Manson follower denied parole

Leslie Van Houten was convicted of murder in the La Bianca slayings

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/ap/manson%20follower--592805476_v2.mobile.jpg


CHINO, Calif. - Leslie Van Houten, the one-time follower of convicted serial killer Charles Manson follower long seen as the most likely of his ex-acolytes to win freedom someday, was denied parole Tuesday for a 19th time.

At the conclusion of the emotional three-hour hearing, the chairman of the parole board, Robert Doyle, said Van Houten was not yet suitable for parole because she had failed to gain complete insight into her crime and its motivation.

While commending her for her adjustment to prison and her work on behalf of other prisoners, Doyle and deputy commissioner Carol Bentley said the crimes involved were so atrocious and heinous that they must be considered in the decision.

"She does not look at herself to see what made her capable of this activity," Doyle said. Both he and Bentley said they were disappointed that Van Houten chose not to speak to them directly.

"It's been 15 years since I've seen you," Bentley said, "and commissioner Doyle has never heard from you."

Doyle criticized a report from a psychologist who he said accepted everything Van Houten told her and did not look beneath the surface.

He particularly noted that in the past, Van Houten has suffered from dependence on strong male figures who were able to control her. He suggested she needs more counseling on how to deal with men.

However, he said the concerns for public safety are not sufficient to give her a 10- or 15-year denial. He scheduled another hearing in three years.

Van Houten, who last appeared before a parole board in 2007, showed no response to the decision and was taken back to her cell.

During the hearing, she read a statement apologizing to the family of Leno and Rosemary La Bianca "for the pain I caused" and saying she understood their grief. She gave them a private written apology.

She said she understood the enormity of her crime and makes no excuses for her actions. She said she has gained insight during her 41 years in prison that is helping her to understand "so it does not happen again."

Louis Smaldino, a member of the La Bianca family, spoke during the hearing of the unending anguish they have experienced and suggested that Van Houten should have been executed. He urged the board to keep her in prison and deny another parole hearing for as long as possible.

"Miss Van Houten is a murdering terrorist, and her character does not change," he said.

Debra Tate, sister of the slain Sharon Tate, whose killing is not involved in this case, appeared on behalf of another La Bianca family member, Angela Smaldino. Tate said Smaldino believes Van Houten should be commended for her growth but thinks her behavior would be unpredictable in a changed world.

"It's not a risk that most of us would want to take," she said.
Van Houten's attorney, Brandie Devall, highlighted her impeccable disciplinary record.

"There is nothing in the record that suggests her dangerousness," she said. "You have a record before you of reform and rehabilitation. People can and do change."

Devall also asked the panel to consider Van Houten's age -- 19 -- when she joined in the La Bianca killings. She noted Van Houten came under the influence of Manson, "who had a knack for finding lost young people and manipulating them."

Devall quoted one of the original prosecutors in the case, Stephen Kay, who said in 1980 that Van Houten would be suitable for parole someday.
"We now have three decades more," she said. "There is no need for more time to observe Miss Van Houten."

However, Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Patrick Sequeira recounted the murders' savagery and urged the panel not to accept the idea that Manson was responsible and Houten was not.

"It's been said he turned people into mindless robots," Sequeira said of Manson. "But there were people in the commune who did not participate in the murders."

He noted that Van Houten chose not to answer questions of the panel at the hearing.

"Nevertheless, the real question that arises is who does this? Who joins this group after hearing the news of what happened at the Tate residence the night before?" Sequeira asked.

Arguing for her continued incarceration, he said, "There's just something about this woman, something about her that led her to cross a very heavy line and become involved in these brutal, savage murders."

Devall responded that current case law suggests the panel should look at "who the person is sitting before you today," and not base its entire decision on the crimes.

After the hearing, Devall said she will probably appeal the ruling.

Asked why Van Houten chose not to speak to the panel, Devall said "There's nothing new for her to add. She has said it all. This time the court won't be able to use her words against her."

Sequeira said he was pleased with the decision and felt Van Houten had not taken full responsibility for her crimes.

"She makes herself out to be a victim rather than a full participant ... I'd like her to tell the truth about what she did," Sequeira said.

Among those attending Tuesday's hearing was Barbara Hoyt, a former Manson family member, who said she had not seen Van Houten in 40 years.

"I hope my coming here stumped her a little bit," Hoyt said.

Hoyt said if she had not seen pictures of the older Van Houten, she would never have recognized her.

Van Houten was convicted of murder and conspiracy for her role in the slayings of the La Biancas, who were wealthy grocers. They were stabbed to death in August 1969, one night after Manson's followers killed actress Sharon Tate and four others.

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.

The Tate-La Bianca killings became one of the most notorious murder cases of the 20th Century and continues to rivet public attention 41 years later.

Very moving. A loving tribute to Sharon. Her beauty is timeless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAiQ8ctAHGg

:clap :clap :clap :clap :clap

She and the others should have to remain in prison. IMO, they don't deserve to be released from prison.

Very moving. A loving tribute to Sharon. Her beauty is timeless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAiQ8ctAHGg
Sharon Tate was born the same year as my mom - which may be why I have a soft spot in my heart for Sharon and her baby. May they both :rip:.

There is something kind of rotten as these animals are still alive while people we love are in heaven :confused:

There is something kind of rotten as these animals are still alive while people we love are in heaven :confused:

There certainly is, and if Leslie van Houten was truly repentent there were ways she could have demonstrated this throughout her 41 years. Her words & actions ring hollow to me.

Very moving. A loving tribute to Sharon. Her beauty is timeless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAiQ8ctAHGg

Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress.

As to the topic itself, Leslie Van Houten poses no threat to society, the California Parole Board isn't fooling anybody by saying that. They're keeping her in because of the notoriaty of her crime. I'm not necessarily saying she should be let out - I see both sides of it. However, the way the laws are in California she probably should be set free.

There certainly is, and if Leslie van Houten was truly repentent there were ways she could have demonstrated this throughout her 41 years. Her words & actions ring hollow to me.

I've got to disagree with you on this one. Out of all the Manson family, Van Houten is the only one I ever sympathized with, BECAUSE she has shown great remorse and steadfast dedication towards repentance in the past 41 years. What else could she do but accept her actions and try to lead a good life?

Liza--she may not have killed Sharon but it sounds like she had something to do with the La Bianca murders???

Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress.

As to the topic itself, Leslie Van Houten poses no threat to society, the California Parole Board isn't fooling anybody by saying that. They're keeping her in because of the notoriaty of her crime. I'm not necessarily saying she should be let out - I see both sides of it. However, the way the laws are in California she probably should be set free.
What's a pet peeve of yours, when people post tributes to Sharon Tate? That falls under too bad about it. Yeah, blame the Parole Board. They'll keep all of the Manson murdering pigs in prison until their deaths, as it should be. It's not about keeping them off the streets. It's about retribution. I'll save my tears for the victims. Van Houten stabbed Rosemary LaBianca about 20 times while her husband was stabbed by her co-murderers. They were a murdering gang, and because of all of them, Sharon Tate, her house guests and others, and the LaBiancas met grizzly deaths. The killers may have carved PIG into some of the victims or wrote it on the walls with the poor souls' blood, but the killers were all the pigs, including Leslie Van Houten, especially her. pig: They're lucky they dodged the death penalty. No more gifts.

Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress.

As to the topic itself, Leslie Van Houten poses no threat to society, the California Parole Board isn't fooling anybody by saying that. They're keeping her in because of the notoriaty of her crime. I'm not necessarily saying she should be let out - I see both sides of it. However, the way the laws are in California she probably should be set free.
I don't care if she poses a threat or not. Anybody that kills someone like that should rott in Hell. She's lucky she's alive at all. All of them should have been executed years ago.

"Men go to prison...dogs get put down."

If after all these years, she's unable to understand her motivation in killing/etc, then she either lacks intelligence or is apathetic.


(And I hope everyone catches the reference I made)

There's something wrong that she gets to live while she people she MURDERED in cold blood are dead.

I hope she rots in prison

What's a pet peeve of yours, when people post tributes to Sharon Tate? That falls under too bad about it.

No Janice - and it wasn't really directed at you - it's a pet peeve of mine that whenever people hear the name 'Manson' they think of Sharon Tate. It's amazing how many people think Leslie van Houten personally killed Sharon.

Yeah, blame the Parole Board. They'll keep all of the Manson murdering pigs in prison until their deaths, as it should be. It's not about keeping them off the streets. It's about retribution. I'll save my tears for the victims. Van Houten stabbed Rosemary LaBianca about 20 times while her husband was stabbed by her co-murderers. They were a murdering gang, and because of all of them, Sharon Tate, her house guests and others, and the LaBiancas met grizzly deaths. The killers may have carved PIG into some of the victims or wrote it on the walls with the poor souls' blood, but the killers were all the pigs, including Leslie Van Houten, especially her. pig: They're lucky they dodged the death penalty. No more gifts
I don't say I sympathize with what she did. I'm as well-acquainted with the details of the case as anyone. (For example, Rosemary was stabbed 16 times, not 20, and it was Tex Watson who killed her). I'm simply stating that the way the laws are written, the Parole Board really isn't following them. Whether that's right or wrong is debatable.

I don't care if she poses a threat or not. Anybody that kills someone like that should rott in Hell. She's lucky she's alive at all. All of them should have been executed years ago.

You might not care, but the law does. Call me old-fashioned, but I kind of think the law's important.

You might not care, but the law does. Call me old-fashioned, but I kind of think the law's important.
and the law says that she stays in prison . She can die an old ugly pig in there too.

and the law says that she stays in prison . She can die an old ugly pig in there too.

Uh... actually it says she has to be released UNLESS she poses a risk to society.

Liza--she may not have killed Sharon but it sounds like she had something to do with the La Bianca murders???

Yes, she was at the house and stabbed Rosemary, after Tex Watson had already killed her. I'm not defending what she did, I just wish people would keep the crimes straight.

Uh... actually it says she has to be released UNLESS she poses a risk to society.
and how do you know she doesn't pose a risk to society? Nobody knows unless she is released. After what she was involved in, why would anyone take that chance? As I said before....I don't care. She should rot in prison and nobody's changing my mind on that. Every single one of those involved in the murders should have been executed years ago. If she's truly changed then good for her. That's between her and God. It doesn't mean she should get a free pass out of prison.

I wonder at this point why they continue to go ahead with these parole hearings for her.

It's obvious to anyone who's followed the case that they have no intention of ever letting her out of prison. If they haven't done so at this point, it's incredibly unlikely that they ever will. And what would be the point? Are they going to finally allow her parole at age 70 and say, "yep, you are ready for society. Go out and...well, we don't exactly know what you're supposed to do with yourself at this age, but have fun trying!" ??

I am not positive but I think I read or heard where Van Houten has given up on being released anyway.

You might not care, but the law does. Call me old-fashioned, but I kind of think the law's important.
Nobody's breaking the law by keeping her in jail. Do you have a degree in Criminology as I'm sure these people do? She goes up for parole, and she's denied. That's the law, whether you like it or not.
Yes, she was at the house and stabbed Rosemary, after Tex Watson had already killed her. I'm not defending what she did, I just wish people would keep the crimes straight.
Who knows if Rosemary was dead or not; should we take the word of those evil slaughtering devils?
No Janice - and it wasn't really directed at you - it's a pet peeve of mine that whenever people hear the name 'Manson' they think of Sharon Tate. It's amazing how many people think Leslie van Houten personally killed Sharon.
Why shouldn't people think of Manson when they hear Sharon Tate's name? He ordered the killings. Had he not done that, those nine people would not have been savagely murdered that weekend. I don't read often that people think Houten killed Sharon Tate. You seem hung up on who gets blamed for what.
I don't say I sympathize with what she did. I'm as well-acquainted with the details of the case as anyone. (For example, Rosemary was stabbed 16 times, not 20, and it was Tex Watson who killed her). I'm simply stating that the way the laws are written, the Parole Board really isn't following them. Whether that's right or wrong is debatable.
Sure they are. Her lawyer would get her out of prison if the Parole Board wasn't following the letter of the law. Oh, excuse me, she only stabbed her 16 times and not 20. She also grabbed a snack out of the victim's fridge on her way out the door, the sicko. She's where she should be. People are held accountable for what happens during the commision of a crime, regardless of their role. That's why getaway drivers are charged with murders when people die during bank robberies, "without ever laying their eyes on the victims."

My husband's uncle has been in prison for murder since the late 60s. He was in prison for robbery and escaped. While out, he met a woman with a child. He moved in with her. Her soon to be ex-husband got jealous. He called the police told them that an escaped inmate was living there. The cops surrounded the house, and a shootout ensued. In the end, the woman and her three-year old son were killed. Despite the fact that ballistics proved that it was the cop's bullets that killed them, he was charged with double murder. It's the way it goes. He's become some sort of a minister in prison. He was ordained or something. I saw the pictures of the ceremony. Still, he'll most likely spend the rest of his life in prison. He's 70.

What's a pet peeve of yours, when people post tributes to Sharon Tate? That falls under too bad about it. Yeah, blame the Parole Board. They'll keep all of the Manson murdering pigs in prison until their deaths, as it should be. It's not about keeping them off the streets. It's about retribution. I'll save my tears for the victims. Van Houten stabbed Rosemary LaBianca about 20 times while her husband was stabbed by her co-murderers. They were a murdering gang, and because of all of them, Sharon Tate, her house guests and others, and the LaBiancas met grizzly deaths. The killers may have carved PIG into some of the victims or wrote it on the walls with the poor souls' blood, but the killers were all the pigs, including Leslie Van Houten, especially her. pig: They're lucky they dodged the death penalty. No more gifts.

We are so on the same page on this one. The only thing I might add is that it seems life in prison is no picnic either as these vermin keep clawing to get out. And like you, I save my tears for the victims - or maybe moreso their families who have had to live with the devastating grief caused by the Manson animals.

My husband's uncle has been in prison for murder since the late 60s. He was in prison for robbery and escaped. While out, he met a woman with a child. He moved in with her. Her soon to be ex-husband got jealous. He called the police told them that an escaped inmate was living there. The cops surrounded the house, and a shootout ensued. In the end, the woman and her three-year old son were killed. Despite the fact that ballistics proved that it was the cop's bullets that killed them, he was charged with double murder. It's the way it goes. He's become some sort of a minister in prison. He was ordained or something. I saw the pictures of the ceremony. Still, he'll most likely spend the rest of his life in prison. He's 70.

Wow, that's horrible. Was there ever a book or anything written on that case?

Wow, that's horrible. Was there ever a book or anything written on that case?
No, but it would make an interesting movie. I'll see if I can find anything on the topic.

My husband's uncle has been in prison for murder since the late 60s. He was in prison for robbery and escaped. While out, he met a woman with a child. He moved in with her. Her soon to be ex-husband got jealous. He called the police told them that an escaped inmate was living there. The cops surrounded the house, and a shootout ensued. In the end, the woman and her three-year old son were killed. Despite the fact that ballistics proved that it was the cop's bullets that killed them, he was charged with double murder. It's the way it goes. He's become some sort of a minister in prison. He was ordained or something. I saw the pictures of the ceremony. Still, he'll most likely spend the rest of his life in prison. He's 70.

Do you feel sorry for your husband's uncle for the situation that he is in? And why
were the police officers not punished in any way for their part in causing the deaths
of the woman and her three year old son? I feel that they should have been held
responsible in some way for it.

Nobody's breaking the law by keeping her in jail. Do you have a degree in Criminology as I'm sure these people do? She goes up for parole, and she's denied. That's the law, whether you like it or not.

The law says she has to be released unless she's a threat to society. After decades behind bars with a pristine record, I find it hard to believe. So yeah, I think the Parole Board is going against the law. But that is just my two cents.

Who knows if Rosemary was dead or not; should we take the word of those evil slaughtering devils?

All three of them agree on this fact, and Vincent Bugliosi believed it.

Why shouldn't people think of Manson when they hear Sharon Tate's name? He ordered the killings. Had he not done that, those nine people would not have been savagely murdered that weekend.

I'll let Debra & Patti Tate (Sharon's sisters) answer that one:

"Sharon's good name had been sullied and still today it is linked to that of pure evil. I hate it. I hate that her beautiful name is linked to Charles Manson."

I don't read often that people think Houten killed Sharon Tate. You seem hung up on who gets blamed for what.

You obviously didn't read most of the responses to the news then:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/07/06/manson.family.parole/index.html?iref=allsearch

Sure they are. Her lawyer would get her out of prison if the Parole Board wasn't following the letter of the law. Oh, excuse me, she only stabbed her 16 times and not 20. She also grabbed a snack out of the victim's fridge on her way out the door, the sicko. She's where she should be. People are held accountable for what happens during the commision of a crime, regardless of their role. That's why getaway drivers are charged with murders when people die during bank robberies, "without ever laying their eyes on the victims."

Janice, take a look at the other people who get paroled - both the getaway driver and the actual robber eventually get let out no matter what the state because of 'good behavior,' 'compassionate release,' and simple overcrowding. They get paroled. Van Houten isn't because of the notoriaty of her crime. It's really that simple.

I wonder at this point why they continue to go ahead with these parole hearings for her.

It's obvious to anyone who's followed the case that they have no intention of ever letting her out of prison. If they haven't done so at this point, it's incredibly unlikely that they ever will. And what would be the point? Are they going to finally allow her parole at age 70 and say, "yep, you are ready for society. Go out and...well, we don't exactly know what you're supposed to do with yourself at this age, but have fun trying!" ??

I am not positive but I think I read or heard where Van Houten has given up on being released anyway.

I agree, and I think it's kind of cruel that they do this. Tex Watson doesn't even bother to go to his parole hearings anymore.

I wonder at this point why they continue to go ahead with these parole hearings for her.

It's obvious to anyone who's followed the case that they have no intention of ever letting her out of prison. If they haven't done so at this point, it's incredibly unlikely that they ever will. And what would be the point? Are they going to finally allow her parole at age 70 and say, "yep, you are ready for society. Go out and...well, we don't exactly know what you're supposed to do with yourself at this age, but have fun trying!" ??

I am not positive but I think I read or heard where Van Houten has given up on being released anyway.

Nope, she went to her parole hearing last week and was denied again, her next parole hearing is in 3 years

The law says she has to be released unless she's a threat to society. After decades behind bars with a pristine record, I find it hard to believe. So yeah, I think the Parole Board is going against the law. But that is just my two cents.

"Sharon's good name had been sullied and still today it is linked to that of pure evil. I hate it. I hate that her beautiful name is linked to Charles Manson."

Janice, take a look at the other people who get paroled - both the getaway driver and the actual robber eventually get let out no matter what the state says because of 'good behavior,' 'compassionate release,' and simple overcrowding. They get paroled. Van Houten hasn't because of the notoriety of her crime. It's really that simple.

No, Liza, it is because of the fact that it was a heinous crime. I really
don't know what your problem is with the whole Manson Family issue
and why you are still defending these people. If Leslie Van Houten
has indeed changed in these 40 years, then good for her. That does
not mean that she should be released from prison, and the same goes
for the late Susan Atkins. And if Sharon Tate's name is still associated
with the Manson Family, it is because of what these evil monsters did
to her. You would probably be a good defense attorney for Leslie Van
Houten if she ever needed one at her next parole hearing. Please leave
us alone and please leave the victims of the Charles Manson Family
alone. And let Sharon Tate's sister speak for herself instead of feeling
you have to speak for her, because I doubt if you are really sincerely
in her corner.

The law says she has to be released unless she's a threat to society. After decades behind bars with a pristine record, I find it hard to believe. So yeah, I think the Parole Board is going against the law. But that is just my two cents.
The article stated other reasons, not just a threat to society.

All three of them agree on this fact, and Vincent Bugliosi believed it.
The bodies weren't found until the next morning, so nobody really knows. Besides, she was convicted of murder.


I'll let Debra & Patti Tate (Sharon's sisters) answer that one:

"Sharon's good name had been sullied and still today it is linked to that of pure evil. I hate it. I hate that her beautiful name is linked to Charles Manson."
I think their reasons and yours are different. You say it because he wasn't there. Her loved ones felt that way because she was so beautiful and Manson is such a flea bitten murderer. Of course he'll be connected to her forever. Same as OJ Simpson and Nicole Brown Simpson.

You obviously didn't read most of the responses to the news then:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/07/06/manson.family.parole/index.html?iref=allsearch
That's no big deal. I can find articles with other opinions.

Janice, take a look at the other people who get paroled - both the getaway driver and the actual robber eventually get let out no matter what the state because of 'good behavior,' 'compassionate release,' and simple overcrowding. They get paroled. Van Houten isn't because of the notoriaty of her crime. It's really that simple.

I read once that the Manson killers will never see the light of day because the majority of the American psyche couldn't handle it. Those crimes were so atrocious, henious and those responsible are where they should be. Who's to say she's not a threat anyway. She's got a nutty look in her eye. Maybe she can go live with you, lol. j/k

Who's to say she's not a threat anyway. She's got a nutty look in her eye. Maybe she can go live with you, lol.


OUCH!

The article stated other reasons, not just a threat to society.


The bodies weren't found until the next morning, so nobody really knows. Besides, she was convicted of murder.


I'll let Debra & Patti Tate (Sharon's sisters) answer that one:


I think their reasons and yours are different. You say it because he wasn't there. Her loved ones felt that way because she was so beautiful and Manson is such a flea bitten murderer. Of course he'll be connected to her forever. Same as OJ Simpson and Nicole Brown Simpson.


That's no big deal. I can find articles with other opinions.
I read once that the Manson killers will never see the light of day because the majority of the American psyche couldn't handle it. Those crimes were so atrocious, henious and those responsible are where they should be. Who's to say she's not a threat anyway. She's got a nutty look in her eye. Maybe she can go live with you, lol.

Well said, Janice

Why should the Manson followers even be paroled? They murdered several famous people, and they should have been given the death penalty in the first place.

Why should the Manson followers be paroled? They murdered several famous people, and they should have been given the death penalty in the first place.

Unfortunately, the death penalty in the United States was placed on
temporary moratorium in 1972(it was reinstated in 1977 with the
execution by firing squad of Gary Gilmore in Utah).

Why should the Manson followers even be paroled? They murdered several famous people, and they should have been given the death penalty in the first place.
I totally agree. I have no compassion for any of these Manson sickos. My compassion is with the victims.

I think their reasons and yours are different. You say it because he wasn't there. Her loved ones felt that way because she was so beautiful and Manson is such a flea bitten murderer. Of course he'll be connected to her forever.

I don't think anything you've ever said to me has offended me more. How dare you say that? My reasons came directly from reading that statement years ago, and had nothing to do with where Manson set his filthy foot. I hope the man rots in jail. I don't support the death penalty, but I wouldn't cry to see him hang.

Janice, you and I have disagreed on many things, but I've always had a respect for your opinions, and I expected the same of you. I'm very disappointed that you could think so little of me.

I don't think anything you've ever said to me has offended me more. How dare you say that? My reasons came directly from reading that statement years ago, and had nothing to do with where Manson set his filthy foot. I hope the man rots in jail. I don't support the death penalty, but I wouldn't cry to see him hang.

Janice, you and I have disagreed on many things, but I've always had a respect for your opinions, and I expected the same of you. I'm very disappointed that you could think so little of me.

And if you really cared about Sharon Tate's family, you would go to them and ask their opinion yourself
instead of just using an old newspaper article. Janice always speaks her mind on here and I am sorry
if you do not like it, but she and I and everyone else on here will continue to speak their minds regardless
of your approval or disapproval.

And if you really cared about Sharon Tate's family, you would go to them and ask their opinion yourself
instead of just using an old newspaper article. Janice always speaks her mind on here and I am sorry
if you do not like it, but she and I and everyone else on here will continue to speak their minds regardless
of your approval or disapproval.

Lee, you have no idea what you're talking about. I've been on the family's website for years and written to her sister before. What does it matter that the quote I used is old? She has a right to feel that way and her opinion struck a cord with me. Her sister is a kind soul and I respect her greatly.

I do not mind people speaking their mind, Lee. What I mind is Janice seeming to believe that I am trying to defend Manson. I take great offense to that, and if you had any understanding, you would see that.

I don't think anything you've ever said to me has offended me more. How dare you say that? My reasons came directly from reading that statement years ago, and had nothing to do with where Manson set his filthy foot. I hope the man rots in jail. I don't support the death penalty, but I wouldn't cry to see him hang.

Janice, you and I have disagreed on many things, but I've always had a respect for your opinions, and I expected the same of you. I'm very disappointed that you could think so little of me.
Oh please, this isn't personal. It's your own words. On page one of this thread, I posted a nice video tribute to Sharon Tate. You quoted it and wrote,
"Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress." When I asked you about it, you wrote, "it's a pet peeve of mine that whenever people hear the name 'Manson' they think of Sharon Tate. It's amazing how many people think Leslie van Houten personally killed Sharon."

So it's more about Leslie Van Houten than Manson with you because you said it twice. I didn't say anything offensive to you. You're the one who sympathizes with Leslie Van Houten. You make sure that people know that she and Watson stabbed Rosemary LaBianca 16 times, and not the 20 times that I posted. As if it matters. The woman is dead. I don't think you care about Manson, but it's clear that you feel bad for Van Houten. If so, that's you're opinion. Don't get mad at me because I point something out.

You accuse the Parole Board of breaking the law. If they were, Leslie's lawyer would prove it. They're not convinced that she has taken full responsibility for what she did. That's not breaking the law.

Do you feel sorry for your husband's uncle for the situation that he is in? And why were the police officers not punished in any way for their part in causing the deaths of the woman and her three year old son? I feel that they should have been held responsible in some way for it.
I don't remember all the details, but I know that his uncle didn't kill anyone. Two cops were suspended or something. To be honest, his uncle did bad time for years. He then shaped up and became a minister. I don't feel sorry for him. His actions led to the death of two people.

Oh please, this isn't personal. It's your own words. On page one of this thread, I posted a nice video tribute to Sharon Tate. You quoted it and wrote,
"Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress." When I asked you about it, you wrote, "it's a pet peeve of mine that whenever people hear the name 'Manson' they think of Sharon Tate. It's amazing how many people think Leslie van Houten personally killed Sharon."

So it's more about Leslie Van Houten than Manson with you because you said it twice. I didn't say anything offensive to you. You're the one who sympathizes with Leslie Van Houten. You make sure that people know that she and Watson stabbed Rosemary LaBianca 16 times, and not the 20 times that I posted. As if it matters. The woman is dead. I don't think you care about Manson, but it's clear that you feel bad for Van Houten. If so, that's you're opinion. Don't get mad at me because I point something out.

You accuse the Parole Board of breaking the law. If they were, Leslie's lawyer would prove it. They're not convinced that she has taken full responsibility for what she did. That's not breaking the law.

I agree with you, Janice

I don't remember all the details, but I know that his uncle didn't kill anyone. Two cops were suspended or something. To be honest, his uncle did bad time for years. He then shaped up and became a minister. I don't feel sorry for him. His actions led to the death of two people.

And I feel sorry for him, so I disagree with you on that point, Janice, but
I don't get mad at you for stating your opinion. That is where Liza and I
differ.

So it's more about Leslie Van Houten than Manson with you because you said it twice. I didn't say anything offensive to you. You're the one who sympathizes with Leslie Van Houten. You make sure that people know that she and Watson stabbed Rosemary LaBianca 16 times, and not the 20 times that I posted. As if it matters. The woman is dead.

You misunderstood why I posted that. I just wanted to show that I am well-educated with this case. I agree, it doesn't really matter, that poor woman died for no real reason.

Yes, it is about Leslie Van Houten. She is the topic of the post. Manson and Sharon Tate are not the topic. I have a great love for Sharon, and Manson is the devil. I also never said that Leslie should get out. I simply said that people seem to get the facts confused, and that I get annoyed by.

I don't think you care about Manson, but it's clear that you feel bad for Van Houten. If so, that's you're opinion. Don't get mad at me because I point something out.

I never said she should get out. I said that according to the law, it does seem as though she should. (And one more time, that is just my opinion, and I can understand why people disagree with me on it.) I'm not offended because of that, I'm offended because of this line:

I think their reasons and yours are different. You say it because he wasn't there. Her loved ones felt that way because she was so beautiful and Manson is such a flea bitten murderer. Of course he'll be connected to her forever.

I said that I don't like Sharon's name linked with Manson. When I explained why, you said I felt that way because Manson wasn't there. That's what I find offensive. I blame him completely for her death. In fact, I used to link their names the same way you do - UNTIL - I read that statement from her sisters.

And I feel sorry for him, so I disagree with you on that point, Janice, but
I don't get mad at you for stating your opinion. That is where Liza and I
differ.

That is where you clearly illustrate that you don't know me at all, Lee.

Janice and I have been debating politics for years. I've disagreed with her many times (and vice-versa). But I'll always agree more than anyone that we all have a right to our own opinions.

You misunderstood why I posted that. I just wanted to show that I am well-educated with this case. I agree, it doesn't really matter, that poor woman died for no real reason.

Yes, it is about Leslie Van Houten. She is the topic of the post. Manson and Sharon Tate are not the topic. I have a great love for Sharon, and Manson is the devil. I also never said that Leslie should get out. I simply said that people seem to get the facts confused, and that I get annoyed by.

I never said she should get out. I said that according to the law, it does seem as though she should. (And one more time, that is just my opinion, and I can understand why people disagree with me on it.) I'm not offended because of that, I'm offended because of this line:

I said that I don't like Sharon's name linked with Manson. When I explained why, you said I felt that way because Manson wasn't there. That's what I find offensive. I blame him completely for her death. In fact, I used to link their names the same way you do - UNTIL - I read that statement from her sisters.

I am sorry I accused you of favoring Manson and his followers but you
made several statements that made it seem like that was the case
even if it wasn't. This is a subject that raises a lot of emotion in people
and sometimes we can let that emotion cloud our judgement. I am sorry
if I offended you earlier. No hard feelings toward you.

You misunderstood why I posted that. I just wanted to show that I am well-educated with this case.
I was obsessed with the Tate killings before you were born. One of the first major adult books I read was Helter Skelter. I know every detail that's ever been made public about all the killings.
Yes, it is about Leslie Van Houten. She is the topic of the post. Manson and Sharon Tate are not the topic. I have a great love for Sharon, and Manson is the devil. I also never said that Leslie should get out. I simply said that people seem to get the facts confused, and that I get annoyed by.
Manson and Sharon Tate are part of this thread, for obvious reasons.
I never said she should get out. I said that according to the law, it does seem as though she should. (And one more time, that is just my opinion, and I can understand why people disagree with me on it.)
You went on and on about how the Parole Board was breaking the law, and how you're sympathetic towards Leslie Van Houten. You're saying two different things.
I'm not offended because of that, I'm offended because of this line:
Originally Posted by Janice
I think their reasons and yours are different. You say it because he wasn't there. Her loved ones felt that way because she was so beautiful and Manson is such a flea bitten murderer. Of course he'll be connected to her forever.
I had the wrong murderer at the time. Those hard core killers are all the same to me. It's Leslie Van Houten's name that bothers you when linked with Sharon, because as you said when I posted the video tribute to Sharon, "Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine. Leslie Van Houten had nothing at all to do with the death of Sharon Tate. She never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress."

A few posts later, you posted,
"No Janice - and it wasn't really directed at you - it's a pet peeve of mine that whenever people hear the name 'Manson' they think of Sharon Tate. It's amazing how many people think Leslie van Houten personally killed Sharon."


I'm not a mind reader. You threw both names out with your pet peeves, with one reason. You then get buggy with me. Make yourself clearer in your posts. Don't try to lay some guilt trip on me.


I said that I don't like Sharon's name linked with Manson. When I explained why, you said I felt that way because Manson wasn't there. That's what I find offensive. I blame him completely for her death. In fact, I used to link their names the same way you do - UNTIL - I read that statement from her sisters.
That's because you had already explained to me why it was a pet peeve. You said that it's a pet peeve that because Van Houten wasn't even there, never set foot on the property or laid eyes on the actress. You take offense when I say the same thing about Manson. No difference to me. I'll still think of Manson when I hear Sharon's name. I don't coordinate my thinking because of anyone's pet peeves, even Sharon's sisters.

Make yourself clearer in your posts. Don't try to lay some guilt trip on me.

I don't coordinate my thinking because of anyone's pet peeves, even Sharon's sisters.

I too think Liza should have made herself clearer in her posts, but she had
her feelings about this whole case and she let her emotions take control
of her thinking. I think you should be a little more understanding. I should
have been more understanding myself and I am sorry I wasn't.

I too think Liza should have made herself clearer in her posts, but she had
her feelings about this whole case and she let her emotions take control
of her thinking. I think you should be a little more understanding. I should
have been more understanding myself and I am sorry I wasn't.

Thanks Lee.

I probably should have been clearer with my posts, and certainly more understanding.

You went on and on about how the Parole Board was breaking the law, and how you're sympathetic towards Leslie Van Houten. You're saying two different things.

How is that two different things? I said I have some sympathy for Van Houten, because the way the law is written, it does seem to me as though she should get out. I never once said that I personally thought she should be released.

It's Leslie Van Houten's name that bothers you when linked with Sharon

You're right about that. It is simply a pet peeve of mine that some people are very uneducated about the crime (yet again, you weren't really the one I was talking about), and just associate any Manson follower with Sharon's murder. That's not sympathy. It's annoyance at people (mostly the ones who post on CNN, ABC, and NBC) who clearly don't know what they're talking about. That's the only pet peeve I was talking about. I just wish people would read up on the crime before they post their opinions. That's all I was trying to say. I admit, I could have been clearer.

Thanks Lee.

I probably should have been clearer with my posts, and certainly more understanding.
It's obvious that both you and Janice are very passionate about this topic - there's nothing wrong with that. What I don't understand is why Charlie Manson isn't on death row. :confused:

It's obvious that both you and Janice are very passionate about this topic - there's nothing wrong with that. What I don't understand is why Charlie Manson isn't on death row. :confused:



Manson and the family were originally senteced to death row. Then in 1972 California abolished the death penalty and all those on death row were moved to life sentences. Thats the only reason why Manson and his followers are still alive today.

Manson and the family were originally senteced to death row. Then in 1972 California abolished the death penalty and all those on death row were moved to life sentences. Thats the only reason why Manson and his followers are still alive today.
Oh, I see. Thanks, Mickey!

Manson and the family were originally senteced to death row. Then in 1972 California abolished the death penalty and all those on death row were moved to life sentences. Thats the only reason why Manson and his followers are still alive today.

Also, Leslie had her original conviction overturned and was granted a retrial. Her sentance at that point was life with the possibility of parole. She was not given the death penalty.