Yes for sure she should have, after release at least a decade ago. The decision to keep her in was perverted and against even Bugliosi's expressed wish for her release. Justice clearly can not be served when there is no separation of it from political considerations. Maybe it is karma that Arny is now most reviled She was young, stupid, manipulated and half mad 40 years ago, and was an accessory more than a killer. Add to that wrongly convicted over the La Bianca killings of which she had declined to partake in. She was not a re-offence risk and had become a great asset by her community spirit.
Yeah I've been watching many videos online and I manged to find an online book which hasn't been published yet I don't think. It is true that she was a politicle prisoner but its still difficult for me to decide.
In theory, I support the release of someone who is terminal. In practicality, no way... California politicitians and thug-huggers have shown a propensity to take a well meaning policy or piece of legislation and then bastardize it until it dilutes the purpose of the law and create more harm. There is also the chance of someone living longer than what is projected. Even SA lived longer than what was offered to us. Her sentence still required her to serve her sentence, and she did. While I do not take joy in anyone dying, it did not bother me that she died in custody. It was the TLB victims that bothered me.
Actually, yes I do. I believe that with the legal actions that both Bruce Davis and LVH have pursued, in conjunction with other matters in front of the courts in respect to parole, someone will be released. Should any of them? No.
I can't see parole boards releasing any of them - as in the case of Bruce D.My belief is that the only hope lies with a higher court. Even then, is there any chance that they can detach the crimes from the larger metaphor of Manson? I doubt it. Just my thoughts- and welcome aboard!
Manson is certifiably whacked and should not be freed. I am glad Susan died in prison. It was fitting justice IMO.
I don't understand this. Irrational and vindictive as it is, I understand that you might find it 'fitting' for her to die in prison, but how can dying in prison be seen as justice, fitting or otherwise? Justice is a moral concept, and is founded in the senses of ethics and law (and, I suppose, natural law, if you subscribe to it - I don't). I can understand how it can be seen as 'just' for a person to be confined in prison, and to serve a (lengthy) period there, but how can dying there be 'justice' of any kind? Does dying in prison somehow make her punishment more complete? Is this what you mean by 'fitting'? That it makes you feel good? If so, what you say is telling me rather more about you than about the appropriateness or otherwise of the place of Susan's death. I'm confused, but as usual it's probably just me. Jem
Both I guess - she is reported to have died 24 Sept 2009 at the Skilled Nursing Facility of the Central California Women's facility in Chowchilla. Jem
Welcome Rapunzel. Glad to have you aboard. TL-want to disagree with you here-from my understanding of what I have read, Susan said she pleaded off going with her eyes. But that really is not a "No" to partaking in the LaBianca's slaughter. I think that she just wasnt chosen to go in their home and help murder them. But that could be just my take-anyone else? Do I think she should have had the ability to die at home...a hard one for me given that I work in a field that we deal with people on the edge of death and offer them comfort and compassion and I do this on a daily basis. Part of the creed of where I work is the fact that we are brought into this world as gently as possible with lots of love and that when it is our time to exit, we should be afforded the same grace and dignity. That being said, I do not think anyone should be struck with any type of cancer regardless of who or what they did. It is a horrible disease. (had my own medical issues along that line a few years back). I felt badly for Susan and James and their loved ones for the suffering that was going on, I truly did. But-should that be a reason to let her out? I do not believe so. Just as if she didnt get sick and spent her last days in the penal system, I feel that she should have spent the remainder in jail. Deadly illness does not take your sentence away. Does not and should not give you special treatment. I really have a hard time saying that, but it is what I truly believe.
Cats it was eye contact and a passive aggressive sigh of exasperation when CM looked to see if he could rope her into LB. The reason for letting her out is simple to me. She served grossly disproportionate time compared to others of similar culpability levels, and was therefore a political prisoner at the time of both her diagnosis and death, certainly not detained for the purported and legally correct reason of still posing a risk. There but for the grace or lack thereof of media and a popularity seeking Gov. It is not just for a justice system to give uneven treatment to its citizens/captives. Because of hair colour, creed or past associations.... Then there are the other arguments re the correct use of compassion, but I'd say that is moot as she ought have been out prior to the diagnosis.
Don't forget her sentence was life WITH chance of parole - so getting released under parole would still have been serving her sentence (part on the outside on parole), indeed it would have been fairly standard treatment rather than special treatment (the exception being for anyone Manson tarred).
Welcome Rapunzel. Her original sentence was death, as were the rest of them. They all got "lucky" when the death sentence was abolished. They were given more compassion than they gave their victims and were permitted to live their lives out. Also on the subject of "begging off with her eyes", she went with Clem and Linda to another residence to do more of the same. It wasn't just one murder she was physically involved in, it was 5 and conspiracy in 7. She was guilty of conspiracy in La Bianca. She knew what they intended to do when she left the ranch.Then there was the lucky guy at the stop light and the one with Clem and Linda so in reality there should have been 9 counts of conspiracy to commit murder. :twocents: FB
TooLate, If that question was for me the answer is... no. Not when it comes to acting like a civilized human being with respect for other people's lives and property. FB
To call a cold-blooded killer like Sadie a political prisoner is such a gross misuse of the term, and a careless and thoughtless insult to TRUE political prisoners. A political prisoner is someone who has not committed a true crime who is locked away because of their beliefs, because they stood up to their government. Was Sadie fighting for our rights when she was hacking away with the knife? Was she standing up for the oppressed when she told an eight-month pregnant Sharon Tate who was begging for her baby's life: "Woman, I have no mercy for you." Was she trying to change the constitution when she testified that she killed Tate because she was "sick of listening to her, pleading and begging, begging and pleading". To liken a hardened, merciless killer to political prisoners like those who stood up in Tiananmen Square or people who have been locked away for decades in what amount to concentration camps in places around the world for merely criticizing their government or speaking out for human rights-- SMFH.
Spare me the melodrama - a "hardened" killer who "hacked away with a knife" - Sadie's knife was clean of blood and she personally killed no-one, and her appeal hearing in the 1970's fully recognised this. She attempted to slash a male defensively, she restrained Shaon Tate and assisted to restrain other victims so aided the killer and had the same role in the Hinmann murder, she did not direct things but was a flunky... which is hardly in the realm of say Ted Bundy and Tex Watson or even close to as culpable as Leslie Van Houten. Some perspective would go a long way here. I did not compare her to Tiananmen square people or Nelson Mandela, but was noting that during the time AFTER her lawful sentence was served (as per Californian benchmarks for someone of her culpability and low risk) that she was retained in jail for political reasons alone, she most certainly was rendered a political prisoner. The parole board was under clear instruction from the Governor that he would overrule them so any grant of parole by them would be pointless. Elected politician calling shots ='s no longer a prisoner of the justice system and under it's control BUT now a political prisoner. In jail because it is politically expedient foe you to be so as not to jeopardise a Governors re-election. SMFH also at how anyone could not grasp that.
