California governor reverses parole board decision on Manson follower

[webfact]

California governor reverses parole board decision on Manson follower

 

Leslie Van Houten reacts after she was denied parole in Corona, California, June 28, 2002. REUTERS/Damian Dovarganes/Files

 

(Reuters) - California Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday reversed a parole board recommendation that the youngest of Charles Manson's murderous "family" of followers be released early from prison.

 

Newsom said in a written decision that he was concerned that Leslie Van Houten, who was 19 at the time of the killings, has the potential for future violence.

 

"When considering as a whole, I find the evidence shows that she currently poses an unreasonable danger to society if released from prison at this time," Newsom wrote.

 

Van Houten, 69, is serving a life in prison at the California Institute for Women in Corona for her role in the cult's 1969 killing spree.

 

January's decision by the parole board capped the latest of 22 attempts by Van Houten to persuade the panel that she be deemed suitable for release.

 

Newsom's reversal marks the third time that a California governor has overruled a parole board recommendation on Van Houten. Fellow Democrat Jerry Brown twice denied the board's recommendation that she be set free.

 

Manson, who died in prison in 2017, directed his mostly young and female devotees to murder seven people, including actress Sharon Tate, in August 1969 in what prosecutors said was part of a plan to incite a race war.

 

Although Manson, one of the 20th century's most notorious criminals, did not personally kill any of the seven victims, he was found guilty of ordering their murders.

 

He was also convicted later of ordering the killings of two others during that summer - music teacher Gary Hinman and stuntman Donald "Shorty" Shea.

 

Van Houten was convicted of fatally stabbing grocery owner Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, in their Los Angeles home on Aug. 10, 1969. The words "Death to Pigs," and "Healter Skelter" - a misspelled reference to a Beatles song - were found scrawled in the victims' blood on the walls and refrigerator.

 

The previous night, members of Manson's cult broke into the rented Los Angeles hillside home Tate shared with her husband, filmmaker Roman Polanski. Polanski was away in Europe at the time.

 

But Tate, who was 26 and eight months pregnant, was slain along with four friends of the celebrity couple, including coffee heiress Abigail Folger and hairstylist Jay Sebring.

 

Van Houten's 1971 conviction and death sentence were initially overturned on appeal, but she was retried, convicted and sentenced to prison in 1978.

 

(Reporting by Brendan O'Brien in Chicago; editing by Darren Schuettler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-04

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Tug]

Good

[ezzra]

I'll never know how come or why those virmins mongols Manson and his followers were allowed to breath air for as long as they did, they should have been condemned to death long time ago and certainly and definitely no parole..

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Tug said:

Good

No idea, I really don't have enough information to determine if she really would be a threat to society. Because that is apparently the issue here.

[Emdog]

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

I'll never know how come or why those virmins mongols Manson and his followers were allowed to breath air for as long as they did, they should have been condemned to death long time ago and certainly and definitely no parole..

You could look it up? They were given the death penalty, but Supreme Court decision negated death penalties until new laws were passed that met requirements. They weren't executed as that would require new trial, double jeopardy and all that.

[Caldera]

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

[arithai12]

17 minutes ago, Caldera said:

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

I think you hit the nail on the head. How else can you explain a system that keeps people on the death row for decades, if not for the greater good of the lawyers - at the expense of taxpayers.

 

 

[from the home of CC]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

No idea, I really don't have enough information to determine if she really would be a threat to society. Because that is apparently the issue here.

the states stopped prioritizing rehabilitation years ago, the impetus here is punishment..

[TVGerry]

26 minutes ago, Caldera said:

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

Death is instant, being locked up in a cage for the rest of your life is a far worse punishment. I'm all for the death penalty but since they put the murderous piece of trash to death, I'm pretty sure people are happy to see her locked up till she dies in jail even if it costs the taxpayers a little bit more,.

[ratcatcher]

She is probably harmless now. Looks like anyone's granny.

She is still in jail, and there she will stay until it's time for her to meet Charlie down in hell

 

[Pedrogaz]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

No idea, I really don't have enough information to determine if she really would be a threat to society. Because that is apparently the issue here.

How unusual you have admitted to not knowing everything....are you unaware that posters here have special powers that turn their opinions into facts?

[Pedrogaz]

50years in jail is enough. 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, from the home of CC said:

the states stopped prioritizing rehabilitation years ago, the impetus here is punishment..

Not according to the op.

[from the home of CC]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Not according to the op.

this is only a very recent development, California championed the three strike law after Washington in '94, they might be tiring of throwing folks into a human garbage disposal..

[madmen]

1 hour ago, Pedrogaz said:

50years in jail is enough. 

Check out the unedited pics of the people they slaughtered in 3 different houses on you tube. I would say she is an animal but that's an insult to animals

[IssanMichael]

2 hours ago, Caldera said:

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

And what about the people who died, can they be resurrected, they paid with their lives, they should have shot this vermin after being found guilty.

[TheHangingJudge]

5 hours ago, Caldera said:

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

I hope she lives to 120 And well done that man.

[Ulic]

Not sure if she is harmless or not, but in this case, life should mean life.

[Sujo]

Whats the point of having a parole board then. Dispense with it and the cost of it. Give all parole applications to the mayor.

 

50 years for a crime when you are 19 is more than enough. You are in jail as punishment, not for punishment. The whole idea of jail is rehabilitation.

[TheHangingJudge]

2 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Whats the point of having a parole board then. Dispense with it and the cost of it. Give all parole applications to the mayor.

 

50 years for a crime when you are 19 is more than enough. You are in jail as punishment, not for punishment. The whole idea of jail is rehabilitation.

Ok so you would be happy with her living next to you.

[Bluespunk]

13 hours ago, webfact said:

 Newsom said in a written decision that he was concerned that Leslie Van Houten, who was 19 at the time of the killings, has the potential for future violence.

BS.

 

If the reason being given for keeping her locked up, is that she is a danger to society, then the governor is talking through his derrière.

 

At 69, she is not a threat. 

 

If she is being locked up because of a desire to punish her due to the abhorrent nature of her crime, then grow a pair and say so. 

 

I might disagree and argue that 50 years is long enough, but I would respect the honesty of your argument and even concede your point has some merit. However, “potential for future violence”... yeah, right. 

[impulse]

11 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

BS.

 

If the reason being given for keeping her locked up, is that she is a danger to society, then the governor is talking through his derrière.

 

At 69, she is not a threat. 

 

If she is being locked up because of a desire to punish her due to the abhorrent nature of her crime, then grow a pair and say so. 

 

I might disagree and argue that 50 years is long enough, but I would respect the honesty of your argument and even concede your point has some merit. However, “potential for future violence”... yeah, right. 

 

How many future votes did he just nail down with that edict?

 

I agree.  It ain't about future violence, or even justice and rehabilitation and 50 years. 

 

It's politics.

 

[Basil B]

8 hours ago, Caldera said:

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

As a 19 year old more probably lead by elder members of the family, I agree probably justice has been served but also understand there maybe good reasons not to release her.

 

It is a sad situation...

 

 

[Pique Dard]

at 19 yo, you are an adult. if you don't know bye then killing is bad and against the law, when are you gonna learn that?

[Sujo]

10 hours ago, TheHangingJudge said:

Ok so you would be happy with her living next to you.

 

10 hours ago, TheHangingJudge said:

Ok so you would be happy with her living next to you.

No problem at all.

[oldrunner]

I enjoy seeing the "do gooders" crying for mercy. I agree it's time to re-publish the pictures of those innocent victims slaughtered while Manson's children ran around killing with glee. Putting off death penalties is nothing more than a lawyers cash cow. Review the case with same judge and limit appeals to 2 times.

[dick dasterdly]

7 hours ago, Pique Dard said:

at 19 yo, you are an adult. if you don't know bye then killing is bad and against the law, when are you gonna learn that?

More particularly in this case as they were quite happy to kill unknown strangers for no other reason than their 'leader' told them to do so....

 

Anyone happy to kill complete strangers for no reason at all, need to be locked up for the rest of their lives.

Edited June 5, 2019 by dick dasterdly

[mogandave]

Keeping someone who's 69 years old locked up for a crime they committed when they were 19 is insane any way you look at it. Either don't pussy around when it comes to the death penalty, or release prisoners after they've served two or three decades max. All other aspects aside, how much has this travesty been costing thus far? Incarceration, appeals, parole board hearings, etc. etc. Insane amounts for sure.

Well she cost a number of people their lives, and they’re never coming back.

I say let her rot.

[Lacessit]

Just give her a choice. A frontal lobotomy to reduce the risk to society, and she can go free. Or continue to rot in jail.

Age is irrelevant. I'm 76, and if I was homicidally inclined I could knock off quite a few people. You wouldn't see me coming.

[Credo]

Age does make a difference.   So does gender.   I suspect she is pretty unlikely to harm anyone.   She should be released on a tight, controlled probation with an ankle monitor.