Discussion: Ex-Manson Family Member Seeks Parole For 1969 Murder

None of them will ever get out of prison alive.

Sheā€™s costing us what, $60K a year?

thatā€™s not the issue, dummy.

manson name is poison; no again

You live in California? If I was a tax paying Californian, Iā€™d consider that a bargain. None of them ever deserve to see freedom again in their lives. See, this is where anti-DP movement wants to go. Get rid of the DP, then get rid of life without parole.

Why isnā€™t the cost of continuing to incarcerate someone 40 years after they participated in a gruesome murder as a young adult not an issue? Obviously if punishment is the only purpose of incarcerating people it makes no difference, but if you believe in the possibility of rehabilitation, or if you are looking from a public safety point of view, it does make a difference, especially in a prison system thatā€™s known to be overcrowded. Thatā€™s money we could be spending in other ways that might have a better impact.

You can argue that other considerations trump that cost, but thatā€™s an argument that needs to be made.

1 Like

ā€œā€ā€œThe only violent thing she has ever done in her entire life was this crimeā€""

Well that ā€˜only thingā€™ is sufficient to warrant her never entering society again.

2 Likes

Yeah, that comes very close to the definition of chutzpah.

Your argument is why I will NEVER support ending the death penalty. She should have been electrocuted decades ago.

ā€œThe only violent thing she has ever done in her entire life was this crimeā€

Kinda like Harry the bridge builder.

And all that would achieve is the elimination of her suffering. She wantā€™s out and all the anguish that goes with that. Dead itā€™s over.

She was initially sentenced to death. That sentence should have been carried out for all of them. The Manson family is why I will never give up support of the DP.

If you take that goofy position to its logical end no one should be jailed. Thereā€™s a cost for just one day of incarceration. And execution costs much more. Dudeā€¦drop the money angle. Itā€™s not as clever as you think.

There is no argument against incarcerating this monster.

Thereā€™s no free way to incarcerate.

Drop the jive.

Even if you base things entirely on money, people should be jailed if theyā€™re going to cost more out on the street than they cost to keep inside, so your first sentence is baloney.

Iā€™m just a little surprised at the vehemence of these arguments. $60K a year spent on other things could save any number of lives. If youā€™re willing to argue that we should allocate our resources this way, fine, but donā€™t argue that itā€™s the only possible choice.

1 Like

Should have saved money decades ago by sticking her murdering ass in the gas chamber and ending the discussion once and for all.

1 Like

There are other sources of money, massive sources that dwarf prison costs: tax breaks for the wealthy, corporate welfare, needless warsā€¦if money matters to you.

Money is no excuse as a reason for paroleā€¦in major violent crimes, Iā€™ll qualify.

At least the Manson groupies have dropped the ā€œWe are your childrenā€ bit.

The only violent thing she has ever done in her entire life was this crime

And that was enough. At 19 she stabbed an innocent woman 16 times as her drug and sex partner ā€˜friendsā€™ made 26 more knife wounds in the victim. She should remain in prison.

Actually, California used cyanide gas at the time.

Since you support capital punishment, I have a few questions for you:

  1. Is it acceptable to ever execute someone who is factually innocent of the crime for which they were convicted?
  2. If it is acceptable to execute innocent people, at what point is the cost (in innocent lives) too high? If it is not acceptable to execute innocent people, how do you propose to avoid it?
  3. How should prosecutorial misconduct in capital cases be handled?
  4. As a purely practical matter, how should executions be conducted to ensure the maximum social benefit from them?

There is a saying: Hard cases make for bad law. In a sense, this was an easy case (once Bugliosi untangled Mansonā€™s motive). There is not a shred of doubt about the guilt of the Manson family in the Tate-LaBianca murders. There is some question about apportioning culpability, but in the end the apportionment isnā€™t important: which each of them was horrific.

So, yeah, in the case of the Manson family I can see capital punishment as the only fitting punishment. The problem is that we canā€™t levy it properly. This is an easy case that makes for bad law.

3 Likes