Sunday, May 06, 2007

Leslie Van Houten Murdering Slut


(well, she did bone everything on the ranch including Danny and Bruce, so that is the definition of slut. and she did murder. hence my title. In honor of James D. Robinison of Staten Island)

Anyways... September will be Leslie's next Parole. I'll get the address. I think in Monkeyboy's honor we should have a viral email campaign. It should say

Leno LaBianca was stabbed 42 times with a bayonet and a carving fork. The word "war" was carved into his chest. Rosemary LaBianca struggled to free herself as she listened to her husband's death gurgles. Van Houten held her down before taking her turn in stabbing LaBianca 16 times. She later told a friend it got more fun with every stab.


Then we can have people email their concerns to the board.

More importantly, let's find Rosemary's son and daughter. Sure the daughter was odd for a while, but maybe she's better.

The more pressure, the more she'll stay where she is.

9 comments:

Heaven said...

Col, you're a naughty boy. Such an antagonist LOL

But I still love ya!

=)

ColScott said...

I thought you thought she should stay...

Heaven said...

Who is she? Leslie?

If so, yes I do think she should stay in prison and I said so on CG's group yesterday...

=)

jempud said...

With regard to this latest posting "Leslie Houten Murdering Slut", I have to wonder whether the tenor (and more specifically the phrasing) might not be telling us as much, if not more, about Col Scott than it does about LVH.

I am indifferent to LVH's guilt/innocence, and was not part of the legal machine that put her there. But a cold review of her lengthy incarceration suggests that thirty-eight years after the events there should be some kind of statute of limitations.

Given that her continued presence in jail is a political issue rather than a legal one, does it not call for some examination of a process that allows, for example, 'victim's family rights' at hearings to people who have no relation to the victim of the parolee? And should the people who continue to impede her being paroled when the whole legal system cries out that ‘yes, like it or not, she should be allowed to go free’, not themselves be arraigned for some kind of habeas corpus, fuelled by vengeance rather than justice?

And, can a momentary lapse of judgment (induced by any combination of: youth, emotional immaturity, lack of self confidence, overdependence on a charismatic leader one is desperate to curry favour with, immense peer pressure, mind-altering drugs and the exhilaration, over-exuberance and hedonistic thrill of being young and dropping out in a happy, hippy, hedonistic age), even when leading to such terrible circumstances, not be considered ‘paid’ by now.

I'm sure that all of us have at some stage done something without due thought of the consequences, egged on by people and circumstances we are unable or unwilling to control. And been prepared to pay for our stupidity/thoughtlessness. And after due time and process been prepared to show signs of atonement. In such cases is it not reasonable to hope for forgiveness? Forgiveness is the true mark of the Christian, and also of the rational mind – vengeance that of the heathen and of the mindless bigot.

Let he (or her) that is without sin …

Jem

catscradle77 said...

Well put, but in a way I beg to differ. First, I do believe in this one and previous posts, the Col. has placed the foundation upon which he chose the words that he did in the description. While we all may or may not have chosen to be this blunt or perhaps agree, he did back them up with fact of what happened/happens.

Jempud states:
...victim's family rights' at hearings to people who have no relation to the victim of the parolee?

>>While I may not agree with her presence, under the law you cite for release of Miss VanHouten, the law states a victim's family member may bring support people, thus, the presence of Debbie Tate. (I assume that is to whom you are referring).It may be a media play, but allowed in the rules that you cite for release.

Lapse of judgement, yes, I think we have all had them. But to join up and joy ride then go into some ones house to commit murder, or stab a dead person or whatnot, in many eyes is more than a "lapse of judgement".


What time limit is a human life worth?? I am not certain as to the exact wording, but possibility of parole and actual parole are two seperate matters. The words "callous disregard" or something to that effect and "heinous" I do appear in the boards rulings on not letting people go.

Just my non-sense for a Tuesday.

ColScott said...

cat's- this deserved a whole other post since Jem thinks that JOYFUL and WILLFUL fucking MURDER is somehow a youthful mistake

catscradle77 said...

Thank you for the heads up on the new post. My last remark in this post on this area then shall be, didn't she also complain that she wasn't chosen to go on the first night? (distinctly proving that the mindset of murder was there?)Wasn't there Rosemary's clothes she took from her closet and then burned at the Ranch? (shirt, shorts something. Why the need for the change of clothes if a dead body was stabbed?) There is also the bag of change that was taken as well. Like change could fund the supposed Helter Skelter or whatnot.

Deb said...

I believe that it is also prudent to remember that Leslie went in the car with Tex, Susan, Katie, Linda, CM and Clem knowing full well what had occured the night previously. It wasn't like it was a huge shock about what they would be doing once they arrived at their destination.

Isn't it a prerequisite that in order to gain parole you must acknowledge your part in the crime? If this is the case then saying things like CM made me do it, or she was dead when I stabbed her do not appear to be acceptance of one's own culpability.

Do I think Leslie will be a danger to society? No. Would I be concerned if she lived next door to me - well I would probably keep a close eye on her (LOL) but there is also the issue of deterence as well. Because (like it or not) the notoriety of the case means these Defendants are being judged to a higher standard so Leslie should just own up to her part in it even if it was because of the circumstances... we know the circumstances but since she cannot even admit her own mistake, then why should she be paroled (the same goes for Susan)? It's not a big deal - we know she did it, they know she did it and Leslie knows she did it so own up to it and accept it already.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.