Helter Shelter: Compassion for a Convicted Killer
[CR Note: Anita Ring, a 42-year-old government employee from the midwest, has maintained a long friendship with a central figure in one of the most notorious criminal cases in US history. She's nice, normal and has three cats and a dachshund puppy. CR hopes you'll welcome her as our first reader/guest blogger. Have you thought of reaching out to someone in prison? Do you think her friend should ever be released? Talk to us.]
Crime Rant guest blog by Anita Ring
When I say her name, few people recognize it. An entire generation may never have heard it at all, thoug
h most people know something about the crimes for which she was convicted.
Patricia Krenwinkle is her name. And she’s been my friend for nearly a decade.
If you don’t know her by name, you’re undoubtedly familiar with the shocking crimes she and others committed 37 years ago, known collectively as the “Tate-LaBianca Murders”. Words like “The Family,” “Spahn Ranch” and “Helter Skelter” may ring a few bells, if not the names of Charlie Manson, Sharon Tate, and Vincent Bugliosi. Movies, occasional documentaries and periodically televised parole hearings have kept the case and the killers newsworthy.
Prosecutor Bugliosi’s indignant chronicle of the case, Helter Skelter, was the first true crime account I had ever read, at the age of 12, and a true crime fan was born. I’ve reread it three times since. The last time was nine years ago when I was becoming acquainted with two of the “Manson Girls,” Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houton, both of whom are serving sentences at the California Institute for Women (CIW).
I wrote to them after witnessing their parole hearings on Court TV. I use the word ‘witnessed’ because it was rather like observing a crime in itself. Before I ever had any empathy for these women, I watched in disgust as the respective parole boards picked and prodded them for every gruesome detail–I mean every knife wound, gush of blood and murderous sound associated with the murders. Leslie held her own, coming across as appropriately earnest and contrite, while Patricia broke into tears and sobbed in shame that nothing she had done could be undone. My heart went out to her at that moment and I wrote to her the same night.
All I could do is tell her how offended I was by the parole board’s questioning, adding my belief that God forgave her the first time she ever asked—and people would do the same someday. But do I really believe that? I’m not sure. In the years since I’ve been writing to Pat, I’ve come to know a remarkable woman. A woman with more self-awareness, fortitude and compassion than any other I’ve known, and until recently, a woman who had hope and optimism. Sadly, I am not at all sure other people are as ready to forgive and forget what she did. Certainly not forget. Perhaps not even ready to see what I see in Patricia.
While Pat committed atrocious crimes, I am convinced she is no longer the person who committed them. As such, I’ve written to the parole board many times, saying if she’s ever paroled, I will welcome Patricia into my home, provide moral and financial support until she can live on her own, and work with her to implement a business plan we have discussed. My words have fallen on deaf ears. Without fail, the parole board conducts itself in the same disgraceful manner each time. Now, Pat no longer attends the hearings and I am afraid she’s given up any hope for freedom. I have seen the change in her once enthusiastic approach to life, and I’ve actually wept about it. Where there was optimism and budding self-esteem there is now an encroaching cloud of depression and hopelessness.
When someone asks me about Patricia Krenwinkle, I openly talk about my relationship with her and express my feelings about the case. When Gregg asked me to write a blog about her, I was glad to so do so. It’s not something I go around preaching, however, and Pat doesn’t know I advocate on her behalf. While she would not be comfortable with it, I feel compelled to share my belief that Patricia Krenwinkle and the others are political prisoners who will never be paroled.
My lack of optimism is not something I’ve ever expressed to Pat, though she may sense it. We’ve never even talked about her crimes, actually, and why should we? We all know what happened and who did what. Likewise, we never talk about the cowardly parole board members and politicians who don’t dare express mercy toward anyone associated with this case. There’s really no point to that either. Instead, we talk about spring flowers, her varied craft projects, helping others through NA 12-step sponsorship, and the CIW program training young dogs for use by the disabled. These are the things that make life worth living even when there is no real hope for parole.
September 8th, 2006 at 5:08 am
Wow, Anita, I must say you are probably more brave and compassionate than I am. I don’t know that I’d have the courage to befriend someone in Pat’s situation.
Pat is very lucky to have you in her life.
I’d really like to hear more of her story some time. Thanks for sharing with us.
September 8th, 2006 at 6:25 am
Anita- thanks for the blog, and I agree with you wholeheartedly – these women are definately not the niave (sp?) 17 year-olds they were 30+ years ago. A documentary of the “Manson women” was just shown again on A&E, and I cannot understand why these women have not been granted parole. They obviously are changed individuals, have served an extensive amount of prison time, and are no threat to society. I also agree when you say they are political prisoners. It is unfortunate when you think of others who have committed much more heinous crimes and have/will serve much less prison time.
September 8th, 2006 at 6:54 am
IMO – Life means life. Political prisoners? They brutally murdered people, including a baby that was just about to be born.
I am glad they are sorry, and can contribute as much as they can from prison. But anyone that is capable of doing what they did shouldnt be let out. I can forgive them, but let them out? No way.
Just my .02
And Deb, there isnt much more henious then what they did!
September 8th, 2006 at 6:57 am
I’m sorry, but I have to take issue with some of this. I was involved for four years with running a 12-step program at three Connecticut state prisons. I learned a tremendous amount about convicts and their sincerity. Writing true crime books for the past several years, studying criminals every day, knowing what they are capable of—especially female murderers—I can’t help but think that “Pat” falls right in line with the rest of them.
Also, in full disclosure I should say my manager/literary agent, Peter Miller, has managed Vincent Bugliosi’s career for several decades.
Inmates, long-term lifers, if you will, have nothing to lose when reaching out to someone on the outside who is as compassionate, trusting, caring and obviously forgiving as Anita. They wait for people like Anita so they can work their charm and mold that person into someone who can support their needs. Anita is a wonderful person, and I am not taking anything away from her character, big heart, or trying to diss her here in any way. I am only pointing out that Pat was responsible for a horrific series of murders. She is where she belongs. There should be no parole, regardless how much she has “turned her life around.” The parole board are not cowards; they are doing their job. Pat is no political prisoner; she is a convicted murderer. I feel that Pat has influenced Anita’s perception of these crimes. Pat and Anita SHOULD talk about what Pat did. Ignoring it is ignoring the reality of what Pat is responsible for.
Lest we forget, Pat “the gardener, 12-stepper and craftswoman,” among other vicious crimes, chased Abigail Folger throughout [a] home and repeatedly stabbed her in the back.” This while the girl pleaded for her life. Pat, or “Katie,” as she’s truly known, also stabbed Mrs. LaBianca repeatedly and stuck a carving fork into the stomach. Patricia Krenwinkel was found guilty and sentenced to death—only later to have her sentence commuted. And now she wants to get out of prison? She should count her blessings she’s still alive, and accept (and be grateful) for her life in prison.
Give me a freakin’ break!
Sorry, Anita. I thank you for guest blogging. I do. You are sincere, and, from reading this, I can tell you are a kind human being. I just don’t agree with blaming the parole board for protecting society from—Manson’s puppet or not—a monster.
September 8th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Oh and thanks for the blog! If anything it will bring people to read about what they did. You are right, people did forget their names.
The Manson Girls were all I remembered.
September 8th, 2006 at 7:17 am
Correction (in true AJ fashion):
“… and stuck a carving fork into the stomach” should read, “… and stuck a carving fork into HER stomach.”
Sorry!
September 8th, 2006 at 7:23 am
I’m on the “no parole” side of the argument as well. She took lives. She may have been young. She may have been under the influence of drugs and the strong personality of a total lunatic. That doesn’t matter. She killed. She gets to keep her life, and for that she should be grateful. Living in prison is a very small price to pay.
Anita, I don’t know how much experience you had with prisoners before writing Manson’s Girls, but I’ll tell you, almost every person serving time in prison is polite, regretful, and a changed person. I have a good friend named Jay. Jay is a drug addict that likes to steal cars. For the last 20 years he’s been in and out of several prisons in several states for several different felonies. Each time he’ll write great long letters about how this will be the last time. He promises to change. He cleans up, leads NA meetings, and turns in to a wonderful upstanding citizen. He’s usually released from prison early because his crimes are non-violent and he takes part in any program that will reduce his sentence. Once released, he stops at a bar, drinks a beer to celebrate, and no one he regularly writes hears from him until he gets locked up again.
It’s easy to change when you have no choice. I’m not saying Pat would kill again, but she needs to serve out her sentence for the lives she already took.
September 8th, 2006 at 7:25 am
Thank you, Anita Ring, for your very thought-provoking guest-post.
I tend to agree with Mr. Phelps. It may very well be that Krenwinkle is truly remorseful, it could also be that she is manipulative and doing everything she can to get out of prison (and, who wouldn’t?). We can never really know.
However, the fact of the matter is, Krenwinkle made a terrible choice — albeit at 17 years old. She committed the crimes. Her punishment continues because the crimes were so unbelievably horrifying. Sure, I can forgive her for what she had done so many years ago. Does forgiving her mean that she should no longer be punished? No, it doesn’t, in my opinion.
I don’t believe Krenwinkle should ever be paroled. I agree that plenty of mercy was shown to her when her death sentence was commuted. I can think of several people whose crimes were equally heinous and those criminals were executed. Yes, Krenwinkle is surely lucky to be alive.
September 8th, 2006 at 7:27 am
Miss James is spot on!
I have hundreds of letters from inmates writing to me, thanking me for my work in the prisons.
I have no letters from those same inmates after release. And a majority promised they’d write.
September 8th, 2006 at 7:31 am
I wonder if Matt or others think NO convicted murderer should EVER be paroled? I, for one, think that those involved in high profile crimes are held to a different standard. We have a case here in Washington going on right now involving Kevin Coe of Jack Olsen’s SON fame. This is the Spokane South Hill Rapist, convicted in the early ’80s for a string of rapes (maybe as many as 40). He’s been in prison for the full 25 years of his sentence. He refused to appear before the parole board. Will not say he did anything wrong. This week they are moving him to a civil commitment facility (sex offender unit at a prison) to avoid releasing him — though he has served every second of a sentence. While it is true that offenders like Coe are likely to rape again, a case can’t be made that Krenwinkel will kill again. I’ll bet there are many, many offenders (rapists, murderers, etc.) that slipped under the radar, did their time, and are free today. All likely served less time than Coe or Krenwinkel. So, if you ask me, there is a different standard for the notorious. I’d say let Krenwinkel out and keep Coe right where he is. Thanks for the post, Anita. It gave me much to think about.
September 8th, 2006 at 7:51 am
I’m of the belief that if you violently and knowingly take a life, no matter who you are or who’s it was, you should be removed from society. Violent and serial sex crimes deserve the same treatment. No matter the amount of remorse felt, no matter the accomplishments you’ve made during your time served. If you were, at any time, under any circumstances, whacked enough to commit an atrocious act like that, you need to, at least, be kept under lock and key for the remainder of your days.
September 8th, 2006 at 8:05 am
I think it definitely depends on the CIRCUMSTANCES of why someone murders. I also think Coe should stay where he is, rapists will always reoffend.
I dont think Krenwinkel is parolable, its not like she committed a heat of the moment, someone was hurting my baby kind of murder. What she did was friggen awful. It wasnt a passion killing. It was a massacre.
September 8th, 2006 at 8:41 am
I thank Anita for the chance to try to put my feet in someone else’s shoes. However, like most of the posts I’ve read it seems to me that she is alive and MANY are not because of her actions. Had Patricia choose to not participate in the Tate – LaBianca murders they probably still would have taken place but she would truly be freed. All of the financial, theraputical, soul searching and whatever other programs Patricia has recieved will NEVER return the LIFES (not even Life but lifes)that Patricia and her friends took all of those years ago. It is great that Anita has befriended Pat but to not even ask what her thoughts were when she committed these acts or how she has actually come from that place to this so-called “better” place, that is injustice. It is injustice for Anita and Pat. Yes we know who killed them. Yes we know what Manson did to his followers. No, we don’t know why Pat was ever with the Manson gang in the first place. No we don’t know how she was able to turn from seemingly good girl to murderer and back to good girl. No we don’t know a great many things about Ms. Krenwinkle. One absolute that I do take great privilage in knowing is that when you take someone elses life you will pay for it with your own freedom. And just hopefully you will lose that freedom forEVER.
September 8th, 2006 at 8:44 am
I agree that high profile crimes are held to a different standard. And that truly bothers me. I also tend to believe that Pat is not a threat to society. BUT she is in prison because she is being puished for the crimes she already committed. Horrible, unspeakable, senseless murders. Her punishment was death-which was then commuted. I believe anyone who’s sentence was commuted to life should never have the possibility of parole. If she is truly a changed person, let her do some good from inside the prison walls….where she should be…..as punishment for her crimes.
September 8th, 2006 at 8:44 am
Screw Coe. He belongs in prison. He WILL re-offend. This isn’t about a serial rapist.
What happen to a sentence is a sentence? What, do we now feel sorry for Krenwinkel because she’s done some time? So WHAT if there’s a small chance she’ll murder again. That’s not the point. Nobody knows if she will or won’t. Heck, she doesn’t even know that answer.
She was sentenced to death. She got life. Lets allow her to pay her debt.
It is remarkable to me how easily we forget (and forgive) with the passage of time.
September 8th, 2006 at 9:04 am
Anita, thank you for your blog, it definitely shows you as a compassionate person. I know people can change, however, also believe that Pat needs to stay in jail for the remainder of her life for the crimes she committed. I’m glad she’s remorseful, and had I personally committed those crimes, whether drugs were involved or not, I would never want to be released, I would want to punish myself daily for what I did. Look at Son of Sam, he refuses to go to parole hearings, saying he deserves to stay in prison for the rest of his life (hope I didn’t open a can of worms there). I found a site about Katie/Pat, and it just brought the whole story back to me. http://charliesfamily.tripod.com/katie.html – especially disgusting is the last picture on the link, on the day of her sentencing.
I’m glad she has a friend like you, but should she be released, I’d have to say no.
September 8th, 2006 at 9:08 am
I dont understand why the death sentences werent reinstated actually. I understand the Supreme Court aboloshed it in 1972, but since then it has made a comeback.
I dont understand how that works. They got lucky.
September 8th, 2006 at 10:15 am
Melissa, essentially in 1972 the Supreme Court ruled that the death penality was unconstitutional. Seventy-some on death row had their deaths commuted to LIFE WITH POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE because at the time in California there was no sentence on the books of LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. Since, the death penalty has been reinstated and California has a law of LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. This is why these killers are up for parole every 3-5 years.
I understand where Anita is coming from and Pat may very well be deeply sorry for her crimes. I do believe in forgiveness and if in her heart she truly regrets her actions, I do think a higher Being can and will forgive her. She has eternal life to look forward to. However, I do think that a sentence is a sentence and that there is a punishment associated with crimes. I can see a scenario where a husband in a rage kills his cheating wife and be truly, deeply sorry for it and probably would never reoffend–but he should still be punished for the taking of an innocent life.
However, I also agree with Gregg that high profile killers are held to a different standard than others. That isn’t right, either.
There are some great organizations who go in, like Prison Fellowship, to help criminals come to terms with their crimes and seek forgiveness. That doesn’t mean that they should be released.
September 8th, 2006 at 10:21 am
I’m with Matt all the way on this one. Anita, although I admire your compassion, who’s to say that after you brought Pat into your home, she’d wouldn’t SNAP and stick a fork in you??
I’m not trying to be funny here at all, I’m SERIOUS. I don’t think any of us can truly know how these criminals will react to society after being in prison for so long. And although you are trying to be kind and compassionate to this woman, I wonder if people are really doing more harm than good in communicating with prisoners. Unless you were SURE she would get out of prison, it’s just filling her head with hopes and dreams that will never come true. And frankly, she doesn’t deserve hopes and dreams. The people she murdered had their hopes and dreams taken away in a bloodbath….
I truly admire Vincent Bugliosi, he did his job, and he did it well. He put the murderous demons where they belong….and there they shall stay.
Matt and Gregg… one of Bugliosi’s books haunts me to this day, I’ve read it 3 times… “And The Sea Will Tell”….. I find it hard to believe that Jennifer had nothing to do with those murders… any opinion?? Thanks.
September 8th, 2006 at 10:48 am
Allison, do you really think that passion murders and THIS kind of murder should have the same punishment?
I think there are cases for which there is a minimum amount served is an ok thing. Not every murder is the same. THIS case is high profile BECAUSE of how horrible it was. It certainly IS fair that this isnt compared with passion murders.
September 8th, 2006 at 10:54 am
Anita, thank you for the blog. I am inclined to agree with Matt on the point he made about you actually discussing the murders with Pat. If I were you I would want to ask her everything about the events that took place. And if she were truly repentant, she would gladly oblige you.
September 8th, 2006 at 11:20 am
Melissa, if someone felt enough passion to kill for something, they should also be willing to die for it. To let crimes of passion off with a slap on the wrist isn’t a good idea. It promotes vigilante justice. If you condone that behavior, why bother having laws and cops and courts?
September 8th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Well there are degrees of murder for a reason I guess.
If I was to say, shoot some guy after finding out he raped my kids and I was within his range when finding out, is NOT the same thing as planning out and doing this helter skelter stuff.
Eddington is a perfect example (if his story pans out) – He hears this news, knows the guy is right there and he is out of his mind with grief and pain over it, so he goes off and kills him.
Is it right? No, but on the other hand understandable by most people, even the sane ones.
WHY someone murders is always a factor, and should be considered when the murderer is sentenced.
Should all murderers get LWOP or DP? No, there are circumstances.
THIS case is a perfect example of the LWOP or DP kind though.
September 8th, 2006 at 11:38 am
There is a saying, common here in the UK, maybe not so much in America, ‘if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime’. It seems to me that in today’s society everyone thinks they should get a free pass and not accept responsibility for their actions. Children don’t want to go to detention because ’she started it’, adults won’t accept that if their children misbehave, and I mean seriously misbehave, and cause a public nuisance, it is nothing to do with them. Drink drivers lose their licenses but continue to drive, because they have no respect for the law. It is a worrying trend.
Now this blogger feels that Krenwinkle should be freed because she is no longer a danger, is a political prisoner, and isn’t likely to kill again. No. Sorry, but if you are caught and sentenced then you have to serve your time however long that may be.
Her victims can’t suddenly regain their lives, she shouldn’t regain her freedom. I don’t doubt that, to a large extent, at least initially, she was manipulated, but the details in ‘Helter Skelter’ show that she stabbed repeatedly, with her cohorts she killed innocent people including a pregnant woman and her unborn child, there is no excuse for that and no time served is long enough, in my opinion.
I admire Anita’s loyalty, but I think she is blinkered if she doesn’t talk about what put her friend in jail in the first place, and naive if she doesn’t consider the possibility that she is being taken for a ride. That said, we all need friends, and both women seem to be getting something from this friendship, which can’t be a bad thing.
The trance that certain personality types can be held in by those whose charisma and rhetoric blinds them to all reason is frightening, but it is not a reason for the followers to escape punishment or receive lesser sentences.
I imagine that Anita will be disappointed by the responses to her blog. I hope it will show her though that most people even from overseas haven’t forgotten, and probably never will. It seems to me that the parole board are only doing their job, and correctly at that.
Millie
September 8th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Gregg –
I’m a little confused about some of the things you said in your post. First – the high profile cases. You are saying that because this was a high profile case Pat is basically being condemned to life in prison. Wasn’t that the sentence she received? You said that “many offenders did their time and are free today” – well Pat has not served her whole sentence yet, has she? So why should she be let out?
Kevin Coe has served his 25 year sentence. Don’t get me wrong, I agree that he should not be let out, but I think Pat needs to continue to serve her complete sentence as well. It has nothing to do with being high profile. These cases get so much media attention because they are horrible, nightmarish crimes.
I really hope you understand what I am trying to say here. I don’t have a gift with words like so many of your other posters here do.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
Anita…thanks for sharing. As a nurse my caring side bleeds for Pat. In the unit I care for people at the brink of death…I have saved criminals, hookers, truck drivers, lawyers, gang bangers (lots of those), and than your just common every day Joe. It is hard for me to disconnect my “caring” even when talking about people who kill. Your blog made me FEEL for Pat and want to TAKE CARE OF HER. After I pondered on my feelings for a bit…..in why I was feeling like I needed to take care of her…..I realized that I get that feeling when someone NEEDS me to take care of them.
Here is my two cents worth. And it may only be worth a hay penny….BUT….here it is nonetheless.
You are a wonderful, caring, deeply rooted person. You read about Pat and than develped a writing relationship (is that correct? sorry if I do not have all the details right). SHE DREW YOU IN to CARE FOR HER when no one else could or would. You, being the super person that you are, saw all of her good sides…and I am sure there are MANY! Seriously…I bet there are. But all these sides you are viewing from outside her life in prison. Outside of daily life. Outside of actual personal connections in prison…the life that is rightfuly hers now. From that vantage you have only a one way view.
The things Pat did were beyond terrible. Yes, they were the result of group dynamics and some form of mind control….however…..it was Pat who picked up that knife and took another. Several others. If she was so vulnerable to others/mind control…..who is to say that she would be able to say no to similar circumstances once she gets out??? We do not know this. And for that reason alone she must never, ever come back among the innocent to TEST IT OUT. She is in prison for what she has done…..and the parole board has kept her there once again because they are not sure if she will/could unleash that same murderous force again…. I do agree that she is a political prisoner IN A WAY….that it was hyped up in the media and she killed prominent people, babies, women…..you name it. However, SHE STILL KILLED THEM. Could you pick up a knife and do the same thing she did? I know I never could. Whatever part in her is broken…….that led her to do what she did….well, it is still broken. And the only place to fix that break…that fracture in the psyche…..is inside the CAST of PRISON.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
Hi Nik,
Here’s my feeling. Key word there — feeling. I believe in the possibility of redemption. I would like to see our criminal justice system take that concept into account, particularly when it comes to crimes committed when offenders were young. If Pat is appearing before the parole board, it says to me that California says she’s eligible (no matter what her original sentence was). If she’s eligible, why not look at her as she is today to determine if she’s a danger to society? She was a drugged out, messed up teenager when she participated in those murders. Of course, I don’t know her. And really, I don’t care about her. I am glad, however, that Anita does care. I think there’s still some value in forgiveness and understanding. Even now. And finally, about Coe, that’s different. He’s never been treated and when/if he gets out it’s a safe bet he’ll rape again. I have serious doubts that Pat would kill again. But that’s just me.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:42 pm
Gregg ~
Just read your last post and agree. I realize that the crimes for which Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houten were convicted were atrocious, callous, brutal and the motive essentially incomprehensible. They were sentenced to death; however, the sentences WERE reduced.
The NEW sentence is life WITH the possibility of parole. Like it or not. This sentence suggests that should certain criteria be met that they should someday be allowed to rejoin society.
They both have met with the parole board, followed the board’s recommendations, attended all programs available to them, and – from what I understand – been model prisoners. If, after serving over 30 years in prison, doing everything required of them, demonstrating that they are willing to “follow the rules”, accepting full responsibility for their crimes, expressing remorse at their own actions, earning degrees, working in worthwhile programs, and generally proving to every extent possible within their current environment, that they are “rehabilitated”, and STILL being denied parole, what does Life With The Possibility of Parole actually mean? There are many other murderers who have been sentenced to the same term and have managed to earn release. I am firmly convinced that only the notoriety of this particular crime, and the link to Charles Manson is what keeps these two women behind bars.
September 8th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Kel and Gregg, I disagree. As was pointed out earlier by Alison “Melissa, essentially in 1972 the Supreme Court ruled that the death penality was unconstitutional. Seventy-some on death row had their deaths commuted to LIFE WITH POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE because at the time in California there was no sentence on the books of LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. Since, the death penalty has been reinstated and California has a law of LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. This is why these killers are up for parole every 3-5 years.”
Its not a political thing, its to make sure that these people that were sentenced to DEATH by their peers dont get out. They didnt get a sentence reduction because they were found to be a bit less guilty, it was because it got outlawed during thier tenure.
I dont understand why they didnt get DP since the reinstation happened though.
September 8th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
Melissa ~ I understand how the sentence changed and I respect your views. I can even understand the need by some to see to it that the original sentence is carried out. That does not negate the fact that the current sentence states that there IS a possibility of parole. What is that possibility? Is it the mere formality of a parole hearing every few years? What must they do in order for there to be a true possibility? Is this a true sentence or just a charade? I firmly believe in upholding the law. If the death sentence had not been ruled unconstitutional and their sentences not commuted, I would have supported the execution of all involved. BUT the sentence WAS commuted; therefore, prisoners must be judged on the current sentence. Personally, I feel that no matter what these two women do, they will NEVER be released. For them, life WITH the possibility of parole does not exist. Their sentence IS death.
September 8th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
Redepmtion is nice. It can be achieved, by certain people. But the fact is, Patricia was sentenced to death in prison. Because of luck, her sentenced was commuted. She still needs to SERVE her sentence, IMO, whether the state kills her or not. She isn’t being held any longer than if her sentence wasn’t commuted. It is also a good reminder to all, that ALL actions have consequences……sometimes, lifelong.
September 8th, 2006 at 1:27 pm
No, they are living in prison. They got to go get an education, they got to do all these programs, they have a life. A life in prison.
I DO think that the people that were on Death Row at that time are probably only getting the parole hearings because its the law. I doubt any of them are getting out. I believe in redemption as well. And if they are indeed redeemed they are redeemed in prison.
They should only be in their mid fifties or so, why should they get out so young? If they do parole them let them do it when they are in their 80’s or something.
Click on the link the kimpossible provided and look at that. Think about what they did. Its not up to me to forgive them, its up to God.
I dont want those women in our society. Like many have pointed out here, who knows if this woman isnt just posing. They LAUGHED while they slaughtered innocent people, multiple people. They laughed about it while on trial.
September 8th, 2006 at 1:41 pm
Soobs…thanks my friend. You can always be so dang succinct. I love that about you. Gregg, I hate to disagree with you…you own this place and I think you are the complete bomb! But…. I do not think that feelings should have any weight in logical decision making. It is unfortunate for Pat that she was young and maleable at the time she stabbed these people so many times that the floor ran with their blood. Would all people at that same age do the same thing in her shoes? If you cannot say yes, and if we went ahead and tried her as an adult (which keeps happenening at a younger and younger age….)…than she is treated as an adult offender period. There is some kind of switch in her psyche that allows her to follow and be vulnerable to suggestion. There is more said in the personality on this than the age per se.
On the other hand this does seem to be a trend….trying more and more “kids” as adults (and thusly they are treated as adults). Frankly, only time and data will tell. Are you ready to let Pat out and try it? There are already enough sickos that are released early and reoffend. I just am not in the mood to give another killer a chance to walk by my kid on the street or drive by my niece or nephew while they play at a playground. It reeks of sex offenders…what I just mentioned…and I know that she is NOT one. However, if we let HER out because she “feels” rehabilitated (and by the way, what measure can predict this in the microcosm of prison???) than we have to be ready for this to let out more Dahmers, Duncans, Raders, and the like. Are we ready for more of that? She did what she did and now lives where she is supposed to spend the rest of her life for doing it.
September 8th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Regardless of her original sentence, Patricia is now sentenced to life with the possibility of parole. IMO she is legally entitled to that.
Let’s use an analogy: You get a job. You muck up a major project and the boss says that you are fired. He comes back and says: The policy has changed and you get your job back. Furthermore, there is a possibility of obtaining a raise if you did X,Y and Z. You would reasonably expect that raise if you did X,Y,Z. Upon review, your boss says, yes – you did X,Y,Z but you really messed up that project when you first started so I want you to do A,B,C. So you do A,B,C. Another review – Sorry – remember that project you messed up – Do L, M, N. You do L,M,N – Sorry, that was an extremely important project you messed up, do E,F,G—- And this goes on for 30 years! At what point does the possibility of that raise become merely a farce? Is there any real expectation of receiving it? NO!!
I know that the above analogy is simplistic and I am by no means trying to diminish the seriousness of her crimes. I am simply trying to point out that if conditions are set forth and they are met, there is a responsibility on the part of the party setting forth the conditions to see to it that they carry some weight! Conditions should not be set that will bear no weight on the outcome. Essentially, what is happening is that she is being held with NO possibility of parole and that is NOT her sentence. How lawful is that?
September 8th, 2006 at 2:07 pm
I think its too soon. My opinion only of course. Who knows what is going on in the sick head of hers. Anybody that can do what she did is a danger to society.
Would she be remorseful if she hadnt been caught? Would she have turned herself in if this were an unsolved case? Somehow I doubt it.
In any case this is a good blog entry, very good discussion.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Kel, I agree that she is entitled to that. And no, it was not a simplistic analogy. it makes complete sense. However, I just want to ponder the fact that just because someone has the chance to get out …… well it is up to that parole board to deem it. Is Pat a victim of political proportions or is the board reading and learning from recent history and making decisions to keep her in on rational things? What is known is that she slaughtered people. How in the world is the parole board to judge if she is releasable into free society. If I were the member of a parole board I would err on the side of caution. Many headlines of late read of people getting parole and than killing again. Despite the desire to be objective in such a thing as a parole hearing I am sure that all the recent blunders somehow, much like an unseen undercurrent, sway their ultimate decision. How would you like to be on the parole board that releases Pat if something else were to happen once she were free? Not saying she would. I don’t know her from Adam. But. I know that it has to be a huge risk in light of historical recitivism facts. You make a great point. And she does deserve to go up for parole. However, as I said above, their reservations, in my opinion, are well founded if history is to teach us anything at all.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Kel, your employer owes you NOTHING. He may say you can come back, then never give you whatever it was that was promised to you. You have the option of leaving (that’s why it’s not really a good analogy.) She may have the LEGAL right at this time, for parole hearings. But because she gardens, and runs NA meetings in prison, doesn’t mean she doesn’t deserve to be exactly where she is. In fact, perhaps her life’s purpose is to educate and help those in prison, and not on the outside. Let her do her good deeds in there.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
DANG IT SOOBS YOU DID IT AGAIN!!! Took the words right out of my mouth…because I am not trying to bash Pat in any way, shape or form. I have no clue if she would re-offend or not. However, I can see how the parole board will always have reservations after the horrible things that she took part in. How can they trust her to not do it again? If she cannot prove that she wouldn’t and for some reason has to live the rest of her life in those walls…than Soob-ie…you said it right…..she can take on that calling and help others on the inside. Maybe Pat is needed there. There are plenty of good deeds that need to be done everywhere on this earth. Instead of flying to Africa or Romania look in your own backyard…your grocery store…your roller skating rink. We humans are always in the flux of needing and being needed. The important thing is to recognize it and know when to give and when it is okay to take. If you could bottle that skill you would have the key to eternal happiness.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
Anita, many thanks to you for sharing your story. You are indeed a compassionate woman.
I personally, however, feel that Pat is exactly where she needs to be. She helped BUTCHER totally innocent people. What was done to the victims that horrible summer are unforgivable. Yes, I can agree with your point that Pat is not the same person she was all those years ago. That she has changed. Unfortunately, changing and growing is a luxury she, in her actions 37 years ago, did not allow the victims of the Tate-LiBianca murders. She needs to stay right where she is.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:44 pm
Melissa – I agree – I enjoyed the blog entry and the discussion has been stimulating!
Becky – I would hate to be on that parole board. Although the murders themselves were horrendous (overkill, in fact), so many other factors were involved! Drugs, psychological control, obsession, racism, celebrity, etc. Certainly not an easy one!
Soobs – I respect your opinions. My concern is that a situation appears to exist that precludes the actual sentence. I question the legality of a sentence that in actuality has no existence in this particular case.
September 8th, 2006 at 2:48 pm
why are all my posts gone? Did I say something to offend someone? I didn’t mean to. It was just a discussion of opinions…
September 8th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Becky ~~ All of your posts are viewable from my computer. Don’t worry!! You are still representin’!
September 8th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
open virtual mouth insert foot…no FEET… sorry….I am in europe, get scanty news coverage, and have a laptop that needs to be burped after every feeding (and unfortunately it eats EVERYTHING including cd’s, frito crumbs, occasional dropletts of german wine, and once in a blue moon…..a full, dousing, cup of morning coffee…..*hair dryers work wonders for that, by the way
September 8th, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Kel,
I agree with your opinion that,
“a situation appears to exist that precludes the actual sentence.” (quote by Kel)
I agree Kel. And that process needs to be examined. And furthermore…wherever the weaknesses are they need addressed and FIXED ASAP. From your above point, Kel, the process is there but not consistently applied…and as more people committ jailable crimes the number of acutal parolees being released will most likely go up as well. That is just common sense. We cannot afford to house every single violent offender for life. I take this chance to introduce MONEY into the equation. Is it easier to keep Pat IN or let her GO OUT into society and risk a recitivistic crime that lands her back in court? I have seen it first hand here overseas. If you have a buck you can buy it. So, follow the money. “money changes everything” (cyndi lauper)….”money!” (pink floyd), and on and on. It rules us, consumes us, and spits us out as the homeless. Oh yeah….cyndi….money DOES change everything…
September 8th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
You know what got me? “Her indulgence in the macabre was not over, though; to top things off, she stuck a carving fork in the dead Leno’s stomach, tweaked it, and watched it wobble back and forth, but not before she used the fork to carve the word “WAR” on his chest.”
This is a person truly capable of evil, and IMHO, not worthy of living among us in society.
Anita, I’m so glad you have such a big heart, and it’s so needed in this world we live in. But a word of caution. Be very careful about the people you are willing to defend. There is good out there, and there is evil, and it was in her to not only watch this person die, but watch the fork wobble back and forth, and then etch “war” on his chest.
Anita, could you do that to someone? I think not. There’s brainwashing, then there’s doing something on your own, Charlie wasn’t even there when she committed these atrocious crimes. Low self esteem? Sure, how many of us girls don’t have that? But to let it result in murder. Nope sorry, she deserves to live the rest of her life in prison.
September 8th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
“Death to pigs”, indeed.
As far as I’m concerned…you can stick a fork in her. She’s done.
I’m glad that she has earned a degree in college. I am glad she is helping to better the lives of her fellow inmates by helping them learn to read. Her crimes were not crimes of passion. They were not accidents. There are no mitigating circumstances. Some whackjob told her to help kill people and she helped kill people. Maybe whatever God she believes in will have mercy on her. I really don’t think we should.
September 8th, 2006 at 5:08 pm
sam…I agree with you…
laadeeee-freakin-dah
these frozen pizzas I have been eating during the deployment are affective my brain. Sorry. LOL
September 8th, 2006 at 10:05 pm
I’ve heard quite a bit about ‘Bleeding Hearts’ and now I know what they mean. Anita Ring is a perfect example. I hope the killers rot in prison. We are paying their dental, operations, medications, exercise equipment, mental and physical therapy, they have three squares a day, checkups, while good people on the ‘outside’ can only wish for all these things. They have TV, a library, card room etc. So they have to tough it out in jail/prison . . Patricia Krenwinkle should be counting her blessings! She is where she deserves to be! Somehow I just can’t shed any tears for ANY OF THEM!
September 8th, 2006 at 10:16 pm
One of Kevin Coe’s victims is a news reporter on a Spokane television station. One morning this week, I woke up to the victim reporting on recent events in Coe’s life. THAT is cruel and unusual punishment – for the victim.
Coe married someone while he was in prison. She had been fascinated with his case. I’m sure he didn’t present himself to her in the same way he presented himself to women of Spokane from the 1970’s until his conviction in 1981!
Nona in Cd’A
September 9th, 2006 at 12:21 am
Hey all…I really appreciate this discussion and I respect every opinion posted here. I do want to clarify one thing in particular, however. The part about the Manson killers being “political prisoners” … I believe the convictions were just, the sentences were just, and infliction of the death penalty would have been just at the time. Dragging Patricia through voyeuristic parole hearings now, as if she ever has a real chance of being paroled, is INjust. I liken it to a cat toying with a dying mouse.
Those associated with these murders will never be paroled because no one on the parole board is willing to put their reputation on the line by voting for it. So why go through the motions at all? I think the entire purpose of dragging Pat and Leslie through the process is to look tough and unsympathetic in front of the cameras. It’s a politically driven, shameless spectacle.
Another point I’d like to clarify. Pat and I never talk about her crimes because I’ve heard and read everything said about them, including her own comments in interviews, and I feel no need to drag her through it in our correspondence. I am all about friendship and support. I already know what she did. I cannot know why she did it any more than what she’s already said.
And finally, Gregg, I *hate* the photo you posted of Pat. I could have given you one much more representative of the person I’ve come to know. BUT I want to thank you and Mr Phelps for the opportunity to share my feelings on the matter. Glad it sparked a healthy conversation!
September 9th, 2006 at 10:11 am
Anita, they arent “associated” with these murders. I agree, it seems cruel to put them through a parole hearing which is required by law and the parole committee is following the law. But having said that, you are right, they probably will never be let out because of the notoriety of their crime. This is the point I want to make about notorious crimes. They are notorious for a reason. Because of the level of cruelty, horrific, evilness involved in carrying out the crimes.
And I say this to feeling bad for her when she is being “put through” being told again what she did, in detail. GOOD, why should she be able to forget when these peoples families cant? She loved every minute of what she did, she laughed about it while doing it, she laughed about it during her trial, she laughed about it during her sentencing, she laughed at the surviving family members. She now cries, good.
She wasnt on drugs when she was going through the trial, she was being kept in jail. She had a long time for her head to clear up and she still laughed.
September 9th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
Look at the response this entry has caused. This is exactly the outcry the parole board is looking to avoid.
The way I see it, there are two issues here. The first is what the sentence SHOULD be. I agree that the crimes were horrendous. The behavior of all defendents was callous. The original sentence was just.
The second issue is the CURRENT sentence. With a sentence of life with the possibility of parole, there is the inherent understanding that an inmate can earn parole. In this particular case, as well as that of Leslie Van Houten, there is realistically NO chance that they will be able to earn parole. They both have done everything asked of them while incarcerated and more. In effect, they are being held to a sentence of life without the possibility of parole in direct contrast to the lawfully imposed sentence.
Regardless of my personal feelings regarding the Tate-LaBianca murders and murderers, the continued parole hearings are a farce. I don’t feel that Patricia refuses to attend them because she wishes to avoid having to revisit her role in the murders; but more about avoiding an exercise in futility. She realizes that she will never be allowed, no matter her behavior or accomplishments, to earn a chance at parole. It is acceptance of the unspoken, unimposed sentence that has been handed to her by the continued horror of the public at her participation in these crimes and the unwillingness of the parole board to stand up to public disapproval and award a prisoner what she has rightfully earned.
September 9th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Kel, I think the sentence was commuted to “life with the POSSIBILITY of parole.” I could be wrong, but if I am right, what is possible, doesn’t always happen.
I’m enjoying the debate as well.
September 9th, 2006 at 6:07 pm
Interesting comments. I fall on the side of reality–they committed a heinous, horrific crime and from my perspective, Pat got a lucky break by not receiving the death penalty. That is hugh given the crimes. I am happy that she has changed (a plus for the prison systems), and I hope that she continues to be a life long model prisoner.
September 9th, 2006 at 6:38 pm
I am also glad she is a model prisoner and helps others with their drug problem.
I have read about this case quite a bit, and even hearing numerous people’s views about Patricia, I cant help but remember that she stabbed someone like 70 times. When the police found Ms. Folger they thought she was wearing a red dress.
And also the testimony of Linda Kasabian, who was also a member of the “Family”, using the same drugs, was also very young, but she couldnt do it. When it came down to it, she stayed in the car, BECAUSE SHE COULDNT DO IT!!
Patricia could, and did, and THEN some. The sheer brutality of what she did is impossible to even fathom.
September 9th, 2006 at 6:51 pm
Also, note to Gregg here. I keep on forgetting to mention this. Pat Krenwinkel was NOT a teenager when she did this. She was born in 1947, which would have made her 21 or 22 when she did this.
September 9th, 2006 at 7:01 pm
California has something called ‘indeterminate sentencing’ for 1st and 2nd degree murder felons. Even if they complete their sentences, do everything asked of them, etc. They can still be denied parole time and again. This is all murderers, not just Pat and Leslie Van Houten. I do think it’s a waste of time to hold parole hearings for the Manson girls IF they have no chance of ever getting out.
The Manson girls were not teenagers when they committed the grisly Tate, LaBianca murders. They were in their early 20’s at the time of the killings. They may have been teens when they met Charlie Manson.
As for Pat’s ‘remorse’, is she really remorseful over her participation in these heinous murders or was she only sorry that she was caught and convicted? I, too, believe in the power of forgiveness and redemption. I have a very compassionate nature, but, my compassion only goes so far. Maybe Pat is sincere, who knows. On the other hand, Pat could be a con artist manipulating others into feeling sorry for her so that they will do favors for her and try to help her get paroled.
I’m glad that Pat has done some good for her fellow inmates. Maybe Pat is better off in prison doing good for her fellow inmates. I prefer to err on the side of caution where the Manson girls are concerned. They need to live out the rest of their lifes in prison.
September 9th, 2006 at 7:44 pm
Melissa, I probably made a poor analogy. I guess what I should have said is that I can see how someone–even a vicious murderer–COULD see that what they did was wrong and repent and truly seek forgiveness, not necessarily Pat or anyone else. But just because someone is truly sorry doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t serve a sentence or be punished. Some crimes are just so awful and the victims and their families deserve justice.
September 9th, 2006 at 8:29 pm
Allison, your analogy ws not bad. You made excellent points. You actually gave me fodder for WHY she shouldnt be let out. I love your posts!
Not to sound so Christian here, but EVERYONE deserves forgiveness by God if they are true about their retribution.
That said though, convicts are con-ARTISTS. They learn from each other.
If you are capable of what Patricia was capable of in any time during your life, be it 16, 21, or 40, you should be locked away from society for the rest of your life.
Imagine.. Pulling someone from a bedroom, someone you have NEVER met, fighting with them, stabbing them with a knife while they are pleading for their life, please stop, no please stop, and having NO compassion for this person who never did anything to you… Stabbing this person so many times that even you dont remember? Laughing about it during court, laughing and threatening a judge and his family…
Cant imagine????
Well neither can I.
Patricia sure can though.
September 9th, 2006 at 8:40 pm
Interesting discussion! This series of murders was truly horrific. It speaks volumes that even 30-odd years afterward, there is still so much debate!
September 10th, 2006 at 6:42 am
What an intelligent discussion, very unlike the combative rants about Wendy. crimerant has won back my total respect. As for what should be done, “I know not, but I know that I know not.”
September 10th, 2006 at 12:48 pm
Frank..
Hey dude! If you aren’t intelligent….just leave your hat (or purse) at the door. Yeah…crimerant rocks. People here do not tend to drivel on with the frivolous. (all CR people…my garter comes off to you
This is one of the only places I go on the web to have INTELLIGENT conversation…the other being Steve Huff’s palace at crimeblog.us. There are quite a few more that acutally JUST delve into the details and vere away from the politial and unsightly…I found a few of them. but they are FEW AND FAR BETWEEN.
So, Frank….please tell me that you are not here to gleen info for a movie or book deal. Or to let your name hang out in three colors of lights with balloons clinging and bubbles flying per the bubble machine.
People here will pick up on that. And you will swing like a pair of worn-out long johns..hanging on the line with skid marks-galore…for that. The only thing that gives you a chance is your “intention”, your integrity, and your human-ness. If you don’t have any of those just freaking buzz off. If you DO….my ear is somewhat open. After all the shit with your daughter it is hard to believe one word you say or one stake you claim. Can you understand that? And Frank….your little advertisemnt on your website was completely uncalled for. You are doing top secret bullshit things with that! If you have something so sensational to say than just dang say it. If you are waiting on us Steve huff people to aim our baited breath at you…you are WRONG. We are smarter than that.
So, Frank…what is your stance? You make some good points but than do stupid shit that makes you look like the national enquiror.
what is up with that?
any narcissism that takes away from finding missing children and the like is pure filler and actually detrimental to the case. What do you have to say about that?
I ask for forgivness for my abrasion. I am like a piece of sandpaper on acid. I know this. However, I also know that anyone telling the truth will go to ultimate extreems to prove themselves wrong….and in doing that…..FIND THEIR BABIES. Where do you fall on that chart?
September 10th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
Damn Becky, I was hoping nobody would respond to that bait.
September 10th, 2006 at 8:59 pm
Becky is loquacious, she can’t help it.
I actually like that about her.
September 10th, 2006 at 9:12 pm
I may be the “outcast” here but I’m with Matt on this one:
SCREW COE AND KERNWINKEL!!
BOTH are where they belong-BEHIND BARS.
I’m so sick of bleeding hearts buying their bull crap hook-line-and-sinker.
OF course she’s a “changed woman” she has to be…not too hard to walk a straight line when all you have is a tight-rope to do it on.
As for re-offending: I DON’T CARE if she would or not…that is NOT the point.
The point is there are many people DEAD, including an EIGHT AND A HALF MONTH OLD UNBORN CHILD who died because she helped [if not actually KILLED them, herself] kill them.
…and least you forget; An 8 1/2 month old child CAN survive outside the womb…so why DIDN’T he?!
All it would have taken was dropping him on someone’s doorstep and ringing the doorbell….seeing as you cut him out of his mothers womb anyway…why not save him?
WHY kill him before he had even had a chance to live?!
Where was the “redemption” for that INNOCENT baby?!
Maybe that’s what’s wrong with our socity today, no one is made to be FULLY accountable for their actions…say you’re sorry or ACT good and you get all kinds of people running to your defense…even if you don’t deserve it.
The simple fact that she won’t discuss her crimes shows denial or maybe hoping by NOT talking about them she can mislead or convince others her part wasn’t as severe or better yet…hope everyone forgets.
Not hardly. I will NEVER forget [and no one else should either] the pictures of the massive bloodshed and grisly crime scenes, and innocent people who suffered ungodly and unimaginable pain and fear,for what?!
A few laughs in a crowded courtroom, where she vowed to “Always love Charlie”?
She can GO TO HELL for all I care.
As for redemption: FORGET IT…I LEAVE THAT TO GOD, that’s HIS territory…NOT mine….they’ll get NOTHING from me aside a good kick in the ass and told to shut TFU…if you can’t DO THE TIME, then DON’T DO THE CRIME.
Cricket
September 10th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
…and least I’m misunderstood;
I have nothing against Ms.Ring, I think she means well, but the Road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and least someone not understand my position…here it is again:
Kernwinkel CAN GO TO HELL…she IS where she belongs and needs to stay.
Cricket
September 12th, 2006 at 10:10 pm
Cricket, I agree with everything you have said about Pat. I feel the same about Charlie, Leslie VH and Susan Atkins who fully and willingly participated in the Tate-LaBianca murders w/o remorse. I’m not buying Pat’s fake remorse or that she is a changed woman.
Charlie, Susan, Leslie and Pat are nothing more than pond scum. Let them rot in prison and go home to Satan afterwards.
I think Anita has a good heart and is a compassionate person. I just hope she isn’t being ‘had’ by any of Manson’s followers.
September 18th, 2006 at 7:04 am
Here are two interesting website names: The Innocence Project, and the Patrick project.
Save the compassion and caring for those who are wrongfully convicted, while the real criminals are left free to offend again. Ever heard of Kirk Bloodsworth, or Bernard Webster?
If you want to be a groupie, at least be a groupie for those really need you.
September 20th, 2006 at 5:35 am
As far as Susan Atkins is concerned, this is exactly how I would respond to her cries for parole: “Listen Bitch, Your’e in here for life and you better accept ir right now – and I dont feel a thing for you”. If you recall, what she told Ms. Tate, as she begged for her life and the life of her unborn child ?
As for the rest of them…they are fortunate to be alive. Asking to be free, they are pushing their luck.
October 6th, 2006 at 1:51 pm
I am with MATT on this one. Pat is where she needs to be…..for life. Stick a fork in her and call her done!
December 18th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
I for one do believe Pat has changed. I am a mother of three young men,all productive indiviuals with families of their own.
I am a full time Medical assistant and I have changed for the better!
Years ago (25) I was a drug user who did many terrible things. I am lucky it never came to violent crime.
I am proof people can change,and would like very much to communicate with Pat. I would like to find out how to contact her. Reach me at mccghn@yahoo.com
March 21st, 2007 at 7:48 am
If anyone deserves to be paroled it’s Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houton. I hope Pat is not losing all hope. There is not a person walking the face of this planet who has not sinned. We were all condemned to eternal hell, but our savior came down and took the punishment for us so we could be pardoned. They’ve done enough time in prison. The are truely not the same people who violently murdered all those years ago. They are not a threat to society. To keep them in prison now, is about hate. It’s time to forgive and move on. I for one hope they get paroled.
November 1st, 2007 at 9:06 am
I know this is an old entry and no one will read this..Anyway, Patricia Krenwinkel doesn’t always “refuse to attend” her parole hearings. Her last hearing was in 2004 – she was in attendance at that hearing and got a 3 year denial. Her next hearing was to be in 2007, but she requested a 6 month delay to Jan. 2008 (I think so she wouldn’t compete with Leslie’s recent hearing). She did refuse to attend her 1997 hearing – perhaps because of the bad psych review she got?
She was not 17 when she committed these murders – she was almost 22. 5 years may not seem like a lot of age difference, but I think it is at that age.
The parole board does a lot more then go over the crime – they question her about her behavior in prison, what she’s been up to and discuss her latest psychological evaluation. Yes, they put her under a microscope – that is their job. At her 2004 hearing, she discussed that she attends AA. When asked who she puts at the top of the list of people she’s harmed (a tenet of AA), she replied, “Myself.” Yikes.
When the crimes are discussed, she says “I don’t recall” A LOT. Also, at one of her early hearings, Steven Kay showed up and recounted her crimes – outside of the hearing room she angrily yelled toward him, “What’d you do that for??”.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
I was wondering if you knew of any website or any refereal that I can view Patricia Krenwinkle’s court testimony during her trial….I have read Susan’s and Charlie Watson’s….but can’t find hers any where…
April 1st, 2008 at 10:04 am
Patricia should stay where she is. Till the day she dies.
None of the Manson killers that are now in prison have sincerely admitted their guilt. They are doing it because they have to. They do not want to discuss the murders, they do not even want to think about them. Because “they have suffered enough” and “they have paid” for what they’ve done. The question of the law here is a smoke screen that blocks the view of the ethics.
Pat’s psychological reports are a great demonstration of a spiritual path that completely lacks the catharsis. She’s never really broken, never really seen what she has done. She doesn’t want to see it. She hovers, never touches the flesh of the truth. She’s a model prisoner – good for her, but in my opinion not enough. That’s not the reason to let her out. Yes, she was young when she did it, but as Sharon Tate’s mother said: she chose her path. The very fact that she wants to get out proves she doesn’t even realize what she’s done.
Life is cruel. Some are born blind, some die as babies and they haven’t done anything wrong. But if you killed several people, there is no question: you have no right to freedom. Brainwashed or not.
And don’t get me wrong: I don’t see Patricia as a monster. I feel for her. I just think that these murders are beyond this type of “forgiveness”.