DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... For Those of Us Old Enough To Remember...

Leslie Van Houten, follower of cult leader Charles Manson, is one big step closer to freedom



ROBERT JABLON
Fri, July 7, 2023 at 8:15 PM EDT
LOS ANGELES (AP) — California’s governor announced Friday that he won’t ask the state Supreme Court to block parole for Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten, paving the way for her release after serving 53 years in prison for two infamous murders.

In a brief statement, the governor’s office said it was unlikely that the state's high court would consider an appeal of a lower court ruling that Van Houten should be released.

Newsom is disappointed, the statement said.

“More than 50 years after the Manson cult committed these brutal killings, the victims’ families still feel the impact,” the statement said.

Van Houten, now in her 70s, is serving a life sentence for helping Manson and other followers in the 1969 killings of Leno LaBianca, a grocer in Los Angeles, and his wife, Rosemary.

Van Houten could be freed in about two weeks after the parole board reviews her record and processes paperwork for her release from the California Institution for Women in Corona, her attorney Nancy Tetreault said.

She was recommended for parole five times since 2016 but Newsom and former Gov. Jerry Brown rejected all those recommendations.

However, a state appeals court ruled in May that Van Houten should be released, noting what it called her “extraordinary rehabilitative efforts, insight, remorse, realistic parole plans, support from family and friends” and favorable behavior reports while in prison.

“She’s thrilled and she’s overwhelmed,” Tetreault said.

“She’s just grateful that people are recognizing that she’s not the same person that she was when she committed the murders,” she said.

After she's released, Van Houten will spend about a year in a halfway house, learning basic life skills such as how to go to the grocery and get a debit card, Tetreault said.

“She’s been in prison for 53 years. ... She just needs to learn how to use an ATM machine, let alone a cell phone, let alone a computer,” her attorney said.

Van Houten and other Manson followers killed the LaBiancas in their home in August 1969, smearing their blood on the walls after. Van Houten later described holding Rosemary LaBianca down with a pillowcase over her head as others stabbed her, before herself stabbing the woman more than a dozen times.

“My family and I are heartbroken because we’re once again reminded of all the years that we have not had my father and my stepmother with us,” Cory LaBianca, Leno LaBianca's daughter, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Friday.

“My children and my grandchildren never got an opportunity to get to know either of them, which has been a huge void for my family,” said Cory La Bianca, who is 75.

The LaBianca murders happened the day after Manson followers killed actress Sharon Tate and four others. Van Houten did not participate in the Tate killings.

Manson died in prison in 2017 of natural causes at age 83 after nearly half a century behind bars.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/leslie-van-houten-follower-cult-001520462.html

I'd say 53 years is long enough. I have never been a 'lock 'em up and throw away the key" type. As you point out in your thread title, most on here can't even comprehend 53 years. That's a damn long time in prison. I could even agree that 50 years is the max as long as the person didn't do anything in prison to make it longer. Most people aren't even going to live long enough to make it 50 years.

I would stipulate that any proceeds from any type of book deal, etc. go to the victims remaining family.

If you release them then other people will murder for the lack of conse@uences.
If they are admititive and the facts are clear that they killed people who were minding their own business in their own place
then the murderer should have been killed @uickly and concisely many many years ago, right after the crime they committed.
There must be swift just conse@uences for those who would kill the innocent minding their own business
to remind others who might stray from righteousness that the value of life is sacred.
and that conse@uence has to be putting to death. The guilty put to death to protect the life of the innocent, reminding people to have a 2nd thought and not murder the innoncent. Multitudes of other people need to be reminded that you don't kill, and if you do kill you are going to be killed, and if you invade a home in the middle of the night to find people in their sleep to murder them
then those people were no more of a threat to you than anything,
this is not two people whose fight ended with one of them dead,
murderers of those who were minding their own business shouldn't even get life in prison, or any prison time because they should be hanged before they even make it to prison.
and that should serve as a message to others that they would also not murder the innocent.

I'm very torn over this. On one hand as Peen said it seems 50+ years is long enough. On the other hand, just how terrible of an act does one have to commit to get life without parole?

50 years isn't consequence?

I have no idea what the average age of a person who commits murder might be, but I would guess late 20's. Most people aren't going to make it 50 years.

If the goal of prison is punishment (IMO, as it should be), then what's the difference between life and 50 years?

I say that both as an honest question, but also as a rhetorical. In this situation, her life is essentially past her by while she was serving her time. At this point, she's essentially just being housed on the taxpayers' dime.

My point is why have sentences that hold no meaning? Life without parole means you will never see the outside of a prison again. So how terrible does a crime have to be to get that sentence? The same as the death sentence. If you aren't going to proceed with the death sentence, then why is it a sentence that can be handed down by a court at all?

I guess to sum it up would be to say there should be accuracy in sentencing. Don't hand down a sentence that won't be seen through. I know in her case she was given the option for parole, but once again, if a sentence can be handed down for life without parole, just how bad does a crime have to be to deserve that sentence?

From what I’ve read she’s been a model prisoner and imo should have been released years ago. It’s weird how one person can gain the type of control over others that Manson did.

I have seen several documentaries regarding the Tate/LoBianca murders, and they were horrific. I have watched both Linda Kasabian & Leslie Van Houten interviews with one of the networks when they were about 50 years old. They did seem remorseful and gave off the impression that they can't believe they are the same people who committed those killings. The interviews are available on Youtube if interested. If you are not informed this crime was not a drive by lump 10 rounds into someone. Those victims were slaughtered.


As I wrote, the crimes they committed were something horrific. The young Folger woman (Abigail, I think her name was, heir to the coffee people) was stabbed at least a dozen times. Sharon Tate was brutalized while being very pregnant. Painting words with the victim's blood?

Sorry, they should have had teh death penalty within a year but since they didn't , never let them out.

Her sentence allowed for parole. She has been turned down several times before.

I have mixed emotions on this one.

The brother of a close friend of mine received the death penalty and was put to death by the state of Ohio.