Charles Manson Dept.

All the shit that doesn't fit!
If it doesn't go into the other forums, stick it in here.
A general free for all
User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by dales »

On this day in 1969 (Aug.9), members of Charles Manson’s “family” killed five people in movie director Roman Polanski’s Beverly Hills, California, home, including Polanski’s pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate. The next night, Rosemary and Leno LaBianca, a wealthy couple who lived across town, were stabbed to death in their home.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
RayThom
Posts: 8604
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Longwood Gardens PA 19348

Charles Manson Department

Post by RayThom »

Image
Image
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.” 

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by Econoline »

To put things in perspective (kinda, sorta)...on this day in 1945 "Bock's Car", under the command of Maj . Charles W. Sweeney, dropped "Fat Man" on the city of Nagasaki, killing somewhere between 60,000 and 80,000 people.

What was it that Stalin said about the difference between a tragedy and a statistic?
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by dales »

I guess we can be glad that CM didn't have access to nuclear weapons.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 15196
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by Joe Guy »

If he did, he would have been as dangerous as Trump.

User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by dales »

CM's latest mugshot:

Image

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
RayThom
Posts: 8604
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Longwood Gardens PA 19348

Charles Manson Department

Post by RayThom »

Still the handsome charmer, I see.
Image
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.” 

User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by dales »


Follower: Manson threatened grisly death if she left cult

By brian melley, associated press

LOS ANGELES — Aug 31, 2017, 8:59 PM



A woman once under the spell of Charles Manson testified Thursday that the violent and manipulative cult leader threatened to have her die a painful death if she left the ranch where they lived.

Catherine Share told a Los Angeles Superior Court judge that Manson once severely beat her and got a male cult member to vow that if she ever fled the man would hunt her down and drag her back behind a car.

The unusual testimony nearly 50 years after Manson's followers terrorized Los Angeles during two nights of bloody rampages that killed seven people, including pregnant actress Sharon Tate, was to support a parole bid by fellow "family" member Leslie Van Houten.

Van Houten's lawyer wants to show a state parole board that his client was under the sway of the twisted leader and more likely to make bad choices at the age of 19.

"Some people could not leave. I was one of them that could not leave," said Share, who said she later regretted enticing Van Houten to join the cult. "I don't think (Van Houten) felt like she was free to leave."

A recent change in California law enables those who committed crimes when they were younger than 23 to seek a hearing on the role their youth may have played. The issues can later be introduced at a parole hearing to evaluate whether a prisoner is fit for release.

"Everyone is confused about how could someone who grew up like she did end up there," attorney Rich Pfeiffer said.

Van Houten, 68, and serving up to a life sentence for the deaths, did not attend the hearing in part because she recently broke her knee cap, Pfeiffer said.

Van Houten was 19 when she and fellow cult members stabbed Leno and Rosemary LaBianca to death in 1969.

The killings took place a day after other so-called Manson family members murdered Tate, the wife of director Roman Polanski, and four others in crimes that shocked the world.

Share was not involved in the killings, but served prison time later for armed robberies. Police said she also was involved in a plot to break Manson and other family members out of prison, though Share denied that. She said the plan was to help a boyfriend's brother get out of jail.

Last year, a parole panel recommended Van Houten be released after she had completed college degrees and been commended for her behavior as a model prisoner. But Gov. Jerry Brown denied her parole, saying she failed to explain how she transformed from an upstanding teen to a killer.

Pfeiffer asked Judge William Ryan to compel prosecutors to turn over decades-old recordings of a conversation between former cult member Charles "Tex" Watson and his attorney in the hopes they may benefit Van Houten and help secure her release.

Prosecutors, who have vigorously fought Van Houten's release, objected to giving up the tapes. The judge began reading some 300 pages of transcripts of the recordings to see if there was information relevant to Van Houten's case.

Ryan said there were at least eight references to Van Houten in the 85 pages he had a chance to read before the hearing.

Authorities had once asserted the tapes included evidence of other killings and their release could jeopardize those investigations, Pfeiffer said. But Ryan said a detective acknowledged during a meeting in his chambers that there are no active investigations related to them at this time.

Van Houten was the youngest Manson follower to take part in the killings after joining the cult in the 1960s.

During her parole hearing last year, she said the murders were the start of what Manson believed was a coming race war that he dubbed "Helter Skelter," after a Beatles song, and that he had the group prepare to fight and learn to can food so they could go underground and live in a hole in the desert.

Van Houten's parole hearing is scheduled Wednesday. She was convicted in 1978 of two counts of murder and conspiracy after an earlier conviction was overturned on appeal.

Manson, 82, and other followers involved in the killings are still jailed. Watson and Patricia Krenwinkel have each been denied parole multiple times, while fellow defendant Susan Atkins died in prison in 2009.

Family member Bruce Davis also was recommended for parole, but Brown blocked his release.

Debra Tate, the only surviving member of her family, attended the hearing as she's done for decades at all Manson-related parole bids. Even though Van Houten's case did not involve her sister's killing, she said she was asked to also represent the LaBianca family.

She does not think Van Houten or any of the Manson cult should ever go free.

"It was particularly vicious," Tate said outside court. "This was an act of domestic terrorism, in my opinion. And there was group collusion with a much larger agenda and for that reason I don't think any of these people should be paroled."

———
Associated Press writer Amy Taxin in Santa Ana, California, contributed to this story.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19818
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by BoSoxGal »

Didn't Van Houten hold down the very pregnant Sharon Tate while she was being stabbed to death?
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
dales
Posts: 10922
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:13 am
Location: SF Bay Area - NORTH California - USA

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by dales »

No, you might be thinking of the late Susan Adkins.
In 1971, Van Houten spoke in chilling detail about the killings during her trial. She was not involved in the first of the two Manson murder sprees, in which Sharon Tate and her friends were killed in Bel Air. But days later, in 1969, the then 19-year-old was one of the Manson family members who killed Los Feliz grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, at their home.

Van Houten testified that she held down Rosemary LaBianca as Charles “Tex” Watson stabbed her husband. After Watson stabbed LaBianca in her bedroom, he handed Van Houten a knife. She testified to stabbing the woman at least 14 more times.

Your collective inability to acknowledge this obvious truth makes you all look like fools.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19818
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by BoSoxGal »

Dreadful; I'm disinclined to support her release.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

Big RR
Posts: 14798
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Charles Manson Dept.

Post by Big RR »

based on the crime and her behavior shortly after, including at the trial, I am inclined to agree with you; however, I would also like to see what the parole board saw that led them to recommend her release. I do think that people can change sometimes, which is why (IMHO) we have a parole system, and the ferocity of the crime is not the only thing that should be considered IMHO. Either that, or we should do away with the possibility of parole for certain offenses and leave it to a judge or jury to see if that is warranted.

ETA: for comparison purposes, I saw a documentary recently on one of those cable crime channels dealing with Caril Fugate, who, along with her boyfriend Starkweather (I don't recall his first name) went on a brutal killing spree in the Midwest in the 50s (this was the basis for a number of movies including Badlands and Natural Born Killers). He was executed, she, 15 at the time (I think he was in his early 20s), was sentenced to life and released 17 years later (around 1975), never committing any crimes afterwards. she maintained her innocence and also said he was threatening her to control her, but given the brutality of their spree and her opportunities to leave, it's hard to think of her as anything but a willing participant, much like van Houten was. But afterwards she seemed to settle into a life which became ordinary and crime free--I think a change is possible for even very brutal people.

Post Reply