Should Leslie Van Houten (Manson follower) be released?
 

Stumbled across this case when I was reading up on Charles Manson & the rest of the Manson family.

Members of 'The Manson Family' (a hippie cult led by Charles Manson) killed 7 people on 9th and 10th August 1969, including Actress and icon Sharon Tate - who was eight and a half months pregnant.

They were eventually arrested, and several, including Manson, Van Houten and two other women (Pat Krenwinkel and Susan Atkins) were spared the death penalty due to the change in the law in California at that time.

Atkins died in prison in 2009, but Manson, Krenwinkel and Van Houten remain in prison presumably until they die. However, Van Houten never killed anyone - unlike the others. She was simply present at the LeBianca Murder on 10th August and was forced to mutilated a body with her life threatened otherwise. Her website states:

Leslie Van Houten has been incarcerated since 1970. After 3 jury trials by 1978, her (final) sentence is a term of 7 years to life [With the possibility of parole]. A sentence in which she had already served in full, therefore, was immediately eligible to be released on "Time Served," pending a Judicial Review. At that point, (1978), the judge expressed only slight concern stating, "She is clearly rehabilitated but I feel she needs just needs a little more time." According to the judge, other attorneys and journalists as well, Leslie was supposed to be a free woman certainly by 1980.

As of 2015, Leslie has been in prison for over 45 years. Her record has remained exemplary. She has excelled educationally as well - earning 2 college degrees. As a model inmate, she continues to mentor women, helping them win their freedom, but Leslie has been denied her own freedom 20 times by California parole boards. In CA, parole is granted to 82% of inmates with life sentences after serving less than half the time as Leslie. (18.75 years)

A lot of misinformed facts consume Van Houten's once high- profile case, involving the notorious 1969 Charles Manson Family, the myth of Helter Skelter, and many theories that have developed over the last 46 years. Leslie's parole hearings has been controversial and confusing to say the least. Much of the public today have never even heard of her name. And those who have, may not know that she never took a human life. And then there are those who are quite familiar with her case, and the Manson cases, in which Leslie has many supporters, as well as non-supporters. All the same, it's worth a look at the facts - to decide for yourself, if there is a woman in prison that should not be there anymore.

To read more about the case, click here: http://leslievanhouten.com/labianca-murder.html

What do you think? Do you think she deserves freedom?

I belive she is the only one who should be now freed, I've read quite a lot about Manson and these murders and honestly I feel Leslie Van Houten had just gotten herself in too deep and was scared to leave Manson.

She and others have said she never murdered anyone and Manson was said to have held her at knife point to to join them and cut already dead bodies so she was involved. I do think she has served her time twice over by now.

I completely agree. Obviously, I'm not the family of the couple whose deaths she was present at, nor the child of the woman whose body she mutilated - however, she was in deep with Manson at the time and had done over 300 trips on acid. She also says that once when Manson found out she was considering leaving the commune he took her to a cliff and told her if she wanted to leave she would have to jump or something. She was kept isolated by everything at the ranch and was effectively brain washed by Manson - and yeah, she never killed anybody and only mutilated the body because her life was threatened.

I'm pretty sure she is only kept inside because of how famous the case was in the 70s, but she has served more than enough time for the crime she committed.

She is guilty of her part in those horric murders. So she says she didn't kill anyone... neither did Manson. She should die in prison.

Let her rot.

The people there that night have also said she didn't kill anyone. She owned up to mutilating the body before she knew about the autopsy report and the injuries on the body matched up with what she said - and were also given after the death. I'm not saying she didn't deserve prison...but 45 years, for not killing anyone just because the case is famous? When some murderers walk free after 15-25 years?

I believe others involved say Manson kept her drugged and held her at knife point though. I know she's guilty for being there but I do honestly believe she has served her time now.

People get less for worse tbh

If what is said in the article is true then she should have been released years ago.

I agree.

Bang On Right Livia

What is the point of sentencing then, isn't that the whole point of justice...you serve the time given and are released?

Yes i agree here.

They were all smacked out of their heads on LSD. They probably don't know who did what, any more than you do. If you're going to take up the case of someone wrongly imprisoned, I would suggest you choose someone more worthy.

Murderers in this country walk after a relatively short time. In the USA, mostly life means life.

Yes, it's easy to say Manson kept her drugged. But she was a junkie. And she stalked the house of the people who died without Manson being there. She was sentenced to life. That's what she's doing... life.

No one took drugs the night the murders happened.

In CA, parole is granted to 82% of inmates with life sentences after serving less than half the time as Leslie. (18.75 years)

I'm not trying to say she was wrong imprisoned - she was rightly imprisoned...but not for this long. It's the fact that in her first parole meeting, she was told that she would be ready for release by certainly 1980, but just keeps getting rejected because of the fame surrounding the case.

It's due to the 'crime of the century' tag that these people will never get out, it's unfair in one respect as it should apply to all murderers that life means life, not just those from high profile cases.

I don't care about the others getting out - they deserve to be in there until they die and more. However, in Leslie's case, she didn't actually kill anyone and was meant to be out by 1980, but is being kept in there because of what you said, 'the crime of the century' tag - which is why I think she should be released. But yes, I agree, murderers should be in there for life - not serve half the time Leslie has.

and rightly so. I wish we'd take a leaf out of their books over here actually

I agree,we are far too soft over here.

It says on average murderers serve 18 years. The 'life means life' thing only applies to Charles Manson, Pat Krenwinkel and Leslie Van Houten (although she shouldn't even be in prison now) because they killed a famous person.

...Cal, have you read her part in the LaBianca murders..?...it was a very active part and something she asked to be part of because she had felt 'left out' of the previous night murders...I won't post any details because they're a hard read but there are many sites, including some with the complete transcripts of parole hearings...

...anyways, it is still a difficult one, even knowing how horrific her crime because the Leslie of then doesn't seem to be the Leslie of now, she has worked to help people for many years in prison and maybe enough is enough and maybe she should be released, I honestly don't know with this...

Post Deleted.

I have read her part in the LeBianca murders - she stayed out of it because the reality of it all hit her until she was forced to 'do something' and so she did something, but she never killed anybody. I completely agree that the Leslie of then is not the Leslie of today - she was completely under Manson's 'spell' back then, so much that she was willing to get the death penalty for the sake of Manson's freedom. She is definitely a changed woman and she has served 46 years for what she did.