That was a California state supreme court ruling.
There is a higher court. I don’t know if the Supreme Court would intervene.
Right. Unlike the President in the Federal sphere, individual state constitutions can allow or not conditions on their governor’s clemency power.
I can’t see any argument that would provide jurisdiction for the federal courts. This is purely a California state law issue.
As brought up in the other recent thread about another Manson-adjacent person, the Manson murders aren’t really a part of the public consciousness anymore. We’re talking about something that happened 50 years ago. Most of the people doing hiring probably weren’t even alive at the time.
If you told me not to go to some business because they hired Leslie Van Houten, my response would be “Who?”
Your addled musings could all be answered by simply reading over the thread.
I don’t have a problem with Van Houten getting out.
I think she will have insurmountable problems adjusting.
She has a routine in prison. A job, friends and even a status in her peer group.
Imho She will be very much like Red in The Shawshank Redemption. It’s fiction, but the reality for people adjusting after several decades in prisons is accurate.
I hope there will be a support system for Van Houten.
She has a huge support group including celebrities like John Waters. She doesn’t need to work; just keep her nose clean - like she’s been doing for 50+ years.
Not only was she just 19 when her crime took place, but she committed it in large part because she had been brainwashed by a cult and its leader. Nowadays, not only would she get a much more lenient sentence, she’d be considered a victim too. She would have been paroled decades ago.
A couple of relatives of Manson family victims have objected to Van Houten’s release. From the appellate court ruling:
"The Board then heard statements from Sharon Tate Polanski’s sister, Debra Tate, and Mr. La Bianca’s nephew, Louis Smaldino, both of whom objected to Van Houten’s release. Tate stated, inter alia, that there was information of which the Board was unaware, specifically details about the Manson cult’s crimes that Tate had learned from attending parole hearings of other cult members, which Tate believed indicated Van Houten was “not coming clean with everything.” Tate believed Van Houten had failed to apologize for her actions except during parole hearings, and that her parole hearing testimony was inconsistent hearing to hearing. Tate claimed to have been threatened by supporters of the imprisoned Manson cult members, and believed the cult members continued to communicate with one another. Tate noted Van Houten’s past correspondence with a man convicted of a double homicide who then committed suicide (Michael Vines, see fn. 7, ante). Tate characterized Van Houten’s relationship with Vines as “romantic,” and believed it suggested Van Houten “still has questionable taste or perhaps is attracted to the same kind of person.”
I tend to doubt she’s a threat at this point. However, her parole agent should keep an eye on things in case Van Houten forms a chapter of Hell’s Grannies.
Van Houten was convicted of the Rosemary and Leno LaBianca murders.
I guess Tate got involved at the hearing because of the ties to Manson.
Yes. That was literally in the first sentence of the first post.
Brilliant deduction.
Moderating:
Please moderate your tone. The first of these is pretty insulting, and the second is needlessly antagonistic. This is MPSIMS, not the pit.
Leslie is the one most likely to be released anyway, as according to the eyewitnesses, she was the least brutal during the killings. Not sure about Robert Beausoleil, as his crime was two weeks before The Murders, and he certainly could have a music career.
I dont see how any Tates should have a say in this matter.
If any of them should be paroled, they certainly wouldn’t be expected to get a job and support themselves. They are in their 70s. They would be taken in and supported by friends or family to live out their days.
The podcast Ear Hustle had an interesting interview with her a couple of years ago.
Is she supposed to stand up at breakfast every morning, beat her chest and wildly declaim how sorry she is? I believe she wrote an apology letter sometime around the first parole hearing [I vaguely remember Bugliosi saying something about apology letters in an interview in 2010ish [close to when he passed]
At any rate, I still feel that shit happens - she was like 20 years old when she got brainwashed by a cult leader, she has had more than enough therapy and time to be rehabilitated. Let her go off into the sunset with whomever wants her, or however she likes [poster mentioned that she has support from a number of people like John Waters Hell let him put her into films like Patricia Hurst
]
The quote you cite comes from the California appeals court ruling, not me.
Sorry, that is how the damned page did the quote
I edited the quote to clarify the attribution.
thanks =)