California governor won't free Manson follower Van... - Page 7

ScarletDove · ‎07-11-2010

I remember when this happened, I was expecting my first child 2 months after the Manson murder spree; will never forget what happened. All of the Manson participants should have been executed, but unfortunately it was not grandfathered in and found unconstitutional so this garbage got reprieves. They would never have to endure the appropriate payback for what they caused to their victims and family members lives. Why is parole an option; when death penalty taken down, should have been life without parole. Bravo to Governor's Brown and Newsom for being smart enough to keep this psycho bunch in prison. No mercy!

Diva on The Q · ‎03-28-2016

@mousiegirl wrote:
@Diva on The Q wrote:
@Goldengate8361 wrote:
She is not a threat. She should have been released on parole.

We (the public) don't have all of the facts. There is no way we can know 100% she is not a threat. I'm sure the Governor's decision to deny parole is based on factual information.

@Diva on The Q Whether she is a threat or not, she killed innocent people, therefore she should pay the ultimate price, and she would have if the law that was in effect at that time remained, so she was able to stay alive, which is not an option she gave to her victims.

@mousiegirl: I think you're confusing my post with @Goldengate8361? I agree (absolutely) with the Governor's decision to keep Van Houten in prison forever!!!

mousiegirl · ‎03-09-2010

@Diva on The Q wrote:
@mousiegirl wrote:
@Diva on The Q wrote:
@Goldengate8361 wrote:
She is not a threat. She should have been released on parole.

We (the public) don't have all of the facts. There is no way we can know 100% she is not a threat. I'm sure the Governor's decision to deny parole is based on factual information.

@Diva on The Q Whether she is a threat or not, she killed innocent people, therefore she should pay the ultimate price, and she would have if the law that was in effect at that time remained, so she was able to stay alive, which is not an option she gave to her victims.

@mousiegirl: I think you're confusing my post with @Goldengate8361? I agree (absolutely) with the Governor's decision to keep Van Houten in prison forever!!!

@Diva on The Q You are right, couldn't see the very light print, sorry.

Diva on The Q · ‎03-28-2016

@mousiegirl wrote:
@Diva on The Q wrote:
@mousiegirl wrote:
@Diva on The Q wrote:
@Goldengate8361 wrote:
She is not a threat. She should have been released on parole.

We (the public) don't have all of the facts. There is no way we can know 100% she is not a threat. I'm sure the Governor's decision to deny parole is based on factual information.

@Diva on The Q Whether she is a threat or not, she killed innocent people, therefore she should pay the ultimate price, and she would have if the law that was in effect at that time remained, so she was able to stay alive, which is not an option she gave to her victims.

@mousiegirl: I think you're confusing my post with @Goldengate8361? I agree (absolutely) with the Governor's decision to keep Van Houten in prison forever!!!

@Diva on The Q You are right, couldn't see the very light print, sorry.

@mousiegirl: No worries

Northray · ‎08-29-2013

This crime was way before my time but I've read about it and for some reason, the whole ordeal creeps me out. There have been as bad or worse crimes since theirs but something about what they did and how they did it was just plain and simply horrible. It was a stabbing, hacking festival that they seemed only too glad to have done.

I think also their gleeful behavior in court. The lack of remorse for years for what they did. Their sanctimonious attitude, as if they were in on some enlightened information from Mason that the rest of the world were not smart enough to get.

And that freak show Tex Watson, who has for some reason flown under the radar when he was the main murderer and leader at those crime sites. And this pig comes up for parole every three years and every three years Sharon Tates mother and sisters (now only one sister is left to fight this battle). Has to go and testify at the parole hearing so this monster doesn't get out. And therefore the family has never been allowed to move on and heal since 1969. I think that is injustice and hell on earth.

Yesterday I was clever, so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise, so I am changing myself.

-Rumi

tsavorite · ‎03-09-2010

She was a willing participant in these murders....she was an adult....I don't care if she took some drugs or drank alcohol or lived in a cult. SHE made the choice to murder....she took ENJOYMENT in doing it...and was able to be relaxed enough after to drink chocolate milk from the victims frige! Just let that sink in.

I have been drunk before...I have liked some people enough to believe what they were telling me...but NOBODY could have EVER EVER talked me into murder! I don't care how much I drank or smoked that is impossible. So SHE WANTED to do it....she needed little encouragement...she enjoyed it. Just watching the old footage of the trails is so over the top sickening.

I don't care that she is old now and in society we think the elderly are harmless. That's false...they just caught the 70+ yr old Golden State Killer finally...should we feel sorry for him? I don't....this isn't about emotion but justice for all the victims.

As far as I see it...she should be GRATEFUL her death penalty was turned into a life sentence. They should stop hurting these families forcing them to show up and defend WHY a brutal killer should stay in jail serving out a life sentence! Now that is a ongoing injustice that needs to end.

mousiegirl · ‎03-09-2010

I watched Valley of the Dolls recently, and seeing beautiful Sharon Tate brought this horror back to my mind, Sharon begging for her baby's life, could anything be worse, I don't think so.

suzyQ3 · ‎03-09-2010

@Cakers3 wrote:
@suzyQ3 wrote:
@Cakers3 wrote:
@suzyQ3 wrote:
@Goldengate8361, I also doubt that she poses a threat to society, and I am right there with you about not letting emotion play a part in the whole legal process.

But if she was sentenced to life w/parole, then she should serve her sentence unless new evidence should show that she did not commit the crime or that there was misconduct in the trial.
@suzyQ3 I disagree with this. Survivors have the right to read victim statements at trials and at parole hearings. Their feelings most certainly do matter and should be taken into consideration. Their statements are part of the legal process; if they were not, they would not be allowed.

Emotions by outsiders are one thing; and actually whether one agrees Van Houten should be released or not is...........an emotional statement.

It works both ways.

My opinion, based on what I read, had to do with Van Houten still blaming Manson for what she did. Therefore, the legal process does not consider her totally ready to be released.

@Cakers3, emotion should not play a part at all when it comes to a decision as to guilt or innocence; that would make a travesty of our legal system.

Maybe they might play a small part in sentencing.

@suzyQ3 That wasn't the point. Nobody said that emotion should play a part in deciding guilt or innocence, although I think we all would be hard pressed to find a truly impartial jury anywhere.

The point being argued is that people are being emotional and vindictive because they do not want Van Houten released.

Two different issues.

@Cakers3, a direct quote from the poster with which this subthread originated:

"Consistency in sentencing that is devoid of biases."

So it was part of the discussion. But as far as our reactions, I think it's fair to say that many are 100 percent emotional, as opposed to those who say that life w/o parole should not be abrogated once it's instituted, except under extraordinary circumstances.

I have no problem with the emotional expressions, but I have in the past when it with othercriminal issues that have arisen here.

~Who in the world am I? Ah, that's the great puzzle~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

Venezia · ‎03-09-2010

@CrazyDaisy wrote:
Murders, rapists, child molesters are released on parole all the time, many to commit these crimes again and again. Where is the justice for these victims and families. Seems that a 69 year old woman would be less threatening than most of them.

@CrazyDaisy- You've heard the expression "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

None of them should be released. The fact of her age has nothing to do with whether she is a threat. Men and women of all ages commit atrocious crimes. Evil knows no gender, nor age limit.