Why should I believe a word that Tex Watson says?
Neither did Van Houten. You have no idea whether she’s a psychopath or sociopath.
I don’t at all dismiss her as a misunderstood confused girl, I don’t discount that she was under the influence of hallucinogens, told what she was doing was right, and was probably in fear of her life if she didn’t. I don’t think she was a sociopath so much as a- pardon the technical term- thoroughly fucked up and easily led individual who deserved to die for her crimes. I really don’t care if she finds a cure for cancer, AIDS and the common cold and heals the blind in prison, personally I don’t think release should ever have been an option, but, IT IS, and my problem with her not getting parole is less the fact it punishes a woman who may or may not be remorseful now but the fact the fame/infamy of the crimes, not the crimes themselves, is most likely the reason for her non release.
Personally I’d reward her good behavior by moving her to a minimum security prison and awarding her more privileges within the prison perhaps- good behavior deserves some reward if only to encourage other prisoners to emulate it. I also think somebody who’s been in prison for 41 years could never possibly hope to cope on the outside- computers filled up offices when she was last free and had all the functionality of a $20 calculator, and she hasn’t paid a bill or cooked a meal for herself since Nixon was president, it would almost be MORE punishment to release her at this stage, BUT they shouldn’t go through the charade of a parole hearing if it’s never going to be a possible option no matter what she does.
There were no witnesses to the murders other than members of the Manson family. Even Kasabian, who was the state’s key witness, was tripping on acid while there. Watson has no real reason to lie and he has not denied his own acts in decades- he admits to stabbing Tate’s pregnant stomach and knows there is no way he’ll ever be released, and he’s had no contact with Van Houten in more than 30 years so it’s not like they’re chums.
There were no witnesses to the murders other than members of the Manson family. Even Kasabian, who was the state’s key witness, was tripping on acid while there.
Do you feel the same about Manson himself? Should he be paroled? He did less than Van Houten did.
Then we don’t know who stuck who, and we have to assume they’re all equally guilty.
I’ve heard that the majority of murders get out after 20 or so years.
A lady at my job was killed in a domestic argument with her bf right after I started work in 1986. He had a knife and she got stabbed during the fight. He was out on parole in 2001. 15 years.
Van Houten has already served nearly double the typical time then most. Only because of the notoriety of the crimes.
Far worse criminals have served time and are on the streets. There’s not enough prisons to hold every murderer, rapist, and pedo. Sooner or later they get out.
Studies show that people are less violent as they age. A guy that kills someone at 22 probably wouldn’t repeat the crime at 56.
She deserves a chance in a half way house. See how she does.
There is absolutely no psychologist or psychiatrist or advocate of any kind on earth who would declare with a straight face that Manson is anything other than criminally insane. He is not only not remorseful, he has never conceded he had anything to do with the murders, and during his time in prison he has done nothing constructive or anything that remotely signifies he would not be a threat on the outside. That said, I’d have little problem with him being sent to a hospital for the C.I. (which is far more like a prison than a mental ward), and yes, if the law is that he must have parole hearings, he should be given due consideration (though in the past he has failed to attend several and in fact in the 1960s long before Spahn Ranch he specifically asked not to be paroled).
As for doing less than Van Houten did, it’s true that he did not do any of the murders or attacks himself; he was, IIRC, convicted of conspiracy to commit murder. Convicting him was a masterpiece on Bugliosi’s because it was not easy. Had conviction failed they probably would have moved in to conspiracy on the Gary Hinman murder or the black drug dealer Charlie bragged of killing [not sure if it was witnessed] or enough felony theft and drug convictions to tie him down for life, but getting him for Tate-Labianca prevented the need for that.
I don’t believe Van Houten is capable or remorse either, and her attempts to minimize her roles in the murders strike me as purel self-serving. I don’t believe her. I don’t trust her, but beyond that, her crimes merit life in prison regardless of what kind of person she becomes (or in my opinion, pretends to become behind bars.
A lower security prison with increased privileges as a reward for good behavior – that I’m fine with. Freedom, never.
While I am not one to usually defend the Mormon (LDS) religion, I think you mean “Thanks a majority of California voters”…
Since you seem to be an expert at analyzing from afar with a minimum amount of information, perhaps you can help me with a small problem. I’m getting cramps in my upper left leg in the middle of the night, usually around 2am or so. I really don’t think it’s a vitamin deficiency.
Can you help me, Dr. the Cynic?
It doesn’t take a special degree to know that the Manson murders were psychpathic acts.
Incidentally, if Van Houten were a man, I don’t believe she’d be getting any sympathy at all.
Nope-it just takes a specialist trained in that field, Doc.
Just for the record… Prop 8 didn’t outlaw all gay unions. Anyone married between when the courts allowed SSM and when Prop 8 passed is still married. We also have a very strong Domestic Partnership law. Yeah, I know we’re not perfect, but if you’re gay, there are a lot worse places to live in the US than CA.
You’ve got to be kidding me. You really think it takes a specialist to know that randomly breaking into houses and carving people up like turkeys is a psychopathic thing to do? You’re being ridiculous.
True, but the LDS did give millions of dollars to the anti Prop8 propaganda.
No, it’s psychotic behavior. Psychopath is a specific diagnosis that is not synonymous with being psychotic; a psychopath is by definition psychotic but a psychotic is not by definition a psychopath. All dachshunds are dogs doesn’t mean that all dogs are dachshunds.
Which (IMHO) is an asshole move, but it is also consistant with their religious beliefs and if done properly, a perfectly legal thing to do…
There are obviously many, many Californians who don’t want legalized gay marriage, and I know that there is not a huge number (it’s gotta be under 10% at the very most) of Mormons in California.
Hmmm. Let’s see.
Yup. Apparently it does take a specialist to give a medical diagnosis.
No, it’s only psychotic if the person is delusional and does not have an accurate perception of reality. None of the Manson killers were clinically psychotic, delusional or hallucinating. They were just psychopaths. Psychopaths are not mentally ill and are not psychotic. They just lack empathy and conscience.