|
Post by aljack on Apr 16, 2016 0:25:53 GMT
I recently learned that she has earned two college degrees while in jail. She now holds a Master's degree in Education and has a teaching certificate. She wants to help those that may be falling by the wayside which is very admirable. All news outlets report she has been running programs in jail to help her peers. I believe prisoners deserve rights and I also believe people can reform. However, I am upset because I am struggling to find funds for the very same degree she holds and I am denied financial aid. I also question how she will utilize this considering every teaching position I have held requires a background check? Even if she works at junior college, I would think she would be scrutinized. Grad school is a luxury for so many students. I talk to many people that spend years paying off their education debt. Okay that's my vent.
|
|
|
Post by kernriver on Apr 16, 2016 1:19:16 GMT
What she did was soooooo wrong. Not even remotely close to being OK. And completely insane. I don't think she deserves to get out. Ever. Get all the degrees you want, but never, ever walk free again.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Apr 16, 2016 1:35:36 GMT
I think she needs to continue to regret her past actions while continuing to sit in a prison cell. None of those psychos ever need to see the light of day. They laughed while they murdered at least seven people, probably more. Did any law enforcement agency ever dig up the land around that ranch they were living on?
|
|
|
Post by **GypsyGirl** on Apr 16, 2016 1:41:58 GMT
I think she needs to stay put. Let her utilize those degrees to help others who are behind bars with her. There are certain crimes that don't ever deserve leniency or probation. She falls in that category for me. There were plenty of others in that era who took LSD, yet never committed murders as heinous as these. It makes you wonder what is really hidden in there.
|
|
M in Carolina
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,128
Jun 29, 2014 12:11:41 GMT
|
Post by M in Carolina on Apr 16, 2016 1:47:01 GMT
At first I thought The Simpsons, but that's Louann...
Then I realized it was one of the Manson Family that murdered Sharon Tate, Abigail Folger, and their friends and then the LaBiancas and tried to start a race war. (I remember all of this but the name LaBiancas from memory--I'm not all TV pop culture)
|
|
|
Post by aljack on Apr 16, 2016 1:48:45 GMT
I think she needs to continue to regret her past actions while continuing to sit in a prison cell. None of those psychos ever need to see the light of day. They laughed while they murdered at least seven people, probably more. Did any law enforcement agency ever dig up the land around that ranch they were living on? Inconclusive I believe the reports read.
|
|
marianne
Pearl Clutcher
Not my circus, not my monkeys. . . My monkeys fly!
Posts: 4,176
Location: right smack dab in the middle of SC
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2014 21:08:26 GMT
|
Post by marianne on Apr 16, 2016 1:49:33 GMT
What she did was soooooo wrong. Not even remotely close to being OK. And completely insane. I don't think she deserves to get out. Ever. Get all the degrees you want, but never, ever walk free again. Yep, I gotta agree with that. It makes me ill that her release is even being considered.
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Apr 16, 2016 2:22:42 GMT
I guess I'm going to buck the trend here. What she did was horrible, and I would NEVER be in favor of Charles Manson being released because I believe he is evil to his core. But I saw a 60 Minutes special a number of years ago on the Leslie and (can't think of the name of the other girl, but she ended up dying in prison) and how they had changed their lives. They truly did change. Leslie has been a model prisoner all her years there and has shown compassion and kindness to hundreds of other frightened women in the prison.
IF there weren't thousands of other murderers who have been released--or who spent only a short period of time--then I would say she shouldn't be released either. But I believe in fairness under the law. There are many, many cases where others have done heinous crimes and still were able to gain release after they were rehabilitated. Why should she be different? Because she murdered someone famous? How is that fair? Leslie never actually murdered anyone. I'm not excusing what she did. It was beyond awful. But she recognizes that and she has expressed true remorse. And she has changed herself. I believe these young people were under the influence of an evil genie. Had she never met Charles Manson, I believe she would have eventually removed herself from the drug scene and become a normal member of society. But she DID meet Charles Manson, and she DID do something horrible. But she has paid for it. She has changed. She has spent far more time behind bars than many other murderers who have done things even worse than she did.
I was very impressed with her after seeing the 60 Minutes special. I believe she is a redeemed woman and she has done her time.
|
|
|
Post by dealsamongus on Apr 16, 2016 2:41:04 GMT
My husband and I like to watch all those crime shows and we have seen many on Manson and the Manson family.
It is hard to say if she has "learned her lesson" but if her actions since are any indication she is trying to make her life better. I think that she should be kept in jail, but let her use her degree to help other fellow prisoner.
This was one of the more heinous, heartless crimes in the US and to let her out sends a message that if prisoners do well and "wait long enough" they will get out.
I am an ex criminal justice major so I feel rehabilitation is possible, but not sure in this case.
|
|
M in Carolina
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,128
Jun 29, 2014 12:11:41 GMT
|
Post by M in Carolina on Apr 16, 2016 2:47:29 GMT
I do think she's changed, but there is a difference in this crime from other murders. These murders were to start a race war--it's more like home grown terrorism. Not because Sharon Tate and Abigail Folger (Folger coffee heiress) were killed. I always remembered the LaBiancas because I was sad that their murder was so overlooked--how horrible for their family!
Yes, Charlie Manson used drugs and sex to manipulate and control those kids. They didn't just murder some people, they were a hate group that wanted to start civil war in this country.
If Leslie wants to help other prisoners, then she should be able to do that. The prisons need more people like Leslie to encourage and help the other inmates. I know she's served an extremely long sentence, but I'm torn because of the hate and purpose of these murders.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Apr 16, 2016 3:18:59 GMT
eslie never actually murdered anyone. So what if she stabbed someone 16 times (per her own admission on Larry King) that was already dead due to her holding the victim while her accomplice did the initially killing. Then painted words on the wall with the victim's blood. She said she was high on LSD, yet was the only person who gave detailed testimony to police so she clearly was lucid when she committed her crime. But out of prison who is going to take care of her? She'll go to a halfway house, maybe get a minimum wage job (if she can get hired), she won't know how to operate in 2016. The parole board approved her for parole. The victim's daughter has already expressed her outrage. My observation is her skin looks like she's 100 years old, it's interesting to observe the difference between a woman who lives in society and wears sunblock and serums daily vs doing nothing.
|
|
|
Post by alexa11 on Apr 16, 2016 3:34:24 GMT
The ENTIRE Manson crew needs to rot/die in jail. I don't agree with this parole at all.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 30, 2024 12:31:32 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 3:35:39 GMT
She needs to rot in prison. Letting her out would open the door for manson to be consider for parole.
Those slenderman killers need to stay in prison too.
That afflueneza killer should also be a lifer.
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Apr 16, 2016 4:03:09 GMT
I don't have anything invested in her release in particular. However, I do think that a person can change dramatically between 19 and 67, ad that such change might be particularly likely if a person were a drug-addled 19-year-old versus a 67-year-old who has spent nearly fifty years in prison.
I am sorry for your struggles in funding your education. I think people should be able to get an affordable higher education. I think also that generally people who are incarcerated are less likely to reoffend if they come out with an education and have a degree and marketable skills, so we all benefit. I think we benefit if people who aren't incarcerated are able to get an education and marketable skills too.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Apr 16, 2016 4:24:56 GMT
I think if you get life in prison for something you did then you have to serve the whole term. Reformed or not. I think that for anyone, for any sentence. I am not a fan of lessening sentences because of good behavior or over-crowding. But that's me.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Apr 16, 2016 4:51:52 GMT
I guess I'm going to buck the trend here. What she did was horrible, and I would NEVER be in favor of Charles Manson being released because I believe he is evil to his core. But I saw a 60 Minutes special a number of years ago on the Leslie and (can't think of the name of the other girl, but she ended up dying in prison) and how they had changed their lives. They truly did change. Leslie has been a model prisoner all her years there and has shown compassion and kindness to hundreds of other frightened women in the prison. IF there weren't thousands of other murderers who have been released--or who spent only a short period of time--then I would say she shouldn't be released either. But I believe in fairness under the law. There are many, many cases where others have done heinous crimes and still were able to gain release after they were rehabilitated. Why should she be different? Because she murdered someone famous? How is that fair? Leslie never actually murdered anyone. I'm not excusing what she did. It was beyond awful. But she recognizes that and she has expressed true remorse. And she has changed herself. I believe these young people were under the influence of an evil genie. Had she never met Charles Manson, I believe she would have eventually removed herself from the drug scene and become a normal member of society. But she DID meet Charles Manson, and she DID do something horrible. But she has paid for it. She has changed. She has spent far more time behind bars than many other murderers who have done things even worse than she did. I was very impressed with her after seeing the 60 Minutes special. I believe she is a redeemed woman and she has done her time. I agree. I stumbled down a rabbit hole about this woman a couple years ago and, like you, think there is no reason she should stay in prison so much longer than other criminals convicted of similar or worse charges. The explanation for her (isn't it 20?) parole denials, especially considering her unusually long time in prison and her in-prison behavior, seems to be the notoriety and public perception of the case. I also learned a lot about the inaccuracies in Victor Bugliosi's book, which had significantly informed many of my previous views about the case and, particularly, about the three young women who were tried. And remember: the fourth young woman was given total immunity in exchange for testifying. It took Ms. Van Houton a bit longer to reject Manson's thrall, but she did. Does that difference mean one woman goes scott free and the other never has a chance for freedom? Believe me, I surprised myself when I came to my conclusions.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Apr 16, 2016 4:57:59 GMT
I think if you get life in prison for something you did then you have to serve the whole term. Reformed or not. I think that for anyone, for any sentence. I am not a fan of lessening sentences because of good behavior or over-crowding. But that's me. It was never a life sentence without the possibility of parole. At the time of her sentencing, the prosecutor believed she would eventually be "suitable" for parole.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Apr 16, 2016 11:18:01 GMT
I guess I'm going to buck the trend here. What she did was horrible, and I would NEVER be in favor of Charles Manson being released because I believe he is evil to his core. But I saw a 60 Minutes special a number of years ago on the Leslie and (can't think of the name of the other girl, but she ended up dying in prison) and how they had changed their lives. They truly did change. Leslie has been a model prisoner all her years there and has shown compassion and kindness to hundreds of other frightened women in the prison. IF there weren't thousands of other murderers who have been released--or who spent only a short period of time--then I would say she shouldn't be released either. But I believe in fairness under the law. There are many, many cases where others have done heinous crimes and still were able to gain release after they were rehabilitated. Why should she be different? Because she murdered someone famous? How is that fair? Leslie never actually murdered anyone. I'm not excusing what she did. It was beyond awful. But she recognizes that and she has expressed true remorse. And she has changed herself. I believe these young people were under the influence of an evil genie. Had she never met Charles Manson, I believe she would have eventually removed herself from the drug scene and become a normal member of society. But she DID meet Charles Manson, and she DID do something horrible. But she has paid for it. She has changed. She has spent far more time behind bars than many other murderers who have done things even worse than she did. I was very impressed with her after seeing the 60 Minutes special. I believe she is a redeemed woman and she has done her time. I agree. I stumbled down a rabbit hole about this woman a couple years ago and, like you, think there is no reason she should stay in prison so much longer than other criminals convicted of similar or worse charges. The explanation for her (isn't it 20?) parole denials, especially considering her unusually long time in prison and her in-prison behavior, seems to be the notoriety and public perception of the case. I also learned a lot about the inaccuracies in Victor Bugliosi's book, which had significantly informed many of my previous views about the case and, particularly, about the three young women who were tried. And remember: the fourth young woman was given total immunity in exchange for testifying. It took Ms. Van Houton a bit longer to reject Manson's thrall, but she did. Does that difference mean one woman goes scott free and the other never has a chance for freedom? Believe me, I surprised myself when I came to my conclusions. I thought about it, and I agree with this. What she did was evil, but she has spent a long time in prison. And it does seem as though she has reformed.
|
|
peabay
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,885
Jun 25, 2014 19:50:41 GMT
|
Post by peabay on Apr 16, 2016 11:45:02 GMT
What is the point of prison? Just punishment? Protecting society? Rehabilitation? I suppose your opinion on this depends on your view of what prison is for. She certainly sounds rehabilitated; I don't think she's a danger to society. So, at this point, it's just continued punishment? Why? So she learns her lesson - sure sounds like she has. I agree with snow silver - if others have been released from prison for worse crimes and with less to offer society when they come out, I don't understand why she shouldn't too.
But that's not what the OP was about and I'm sorry about your frustration. I understand it.
|
|
rickmer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,137
Jul 1, 2014 20:20:18 GMT
|
Post by rickmer on Apr 16, 2016 14:48:02 GMT
in canada one of our most infamous crimes were committed by paul bernardo and karla homolka. he was a rapist who brought his wife into it and they kidnaped, raped and tortured two young teen girls - and filmed the horror so they could enjoy it over and over again. they drugged her own teen sister and raped her while unconscious, choked on her vomit and died. she made a deal with the prosecution, saying she was an abused wife to explain why she didn't help those girls. after the deal was made, videos were found that showed she appeared to be a *very* willing participant but deal was done... it has been referred to as "the deal with the devil" in canadian media ever since. she served a 12 year sentence and was released in 2005 at age 35 with a degree woman's studies, psychology and i believe criminology and fluently bilingual. all paid with tax payers' money. the taxes paid by the parents of the girls she tortured and murdered. while i can appreciate we want offenders to have an education so potentially they have better options upon release rather than to re-offend, no one in their right mind would hire this woman to work in any type of psychology or criminal justice capacity. i think if leslie van houton is doing great things in prison and making a difference to the inmates there that still have a future, then leave her there to continue to make that difference. i would assume her parents have passed on and she has no children, also the innocent victims of many criminals, so that would not sway me that she should be released. My observation is her skin looks like she's 100 years old, it's interesting to observe the difference between a woman who lives in society and wears sunblock and serums daily vs doing nothing. i expect she doesn't need much sunscreen in prison. and there are many women who "live in society" and don't buy anti-aging serums and creams.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 30, 2024 12:31:32 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 14:49:54 GMT
I think if you get life in prison for something you did then you have to serve the whole term. Reformed or not. I think that for anyone, for any sentence. I am not a fan of lessening sentences because of good behavior or over-crowding. But that's me. It was never a life sentence without the possibility of parole. At the time of her sentencing, the prosecutor believed she would eventually be "suitable" for parole. I thought they were all given the death penalty, but then it was commuted to life without parole when the death sentence was deemed unconstitutional, or whatever, in California? I hadn't heard she was granted parole, I thought it would NEVER happen. I have very mixed feelings about this...I have always been fascinated with the case, and it's hard not to feel sympathetic when you see interviews with LVH and Patricia Krenwinkle in the decades after the crime and realize how young they were when it happened. Still, the murders were SO horrific, and the victims were not given any second chances. So I just don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Skellinton on Apr 16, 2016 15:09:48 GMT
I have trouble quoting on this tablet, but for those of you saying that since other criminals with more horrific crimes and sentences are getting released earlier it isn't "fair" that she isn't, is that really a reason she should be released? That is like saying to your parents, "Well, Jimmy's parents let him (insert random illegal or stupid act here) so you should let me. It isn't fair." Just because the system fails by letting criminals out early or giving some criminals a slap on the wrist doesn't mean that should be the standard for all criminals.
I don't really know much about her personally, but just because other people have been released early doesn't mean everyone should.
|
|
marimoose
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,282
Jul 22, 2014 2:10:14 GMT
|
Post by marimoose on Apr 16, 2016 15:14:20 GMT
My observation is her skin looks like she's 100 years old, it's interesting to observe the difference between a woman who lives in society and wears sunblock and serums daily vs doing nothing. i expect she doesn't need much sunscreen in prison. and there are many women who "live in society" and don't buy anti-aging serums and creams.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Apr 16, 2016 15:22:17 GMT
My rule of thumb is unless you can bring the person that you murdered back to life you should never, ever get out of prison.
|
|
georgiapea
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,846
Jun 27, 2014 18:02:10 GMT
|
Post by georgiapea on Apr 16, 2016 15:42:00 GMT
It isn't that I feel she would be a danger to anyone if released, but that a 'life sentence' should be just that. She should accept that she is in prison for the rest of her life and make the best of it. She can continue her education if she wishes and continue to help people there. No parole.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Apr 16, 2016 17:44:37 GMT
i expect she doesn't need much sunscreen in prison. and there are many women who "live in society" and don't buy anti-aging serums and creams. No I'm sure she goes outside for an hour a day or so.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Apr 16, 2016 17:48:40 GMT
I think if you get life in prison for something you did then you have to serve the whole term. Reformed or not. I think that for anyone, for any sentence. I am not a fan of lessening sentences because of good behavior or over-crowding. But that's me. She was sentenced to "life in prison with eligibility for parole". To continue to deny her parole is effectively sentencing her to "life in prison without parole". This isn't about lessening a sentence for good behavior or over-crowding, this is about abiding by the terms of her sentence. Whether she is released or not, I do think she is rehabilitated and will continue to contribute positively to society. Her 2013 parole application was denied because "she had failed to explain how someone of her good background and intelligence could have committed such 'cruel and atrocious' murders". If that is the test the hearing board is putting her to, I'm not sure they will ever be satisfied by her answers.
|
|
marimoose
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,282
Jul 22, 2014 2:10:14 GMT
|
Post by marimoose on Apr 16, 2016 19:14:25 GMT
No I'm sure she goes outside for an hour a day or so. I am pretty confident in saying that someone who is imprisoned for life (or damn close) has far more to be concerned about than serums for her face. She may be wearing sunscreen but still..... not at the top of a worry chart for many
|
|
|
Post by whipea on Apr 16, 2016 19:47:30 GMT
eslie never actually murdered anyone. So what if she stabbed someone 16 times (per her own admission on Larry King) that was already dead due to her holding the victim while her accomplice did the initially killing. Then painted words on the wall with the victim's blood. She said she was high on LSD, yet was the only person who gave detailed testimony to police so she clearly was lucid when she committed her crime. But out of prison who is going to take care of her? She'll go to a halfway house, maybe get a minimum wage job (if she can get hired), she won't know how to operate in 2016. The parole board approved her for parole. The victim's daughter has already expressed her outrage. My observation is her skin looks like she's 100 years old, it's interesting to observe the difference between a woman who lives in society and wears sunblock and serums daily vs doing nothing.Not not to drift too far off topic but not everyone in free society "wears sunblock and serums daily". Most men I know don't always wear sunblock or use serums and they look fine. To state the obvious, prison is extremely stressful and the harsh environment is not conducive to a healthy complexion. Research has shown that people in prison die at least 10 years younger than those in the free world. This is due to violence or emotional stress which leads to disease. People who have been incarcerated long term look much older due to the environment, not lack of product.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Apr 16, 2016 21:54:53 GMT
Not not to drift too far off topic but not everyone in free society "wears sunblock and serums daily". Most men I know don't always wear sunblock or use serums and they look fine. To state the obvious, prison is extremely stressful and the harsh environment is not conducive to a healthy completion. Research has shown that people in prison die at least 10 years younger than those in the free world. This is due to violence or emotional stress which leads to disease. People who have been incarcerated long term look much older due to the environment, not lack of product. Interesting, thanks for sharing! Yes I know men don't wear anything and I think when looking at a couple you can tell their age by the man who never wore sunscreen and night creams. Especially how the texture of the nose changes on elderly men.
|
|