Manson gang member Leslie Van Houten to be paroled. California stopping appeal of her release

I think it's safe to say that without Charlie Manson, Van Houten, today, would be a quiet 73 year old grandmother, probably living in a senior community near Fresno, Ca. That being said, she did commit willful murder, for which she received the death penalty. She may have come to regret her actions, but the La Biancas are just as dead as the day she killed them.
 

On the one hand she has served 53 years, is now in her seventies and unlikely to be a risk to anyone but, I do remember this case; they slaughtered everyone they could find in that house including a heavily pregnant woman and her unborn child.

I think Leslie Van Houten should spend every remaining day of her miserable life, locked up.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
I think it's safe to say that without Charlie Manson, Van Houten, today, would be a quiet 73 year old grandmother, probably living in a senior community near Fresno, Ca.
Click to expand...
Perhaps... and I suppose a lot of murderers have "if only" stories. Not, in my opinion, something that should be taken into account.

What we do know was that when given the opportunity she took it.
Trish said:
I think Leslie Van Houten should spend every remaining day of her miserable life, locked up.
Click to expand...
Yep!
 

Trish said:
On the one hand she has served 53 years, is now in her seventies and unlikely to be a risk to anyone but, I do remember this case; they slaughtered everyone they could find in that house including a heavily pregnant woman and her unborn child.

I think Leslie Van Houten should spend every remaining day of her miserable life, locked up.
Click to expand...
They didn't get her on the Tate murders but got her on the LaBianca murders the second night. She was one of the stabbers. But yes just knowing her peers annihilated all living beings in a house and did so her self on a second occasion says something about the individual.
 
At this point all society can do is wait to see if Leslie Van Houten hooks up with another nut job to commit similar crimes. Or will she meld into society & never be heard from again?

What was & what is varies.


A Sacramento mass shooting suspect completed his 10-year sentence in four years. Here’s why.
Nicole Nixon
Wednesday, April 13, 2022 | Sacramento, CA

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2...his-10-year-sentence-in-four-years-heres-why/
 
Does a life sentence really serve as a deterrent? I kind of doubt it. When someone commits murder, or takes part in a murder committed by another person, do they really sit down and analyze: "Well, if I'm caught, being that this state tends to issue life sentences, maybe I'd better rethink the whole thing and not commit this murder?"

I doubt that such a level of reasoning, let alone familiarity with the law and the probability of various kinds of sentences, even figure in at all.

Maybe enormous traffic speeding fines might serve a purpose in slowing down drivers. But murder? I doubt it.
 
Sunny said:
Does a life sentence really serve as a deterrent? I kind of doubt it. When someone commits murder, or takes part in a murder committed by another person, do they really sit down and analyze: "Well, if I'm caught, being that this state tends to issue life sentences, maybe I'd better rethink the whole thing and not commit this murder?"

I doubt that such a level of reasoning, let alone familiarity with the law and the probability of various kinds of sentences, even figure in at all.

Maybe enormous traffic speeding fines might serve a purpose in slowing down drivers. But murder? I doubt it.
Click to expand...
In some Scandinavian countries, speeding fines are based on the annual income of the convicted driver, so fines in the range of thousands of Kroner are laid and collected. Kind of like if John Travolta got a $75,000.00 fine for driving 120 mph on the freeway in LA. And his Lambo or McLaren was seized and crushed, by court order. Justice. JimB.
 
Sunny said:
Does a life sentence really serve as a deterrent?
Click to expand...
I think I've read that studies show it doesn't. ( I'd take a guess on the stats but @Alligatorob is fact checking me. ;) ) Just as you say, Sunny, the typical criminal is not very smart or self-aware. He doesn't care what the sentence is because he doesn't think he'll be caught.

@Knight's link is an example of why I think Van Houten should be let out. Criminals with far longer rap sheets than hers walk after a few years. It's those revolving door criminals who are the repeat offenders.

But what are we really talking about here? I keep hearing details of her crime and they're terrible, but so are the details on most murders, we just don't know about them.

I agree we need longer sentencing for most crimes, but I think we should try for some sort of evenhandedness in our courts. Just because we saw reenactments of her crime on TV she shouldn't have to serve almost three times as much as other criminals just because their crimes weren't as famous. Maybe if we saw re-enactments of some of the other thousands of murder cases, some that involve children and slow torture, we wouldn't think she was the worst person who ever lived.

Are we going to base our judgements and sentencing on public opinion and videos now? Everyone saw the video of George Floyd dying so Chauvin get's an extra long sentence. No one had a video of George Floyd breaking into a woman's house and pushing s gun into her pregnant belly while his friends robber her, so it's like that never happened and he's a national hero.

A judge got in trouble, something that almost never happens, because the public didn't like his sentencing for Brock Turner. His sentencing had been in keeping with other similar cases, but in Turner's case the victim happened to be a really good writer who had written and published a moving essay about how much the incident had hurt her (although she admitted she had no memory of it.) What about all the actual rape victims who aren't good writers? Shouldn't their assailants be punished as much? Well they aren't.
 
By several accounts Van Houten was doing hard drugs including hash and LSD before she met Manson. Can't blame every thing in her life on Manson. Also shows how easy one thing can lead to another including different/the wrong people in one's life.

That being said being high so much of her late youth early adulthood corrupted her thinking and stalled her maturity which made her vunerable to the likes of Manson. Didn't manufacture murderous thoughts but did make her more susceptible to suppressed urges and 'suggestion'-Apparently her parents divorced in her mid teens which probably created/festered some resentment which Manson could've picked up on.

But again doesn't excuse or rationalize murder. It's a simple rule to follow-don't kill, can get angry, frustrated, resentful etc but can't kill. She missed or ignored that lesson.
 
WhatInThe said:
By several accounts Van Houten was doing hard drugs including hash and LSD before she met Manson. Can't blame every thing in her life on Manson. Also shows how easy one thing can lead to another including different/the wrong people in one's life.

That being said being high so much of her late youth early adulthood corrupted her thinking and stalled her maturity which made her vunerable to the likes of Manson. Didn't manufacture murderous thoughts but did make her more susceptible to suppressed urges and 'suggestion'-Apparently her parents divorced in her mid teens which probably created/festered some resentment which Manson could've picked up on.

But again doesn't excuse or rationalize murder. It's a simple rule to follow-don't kill, can get angry, frustrated, resentful etc but can't kill. She missed or ignored that lesson.
Click to expand...
To me, HARD DRUGS back then were Heroin, and Cocaine, and Morphine. Add the new opiodes, and meth/fentinal to that list. JimB.
 
I don't know what to think either. I don't think she is a threat to anyone. People lost their lives and their direct family members continued to suffer.

Young people can ne so impressionable. Their brains are not fully formed and they can be sucked into all kinds of things. It's not an excuse of course, but it can happen. She was nuts at the time.
 
I’m kind of surprised some posters are OK with her release, but when someone commits a mass murder with a gun, it’s a different story. Makes me wonder what’s the difference. When killers use a knife, psychologists have stated that it’s a personal thing as to why they chose a knife. I used to think it was because they couldn’t get their hands on a gun, but using a knife gives the murderer the feeling of power and control.

I believe it was Atkins that told Sharon Tate, “You’re going to die, Bitch.” That’s cold and calculating, not to mention premeditated. Why would anyone be freed after receiving a death sentence? These were brutal attacks on pure innocent people that didn’t even know, let alone heard of their attackers. I’m sure the families don’t agree with this decision. Do the crime, do the time.

It’s too bad that Dahmer was killed. He should have been eligible for parole, along with Gacy, Bundy and other mass murderers. They should all be eligible for parole at some point, if this is going to happen. I’m sure they would have changed in prison also.

It’s a sad day for Justice, again. JMO
 
This may not be a popular thing to say here as there as some who wish for Leslie Van Houten's blood, but I think all the Manson girls were victims themselves . Anyway, she didn't kill anyone. What she did was post mortem. :(
 
chic said:
Anyway, she didn't kill anyone.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. From Wikipedia:

...Van Houten stabbed her approximately 16 times in the back and the exposed buttocks.  Van Houten claimed at trial that Rosemary LaBianca was already dead during the stabbing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tate–LaBianca_murders

No matter her excuse, or claims of being a victim I believe she belongs in jail for the rest of her life...

Not so much interested in her blood as protecting the blood of the general public.
 
Last edited:
chic said:
This may not be a popular thing to say here as there as some who wish for Leslie Van Houten's blood, but I think all the Manson girls were victims themselves . Anyway, she didn't kill anyone. What she did was post mortem. :(
Click to expand...
Leslie Van Houten ... Not true. During her trial "Van Houten aggressively implicated herself in inflicting wounds while the victim was living, and severely wounding the victim, severing her spine, which might have been fatal by itself."
Would you be so dismissive if she had done that to say, your mother, sister, neighbor or friend?
 
She's likely no danger to the general public, so I'm okay with this. I don't believe in the death penalty, so that aspect isn't an issue for me. Her life is, basically, over. She won't find it easy to adjust. A life wasted.
 
Naturally said:
Leslie Van Houten ... Not true. During her trial "Van Houten aggressively implicated herself in inflicting wounds while the victim was living, and severely wounding the victim, severing her spine, which might have been fatal by itself."
Would you be so dismissive if she had done that to say, your mother, sister, neighbor or friend?
Click to expand...
Yep, she stabbed Rosemary LaBianca repeatedly until she died after Patricia Krenwinkle didn't succeed in killing her. :(
 
Alligatorob said:
How likely or unlikely would she have to be?

I don't think we can know that with certainty, so why let her out?
Click to expand...

We can't know anything 100%. But I suspect she's no danger now. We can never know.

In the UK, a guy was driving illegal immigrants into the country. But he got it wrong, and 39 people perished in the back of his truck. He was caught, and taken to court for their deaths. He got 12 years. He'll do 7. Yet surely he's a greater danger? He did it for money, he showed a willful disregard for human life. Yet 7 years and he'll be free. Compare that to this woman - and the years that have passed. I'm not worried about HER.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top