@no1marauder saidDidn't she hold someone down, whilst they stabbed that person repeatedly, and then helped along with the stabbing?
A quibble, but Van Houten was not involved in the murders at Tate's residence.
She was not sentenced to life without parole, so she was legally entitled under California law to regular parole hearings.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidYes, but not at Tate's residence.
Didn't she hold someone down, whilst they stabbed that person repeatedly, and then helped along with the stabbing?
I already stated her crime was heinous.
It was also 53 years ago when she was 19 years old.
@no1marauder saidI agree. She’s had her punishment.
Yes, but not at Tate's residence.
I already stated her crime was heinous.
It was also 53 years ago when she was 19 years old.
I thought it was at Tates, but I don’t know much about it all (except what I got from Aquarius and South Park).
3 edits
@earl-of-trumps saidI have mixed feelings about Leslie Van Houten, but highly doubt that a frail old woman in her 70's poses a threat to society. Keeping her locked up for the remainder of what few years she has left to live will make conservatives feel good but has no real purpose.
I remember the incident so vividly. Summer, 1969.
-----------------------------------------
Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten released from prison a half-century after grisly killings
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten, a former homecoming princess who at 19 helped carry out the shocking killings of a wealthy Los Angel ...[text shortened]... moved[/b][/i]
https://news.yahoo.com/leslie-van-houten-follower-cult-195406899.html
2 edits
@mchill saidI too remember it vividly. She may have paid her debt to society, but not to her victim. She stabbed her victim 14+ times in the back. There was no real purpose to her life, so let her think about that staring through the bars of her cage.
I have mixed feelings about Leslie Van Houten, but highly doubt that a frail old woman in her 70's poses a threat to society. Keeping her locked up for the remainder of what few years she has left to live will make conservatives feel good but has no real purpose.
2 edits
@ponderable saidShe took a life, deliberately, gruesomely. Her victim was butchered, 14+ stabs to the back. This wasn't just any happens-every-Friday-night-in-Chicago shooting murder; it was utterly savage cruelty. She forfeited her own life in that moment. It's fitting that she not enjoy any of the life she took away from her victim. She already had her sentence commuted; that was more mercy than she showed her victim.
So we can debate what is the sense of the punishment system?
* vengeance. If so, don't let her go ever.
* safety. As of now she doesn't pose a threat to society, from this aspect: let her go.
* bettering of the incarcerated. From what Marauder posted, this target has been fulfilled, so let her go.
Murders of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca
Main articles: Tate–LaBianca murders and Manson Family
On August 9, 1969, Van Houten, Tex Watson, Patricia Krenwinkel, Linda Kasabian, Susan Atkins, Clem Grogan and Manson went to the house of Rosemary and Leno LaBianca.[12][20][21][22][23] Manson entered the house with Watson, then left with Atkins, Grogan and Kasabian. Krenwinkel, Van Houten, and Watson murdered the couple.[7][18][24] He allegedly sent the others to kill an actor, but Kasabian claims she led Atkins and Grogan to an incorrect address.[25]
Van Houten and another woman held down Rosemary LaBianca as Watson stabbed Leno LaBianca. After stabbing Rosemary, he gave Van Houten a knife, and she stabbed the woman at least 14 more times. She testified in 1971, “And I took one of the knives, and Patricia [Krenwinkel] had one — a knife — and we started stabbing and cutting up the lady.”[26]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Van_Houten
@moonbus saidHer sentence included the possibility of parole to be determined by the application of various statutory factors, almost all of which now strongly support the granting of parole. So you are essentially insisting California's courts ignore their laws in the name of simple minded vengeance.
She took a life, deliberately, gruesomely. Her victim was butchered, 14+ stabs to the back. This wasn't just any happens-every-Friday-night-in-Chicago shooting murder; it was utterly savage cruelty. She forfeited her own life in that moment. It's fitting that she not enjoy any of the life she took away from her victim. She already had her sentence commuted; that was more merc ...[text shortened]... started stabbing and cutting up the lady.”[26]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Van_Houten
An eye for an eye "justice" system is what Iran has, not California.
@moonbus saidIt says a lot about the state of a young woman’s mind.
She took a life, deliberately, gruesomely. Her victim was butchered, 14+ stabs to the back. This wasn't just any happens-every-Friday-night-in-Chicago shooting murder; it was utterly savage cruelty. She forfeited her own life in that moment. It's fitting that she not enjoy any of the life she took away from her victim. She already had her sentence commuted; that was more merc ...[text shortened]... started stabbing and cutting up the lady.”[26]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Van_Houten
She’s been punished, had therapy, done her time.
It’s then time to be empathic and show forgiveness.
Otherwise, what sort of message are you sending? Once a criminal, always a criminal? If there was no hope for you then, you will never have hope at all?
That message does not benefit anyone in trouble to seek help.
@shavixmir saidShe was not at the Tate's killings, hers was all at the Labiancos.
I agree. She’s had her punishment.
I thought it was at Tates, but I don’t know much about it all (except what I got from Aquarius and South Park).
@shavixmir saidShe should have sought help before she entered LaBianca’s home.
It says a lot about the state of a young woman’s mind.
She’s been punished, had therapy, done her time.
It’s then time to be empathic and show forgiveness.
Otherwise, what sort of message are you sending? Once a criminal, always a criminal? If there was no hope for you then, you will never have hope at all?
That message does not benefit anyone in trouble to seek help.
@no1marauder saidHer original sentence was execution.
Her sentence included the possibility of parole to be determined by the application of various statutory factors, almost all of which now strongly support the granting of parole. So you are essentially insisting California's courts ignore their laws in the name of simple minded vengeance.
An eye for an eye "justice" system is what Iran has, not California.
@moonbus saidPerhaps.
She should have sought help before she entered LaBianca’s home.
But that’s not what happened and she threw most of her life away.
I believe she’s not sociopathic, so was under influence of drugs or stronger personalities. A terrible thing.
Forgiveness begets you.
@no1marauder saidIrans is more akin to an eye for a light bruise on the upper arm but I get the point.
Her sentence included the possibility of parole to be determined by the application of various statutory factors, almost all of which now strongly support the granting of parole. So you are essentially insisting California's courts ignore their laws in the name of simple minded vengeance.
An eye for an eye "justice" system is what Iran has, not California.
It’s probably worth noting that these murders took place against the backdrop of the Vietnam war when whole villages were being brutally wiped out on taxpayers dollars, so maybe the state and US society in general has to accept some responsibility for these moral compasses going so wrong, the drug cocktails wouldn’t have helped either.
@moonbus saidAll of your posts make good points. Ultimately, she was a tool of a cult leader, who can be more powerful than you realize, especially for young people.
Her original sentence was execution.
None of this excuses her brutality. Period. It's simply something worth considering. But you're not wrong.