December 19, 1969 LIFE Magazine: The Green Caddie

Another cool tidbit from the December 9, 1969 LIFE magazine:

"The strange story of Charlie Manson and his brood of nubile flower children charged with murder begins on p. 20 of this week's issue. Written in New York by Paul O'Neil, it is based on legwork by our entire California staff plus a few others. In search of facts and pictures, they travelled from the surfers' canyons of Los Angeles to the heart of Death Valley and San Francisco's decaying Haight-Ashbury, and on the way they had some adventures of their own. Los Angeles Bureau Chief John Frook reports:  

"After all the pounding on doors, false steps and blind leads, there always seems to be that one shiny moment you remember. Reporter John Fried and Photographer Vernon Merritt, for example, got the job of covering the Manson Family's existence at the Barker ranch. Its a terrible place to get to and their journey involved four-wheel-drive vehicles and a helicopter, but they made it to the ranch, got their words and their pictures, and made it back again. The day ended in a restaurant in Death Valley with two Japanese journalists approaching and asking, please, for directions to the Barker ranch. Fried and Merritt couldn't say a thing."

"Reporter Judy Fayard tried to tack down people who might have known Manson or his followers. Late one night - "Make that one very dark night,' she says - in Las Flores Canyon, she scrabbled (sic) up a hillside to reach a deserted-looking house where some promising sources were supposed to live. 'Their apartment was in the very back. I went in and quite literally groped my was across the living rom and for the first time in my career the thought crossed my mind that yes, sex DOES make a difference in this business. But when I found them, they turned out to be nice and they gave me some good material."

"Luck - good and bad - figures mightily in a story of this kind. Merritt and I had been to Death Valley on a different story about 10 days before the Manson thing broke, and when it did I called a friend I had made there and asked if he'd heard of this desert commune. 'Sure,' he said, 'Why didn't you ask?' Now that is bad luck. But there was one moment when luck did seem to be with us. Trailing through Devil's Canyon, which was to have been Manson's escape route to the desert, we came upon a new, green Cadillac convertible, complete with a bullet hole in its trunk, wedged into an arroyo. We were sure we had a giant clue. Short of a parachute there is simply no way it could have got in there. Unfortunately I couldn't find any connection between the car and the Manson tribe. But I checked the registration, and Mr. J.E.Lopez, if you're interested, I know where your Caddy is."

Tex's thoughts on the subject....

I just read an interview Tex Watson did, (Manson's Right-Hand Man Speaks Out) in which the interviewer asked him if the crimes would of happened without Manson. This is what Tex had say in regards to that particular question. He also added something else, which I find interesting. Of course, Tex was full of caca most of the time, but who knows, perhaps he was right on the mark with what he said in his answer. Read on:

Q: Would the crimes have happened without Manson's order?

Definitely not! Bugliosi, the prosecuting attorney, agrees that Manson was the catalyst. We would never have gone out on our own and killed people. It was not our idea of an exciting night. We murdered after taking on Manson's beliefs and hatred toward society, but it was nothing we wanted to do. We could've said no, but our foolish hearts were darkened. True, I had anger in my heart and released it during the crimes. I had misplaced anger, but enough to kill? -- not without many other factors, none of which excuses my actions.

Manson had the motive. It was more than just his crazy philosophy and a copycat murder. Manson was angry at Doris Day's son, Terry Melcher, for not giving him a recording contract. Terry was an acquaintance who used to live at the house where the murders took place. It's believed that Manson was at the house looking for Terry the night before the murders and was offended by the new occupants. As a result, he sent us there to kill them and to start Helter Skelter. I also believe that Manson and another family member went to the house afterward and disturbed the crime scene.

James Franco set for hair stylist biopic

Article by Catherine Shoard for guardiannews.com

Franco is to star and direct Beautiful People, a biopic about Hollywood celebrity hair stylist Jay Sebring who was murdered by a member of the Charles Manson cult.

Hairy tales in Hollywood today as it emerges that James Franco is set to direct and star in a film about a visionary hair stylist, while a real-life tress-dresser on the new Superman movie is suing Warner Bros.

Franco's film is Beautiful People, a biopic of Jay Sebring, who tousled the barnets and more besides of multiple celebrities in the 1960s before being murdered – along with sometime girlfriend Sharon Tate – by the cult led by Charles Manson.

Franco is currently in Park City for the Sundance film festival, where he's promoting three projects: Interior. Leather Bar, which he co-directed, Kink, a fetish documentary which he produced, and the biopic Lovelace, in which he costars.

Meanwhile, Cheryl Pickenback is suing producers on Man of Steel for injuries allegedly received on set. Pickenback, a professional movie coiffeur, says she was instructed to walk across an Illinois set that was made to appear like rubble to attend to an actor's hair between takes. "Severe and permanent" injuries apparently resulted from a fall she sustained on the "fractured and uneven walking surface".

 Thanks, Max Frost

(Max will soon be a regular contributor on Eviliz)

Examining Fairness

Debating Which of the "Family" Members Truly Deserve to be Released

                            I think a few things have happened in recent years- Bruce got turned away a second time by the Governor, Susan was not allowed to even die at home, and Leslie is now getting 5 year denials- which make me feel it is about time to acknowledge that the chances of any of the convicted "Family" members ever getting out is nil. For those of you who don't play soccer that means zero :)  So I thought today I would take a moment to smoke a joint and open my mind honestly to a few reasons some of them might have deserved a second chance, and then try to answer myself as to why it has never been enough? Certainly not an easy task to get blasted this early on a weekend morning and try to play mental tennis with myself - but I feel I am up for the challenge, and anyway it is not the worst thing you could play with yourself. ( did that come out right?) So let me take one last hit and give this a shot....


                          Some say Susan Atkins deserved to be paroled and maybe that's so. She never really killed anybody herself, and was the longest incarcerated female in California history at the time of her death. She was unable to sit up in bed or stay awake for long periods of time, and couldn't possibly be a threat to anyone. She had a great post conviction record and even took pictures with Gov. Arnold at one point in time. Certainly, she had a dedicated husband and steady job waiting for her, before she got to ill for any of that to matter. It would have been more of a show of mercy to her family to let her have her last few days at home than an insult to her victims, and for sure she wasn't going to hurt anyone else. But Sexy Sadie told a 9 month pregnant women she was going to die and she didn't care. She helped Kill 4 people that night directly, and if you add her trip to Gary's, we wind up with 5 lives she participated in taking. How can we teach a lesson and still show mercy to a women who by her own boasting admission chose to terrorize instead when asked show it to someone else?

                        Some say Bobby Beausoleil deserves to be paroled and maybe that's so. Bobby committed one stupid act over 40 years ago when he was a young cocky punk who thought he knew it all. Bobby has always stayed true to himself, and never used religion or anything else as a crutch. He has grown into a very smart and talented musician, who in jail, has made a whole lot out of very little. Until her recent death- he had a loving wife and fine family waiting on him at home and surely wouldn't have done anything stupid if he is given a chance to join them. But Bobby tortured a guy who he also called a friend. Bobby has changed his story three times and to this day tries to distance himself from the others. How can we release a guy who is still in denial?

                       Some say Bruce Davis deserves to be paroled and maybe that's so. Bruce didn't directly kill anybody and has been getting one year denials since basically I was in 6'th grade. Bruce found religion and has a good family waiting on him should he ever get home. Bruce counsels others in prison and has dedicated his life to the church. But Bruce is a sneaky little bastid as well, and there will always be the chance he knows more than he will tell. He possibly committed other murders and refused to cooperate and lied when asked about them. How can we free a man we can never really trust?

                      Some say Leslie Van Houten deserves to be paroled and maybe that's so. LULU was the youngest of them all when it happened, and of the TLB murders- was the least involved. She has an almost spotless prison record in over 40 years and has mentored and tutored other women. She has a great support group to help her when released. She had a chance to prove herself while out between her second and third trials and acted exemplary. If ever there was a case of young and stupid- LULU is the poster child. But Leslie Van Houten has the one strike against her which none of the others have to answer for. She asked to be part of it. How can we grant a second chance to the one person who volunteered? 

                    Some say Charlie Manson deserves to be paroled and maybe that's so. Charlie never killed anyone himself ( that can be proved anyway lol) and he wasn't even there when the victims were killed. He has done over 40 years for being an accessory, and wasn't even allowed to act as his own lawyer at his trial. He is an older more peaceful man who simply wants to rejoin his ATWA nation and live out his days playing music with Star and Greywolf, and maybe learn how to use App's on that cell phone. But Charlie is the "Most Evil Man Alive". How can we set free the face of evil and still expect our children to sleep at night?

                  Some say Patricia Krenwinkle deserves to be paroled and maybe that's so. Pat has the best post incarceration record of the them all and with the death of Susan Atkins has been in a California clink longer than any women ever. She has shown the most remorse and has clearly become a kind and sensitive person. But Pat was absolutely brutal on those two nights and she personally caused pain and suffering beyond anything anyone should ever have to endure. How can we justify the parole of one of the primary culprits in one of the most infamous murders of all time?

               Some say Tex Watson deserves to be paroled- but I am not one of them. Anyone who thinks this animal should be anywhere besides hell or taking it up the hinalinous against his will, and painfully, from the largest and angriest man in the Mule State Prison is no longer allowed to read my posts.

                                      So there you have it. Some pros and cons for all of them done as fairly as my mind would allow me to do them. And,  absolutely there are arguments to be made for almost all of them by this time. Good arguments.  It is a very hard decision in some cases. Bobby, LULU, or Pat wouldn't hurt anyone if they got out and I know that. I want to be Fair. But, I guess how I feel is that Fair is important, but equally important for both sides. How can you be Fair to both? Many people feel it is fair now to let the convicted go home. The victims families feel it is Fair for the convicted to spend the rest of their lives in jail, as in most cases they were supposed to die for their crimes. When you have two groups of people who want different things and you only have one choice- how can you be Fair to both?? In my opinion- if you have to err- do it on the side of those who were harmed and not the side of those who did the harming. They all wound up depending on fairness from this decision together- but those who harmed did not have to be there, and the harmed had no choice....


St. Circumstance

                 

Thanks for MANSON success

Matt - Post if you want:

I want to thank ALL for the totally unexpected success of MANSON's return to a theater - after over 3 decades.

Our final encore showing out-grossed every previous showing. AND, of course, NOW the cult classic is poised to grace screens all across America - once again.

In the final Q & A a person asked what the "truth" is and I replied: The truth is what you want to make of it - because now there are only previously undiscovered pieces to the puzzle - waiting to be revealed.

IE: When Bugliosi interrogated Gregg Jakobson about a white vs black war, Gregg confirmed that Charlie "advocated" for the black man to "serve" white man as "President", "the police" and even "legislators."

Then, all the prosecutor needed was a witness to drop the words "President", "the Police" and "legislators" and instead say: "serve white man" and we got an "evil mastermind" trying to ignite a "Black / White" race war -Helter Skelter.  BUT, I'm NOT complaining!!! Nor is the government that collects tax $$$ on the revenue made from the exploitation of MANSON.

My Best
Robert

Newest Manson Photo

Eviliz gets this one first!

Leslie was free in 1978

One not-very-discussed fact about Leslie Van Houten is that in 1978 while awaiting re-trial, she was free on bond.

During the original trial Van Houten's attorney, Ronald Hughes went missing in late November of 1970 while taking a break at Sespe Hot Springs. He later turned up dead. The Manson Family brashly took credit for this as the beginning of the "retaliation murders". It is far more likely (and agreed upon by TLB Scholars) that he died tragically in a flash flood.

She therefore won a retrial in 1977 on the grounds of ineffective representation by counsel. Her second trial ended in a hung jury. She was then granted a third trial.

A fact that is rarely brought up is that Leslie was granted bail for her third trial. That bail was $200K. She was free for around six months or so. During that time she worked as a legal secretary while she prepared for court and lived with an old friend.

While out on bail in 1978 she attended the Oscars with a friend... and wasn't recognized. John Waters wrote about her experience that night:

"But what did you talk about to the people you met that night?" I wondered, knowing she had been released from death row not that long before, not exactly a center of industry screenings or "For Your Consideration" Oscar campaigns. "If someone brought up one of the nominees," she shrugged, "I'd just say 'No, I missed that one' or 'I was away when that was playing.'"

Parole Denied for Leslie

US News | Weird News | More ABC News Videos

Original Story here

A parole panel refused an emotional bid by former Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten to release her from prison 44 years after she participated in a notorious set of murders.

The denial came at the 63-year-old's 20th parole hearing on Wednesday, where the panel heard from relatives of the victims who were opposed to her release.

Board of Parole Hearings Commissioner Jeffrey Ferguson told Van Houten she had failed to explain how someone as intelligent and well-bred as she was could have committed the "cruel and atrocious" murders of Leno and Rosemary La Bianca. She won't be eligible to ask for parole again for five years, but Ferguson said she could request another hearing sooner if circumstances change.

"The crimes will always be a factor," he said. "The question is whether the good will ever outweigh the bad. It certainly didn't today."

Van Houten was convicted of murder and conspiracy for her role in the slayings of wealthy Los Angeles grocers Leno and Rosemary La Bianca. They were stabbed to death in August 1969, one night after Manson's followers killed actress Sharon Tate and four others. Van Houten was 19 at the time.

Van Houten did not participate in the Tate killings but went along the next night when the La Biancas were slain in their home. During the penalty phase of her trial she confessed to joining in stabbing Mrs. La Bianca after she was dead.

"I know I did something that is unforgiveable, but I can create a world where I make amends," Van Houten said before the decision.

With survivors of the LaBiancas sitting behind her at the California Institution for Women, Van Houten acknowledged participating in the killings ordered by Manson.

"He could never have done what he did without people like me," said Van Houten, who has been in custody for 44 years.

The ruling came after a full-day hearing at which six representatives of the La Bianca family spoke in anguish about the loss of the couple.

"Today after 44 years, your crimes still instill fear in innocent people," said Ferguson. "The motive was the worst I can imagine, to incite a race war. Your crimes were gruesome and bloody."

During her comments, Van Houten repeatedly said that she was traumatized by her parents' divorce when she was 14, her pregnancy soon after and her mother's insistence that she have an abortion.

"Many people have traumatic childhoods," said Ferguson. "You have failed to explain at this time what would cause you to commit such horrific atrocities."

Van Houten showed no reaction to the ruling and quickly was escorted out of the room.

In her final statement, Van Houten apologized to everyone she harmed.

"I know that the pain goes on generationally. I want the victims to know I'm deeply ashamed of what I have done," she said.

After years of therapy and self-examination, she said, she realizes that what she did was "like a pebble falling in a pond which affected so many people."

"Mr. and Mrs. La Bianca died the worst possible deaths a human being can," she said.

Arguing to the board, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Sequiera said some crimes may be an exception to the law guaranteeing the possibility of parole.

"There are certain crimes that are so heinous, so atrocious, so horrible that it should cause denial of parole," he said, elaborating on Van Houten's contradictions over the years.

In response, Van Houten's lawyer, Michael Satris, said his client "sank to the depths of Dante's inferno and she put herself there by consorting with the devil himself, Charles Manson."

However, Satris said his client has totally reformed herself.

"Leslie committed a great sin, a great crime in 1969, and in that time (in prison) she has developed into the equal of a saint," he said. "Everything she does is for humanity."

Van Houten was portrayed at trial by her defense lawyers as the youngest and least culpable of those convicted with Manson, a young woman from a good family who had been a homecoming princess and showed promise until she became involved with drugs and was recruited into Manson's murderous cult.

Now deeply wrinkled with long gray hair tied back in a ponytail, Van Houten at times seemed near tears but did not break down at the Wednesday hearing.

She said that when she heard the Manson family had killed Tate and others, she felt left out and asked to go along the second night.

Asked if she would have done the same had children been involved, she answered, "I can't say I wouldn't have done that. I'd like to say I wouldn't, but I don't know."

Asked to explain her actions, she said, "I feel that at that point I had really lost my humanity and I can't know how far I would have gone. I had no regard for life and no measurement of my limitations."

Van Houten has previously been commended for her work helping elderly women inmates at the California Institution for Women. She earned two college degrees while in custody.

Other members of Manson's murderous "family" have lost bids for parole.

One former follower, Bruce Davis, was approved for parole last year only to have Gov. Jerry Brown veto the plan in March, saying he wanted the 70-year-old Davis to reveal more details about the killings of a stunt man and a musician. Davis was not involved in the slayings of Sharon Tate and six others.

Manson, now 78, has stopped coming to parole hearings, sending word that prison is his home and he wants to stay there.

Quotes from Leslie Today at the Hearing

 Source: abcnews.go.com

"I know I did something that is unforgiveable, but I can create a world where I make amends," Van Houten said. "I'm trying to be someone who lives a life for healing rather than destruction."

"He could never have done what he did without people like me"

[I was] "like a pebble falling in a pond which affected so many people."

"Mr. and Mrs. La Bianca died the worst possible deaths a human being can," she said. "It affected their families. It affected the community of Los Angeles, which lived in fear. And it destroyed the peace movement going on at the time, and tainted everything from 1969 on."

Parole board commissioner Jeffrey Ferguson asked her, "You felt left out and you wanted to be included the next time, is that correct?"

"Yes," Van Houten said, adding that another of the women tried with Manson, Patricia Krenwinkel, had been like a sister to her and she knew that Krenwinkel had participated in the first round of killing.

"She had crossed the line in her commitment to the race war and I wanted to cross the line, too. ... It was something that had to be done," she said.

FROM the LA Times:

"I twisted myself to the point where I thought this had to be done and I participated".

Asked if she would have done the same had children been involved, she answered, "I can't say I wouldn't have done that. I'd like to say I wouldn't, but I don't know."

Asked to explain her actions, she said, "I feel that at that point I had really lost my humanity and I can't know how far I would have gone. I had no regard for life and no measurement of my limitations."

Leslie Van Houten Parole Hearing Today

Today, June 5, 2013, is the 20th parole hearing for Leslie Van Houten.  What do you think the chances are this time for her parole?  Will she go the way of Bruce Davis and be recommended for parole only to have that opportunity negated by the governor?   Will she be outright denied like she has 19 times before?  Or will she be granted parole?

We will let you know the board's decision as soon as we learn of it.  In  the mean time here is a December 11, 1969 Pasadena Star News article, one of the first articles to feature Leslie.

MUZZLE ORDERED IN TATE CASE

Strict limits were ordered Wednesday in Los Angeles on principals in the case of the slayings of Sharon Tate and six other persons.

Superior Court Judge William B. Keene said any violation of his order would be considered contempt of court.

His order -- similar to that issued to guarantee a fair trial for Sirhan B. Sirhan, convicted of killing Sen. Robert F. Kennedy -- came after three young women defendants waived arraignment on murder charges.

Judges' Ban

Judge Keene restricted "attorneys, public officials, law enforcement officers, grand jurors, witnesses and others from making extrajudicial statements... related to this case."

A section directed at defense attorneys told them not to release evidence they intend to present not to express an opinion on the weight, value of effect or any evidence in establishing guilt or innocence.

Girl At Scene

Attorneys for one defendant last week made public her story that she was at the scene of two sets of killings, and gave limited details of her account.

Susan Atkins, 21, Linda Kasabian, 20, and Leslie Louise Van Houten, 19, were impassive during the waiving of arraignment and reading of the publicity order.  The murmured "no" when asked if they had questions about their rights or about the order.

Dec. 22 was set for pleas from Mrs. Kasabian and Miss Van Houten and Dec. 16 was set for Miss Atkins.  Miss Van Houten was identified by in the proceedings, with her home town given as Monrovia, Calif.  She previously had been identified as Leslie Sankston.

Monrovia High Grad

Miss Van Houten was reported to have gone through schools in Monrovia, at least from junior high school onward, graduating from Monrovia High School in 1967.

A girl friend said Miss Van Houten started to drop out of school activities in her senior year and had considered entering a convent to become a nun soon after graduation.  She apparently changed her mind and completed a course in a secretarial school in Manhattan Beach while living with her father, Paul Van Houten.

"She was a nice girl," the friend commented.

The three, with Charles M. Manson, 35, Charles D. Watson, 24, and Patricia Krenwinkel, 22, were indicted on murder conspiracy charges Monday in the slayings of Miss Tate and four others at her home last Aug. 9, and of Mr. and Mrs. Leno LaBianca the next night.

Watson is in custody in McKinney, Texas and Miss Krenwinkel is in custody in Mobile, Ala.

The bearded Manson, identified as the "God" and "Satan" of a communal group whose members slavishly did his bidding, is to be arraigned Thursday.  He was brought to L.A. Tuesday from Independence, Calif., where he had been held since being arrested in October.  He is accused of operating a car theft ring for the band's desert commune near Death Valley.