...Truth has not special time of its own. Its hour is now — always and indeed then most truly when it seems unsuitable to actual circumstances. (Albert Schweitzer).....the truth about these murders has not been uncovered, but we believe the time for the truth is now. Join us, won't you?
Leslie Van Houten heads to her 19th parole hearing Tuesday, July 6. Being held for murder as part of the notorious Manson Family’s grisly Tate La Bianca Killings in August of 1969, Van Houten has been denied parole 18 times.
After the California Death Penalty was overturned and death sentences were commuted to life, Van Houten a devout Manson follower found herself in the California Institution for Women in Chino, while Charlie and several others reside in Northern California prisons.
Parole didn’t bode well for any of the family.
Patricia “Katie” Krenwinkel keeps company at the Chino Women center, as well and was last denied parole for the 11th time in 2008.
Calling his cell at Corcoran State Prison home, Charlie won’t have a peek at parole again until 2012. He was last denied in 2007 for the 11th time.
Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme faced life for an assignation attempt on President Gerald Ford, but was released August of last year. Squeaky was involved but not charged in the Family's 1972 Stockton murders in the house on Flora St.
Susan “Sadie Mae” Atkins died from a brain tumor serving her life sentence in the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla, at the age of 61. Her request for parole one year prior to her death, due to her debilitated state and paralysis was unanimously denied. Being denied parole 18 times, she holds the honor of longest incarcerated female in California’s history.
Linda Kasabian escaped imprisonment as a witness for the prosecution turning state’s evidence for immunity.
Convicted of seven counts of murder one and one count of conspiracy, Charles “Tex” Watson waits for his 14th parole hearing in December 2011, at Mule Creek State Prison in Northern California.
Serving two life sentences at the California Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo for the Hinman and “Shorty” Shea murders, Bruce Davis was granted parole by the Board in January of this year. The decision was overturned by Governor Schwarzenegger last week. He will again be eligible in 2011.
Notorious Manson Family member Leslie Van Houten asks to be set free -- again
Leslie Van Houten has been behind bars for over 40 years and has asked to be released on parole 18 times, however, each time the former Manson Family member has been denied her freedom.
She is now 60-years-old and is once again asking to be set free.
Although Van Houten did not take part in the horrific 1969 murders of pregnant actress Sharon Tate and four of her friends, she was involved in the killing of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, which occurred the night after the Benedict Canyon massacre.
According to reports, on August 10, 1969, after being driven to the couple’s home by Charles Manson, Van Houten, Tex Watson, Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, Steve Grogan and Patricia Krenwinkel entered the home.
Van Houten, along with Krenwinkel and Watson stabbed Rosemary multiple times. Van Houten is said to have then changed into the dead woman’s clothing and scavenged the refrigerator for food.
To read about the Tate and LaBianca murders and see photos regarding the brutal slayings, click here.
The Pasadena Star News reports that officials at the California Institution for Women in Riverside County describe Van Houten as a model prisoner.
Susan Atkins attempted to gain her freedom for the 13th time last year, but was denied parole. She died in prison in September of brain cancer.
'Leslie, My Name Is Evil' Stars Talk Manson Cult, Suburban Culture
* May 20, 2010 * | * By: Chris Jancelewicz
Canadian films are all snow and desolation and melancholy, right? Not anymore. 'Leslie, My Name Is Evil', a pseudo-fictional feature film directed and acted by Canadians, is found somewhere opposite on the spectrum, far from where we would expect it. Focusing on the Manson Family murders and subsequent trail of the late 1960s, the movie is a dark, satirical stab at the heart of what makes America America: the nuclear family, religiousness, 'wholesome' values, and military prowess.
In his film, director Reginald Harkema (known for his zany style and outlandish hair) looks specifically at one of the Manson girls on trial, Leslie Van Houten (Kristen Hager), as she goes from straight-laced daughter to outright devotee of the Manson cult. Harkema juxtaposes her journey with that of Perry (Gregory Smith), another buttoned-down youth who's selected as a member of the jury for the trail.
At times psychedelic and at other times sobering, 'Leslie' is an interesting departure from the usual Canadian canon. Moviefone got together with Harkema, Hager, and Ryan Robbins (who adeptly captures the manic essence of Charles Manson) to talk about the making of the film, and what it was like to embody – sorta – some of the most notorious people in American history.
Reg, what inspired you to make a film like this? And about this topic?
Harkema: It was a confluence of two things: the first Pink Mountaintops' album being in heavy rotation on my turntable with the song 'Leslie' playing, and me stumbling across a first-edition copy of 'Helter Skelter' at Value Village. I thought I could make some money off of it, but then I learned that the hottest Manson chick was this Dutch Christian girl named Leslie Van Houten – who's the exact same age as my mother. Then I wondered, "How could my mother become a hippie death cult murderess?"
I guess that's all it takes.
Harkema: That sucked me into the book, and then I found this little tidbit about one of the jurors being infatuated with Leslie. I thought that was an interesting story to tell between two people who can't speak to one another.
Those courtroom scenes can be really intense. Especially Leslie's stare – it's hypnotic!
Hager: Well, thank you! I think.
Reg, did you ever balk at the subject matter, or about approaching it in this way?
Harkema: The only time I ever sort of balked was when my next-door neighbour slipped me some ketamine, and I started having an out-of-body experience. I really felt like I was being sucked into hell. 'Halloween' was also on TV. Let me tell you: never try ketamine while writing a film. [Laughs]
What sorts of reactions have you received at film screenings?
Harkema: It's divided. People love it and hate it. Someone called it the second-worst movie of the year.
Hager: Yes, I would say exactly that. People are polarized.
How much research did each of you conduct for these roles?
Hager: I did more research than I've ever done for any other role. Ever. I spent a good month essentially locking myself up in my apartment watching anything and everything on Manson and his girls. Interviews, YouTube, documentaries, books, culture... you name it. I let it sink in and that was that.
Robbins: Yeah, I'm with Kristen. I think I came on a week-and-a-half before we started filming, so I didn't have as much time to prepare. It was a cram session for me. There is a lot of Manson's audio available, so I used that. And Reg had given me this book, essentially written by Charles Manson. I was more interested in his perception of himself than other peoples' opinions of him. I mean, no one willingly follows a madman unless there's a reason. I wanted to explore the girls and Manson from other angles.
Harkema: Follow them and bed them then, Ryan! You cutie. [Laughs]
Robbins: Now, now.
Playing Manson is obviously a major role. Actors would step over one another to play him. Were you ever nervous at all about taking this on?
Robbins: I went in apprehensive, but also a little excited. Speaking with Reg, I was really confident about his approach and vision. Keep in mind, our film is more of a statement than a biopic. There was more freedom that way.
Kristen, what was it like for you to go from Red Lake, Alberta to playing a Manson follower?
Hager: [Laughs] Well, it wasn't unlike Leslie's journey from a small suburban home. Fortunately I went to theatre school and had a few other jobs in between, but hands down this is one of my favourite roles. Definitely the most challenging.
What was the hardest scene you filmed for this movie?
Hager: [Laughs] For me, that's easy. It involved a kitchen knife and some blood. From the moment I read the script, I knew the murder sequence was going to be a challenge.
What were you actually stabbing?
Hager: A cardboard box. I don't know if there was anything in it or not. The make-up lady was sitting a bit too close to the box, squirting blood into my face and eyes.
Harkema: That was actually the toughest day for me. We were shooting in the middle of November in Toronto but it was supposed to be standing in for California in August.
What about you, Ryan? What was the hardest scene for you?
Robbins: Well, day one, the first shot is me having to have sex with Kristen. [Laughs] It's like, "Hey, how you doing? I'm the second guy you have sex with! Sorry about that."
Hager: It's always like that with every job I have. Intimacy is always the first thing.
Robbins: It was especially challenging because I was strapped to a huge cross in nothing but a loincloth with naked women dancing all over the place.
Harkema: That's really tough, Ryan! [Laughs]
If you can pinpoint it, what would you say is the main message you hope to send with this movie?
Harkema: I think it's a message-less movie. Take what you can from it. The only thing I hope to get out of this movie is that a boy and a girl, a girl and a girl, or a boy and a boy will go to it on a date and get into a big fight about what it means, and then have great make-up sex.
What stood out to me as the main issue was the stubborn adherence to that nuclear family, right-wing, religious ideal. It still seems to be prevalent today, 40 years later.
Robbins: That's what I remember thinking too, when I read the script.
Harkema: Yes, we're still making the exact same mistakes. My girlfriend of 10 years is American. We go to Tennessee and have Christmas with her southern Republican father, and then the other Christmas we'll go to Olympia, Washington with her mom's family, who are all dope-smoking lesbians. So the cultural divide of America is clearly demarcated, and that's what the movie is about – about how much that still exists today.
After Patricia Wenskunas was assaulted by her personal trainer in 2002, she felt victimized a second time when prosecutors negotiated a plea agreement with her attacker without her knowledge.
Angered to action, she formed Crime Survivors Inc. after rallying 50 people outside the Orange County courthouse in what turned out to be a successful effort to oppose the plea deal. She doesn't want other crime victims to feel as helpless as she did before the rally.
"Criminals are read their rights. Victims are told, 'Just go on with your life,'" said Wenskunas, 39, who owns a catering business.
She is among the supporters of Proposition 9 on the Nov. 4 ballot, which seeks to place rights for crime victims in the state Constitution. Supporters say criminals are often coddled while victims are left to fend for themselves.
Opponents say the proposal would tip the scales of justice too far, potentially violating defendants' rights and conflicting with federal court rulings.
That initiative follows voter approval of the "Victims' Bill of Rights" in 1982. That measure wrote numerous victims' rights into law but not into the Constitution. It gave victims the right to be told when criminals are nearing release, to be notified of criminal proceedings and to participate in sentencing and parole hearings.
Proposition 9 goes further.
Prosecutors would be required to consult with victims on what charges to file, judges would have to consider victims' safety when setting bail, and victim restitution would get priority over fines and fees.
Victims could refuse to be interviewed or provide evidence, testimony or confidential information to defendants.
Under the initiative, criminals denied parole from their life sentences might not get another hearing for 15 years, and parolees could be sent back to prison without legal representation.
"What we're asking is equal justice," said Harriet Salarno of Auburn, president of Crime Victims United of California. "We're not taking anything away from the criminal. We're just asking the same rights be afforded to us in the Constitution."
Salarno formed Crime Victims United of California after her daughter, Catina, was murdered by a former boyfriend in 1979.
Jakada Imani also knows what it feels like to be victimized by violent crime, but says Proposition 9 goes too far.
He had two brothers wounded by gunfire in recent years. One brother was struck in the head by a stray bullet in Sacramento. The other was hit when Oakland gang members opened fire on a family gathering, killing his brother's best friend.
"This initiative can start to blur the line between accused and guilty," said Imani, executive director of the Oakland-based Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which promotes alternatives to incarceration. "It tips over into politicizing victims and crime."
The measure could conflict with certain federal laws and court rulings.
It would reverse the state's agreement to provide attorneys to all ex-convicts facing revocation of their parole, an agreement struck in the settlement of a federal class-action lawsuit. Proposition 9 would require the state to provide attorneys only for parolees who can't afford to hire an attorney and can't represent themselves because they lack sufficient education or are mentally incapacitated.
It also would amend the state Constitution to prohibit releasing inmates early as part of a mandate to ease crowding in prisons or county jails. The Legislature and county boards of supervisors would be required to provide enough money to house inmates for their full sentences.
That runs counter to federal court orders capping the number of inmates who can be housed in 20 jails throughout the state. Twelve more counties have a self-imposed cap.
There is no cap on the state prison population, but a special panel of three federal judges could impose one after a trial scheduled for November.
Supporters and opponents of Proposition 9 agree that federal law or court decisions would supersede the state Constitution. Supporters said the initiative would allow alternatives to being jailed, such as home detention or using tracking devices.
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office projected that keeping inmates in jail or prison longer under Proposition 9 could cost the state and counties hundreds of millions of dollars a year. It estimated the state could save tens of millions of dollars annually by reducing parole hearings.
Currently, inmates serving life sentences are entitled to a hearing every one- to five years. The proposition would permit hearings every three- to 15 years. Inmates could petition for a quicker hearing if they present evidence of rehabilitation.
The proposition, which proponents dubbed "Marsy's Law," has a troubled history.
It's named for Marsy Nicholas, a 21-year-old University of California, Santa Barbara student who was murdered by her boyfriend in 1983. Marsy's mother was shocked to run into her daughter's killer days later at a grocery store, after he was released on bail without the family's knowledge. He eventually was convicted and died in prison.
The incident prompted Marsy's brother, Broadcom co-founder Henry T. Nicholas III, to spend $4.8 million to get Proposition 9 on the ballot.
But the billionaire was indicted in June on federal securities fraud and drug charges, alleging he spiked the drinks of business associates with Ecstasy and maintained a drug warehouse. He has pleaded not guilty.
In a further oddity, two imprisoned followers of 1960s cult leader Charles Manson challenged the official ballot arguments used by Proposition 9 supporters.
Bruce Davis and Leslie Van Houten, who have been denied parole repeatedly, objected to being named as examples of inmates who force taxpayers to "spend millions of dollars on hearings for dangerous criminals that have virtually no chance of release."
They argued they would have been freed long ago had it not been for their association with Manson and that their parole hearings cost taxpayers little. A Sacramento County judge dismissed their challenge in August.
A letter from Janet Parent to the Leslie Van Houten Parole Board in 2000 courtesy of Nelson's old site. Orca was not the first unrelated relative to speak up against the whore who "only" stabbed a dead lady.
Dear members of the California Board of Prison Terms:
I am writing in regards to prisoner #W 13378 Leslie Van Houten.
I have been silent too long. My family never thought that the day would come when any of these animals could possibly be released back into society, but here we are. It is time to speak out.
My name is Janet Parent and I am the sister of Steven Parent one of the victims of the Tate murders. I am appalled that this woman even has a right to possibly return to society. All the therapy and degrees in the world doesn't change the fact that she is a cold blooded murderer.
These people are not insane and were not at the time they committed these murders. They planned and conspired to commit these crimes. Insanity might be a small reason to help understand how these horrendous crimes were committed, but insanity wasn't a factor. They knew exactly what they did and being a model prisoner doesn't give them the right to be released.
Leslie Van Houten is a murderer, granted she wasn't at the Tate house but she wanted to be there and in my mind that doesn't make her any different than the rest.
Where is my brothers degree? Eighteen, just graduated from high school, accepted to college. No, he didn't even get the chance.
Miss Van Houten isn't supposed to be alive, because our system sentenced her to death, but she is alive and should spend the rest of her life right where she is, remembering each and every day of her life what she has done.
If any of these animals are let out our system is telling us that you can murder and murder and murder and get away with it.
Please don't let my family and the other victims families down.
Bill Nelson Published this July 17 2000.Yes, Babs is basically full of shit.But she's right. We mustn't forget LVH was involved in Shorty's murder and never paid the price. -----------------------------------------------
A CHALLENGE FROM BARBARA HOYT TO LESLIE VAN HOUTEN
Barbara has been after me for some time to offer Leslie Van Houten a challenge. Barbara has said that maybe if Leslie took her up on it and passed, that perhaps she might back off a little from opposing a release date for the twice convicted murderess.
I received a call last night from Barbara as she had just read my updates of July 14, 2000. She was deeply moved by the letter from Angela Smaldino and asked me to convey her deep admiration for the way she handled herself in the letter. Then, Barbara began talking about how all of the killers are still lying and none of them tell the truth. She spoke of Susan Atkins and stated, "She is still protecting Charlie!" "When Susan tells the parole board about the motive for the Tate murders being a 'Copycat' killing to get Bobby out of jail, she is lying."
"That was not even introduced into the trial until the death penalty phase following the guilty verdicts and even Gypsy admitted that on that Hard Copy show with Vince Bugliosi."
"To the degree that Susan keeps telling that story, she is still protecting Charlie."
To Leslie: Take a polygraph test on the subject of the killing of Shorty.
Said Barbara, "Now that I read on your new page about Faces of Susan Atkins that she admits to helping cover up the area the murder took place, I find it hard to believe that Leslie did not know about it too.
Gypsy knew. Susan knew, and I believe Leslie knew."
Submit to a polygraph.
Pass it.
Show no knowledge of the murder of Shorty Shea at that time, no participation in the burial of Shorty and then I will consider backing off.
Leslie Van Houten, the murdering slut who went into a stranger’s house, put a bag over her head and killed her is suing the Warden of her prison. Her lawsuit is filed essentially the same as the one filed by Susan Atkins.
As a disbarred attorney I will translate---
Leslie alleges
1- That she is sentenced to life with the possibility of parole. 2- That there is a checklist of things that one needs to do to obtain parole. 3- That she has done all these things. 4- That by denying her parole in 2004 the Warden and the commission viokated her rights. 5- That she is thus being held there illegally and that the government should show cause why she should not be released immediately. 6- That barring that she is to be considered a political prisoner being held illegally by the State of California.
Christie Webb, Leslie’s attorney, also alleges that Staten Island Jim has no nutsack in the pleadings. Okay, okay I jest.
I understand why Leslie is doing this. She isn’t getting out ever anyway, so why not? I mean, she could light herself on fire that would get her out sooner. But she is trying all legal remedies. Everything short of granny porn.
In a nutshell, she says “I have a right to parole and have done everything right and you suckers are not letting me out.”
Probably doesn’t help that she calls the Warden and others names and sues them. But whatever.
Why does her argument fall to the ground? Because she doesn’t have a right to parole. It is that simple. It is POSSIBLE she could get paroled. But she won’t.
Why then does she keep suing?
What else does she have to do with her time?
[Pictured- Leslie the killer and her great father who said on CNN that he never has talked about the murder of Rosemary LaBianca with his daughter the fucking murderess]
I heard that you wanted MORE Leslie from Nellie's old site.Why would I decline your wishes?
An Editorial by Bill Nelson
The next person to have a parole hearing is Leslie Van Houten and it should take place in May, since she received a one year denial just last May 28, 1998. Having served thirty years for her participation of murder in the LaBianca home, she has the best chance for a parole date. She was charged with one count of murder and one count of conspiracy. She did not physically participate in the brutal stabbing of Leno LaBianca who was tethered in a defenseless position by Manson and Tex Watson. Leslie entered the private home without a weapon but she and Pat immediately obtained knives from the victims kitchen.
Leslie likes to talk about starring into an empty room during the brutal stabbing and claims she only stabbed Rosemary in the lower back some sixteen times after Tex demanded she do something. She whispers softly to the assembled members of the parole board that Rosemary was already dead. It is a moot point.
What Leslie fails to talk about is her willingness to fight, subdue, tie down, wrestle and brutalize Rosemary in the sanctity of her private residence while getting ready for bed around 2:00 A.M. on that fateful August 10, 1969 Sunday morning. She held Rosemary down while Pat tried unsuccessfully to stab the victim. Leslie struggled hard with the victim, she put a pillow case over the victims head, a lamp cord around the neck and when Rosemary was tough enough to get up off the bed at hearing the screams of husband Leno being butchered by a lying Tex Watson, she called for Tex - trustworthy killer - to finish the job the two Slippies were unable to do.
Leslie Van Houten was more than a passive demure little obedient slave. She was an enthusiastic willing thrill seeking killer. After the blood shed, during the quietness of death, Leslie wiped down the house seeking to destroy any prints left by the killers. She did a very good job at that. There were no prints found in the house from Manson, Watson, Van Houten or Krenwinkle. Left in the wake of madness were two brutally stabbed victims, a husband and wife, and the only reason given was to start a race war between the Black and White races of America. That is why Pat took the time to write in blood on the living room wall above the front door "RISE", and over the wall facing that door, "DEATH TO PIGS", then on the refrigerator the misspelled words "HEALTER SKELTER". Oh, while Tex took a shower, Pat took a fork from the kitchen and stabbed the dead corpse of Leno several times. Then, in an expression of total depravity, she wobbled it, left it in the stomach wound, and is said to have remarked something like "This will freak out the children when they come to Sunday dinner tomorrow."
There was one more thing Leslie has not talked about lately, she was angry at not being asked to participate in the massacre at the Tate/Polanski residence the night before.
Fast forward. Thirty years later. Incarceration, three trials, remorse and a little bit of Jesus thrown into the mix, Leslie wants to go home. She has a job waiting. She has offers of financial support. Her life is pretty well together now, she is the beneficiary of a devoted following called "Friends of Leslie".
Leslie has what Rosemary and Leno lost. There is no organization called "Friends of Rosemary" or "Friends of Leno" for they have all but been forgotten. Murdered. Dumped. Their cries for help, their pleas to live fell on deaf ears.
Why didI work with Alice LaBianca last year to present a letter to the Board of Prison Terms opposing the release of Leslie Van Houten? First of all, Alice was not manipulated to do that by me, as some friends of Leslie have suggested, far from it. Alice LaBianca is a very independent woman. She laughed when that suggestion was given to her.
I did it because the LaBianca family needed to get beyond their grief and do something positive. The LaBianca family has been judged for having never spoken out and that changed last year. Alice did the right thing. Do I think she will once again do it this year? I think not. Will we see a LaBianca family member appear before the hearing to oppose the release of Leslie? It is doubtful. The senseless murders inside the LaBianca home thirty years ago froze the family in terror and they have never recovered. Part of that terror is their fear of the daughter of Rosemary, Ms. Suzann LaBerge, and that is a story I have not been fully told.
So what would it take for me to step aside and not oppose the parole date for Leslie Van Houten?
There is nothing Leslie Van Houten can do. I will never support her release. The motive for the murders, and the brutality of the killing should close the door to that prison entrance for ever. The only way Van Houten, Atkins or Krenwinkle should ever come out of CIW is in a pine box.
Leslie Van Houten has the right to request a parole date, she does not have a guarantee that the state is obligated to give her one. The state has the responsibility to hear her appeal each time the Board of Prison Terms assembles at the California Institute for Women for a Van Houten hearing. Each time I listen to the words of Leslie and study her demeanor during the hearing, I ask myself about the cries of the victims. But then, my mind returns to the present and I watch to see if the panel is listening or sympathetic towards the matured woman before them.
Yes, the panel has listened and they have shown interest in her progress. It gives caution to the Deputy District Attorney representing the people of the great state of California. There are some things that I would like to see Leslie Van Houten clear up before the parole board gives her a date though. It would illustrate remorse, understanding and rehabilitation.
Did Manson and Watson enter the home together?
What does Leslie know about the claims of Gypsy that the Manson family creepy crawled the LaBianca house within two weeks of the murders?
Did she hear any questions from Tex about Leno giving him a little black book?
Does she know anything about the brass door handle ending up in the refrigerator some two weeks after the murders in the LaBianca kitchen?
What, if anything, does she know about the arrangement of logs before the fire place some two weeks after the murders?
Did Leslie know Joe Dorgan, the boyfriend of the daughter of Rosemary? Dorgan rode with Manson with other bikers.
Where did Tex hide that bayonet? My first book proved he did not throw it into the Hyperion water as he claimed.
Were the bushes they slept in near the steps leading to the freeway?
Did Leslie know Marina Habe, a female murder victim known to have visited the Spahn Ranch?
Did Leslie actually participate in the burial of the remains of Shorty Shea following his murder, as I have been told?
These are fair and logical questions for the lady anxious for a parole date. These are some of the questions I personally would like to ask Ms. Van Houten. But, I am not on the board and I am not the one to decide if she is granted her wishes for a release date.
I plan to video tape the hearing in May once again. I will be there to document and record the events as they transpire. If she receives a date I will not be surprised. If she is denied because of the new Governor Gray Davis I will not be shocked. The board who grants her a date will have to be strong and the Governor who signs off on it will have to have some rather large shoulders. The outcry would be much louder than the joy from the Friends of Leslie. Is Leslie Van Houten a threat to society? Maybe not. But then again, neither are Rosemary and Leno LaBianca.
Footnote below:
VAN HOUTEN, LESLIE LOUISE F/W 5'6 brn brn 8-23-49/48 POB: Iowa Nicknames: Leslie DL# DD 436893 (temp) aka's: Sankston, Leslie Mary, Owens, Leslie Sue; Alexandria, Louella Maxwell; Alexander, Louise Susan Arrested with Manson family Convicted of the murders of Rosemary & Leno LaBianca.
One more comment from the Editorial above...3/2/99
The parole board is allowed to ask questions about the commitment offense, the record of the inmate prior to the life crimes, the progress inside the institution, the psychological evaluation, plans for a parole date, and questions about things relating to the crimes. Bruce Davis was questioned about the fact he did not inform law enforcement of the burial site of Shorty Shea. Bruce Davis was asked about his opinion as to the suitability of Charles Denton "Tex" Watson to get a parole date, even though the question had nothing to do with the main line of questioning. Davis was asked about the shooting of Bernard Crow. He was not involved in the crime. Van Houten may be asked questions showing her suitability for a release date and that may be determined in part, by her willingness to answer related questions. These questions were raised outside the prison last year and they may be asked of Leslie at the hearing this year.
Her defenders at any cost will have to pray Leslie is truthful, forth coming, and receptive to whatever related questions the panel decides to ask. Certainly, questions about members of the Manson family being inside the LaBianca residence within two weeks of the murders and the letters from Leno to his daughter documenting the facts are reasonable.
To the Friends Of Leslie and other sympathetic supporters of the murderers I ask, What have you done for the victim's families in your life time? Absolutely nothing!
