of the crime and the 50 year fascination with Manson and the family also play a huge factor. Also the demonizing of Manson instead of seeing him for what he is, a pimp user narcissist. Leslie has not shown any of the behavior that she showed during the trial since. They certainly have no one to blame but themselves but to deny parole on grounds of danger to society is ridicules.

AstroCreep said...

Matthew, I concur but their behavior and “let’s shock the world” antics are what lead to the 50 year fascination. Had they plead guilty, showed remorse, and told the story to give the families closure, it would have been a smaller blip on the radar screen.

The actual crimes themselves are a huge part of the fascination too. The savagery of it and WHO they went after pretty much created a panic and gained worldwide attention.

Again, you can’t have it both ways... Shock the world then expect people to just forget about it and let them off the hook because typical murderers get off in 12-16. They aren’t typical murderers.

David said...

The ‘people’ of California passed the law so the ultimate decision maker could be held politically accountable. That means that absent an unusual set of circumstances, a lame duck Governor, who perhaps already has destroyed his/ her own legacy and political future, they are going nowhere. It is a very easy decision to make. This is what you get when a supposedly independent body is politicized.

Diana said...

"hen I say I react with laughter, it's not laughter at the act, but laughter at your nations cavalier attitude to the right to bare arms …"

I will fight to the death for my right to bare arms!

Mon Durphy said...

If the tables were turned and he let her out people on the other side would say the same shit, know what the lesson here is kiddos? Don't fuckin kill anyone

Mon Durphy said...

Couldn't agree more on the military, military spending is 2019-2020 is planned to be over 900 billion dollars as opposed to 150 the year before 9/11

Doug said...

Charlie - Did you forget about "The Troubles?"

I'm no fan of innocent people dying anywhere/anytime. I cannot comprehend your thought process...this I'd no laughing matter...ever!

As a Canadian, I tend to favour the rationale brought up by the advocates for gun control. I also gave no love for POTUS. He frightens me.

We have our own shame to own up to also. I did outreach in Vancouver's Downtown East Side during the Pickton/Missing Women's timeframe...I suppose that you would consider the murdered women "less than human" seeing they were "just" drug addicts and prostitutes!

Doug said...

IS no laughing matter

Doug said...

I wish you'd taken this route in your prior post

Doug said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Doug said...

"I will fight to the death for my right to bare arms!"

How about "I will fight to the death for my right to RESPONSIBLY bare arms!"

Mon Durphy said...

Kind of like "Freedom of Speech as long as at least 60 percent of people agree with it and it doesn't hurt anyone's feelings"

David said...

Doug note how he originally spelled ‘bear arms’. I believe that was what led to Diana’s comment.

21 Days Stop Smoking Programme said...

I'm an American who lived in Ireland for 20 years. You're right.

21 Days Stop Smoking Programme said...

Astrocreep, you're right that it's their actions of '69, and '70 that sealed their fate.

But they're no longer the same people. Other than being identifiable by DNA, it's hard to imagine any way that LVH of '69 is the same person as the Leslie of 2019. And punishing the Leslie that exists today has no effect on the Leslie of the trial.

John Seger said...

David, maybe "bear hug" LoL

Doug said...

Nice catch

I guess skimming over things while planning my father's funeral is not recommended...

Appreciate you bringing that to my attention

"Bear" or "Bare" - I do stand by my addition of "RESPONSIBLY"

With the appropriate apologies to Diana

Dan S said...

The svengali is dead. Lou Lou Horse Face lol. So juvenile. Let the old lady out. Clem's been out for 30 years.

Unknown said...

Lulu denied again? As Gomer Pyle would say: "Well ... surPRISE surprise!"
Any "family" paroles are an electric third rail for any California Gov ...
Probably never happen.

In other news, I hear Adam G's jamming at a vegan joint in Oakland this weekend. =D

Unknown said...

"I don't think Manson was a Klan-type racist. His racism was mostly abstract and political."

Respectfully disagree. Manson's racism to me is typical of prison culture.
In prison, you stay with your "tribe" or you just might die. Charlie was raised in prison. You don't snitch, and you stay loyal to your white / (black) tribe.

John Seger said...

She should NEVER be released. Not only was her crime horrific, but her antics during the trial were freaky. Singing, laughing, chanting, shaving her head and carving an X onto her forehead, grinning at the victim's families as she described how much "fun" it was to stab! Releasing her would send the wrong message. She participated in one of the most infamous murders in the USA. Rot in prison Lulu horse face!

Diana said...

I stand by my comment. My right to "bare arms" is sacred and inviolable. At least in the US; I won't go to Iran and test my thesis. When in Rome...

"Matthew, I concur but their behavior and “let’s shock the world” antics are what lead to the 50 year fascination. Had they plead guilty, showed remorse, and told the story to give the families closure, it would have been a smaller blip on the radar screen."

I have to disagree. The 50-year fascination has to do with who got murdered in the Tate part of TLB. If these were the Hinman/LaBianaca/Shea murders, sadly, no one would care. And the Tate part matters because of who she was married to, and connected to.

Manson himself is the yin to her yang and yes, I am saying he is the feminine/dark side/negative to her sun, because his notoriety is based on hers. That said, he fascinates because of how he wormed his way into powerful circles, and there is a nagging sense that so much truth was squelched in the process of convicting him.

"The actual crimes themselves are a huge part of the fascination too."

Sure, but not because they were the worst crimes in history, or even in CA history. As I've said I'm not a true crime buff but I've sampled the wares and frankly, I could continue after reading about Richard Ramirez' first victim, a little 9-year old girl. I can't even describe it, I've blocked out the details.

The TLB murders were bad, don't get me wrong, but nothing like Gacy, Ramirez, and that Highway Killer.

"The savagery of it and WHO they went after pretty much created a panic and gained worldwide attention."

Nope, it was the press that did it. WHO? Yes, I dealt with that, above, but WHO in and of themselves wouldn't matter if it didn't create a virtual industry.

There's a lot of money in Charles Manson. Not so much in the others.

Diana said...

PS, there isn't an edit function. I should learn to proofread better.

"I could continue after reading about Richard Ramirez' first victim, a little 9-year old girl. I can't even describe it, I've blocked out the details."

should be "couldn't continue"

In order for crimes to fascinate the general public they should be gruesome, but not too gruesome.

Dan S said...

LVH acted very nicely in the trial she is serving her sentence from

Robert C said...

It now seems pretty clear LVH is not leaving prison under her own power in a vertical state largely because there are not enough people that really care anymore. Generations have now passed and many today if not most don't even know who she is.

I always felt her best chance would have been in the early 80's when she was still relatively young, could have worn her best schoolgirl short plaid skirt and white blouse to the parole hearing, grabbed her ankles facing the board and pled her unreserved remorse while describing her fully rehabilitated person. Boom, she might have been sprung.

Instead it's now obviously a political hot potato that nobody wants on their docket, the conclusions thereof not really making any sense. Or what was one of the Family's chants … No Sense Makes Sense ?

So now what's the most dangerous thing granny can do if released ? Maybe organize a Family reunion bringing down all those surviving Family escapees of justice from Oregon and Washington to join with the California remnants ? Or grab an AR and go clean out LA city hall for us all as her final act of contrition ? Or could she join another cult and become high priestess ?

If they don't let her out we'll never know the answers to these riveting questions nor will we have any future action-bling to address and build on !!! So I sure hope she gets better than usual legal council and finds some judge willing to over-ride and set her free ....

Zelda Formaldehyde said...

David at 11:25 am said it best. The process is no longer a legal one, it is a political one. It's a method of buck-passing. Leslie has essentially lived a perfect stretch of prolonged incarceration, but it makes no difference. And the govervor(s) can limitlessly trot out the tired line of 'threat to society'. I don't really care if she or any of the killers is released, but please just be honest about it.

Mon Durphy said...

Why do you think Newsom is lying when he says she poses a risk to society?

Mon Durphy said...

You mean the asian girl Ramirez killed in the building basement in Frisco in 84?

Mon Durphy said...

Too bad she didn't act that way in the Labiancas bedroom that night

beauders said...

Doug, did it come out in the press in Vancouver that Pickton was most likely killing some of those women for an audience? I read a book "On The Farm" by Stevie Cameron that implied heavily that Pickton tortured and killed some of the women for an audience including bikers. There is a lot of that going on with street women who are not missed. The I-45 murders in Houston are also rumored to have had an audience as well.

Doug said...

There were humongous parties at the farm. Local bikers, politicians, sex workers and LE commingled at these events.

Some have said there may have been "snuff" elements involved.

This is typical of how brutal LE were during this time period.

http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/bloody+knife+fight+left+pickton+victim+clinging+life/3360169/story.html

StillGrooving said...

I'm certainly not surprised by the governor's actions … following the former governors. Is this woman dangerous? No one can seriously think she'd pose a threat inside or outside prison. I'd like to see her be given the chance to see a few years of freedom before she moves on. However, when I think about the original sentence given to her with the death penalty, I guess this is on par with denying parole. Maybe denying parole IS justifiable.

AstroCreep said...

StillGrooving- I agree with you 1000% she’s in no way a danger to society. I don’t think any of them are a danger to society and would probably live the remainder of their days as peacefully as they could.

No governor is going to defend the killer’s actions after massive petitions are signed. It would force the governor to have to answer those tough questions why he/she didn’t deny parole for a Manson Family killer.

“Well she only stabbed Rosemary's dead body while Tex was carving up Leno in the other room and that’s not as bad as real murder”.... it’ll never happen.

Dan S said...

She DIDN'T receive the death penalty

John Seger said...

Van Houten was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, before her sentence was automatically commuted to life in prison when California banned the death penalty in 1972.

David said...

John,

LVH's conviction is more complicated than that.

Yes, she was originally convicted and sentenced to death. That conviction was overturned on appeal for 'ineffective assistance of counsel'- Ronald Hughes' disappearance and the trial court forcing Maxwell Keith to argue the matter on a short timeframe. He moved for a mistrial which the court denied.

Her second trial ended in a hung jury: 7-5 for murder vs manslaughter.

Her third trial resulted in her receiving an sentence of something like 7-life, not the death penalty.

John Seger said...

David, I am aware of that. But to simply post that she didn't receive the death penalty is misleading and false. Her original sentence WAS death. It's a shame any of their sentences were changed. IMO they should have been gassed decades ago.

AustinAnn74 said...

Leslie Van Houten and the rest of her murdering friends forfeited their freedom just as permanently as they left the victims in their place of burial. How vulvar to even imagine her getting out & enjoying dinners with friends, walks on the beach, laying in a hammock on a beautiful, blue-sky day, being embraced by a lover etc., all while her victims are mere skeletons in a casket without earthly pleasures to enjoy. No f*cking way!!

John Seger said...

@AustinAnn74 EXACTLY! They are piles and piles of poop! đŸ’© Should be flushed,not paroled!

grimtraveller said...

John Seger said...

I am aware of that. But to simply post that she didn't receive the death penalty is misleading and false. Her original sentence WAS death

Yes but any sentence is subject to attempts to appeal, are they not ? So if a sentence is overturned on appeal, the original verdict is null and void. Even Leslie's second sentence of life in prison {with built in eligbility for consideration for parole} when the death sentence was outlawed by California was set aside by that appeal result. In other words, that result does not exist. So with that in mind, and particularly as you state your awareness of the nuances of her case, it's misleading to say "Van Houten was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, before her sentence was automatically commuted to life in prison when California banned the death penalty in 1972" because while technically true, it only tells 2 chapters of a 15 chapter story. It also does you no credit and cheapens your point when you go on about Van Houten's physical appearence, not once but twice.

grimtraveller said...

John Seger said...

Not only was her crime horrific, but her antics during the trial were freaky. Singing, laughing, chanting, shaving her head and carving an X onto her forehead, grinning at the victim's families as she described how much "fun" it was to stab!

Actually, she never described how much fun it was to stab during her trial. And do we know if and which members of the victims' families were present in court during the penalty phase when she did speak ?

She should NEVER be released. Releasing her would send the wrong message

What, that if you commit murder and within a few years recognize the error of your ways and try to turn your life around and pretty much succeed and become a useful person within prison while hardly setting a foot wrong in 45 years and having been incarcerated for 50 and refused parole 19 times, that you'll be deemed to have gotten away with it ?

John Seger said...

@grimtraveller,
With much respect, as I love your posts,
The fact these murders are so infamous and publicly noted, I think that is more of a reason to never let them out. Whether that makes them a political prisoner or not. The infamous spree killers and serial killers Should be used as examples. Is that fair? That's up for debate, but nothing will change my opinion. Clem and Squeaky should have never been paroled either.
As far as my credibility being reduced for calling Lulu a horsey face twice, oh well. She's a public figure that murdered, and giggled and made a horse's @ss out of herself during the trial. I could use much worse names to describe her, but I won't.
I have zero respect for any of these murdering idiots.

Dan S said...

Her original sentence was ruled invalid. You can't have it both ways

Dan S said...

They should have been put to death. Still i believe in redemption and two wrongs don't make a right. I think the mylai massacre happened at the same time but i guess 200 g**ks aren't worth one movie star

all8 said...

I don't think Newsome wants his name attached to any potential Manson parolee as the guy who didn't overturn a parole board decision. Don't blame him.

Robert C said...

all8 said: " I don't think Newsome wants his name attached to any potential Manson parolee as the guy who didn't overturn a parole board decision. Don't blame him. "

The thing of it is, I don't think there are very many today who care. Most who are older than me are now dead as are many of my age. I was a very young adult when it happened.

So I keep wondering why it would there be significant political ramifications for someone like Newsome to follow the parole board and cut her loose ? Sure there will be a few vocals plus perhaps a few media days before it's all forgotten. All Newsome has to do is tell the public, hey, the parole board said it was ok. So then I keep wondering what is it guys like Newsome and Brown see that many of us don't ?

Did you know that beautiful actress Dominique Dunne was strangled to death at age 22 in SoCal in 1982 and her murderer did **less the four years** ? He almost immediately became a head chef at a nice restaurant for a few years in LA but then left to be likewise in another city where he remains to this day. I mean, this guy had real hands-on involvement. I mean when you're staring in someone's face while physically snuffing them ... that's more than crossing a line. You don't come back from that.

And here we have LVH serving how long … multiple decades for inflicting what the coroner said was post-mortem wounds in the lower back of one individual with a high probability none of them being fatal had the victim been alive at the time ? Is that it ?

Tell me again, how long did the murderer serve for actress Dunne ? And how long has LVH served for actress Tate (of which LVH wasn't there) ?

I think the bulk of Americans today have gone batshit crazy without any common sense anymore. We already know the legal system has. Like lost airline luggage in the rings of Saturn, it just doesn't make sense.






beauders said...

When Van Houten's conviction was thrown out, it made it like she had never tried at the Tate/LaBianca murder trial at all. Only Manson, Atkins and Krenwinkel were given the death penalty at that trial.

Matthew said...

I would have to disagree that they should have been put to death years ago. If that would have happened, they would be forever young misguided hippies. This way, we watch them grow old and live with the guilt. I remember Pat once said that not one day goes by that she doesn't wake up knowing that she is a destroyer of life. Death would have been an easy way out.

Matthew said...

I also don't think that there would still be so much interest in the case had they all been put to death. I also don't think that if LVH were ever to be released that she would be out with friends having a blast every day. She is an old lady and doubt she has many friends. At least true friends and not friends because of her notoriety.

John Seger said...

@Matthew, Yes, good point. I remember Pat saying that too. On a Diane Sawyer interview I think. I think it would be the easier way out(execution) than being locked up for decades. I just think it would have been easier for the families of the victim's. Not having to deal with the parole hearings, the media hype, etc. For example, the horrific life of Frank Struthers. How terribly sad.

Matthew said...

John Seger said:
I just think it would have been easier for the families of the victim's. Not having to deal with the parole hearings, the media hype, etc.

Another excellent point. Maybe put down half for the families and save half for the curious.

Dan S said...

I believe dunne's murderer was a long time boy friend of hers. There's something worse about apathetic stranger murder than a heat of passion murder. And thrill killing is even worse. One of the Leopold and Loebs was released.

How much is it to house an inmate a year? 35000$? That's a couple bombs at least.

StillGrooving said...

I wish the governor had been honest. He should have just said, "It would be political suicide to allow this prisoner to walk free, therefore, I overturn the parole recommendation"

AustinAnn74 said...

Old lady? I know several women older than Van Houten that go out with friends all the time, do yoga, go on cruises, have boyfriends, etc. I think people are considering LVH a blue hair who is already using a walker & wearing adult diapers. The arguments that she wouldn't hurt a fly if released is irreverent. So is comparing other crimes to hers. It is what she did, not what she might do. Also,she didn't help herself by laughing, singing and acting like complete animal during the trial. She poured salt in the wounds of the families left behind. Nobody seems to give any thought to Rosemary's son or Leno's mom & children. Broken hearted doesn't come close to the horror of what they went through. So, everything is supposed to be forgotten because Leslie is eligible for parole?

Dan S said...

Turn the other cheek or eye for an eye. There's a middle ground too. We're more sophisticated than biblical times. She is NOT Tex, or Charlie for that matter

John Seger said...

When it comes to Lulu insisting she only stabbed Rosemary after she was dead, that is a guess.
There were pre and post mortem stab wounds in her back. Either way, that shouldn't lessen her contribution. She volunteered to go the second night ("I wanted to be a good soldier"), and her antics during the first trial were disgusting.

Unknown said...

If the governor has interest in a political future he could never release a Charles Manson family member not him he needs the votes

Unknown said...

That's what it's really happening here

Robert C said...

John Seger said: "When it comes to Lulu insisting she only stabbed Rosemary after she was dead, that is a guess. There were pre and post mortem stab wounds in her back."

Not really. Knife and bullet wounds on dead things don't generally bleed a lot. I know, I've seen it. There are other ways to discern the difference too. But the general area of LVH's stabs (butt and just above) were neither drenched in blood nor fatal spots even if RMLB had still been alive which she wasn't. At worst she could have been paralyzed had the spine been hit if she had still been a live and survived medical treatment for her other wounds.

John Seger said: "She volunteered to go the second night ("I wanted to be a good soldier"), and her antics during the first trial were disgusting."

That in no way should require anyone to serve anywhere close to how long she has for the stated crime, comparably speaking in California, especially with repeated recommendations for release from the parole board lately (which comes with limitations). All you're after is revenge and bloodlust which doesn't become anyone and has no business in the law.

Unknown said: "If the governor has interest in a political future he could never release a Charles Manson family member not him he needs the votes"

I now no longer see the risk for politicians releasing LVH for reasons cited in my earlier post above. Like I said, I don't see that many people **alive** now from that era, and who of the rest who don't remember anything about it would care one way or the other? SO the Guv just says the board says it's ok, there will be a short stink and media hype, then end of story.