Nancy Grace on Barker

Anybody see that last night?  Man, that woman is annoying.  There was a clip of Leslie in tears.  She was distraught over not having been paroled and not being able to understand why.  It looked like it was very recent but I am not sure.  I don't really keep track of their parole hearings because I don't believe parole is even a remote possibility.  The clip was sad in a way.  The fact that she will never again be free is something she should have come to grips with a long time ago.  Someone said that anybody who knows her likes her and becomes her ally.  They must be lying to her because anyone can see that California will never allow parole for anyone directly involved in the Tate-LaBianca killings.  It is one thing to parole Clem.  It is quite another to parole the notorious Leslie Van Houten.

I can't watch or listen to Nancy Grace!
I find her one of the most annoying people on the face of the earth!

[quote author=ecnivb link=topic=2742.msg14625#msg14625 date=1206453238]
I can't watch or listen to Nancy Grace!
I find her one of the most annoying people on the face of the earth!
[/quote]
I had never watched her before.  I had no idea.  You are absolutely correct.

Somebody told me she just had a baby.  I can't imagine someone impregnating her.  I wonder if she gave a running commentary during the process?

She recently gave birth to twins.
Dual spawns of Satan.  ;D

does she have to yell every statement?  that is one problem I have with her..

- Leslie Van Houten

[quote author=Jean Harlow link=topic=2742.msg14636#msg14636 date=1206461058]
does she have to yell every statement? that is one problem I have with her..
[/quote]

My biggest problem with her, is that she thinks anyone who is accused is guilty.

Everything is so polarized.  There is no such thing as a happy medium anymore.  The victims rights advocates want us to string up everybody and the apologizers and rehabilitators want us to let everyone go free.  How about some common sense?

I can't stand Nancy Grace...

As for Leslie, it's got to be difficult to come to grips with never being paroled when the parole board keeps stringing her along and hinting that she's close from time to time.  Like the 1 year denial, etc.  It seems like it would be easier for the others, as they realistically have no hope whatsoever and the implication that they'll actually get a date is really not there at all. 

It's also worth mentioning that for Watson, Krenwinkle and Atkins, the only reason they have life with possibility of parole was because of their death sentences being lowered to the next rung down when the death penalty was abandoned in CA.  Leslie's original trial and conviction was thrown out however, so this was her actual sentence, unlike the others.  From a legal perspective, I usually don't group her with the other two girls, as it was a completely separate trial that resulted in her conviction and sentence. 

BTW, I try to separate my personal feelings on the punishment that is deserved for these crimes with the legal and political aspects of the case in order to remain truly objective. 

It is unfortunate that she has been given false hope.  I think it should be clear to all, by now, that they will never be allowed to go free.  I understand the legal distinction, however, I think it is political reality which will keep them in prison for the rest of their lives.  The only possible threat to society is that, as cult heroes to some people, they could incite others to act on their behalf.  Not that they would, simply that there are people out there who would want the fame associated with such acts.  I am surprised it hasn't already happened.

She usually gets a One year denial. Last August.. they gave her a Two year denial.
It appears she is  appealing  & suing.."Writ of Habeus Corpus". should be interesting

Didn't Sadie try this before?  One of them said that she had fulfilled all the recommendations of the parole boards and yet still had not been released.  If I remember correctly the Supreme Court said that parole is not a right it is an option available to the State.  It also said that the board does not have to give a reason for denying parole.  I might have this all wrong.  It wouldn't be the first time.  I will see what I can find out and get back on here.

[quote author=Lilmagil link=topic=2742.msg15269#msg15269 date=1206975449]
She usually gets a One year denial. Last August.. they gave her a Two year denial.
It appears she is appealing & suing.."Writ of Habeus Corpus". should be interesting
[/quote]
No, it was Tex.  I will have to see what was written on the decision.  Sadie sued the Duke.  She lost too.

You are right Birds Sadie also filed.. last year or so?... Van Houten just filed hers recently.. Bret's site has the recent report on it... I think you are right tho.. chances are slim to none...as she has fulfilled all the requirements...and not sure why this year was a two year denial over last years  one......it's arbitrary...

I thought there was a specific reason.  Or at least reading it there was clearly something that stood out in my mind.  It might have had to do with her ex or some guy she was writing to.  I am not sure.  Cats will know.

See, told ya.

I think it was more error on her lawyers part who should have known better..That Billy Cywin thing, existed at previous hearings where she only received the 1 year... I haven't read the transcript yet...so I will wait til then to comment on the "said" letter that seemed to be an issue.....I can't imagine any of them will ever be released...but the 1 year denials always gives them hope...I always wonder why the board doesn't just give them the max term denials instead, if it's really never going to happen.