Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Read Van Houten's parole transcript on the link.  Thanks Sunset!!!! 


At parole hearing, Manson acolyte said she would have killed babies

California parole officials foolishly recommended a former Charles Manson disciple for release — even after she admitted she would have killed babies during her murderous 1969 rampage.

During an April 14 parole hearing, Leslie Van Houten, 66, went into graphic detail about her despicable role in the savage murders of a wealthy married couple in their Los Angeles home on August 10 that year.

Presiding Commissioner Ali Zarrinnam grilled Van Houten about her sick bloodlust, “You would have done anything at this point, right? If there were babies in the home, would you have killed babies, newborns, toddlers?”

Van Houten responded: “I think I would have if he’d have said,” referring to Manson, according to the 210 page parole board transcript exclusively obtained by The Post.

The gray-haired femme fatale never recanted or took responsibility for her shocking statement, saying instead that she had “surrendered completely, morally, ethically” to Manson.

Yet, parole officials have paved the way for Van Houten to be released from the California Institution for Women in Chino, Calif.

Governor Jerry Brown has the final say on whether she will be released. His decision is expected in the coming months.

During the seven hour parole hearing, Van Houten gave a chilling blow-by-blow account of the couple’s slaying at the hands of her and her accomplices, Patricia Krenwinkel and Charles “Tex” Watson.

Van Houten, then 19, said it started with Manson and “Tex” breaking into the Los Feliz residence and tying up Leno, 44, – a supermarket owner – and his wife, Rosemary, 39.

Manson ordered his brainwashed crew to make the killings appear less “gruesome” than the night before when he had ordered the murders of five other people, including Roman Polanski’s pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, Van Houten testified.

Charles Manson in October 2014Photo: AP
“[Tex] told Pat and I to go into the kitchen and get knives, and we took Mrs. LaBianca into the bedroom and put a pillowcase over her head,” Van Houten said.

“I wrapped the lamp cord around her head to hold the pillowcase on her head. I went to hold her down,” Van Houten testified.

At that moment, they could hear the “guttural sounds” and “struggles” of Leno while he was getting butchered in another room, Van Houten said.

Rosemary “jetted forward and started calling his name saying what are you doing,” Van Houten said. “And I tried to hold her down more, and Pat went to stab her on the collarbone and the knife bent.”

Watson showed up at the door and Van Houten told him that “we can’t kill her, it’s not working,” she said.

He then handed a knife to Van Houten and told her to “do something,” she said. “And I stabbed Mrs. LaBianca in the lower torso with the knife he gave me. Coroner’s reports say between 14 and 16 [times].”

Van Houten was convicted in 1971 for the LaBianca murders and sentenced to death.

Manson, 81, is also serving a life term with parole for murder along with several other accomplices.

Read Leslie Van Houten’s full parole board transcript:


Saturday, April 30, 2016

Katy Perry and the Convent next to the LaBianca's house on Waverly Drive

Los Feliz convent

I'm very sorry to have been gone so long.  I am mad busy with three gigs now so I shall probably remain scarce for a while...


Back in January I finally was able to make the trip and spent four days and nights in LA.  I saw some friends, dined in Hollywood at Osteria Mozza after having had drinks at Musso and Frank with an Industry friend of mine, saw Chris Carter of The X Files and met an actress who gets killed on it's latest incarnation.  I planned on taking the Manson Tour but it wasn't available, so I had to see what I could on my own.

I drove up and down Cielo Drive and took pictures from Falcon's Lair, drove up and down Mulholland Drive, went to Brentwood and accidentally found myself on Bundy, but also went to Los Feliz to see the LaBianca's  house on Waverly.

I noticed that the property right next to it on the left as you look at it was a Convent.  I studied it because it went a long way towards my understanding that the LaBianca's house could indeed be considered somewhat isolated because the Convent's grounds are vast and there's no house on that side anywhere near where the LaBianca's house is.  I thought I would eventually research the Convent, see how long it has existed and all, but didn't get around to it.

Then I saw this Katy Perry thing on the TV news and it seemed so familiar as they described this property, and yes indeed it is one and the same.


And it's pretty damn amazing about Jane Doe 59 too.

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Jane Doe #59 - Reet Jurvetson

Possible Manson victim identified after nearly 50 years
Wed Apr 27, 2016 7:20pm EDT LOS ANGELES | BY DAN WHITCOMB

 A woman found stabbed to death in 1969 and considered a possible victim of followers of Charles Manson has been identified after nearly 50 years, prompting detectives to question the imprisoned mass murderer about her death, Los Angeles police said on Wednesday. 

 The woman, previously known only as Jane Doe #59, was identified through DNA testing as 19-year-old Reet Jurvetson, who lost contact with her family after traveling to California from Canada in 1969, the Los Angeles Police Department said.

"Finally, after all these years, we are faced with hard facts. My little sister was savagely killed. It was not what I wanted to hear," the slain woman's sister, Anne Jurvetson, said in a statement posted on a memorial website. 

 Anne Jurvetson wrote that her parents never reported her sister missing, not realizing she had been the victim of a crime. The body of Jurvetson, who was born in Sweden and grew up in Montreal, was found in the Hollywood Hills brush. She had been stabbed 150 times in the upper body. An initial breakthrough in the case came when a family friend looking through a database of missing and deceased victims recognized her. 

"Due to the location and the time period where Reet Jurvetson was found, and the violent manner of her death, investigators wanted to rule out any possible connection to the notorious 'Manson Murders' that occurred during the summer of 1969," the LAPD said. 

Investigators questioned Manson, now 81, in prison about Jurvetson's death but learned nothing useful "and the investigation remains open and ongoing," the police department said. The LAPD asked the public to help in identifying a friend of Jurvetson known as John, or Jean. 

In the summer of 1969 Manson directed his mostly young, female followers to murder seven people. Among the victims was actress Sharon Tate, the pregnant wife of filmmaker Roman Polanski, who was stabbed 16 times by members of the cult in the early morning hours of Aug. 9, 1969.

(Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Toni Reinhold and Tom Brown)


Sunday, April 24, 2016

Leslie's Parole. Lynyrd Weighs-in.

I’ve watched the KABC video (on the thread below) 3 times. I also watched it (a 4th time) on Brian’s radio show this evening.

The entire KABC broadcast, can be summed-up with the following exchange:

Jillian (the interviewer) said:
“What Leslie did was take a life, and when she did that, she forfeited her own freedom. Period. The end. That‘s it.”

Attorney Rich Pfeiffer responded: 
“That’s not the law in this country. She was sentenced to life, with the possibility of parole. You don’t want to follow the law. And if the law isn’t followed, and the government becomes lawless… what kind of country are we?”

That’s the cruxt of this situation.

Here’s my thoughts:

No murderer will ever truly “deserve” parole, based upon the gravity of  their crime(s). 

You can never pay back a life. That’s common sense.

As Vincent Bugliosi once explained… parole for murderers is ALWAYS based upon some degree of pardon.

From that standpoint, Leslie (and no murderer, for that matter) will ever truly “earn” or “deserve” parole. 

That’s understood.

The real question becomes:
Does Leslie “deserve” parole based upon her sentence?

The first thing we need to clarify, is WHAT EXACTLY does the phrase “with the possibility of parole” mean?

I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t tell you the answer to that key question, based upon law.

As a layperson however , it seems to me, that “the possibility of parole” means this:
If the prisoner is “good enough” for “long enough”, they will be released (i.e., “pardoned”) before their death.

But regardless of my opinion, here’s the point:
There HAS to be SOMETHING that differentiates “Life WITH the possibility of parole”, from “Life WITHOUT the possibility of parole”, other than empty rhetoric.

Think about this:
If we intend to keep Leslie incarcerated FOREVER (based upon the gravity of her crimes alone), REGARDLESS of her good behavior, and REGARDLESS of her achievements… then, haven’t we (for all intents and purposes) changed her sentence to “Life WITHOUT the possibility of parole”?? 

I mean, if we honestly believe that Leslie should NEVER be released, under ANY circumstances (like Jillian), then where is her “opportunity for parole”? 

I understand, that by law, we can keep Leslie incarcerated forever. I fully understand that. BUT, is that REALLY in keeping with the INTENT of her sentence?

If you believe like many folks, that Leslie should NEVER be released under ANY circumstances, then quite frankly, I don’t believe you’re upholding the true intent of her sentence.

I’m not a Leslie supporter... FAR from it. I'd love to see her die in prison. But, sometimes in life, you have to live with your mistakes. The idiots in California, granted Leslie “the opportunity of parole”… and now, we’re stuck with upholding it.

This is my conscience:

Does Leslie deserve release based upon her crimes? Hell No!

Does Leslie deserve release based upon her sentence (and the “pardon” it implies)? Probably, yes.

It pains me to say that… but, it’s true. 

The fact is, there’s absolutely nothing more that Leslie can possibly do (to earn her release), other than spend more time in jail.

Are we REALLY offering Leslie “the possibility of parole”? Really? 
You’ll have to answer that question with your own conscience.


Saturday, April 23, 2016

Leslie Van Houten, a/k/a Van Skankston, hires a new attorney every time that last one failed.  Where is she getting money for this?  Is it pro bono?


They're mostly men.  She's like the mythological creature, The Siren, who lures men to watery graves.  Ronald Hughes was one who did die a watery death....


Was Lu Lu's attorney treated badly in this interview, or was it completely justified?


Let's start round one!  LOL.




Jillian & John talk with Leslie Van Houten’s lawyer

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Board recommends parole for Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten; victim's daughter outraged

Matt HamiltonContact Reporter
A California review board recommended parole Thursday for former Charles Manson family member Leslie Van Houten, who was convicted in the 1969 killings of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. 

The decision was issued following a hearing earlier in the day at the California Institution for Women in Chino. Van Houten has been denied parole 19 times since she was convicted of murder in the deaths of Leno LaBianca, a wealthy grocer, and his second wife at their Los Feliz home.  

After the ruling is reviewed by the parole board's legal team, it will be forwarded to Gov. Jerry Brown, who could decide to block Van Houten’s release.

Cory LaBianca, who was 21 years old when her father and stepmother were slain, told The Times that she strongly disagreed with the parole board's decision.

"Maybe Leslie Van Houten has been a model prisoner," Cory LaBianca said. "But you know what, we still suffer our loss. My father will never be paroled. My stepmother will never get her life back. There’s no way I can agree with the ruling today. I don’t seek revenge. I just think it's just for someone to do that to stay in prison."

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey, whose office argued for Van Houten to remain behind bars, also expressed disapproval in a statement: "We disagree with the board's decision and will evaluate how we plan to proceed."

The youngest of Manson’s followers, Van Houten, 66, has been considered the least
blameworthy member of the group, and has been portrayed by supporters as a misguided teen under the influence of LSD on the night of the killings.

A former homecoming queen from Monrovia, Van Houten did not join in the Aug. 9, 1969, killings of Sharon Tate, the wife of film director Roman Polanski, and four others at the Benedict Canyon home that Tate was renting.

But the following day, then-19-year-old Van Houten joined in slaying the LaBiancas.

Van Houten and another woman held down Rosemary LaBianca as Charles “Tex” Watson stabbed Leno LaBianca. After Watson stabbed Rosemary LaBianca, he handed Van Houten a knife. She testified to stabbing Rosemary at least 14 more times.

The blood of the victims was used to scrawl messages on the walls, as had been done at the Benedict Canyon home.

In prior bids for parole, Van Houten's attorneys have characterized her as a model inmate who has obtained a college degree behind bars and has been active in self-help groups.

At a 2002 parole board hearing, Van Houten said she was “deeply ashamed” of what she had done, adding: "I take very seriously not just the murders, but what made me make myself available to someone like Manson."

Van Houten's attorney, Richard Pfeiffer, said he believed the two-member board was most persuaded by her exemplary behavior behind bars.

"Since 1980, there were 18 different doctors who did psychiatric evaluations of her. Every single one found she was suitable for parole," Pfeiffer said.

Van Houten told her attorney that she was left "numb" by the decision handed down Thursday. Pfeiffer said he's hopeful that Brown chooses to grant her parole.

Last summer, a parole board recommended parole for Manson associate Bruce Davis, who was convicted in the 1969 killings of Gary Hinman and Donald “Shorty” Shea.

But in January, Brown rejected parole for the 73-year-old, stating that “Davis' own actions demonstrate that he had fully bought into the depraved Manson family beliefs.” Davis was not involved in the killings of the LaBiancas, Tate and four others.