The Manson “household” killings of 1969 and subsequent trials have been earlier than my time, however their terrifying maintain on the collective creativeness in Southern California was apparent to me as a child rising up in Glendale within the Nineteen Eighties and 90s. We weren’t acquainted with the terrible particulars, fortunately, however I recall realizing sufficient to generally name whichever child was “it” on the playground Charles Manson. Adults didn’t like that.
So it shouldn’t be a shock that readers who keep in mind the brutal murders of seven folks in Los Angeles over two nights in August 1969, plus two extra murders on different days, have sturdy opinions about paroling former Manson follower Leslie Van Houten. In truth, I’ve by no means seen such intense curiosity by our letter writers within the destiny of every other incarcerated particular person, which can assist clarify why suggestions for her parole have been reversed 5 instances by two completely different governors.
This time, Gov. Gavin Newsom declined to struggle a state appeals court docket choice that Van Houten needs to be granted parole, and on Tuesday she left the California Establishment for Girls in Corona after 53 years in jail. Maybe as an indication of how views on legal justice and public security have developed lately, about half of the letters on Van Houten’s parole have expressed help for it, a better portion than any time earlier than.
————
To the editor: Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. Stab. And after stabbing her sufferer 14 instances, Van Houten helped lower her up.
Opposing her launch from jail is just not an act of vengeance. It’s known as justice, and being a mannequin prisoner has nothing to do with it.
Kelly Gallagher, Santa Ana
..
To the editor: There’s one issue that has not been mentioned concerning the choice to parole Van Houten.
She was out on bail for seven months in 1977-78 throughout her retrial, the one lively participant within the Tate-LaBianca murders allowed outdoors jail for any cause.
What crimes did the 20-something Van Houten commit when she was free? None.
She wasn’t a menace to the general public 45 years in the past, however as a society we don’t normally let convicted murderers out after lower than a decade behind bars. However now she is aged and has been incarcerated for the higher a part of six many years, it’s time to let her go.
I don’t really feel the identical about paroling her co-participants Charles “Tex” Watson and Patricia Krenwinkel, who murdered seven folks, together with the pregnant Sharon Tate. However Van Houten has paid her debt to society.
Ron Shinkman, Northridge
..
To the editor: How is it that Stanley “Tookie” Williams, who confirmed some extent of regret and rehabilitation within the type of writing youngsters’s books, was executed, and the Manson “household” killers weren’t?
Gov. Gavin Newsom ought to have stood his floor on Van Houten’s parole for the sake of the victims’ households.
The truth that this state doesn’t perform loss of life sentences needs to be thought-about by the parole board earlier than ever permitting such criminals to see the sunshine of day, nevertheless briefly, earlier than their remaining judgment from which there can be no parole.
Artwork Peck, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: I believe we neglect that in some ways, who we have been at 19 may be very very completely different than who we’re at Van Houten’s age of 73 (I’m 70).
At 19, I too joined a cult, though not a violent one. I broke many legal guidelines on medication and driving — I used to be simply not caught.
Jail is a punishment, however there’s additionally speculated to be some rehabilitative side to it.
What Van Houten did can by no means be forgotten or forgiven, however she has apparently used her jail years to remake herself right into a helpful member of her society. Statistically, it appears older (or previous) prisoners are a lot much less more likely to re-offend than their juniors.
It’s exhausting to think about Van Houten will discover one other “grasp” and go on one other killing spree.
Anne Beaty, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Prisoner rights advocates argue {that a} assassin’s present hazard to society needs to be a determinative issue for parole.
On the contrary, whether or not Van Houten or any assassin is presently harmful shouldn’t play any function in deciding whether or not such convicts are launched.
Justice calls for that after an individual murders one other, the convict completely forfeits the appropriate to rejoin society. Releasing any assassin whereas his or her victims stay lifeless is just not justice. “Remedy and reflection,” as one letter author put it, don’t justify a assassin’s launch.
In arguing for Van Houten’s launch, one reader notes that the “murders have been really terrible, however what homicide isn’t?” Precisely — no assassin ought to ever be launched from jail.
Ray McKown, Torrance
..
To the editor: It’s an unlucky signal of the instances that whereas there’s lots of tut-tutting about this horrible incident greater than half a century in the past, as fashionable mass murders go it hardly strikes the needle.
Possibly we have to ask ourselves why there’s a lot consideration paid to protecting somebody in jail far past the place they’d usually be paroled for this crime, and but we are able to’t appear to muster the need to have the ability to take care of crimes of comparable or worse severity that appear to occur regularly.
Martin Usher, Thousand Oaks
