Showing posts with label Parole Hearings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parole Hearings. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Steve Grogan - (Partial) Parole Hearing

How Grogan looked around the time of his release.

This is only a portion of Steve Grogan's Parole Hearing (after he led law enforcement officers to Shea's remains) - but here it is for discussion:

INMATE GROGAN: First, it was 10 years ago. I’m a completely different person to this point. I was young, 16 years old, you know. I was vulnerable to any hustler that would want to hustle me, really, because of my lack of street experience, my lack of just being out in the world, period. I probably would have gone for anything hook, line, and sinker, any salesman or hustler that wanted to hustle me, because they caught me at that age, that point of vulnerability. I was manipulated very easily. My defenses for what he had for me were, you know, almost nonexistent. It was two years after I was already incarcerated that I realized the games that he had run on me, psychological games. It was over my head, out of my awareness. It was just, you know – and now that I have been around hustlers and all types of people in the criminal line of existence there is no way I could let anybody hustle me into anything, into believing a certain philosophy.

HEARING REPRESENTATIVE VINEYARD: Well, according to the most recent report, staff is still describing you in terms of your passivity and your dependency. Whether or not this is still at that same degree it was 10 years ago can be debated, and probably isn’t, as you say. But whether or not it has reached a place – what could you offer as a demonstration of the fact that you have become your own man in the past 10 years that this kind of influence couldn’t be exerted over you again?

INMATE GROGAN: Well, I think the records state that if I’m so dependent as they suggested, I would most likely be in one of these gangs or cliques and my dependency would be on the group itself. But overt these years I haven’t joined any cliques or have any desire to join any cliques.

MS. SAMUELSON: There is a letter in fact in the file to indicate that there was a reference that he was a member of one of the white groups, and that was corrected to show that there is no such affiliation. That’s also in the file. I’m sorry; I just wanted to bring that up.

INMATE GROGAN: The fact that – I think my record states that I’m more or less a loner. It’s like I don’t hang around with a lot of groups of people. I have managed to complete a trade by myself with no help from nobody. I managed to come to the point from a fair guitar player to take off the state competition in the music field. And that was – nobody helped me do that. That was all my own effort. I managed to put together a nice portfolio of artwork. I managed to become fairly versatile with art at this point.

INMATE GROGAN: Well, it was like a growing hostility. They didn’t like him. Charlie didn’t like him because he was – he was always drinking, and he thought he was a slob. He was, you know – was always talking about messing with the girls that were there. And it was like, you know – it was kind of subtle at first, the way, you know, he voiced his dislike and disapproval of the man. Like he would bring it up in conversation at dinner when we all sat around and ate. Over a period it grew worse until – and then we were raided by the police where everything we had was taken, that we had bought legitimately. All our tools and cars and all the possessions that we had accumulated. And plus the children were taken, too. Everybody was arrested on the ranch.  In fact the only person left was George Spahn, and he was blind. And they had Carl’s brother come in and watch him so he would have someone to take care of him.

PRESIDING MEMBER BROWN: Why were you arrested?

INMATE GROGAN: I was under the – because Mr. Shea had told the police that we had a stolen car ring. Okay? Well, we spent three days in jail, and we were released. And we didn’t get back none of our property. The pink slips were confiscated – along with our property – to four or five dune buggies that we couldn’t get back from them: the children put into foster homes. And what it really did is made everybody really upset at this guy, because I was led to believe that he was doing it to get us evicted off the ranch, to get us thrown off the ranch. And that was the only place we had to stay at the time. And it was through his actions that he caused us this trouble. I think it’s – you know – excuse me. It goes – you know, it goes – it’s kind of hard for me to talk about this because there are a lot of emotions that I have experienced, guilt and stuff, you know, what I did. But there was, you know, a feeling almost of hatred toward the guy because of what he made us go through, the children and stuff. Like we had held the children in really almost the highest position. They were home delivered and breast fed. It was like – our feeling for the children was really the highest thing we felt. This was mostly the whole reason we was all together, to put the children in a good environment, free from social indoctrinations and stuff, try to raise them as natural as we could. And then to have someone come along and form a false story and have them put in foster homes, it was really a blow to the women and men that were at the place at the time.

The incident in Ventura County concerning the indecent exposure, could you explain that to the Board, what that entailed?

INMATE GROGAN: I was coming back from the Spahn Ranch where I was working before and I was going to my parents’ house. This happened on the same block as my parents’ house. I came back and I wanted to get some money because I had a traffic ticket that I had to pay off. My brother was living there and he offered to pay the traffic ticket. So there was nobody home. As I was leaving there was some neighborhood kids that were on the lawn and I was playing with them and the pants I was wearing had the crotch ripped out of them from riding on the horses and things at the ranch. So when I was playing with the kids on the lawn I guess one of the mothers had viewed it from one of the windows and had called the police thinking that I was exposing myself to their children. As a result of that, I was arrested.

MR. FOLEY: In fact, you were referred to a hospital for a period of time?

INMATE GROGAN: Yes. They referred it to, I think, it was Camarillo for 90-day observation.

MR. FOLEY: Also, one other thing crossed my mind. This ranch that you were living on, the Spahn Ranch, were you residing there prior to Charles Manson’s arrival on the ranch?

INMATE GROGAN: I was there when I was about 15 years old and lived in the back. They had a back ranch-house that I lived in and I worked odd jobs, guiding tours for writers and cleaning up the ranch and stuff. They’d give me food and clothing. The rent was free. It wasn’t really nothing to pay for rent. It was just an old shack. It had no electricity or hot water or anything. Just a place to rest.

MR. FOLEY: The next entry on your record is the auto theft, grand theft auto. Could you explain that? That’s in December of 1969.

INMATE GROGAN: I recall being arrested for grand theft auto because I had rented a truck. It was a half-ton truck, I think. I took it to the desert and it got stuck in the desert. At that time I was arrested by Inyo County. I had rented it for one day. So the company called up and thought I had stolen the truck. I went to court and I paid restitution for it, all the damages and the time overdue. I pleaded guilty, I think, to a breach of promise, a misdemeanor. Is that the same one?

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: About this incident helping somebody to go to Hawaii to avoid testifying?

INMATE GROGAN: What happened in that incident, one girl named Barbara Hoyt was scheduled to testify in the Charles Manson trial. She came to the ranch where I was living at the time in Chatsworth, California.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: This is when you were on bail?

INMATE GROGAN: Right. And indicated to the girls and that came to me through hearsay from the girls that she didn’t want to testify that she wanted to, you know, go someplace and hide till the trial was over. So, I guess the girls suggested that they go to Hawaii. They bought her tickets.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: On a stolen credit card or something?

INMATE GROGAN: I don’t know how they got it. I think the friend bought it on a credit card, his personal credit card. I think. I’m not sure.

Anyways, they secured the means of going to Hawaii. And one girl went with her. When she went to Hawaii, the girl gave her some hallucinogenic drugs and some food and left her and flew back to the States. And that scared her and she went to, I think, YMCA or something like that and told authorities and then went back to the police and told them that she thought everyone was trying to kill her or dissuade her from testifying. Consequently, everybody that she came in contact with at the ranch that time she mentioned and was mentioned in the indictment.


INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. And can I add something to that?


INMATE GROGAN: We were planning to take the case to trial because the evidence was really shaky on it. There was no evidence, as far as my participation was concerned, but due to the fact I was already in for murder trial, I thought it be best interest to go in with Ruth Moorehouse. Ruth Moorehouse, she was pregnant at the time.

So we all agreed those were charged with conspiracy plead nolo contendere to a misdemeanor, if they would let her out on her own recognizance to have her child in the streets. Because we didn’t want her to have her child in the county jail and have it taken from her at the early part of delivery. So the District Attorney agreed that would be acceptable to him, and that’s how the disposition was handled.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: And then later on you were convicted of the murder?


PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Right. I’d like to thank you very much for providing that information. I know it’s pretty well covered in the pages I mentioned, pages 32 to 41 in the hearing of 1979.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: At a certain point after you’ve gotten married, your wife needed to change her unlisted phone number and indication because of threats from Manson family. Would you elaborate upon that, because this was sometime after you were incarcerated? Charlie Manson was incarcerated. Who was the threat coming from? What was it all about?

INMATE GROGAN: Well, after couple years being in prison, after reflecting clear in my head, all the cobwebs, what I call the drug residue, I just started thinking. I came to myself. Man, I started thinking, well, what am I doing with these people? Man, why am I still even letting them write to me?

So cut them loose. In the meantime, I had met, you know, met my wife and we visited over a year. I visited with her for a year because I wanted to see where she was at in her head, as far as for a wife, good wife, my children. It was more like a testing period. I let her go through to see if she would stick by me. Of course, there was no guarantee of that. It seemed that after a year of going through these hardships of prison life, visiting, coming back and seeing you, on the basis that she had left, you know, call it quits or she would stick by me.

So consequently after a year and a half, I decided we should get married. And some of the girls that were involved in Charlie’s in Sacramento got wind of the marriage and they threatened her with telephone calls. Telling her that she wasn’t good enough for me. They were going to kill her; send somebody over to get her, that she should leave me alone; get the hell out of there.

These are not quotes, just summations of the feelings. So I told her to change her address, move out of there. I wondered how they know where she lived.


INMATE GROGAN: I was wondering how they know where she lived.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: At the time you got married, were you prepared as far as the consequences that that might be the reaction from the people that were still out?

INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. It was – I had those reactions to them during that relationship. We had told her, you know, relatively the same thing, leave me alone. You have no business with me, and I kind of half ass respected that from those people. Because in their eyes, here I am in the past involved. I am in effect getting out of the group. To them there’s no getting out. Because it’s – it’s kind of difficult to explain, I guess, the attachment they had to each person that was involved with them over the years and they didn’t want to let go of it.


INMATE GROGAN: It’s like we’re supposed to be bonded together for life, you know, for eternity. Almost to a, like a vow, you know, to that. That was their viewpoint of my involvement with them and I didn’t see it that way. And they was highly upset that I would leave them and just told them to get the heck away.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: I think you indicated that at the time of the killing, correct me if I’m incorrect, that Manson said to mutilate the body and that you surmised that it was a means of bringing the group more under his control, because the group was beginning to shift away from him; is that correct?

INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. At the time – it wasn’t really at the time of the murders. It was after the murder, sometime after. The murder that he told me that, you know, circulate that story if anybody asks.

MR. ROBINSON: Just for clarification, he didn’t tell you to mutilate the body?

INMATE GORGAN: He told me to say that we had mutilated the body.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: Okay. Of the people that were involved in the Manson family, do other people have – at the time that the incident took place, people were very close to one another in terms of the psychodrawn path? At this point is there a spread in terms of individuals?

INMATE GROGAN: Yes. There’s a – there’s a –

BOARD MEMBER TONG: Where people are at in terms of their relationship with Manson or –

INMATE GROGAN: I was the only one that was, you know, saying – taking a good look at where they’re at. It took me a couple years because oriented myself in prison and then still work sifting though the distortion of the thinking I had. But, yeah, I think they were desperate to hold what they had, what little clique of a group they had left.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: Are some of them still pretty close to him in terms to the extent that you can be?

INMATE GROGAN: My contact with them over the years has been nill. I imagine probably couple of the girls are still with them, but that’s about it as far as I’m concerned.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: Okay. I don’t have any other questions.

INMATE GROGAN: Okay, I’ll start with the report that you read is pretty accurate insomuch as it describes everything that happened.

Few inconsistencies in the sense that, if I understood right, you said we enticed the victim to the car. I don’t know if it was understood how I explained it last time that he was taking us down to an auto mechanic place to change some auto parts in. So actually we were like hitching a ride with him.

I don’t know – is enticing the same thing?

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Well, no, not exactly.

MR. ROBINSON: Well, let me put it to you this way: It begins for you, you’re waking up in the morning, right? If you could start at it from that point and just sort of discuss it. I know you discussed it so many times.

INMATE GROGAN: Well, that morning I was awakened by Charles Manson and still, you know, half asleep, told me to get to the car and handed me like a pipe wrench. Told me to hit Shorty in the back of the head as soon as Tex gave me the go ahead or gave me the signal.

At that point Tex and I entered the back seat behind the driver, which was Jerome Shea, and Tex was on his right hand side. We proceeded down Santa Susana Pass toward San Fernando Valley. And about a quarter mile down from the ranch there was like a turnoff where cars, you know like rest area. And Tex mentioned that he had some parts over there that he had to get, pick up before he went to the store.

I still haven’t got over, you know, the emotional part. You know, so sometimes it’s kind of hard to, you know, overcome the atrocity that I did.

BOARD MEMBER TONG: Would you like some water?

INMATE GROGAN: Yeah, if I could.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: So Charles Manson was in the back seat with you?

INMATE GROGAN: No. No one was in the back seat.


MR. ROBINSON: Tex was sitting in the front seat and you were sitting where?

INMATE GROGAN: I was sitting behind the driver.

MR. ROBINSON: In the back seat.

INMATE GROGAN: Then we pulled off the road. Tex got out. The car was still in gear. I think he just had his foot on the break, and they got out and they looked around the bushes like he was looking for some parts.

In the meantime, I was supposed to hit this guy in the back of the head. And like I never, you know, hit anybody or hurt anybody like that before, and it was hard, you know. I kept hesitating in my mind, you know, looking at the cars on the highway hoping maybe cause of traffic I wouldn’t have to hit him because it was just 10 feet off the lane.

And Tex was urging me, you know, come on hit this guy. I kept hesitating. He pulled out a knife that he had. I guess that’s what finally, you know, put me over the edge. I just hit the guy. I wasn’t really – there was no accurate shot or nothing like that.

MR. ROBINSON: Take your time.

INMATE GROGAN: Well, the blow stunned him but it didn’t knock him out. And he jumped to the passenger side of the seat. That was, the car door was already open and exited through there.

MR. ROBINSON: Steve, let me interrupt you. One of the things that was read in the statement was that the blow knocked him out of the vehicle. I remember that was discussed last year, and as you just said, he left the vehicle after being hit, right? He went out which side?

INMATE GROGAN: Right side.

MR. ROBINSON: The passenger side, all right.

INMATE GROGAN: The blow knocked him forward so he hit the steering wheel and surprised him and jumped out the side and I had to reach over the seat and get in the driver’s seat to stop the car, because the way it was parked there was an embankment, you know, like cul de sac ditch. And the car ran – drove into the ditch. So, meantime I’m jumping over the seat trying to put the brakes on, put the car in gear, stop the motor, he had already been stabbed.


INMATE GROGAN: I imagine Tex did. I didn’t actually see him stab him. My head was turned, you know. The car had left. My peripheral vision, I didn’t catch what was going on. Came out of the car and he was laying on the ground and semi unconscious state. He was already going or something. And at that point Manson arrived on the scene with another person.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: They were in a different car?

INMATE GROGAN: I actually didn’t even see a car drive up. I just noticed to my right he came up. He might have gone through some back trails and in time – he must have been in another car.

HEARING REPRESENTATIVE EPPERLY: Was it Tex who initially said there were some parts over here and caused the vehicle to turn off on the side?

INMATE GROGAN: Right. And I came upon the victim in a semi unconscious state. And I was handed a knife and told to stab him, and I stabbed him twice in the chest. And some others were told the same.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Did Manson stab him too?

INMATE GROGAN: I don’t know. He might have slashed him. I don’t recall if he stabbed him.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: So you stabbed him and Tex stabbed him. Anybody else stab him?

INMATE GROGAN: I think Bruce might have stabbed him in the arm.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Then what happened?

INMATE GROGAN: Well, at that point, couple minutes after that he was dead and I was told to take him, drag him into some bushes that were further from the highway, cover him up till night, come back at night and bury him. And the others left so I came back at night and buried him.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: You came back yourself and buried him? How deep was the grave?

INMATE GROGAN: It was pretty shallow. It was just enough to cover his body. But in reference to the deep grave, over the years it was seven years or eight years and there had been rainstorms and mud slides in that area. And I think that’s what – they had trouble finding him when I initially drew a map. I had to go down with them, escort, and show them the direct vicinity. I couldn’t even remember the exact spot because, you know, landscape had changed.

PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: How about all this talk, it was groovy to kill him, and all that kind of business?

INMATE GROGAN: Well, I was told that if anybody was to ask what happened that those were the statements I was to give them in order to – at that point in time, at the ranch there was a lot of, seems like there was a little bit of dissention and philosophy that was promulgated there. There was always – fear or love would pull people together from breaking apart. And I think it was, you know, meant to understood that this statement would bring more fear to the people rather than just stab the guy the way we did.


This is not the original transcription of Grogan's hearing. This document was sent to me in "word" format... but I have seen and read the original transcription, and I personally attest to it's validity.

Time Frame:
One can safely assume the hearing was held after 1979, as Grogan and the Hearing Representative, both refer to the crimes as being committed "ten years ago". My best guess would be 1980.  

Below is a video shot at the time of Grogan's release 

(Courtesy of Backporch Tapes)

Monday, March 23, 2015

Charles "Tex" Watson Parole Hearing 2006

Charles "Tex" Watson did not attend this parole hearing - neither did his attorney at that time...but Debra did!


In the matter of the Life

Term Parole Consideration

Hearing of:

CHARLES WATSON                                            CDC Number B-37999

November 27, 2006

2:04 P.M.


SANDRA BRYSON,  Presiding Commissioner

KENNETH CATER,  Deputy Commissioner


PATRICK SEQUEIRA,  Deputy District Attorney
TIP KINDEL,  Board of Parole Hearings
DEBRA TATE,  Victim's sister
JEAN WEISS,  Victim Escort
KEVIN RIGGS,  KCRA, Channel 3, Reporter
JOHN BREEDLOVE, KCRA Television, Sacramento, Camera man

Robertine Donaldson, House of Scribes

Footage from the hearing. Watson did not attend by his own choice.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON. This is the Thirteenth Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing for Charles Watson, WATSON, CDC Number B boy, 37999. Today's date is November 27'", 2006 and the time is 1404. Were located at Mule Creek State Prison. Inmate Watson was received into the California Department of Corrections, C.D.C., on November 17, 1971 from Los Angeles County, Case No. A, Adam, 253156, subsequent to a conviction of seven counts of Penal Code 187, murder in the first degree, and one count of Penal Code 187 -- correction 182.1/187, conspiracy -- excuse me -- to commit murder. The weapons, at least one firearm, and several knives, were used in the commission of these crimes. Mr. Watson was originally sentenced to death with the sentence on the conspiracy to commit murder charge stayed pending the determination of any appeal of the other counts. Per the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, decision filed March 20'", 1973, the sentence of death was reduced to life and the sentence on the conspiracy to commit murder charge was imposed, all charges to be served concurrent. And the life charge is that on life. This hearing ie being recorded. For the purpose of voice identification, each of us will state our first and last names, spelling the last name. I will start and then go to  my left. Commissioner Sandra Bryson, B-R-Y-S-O-N, Board of Parole Hearings.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Kenneth Cater, C-A­T-E-R, Deputy Commissioner, Board of Parole Hearings.

MS. TATE: Deborah Tate, T-A-T-E, victim's sister.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEQUEIRA: Patrick Sequeira, Deputy District Attorney, County of Los Angeles. That's spelled S-E-Q-U-E-I-R-A.

MS. WEISS: Jean Weiss, W-E-I-S-S, victim escort, Mill Creek State Prison.

MR. KINDEL: Kit Kindel, K-I-N-D-E-L, Board of Parole Hearings.

MR. RIGGS: Kevin Riggs, R-I-G-G-S, KCRA Television, Sacramento.

INMATE CABRERA: John Breedlove, J-O-H-N B-R-E­E-D-L-O-V-E, KCRA TV, Sacramento.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you, and I notice for the record that we have a correctional peace officer in the room who is here for security purposes. I also note that this inmate has elected to waive his presence here today and also to waive representation. And he has signed B.P.T. Form 1003, the attorney waiver. He signed that on August 8th of 2006. He also signed B.P.T. Form 1001(a) waiving his appearance and his right to attend the hearing. He signed the form in stating: "I understand I am scheduled for the Board of Prison Terms hearing. I do not wish to attend my Board hearing and do not wish to be represented at the hearing. The hearing will be held in my absence."

And this document was signed on July 27th of 2006. I also note for the record and in the inmate's behalf that he signed on June 9th of 2006 B.P.T. Form 1073, indicating that, in fact, he has no disabilities identified and he does not -- did not need any help for his parole hearing, indicating that he understands plain simple English, and he has no A.D.A. issues. He also has a high school diploma. And that was subsequently signed in confirmation by Mill Creek staff. And so we will proceed in absencia. And first, Commissioner Cater, is there anything confidential in the file, any confidential material, and if so, will it be used today?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: There is confidential information within the C File. However, it appears to be limited to numerous letters of opposition. I trust they will be reviewed and considered as appropriate. But they are deemed confidential, I believe, because they identify not just the sender, but their address. Beyond that, there's nothing relevant to today's decision making.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. And District Attorney to ensure we're all proceeding with the same set of documents. And does the District Attorney have all the documents?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEQUEIRA: Yes. I've received all the documents on the checklist. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. I will then proceed to read the facts of the crime into the record from the Court of Appeals, State of

California, Second Appellate District Division 5.  This is People v. Charles Watson, filed March 20th of 1973. Beginning on page three, as to the facts.

"In light of the nature of the contentions raised by the defendant, it is not necessary to discuss all the gruesome details of the wanton and indiscriminate killings of the seven victims. Five of the murders occurred on the night of August 8th to the 9th, 1969. The victims of these murders were Abigail Folger. That's F-O-L-G-E-R, and the second victim, Wojiciech, W-O-J-I-C-I-E-C-H, last name, F-R-Y­K-O-W-S-K-I. Third victim, Steven Parent, P-A­R-E-N-T. Fourth victim, Sharon Marie Polanski, P-O-L-A-N-S-K-I. Fifth victim, Thomas Sebring, S-E-B-R-I-N-G. Throughout the People's briefs, the killing of these individuals have been referred to as the Tate murders. Footnote 1, the stage name of Sharon Marie Polanski was Sharon Tate. Returning to text and we will so refer to them. The other two murders occurred on the following night. That would be Counts 6 and 7. The victims were Leno, L-E-N-0, and Rosemary LaBianca, that's L-A-B-I-A-N-C-A. To distinguish these killings were necessary from the others, we will refer to them as the, quotes, LaBianca, end quotes, murders. The Tate murders occurred when Watson and a number of female followers of Manson were sent by the latter to murder the occupants of the house in which they were found. Footnote 2. One of the victims, Steven Parent, had the misfortune to have been visiting a friend of the estate where the murders occurred. According to Kasabian's - - that's K-A-S-A-B-I-A-N's testimony -- this victim was in his car leaving the property when Watson shot him in the head four times. The coroner testified that five gunshot wounds were inflicted on Mr. Parent, two of which were fatal. Returning to text, the victims other than Mr. Parent were stabbed to death. Footnote 3. Ms. Tate received 16 stab wounds, Ms. Folger, 28 stab wounds, Mr. Sebring, seven stab wounds, plus one gunshot wound. Mr. Frykowski, Returning to text. At the scene of the murders, aside from Mr. Parent, whose body was found in the seat of his car, Ms. Folger's and Mr. Frykowski's bodies were found on the lawn. Ms. Tate's and Mr. Sebring's bodies were in the living room with a rope around their necks. The rope was looped over a beam in the room. Mr. Sebring's head was covered with a pillowcase or cloth. There was much blood in the house. The word, quotes, pig, end quotes, was written on the front door. Telephone wires were cut, the prisoner, the co-defendant, having climbed a pole to cut them before killing Mr. Parent. The victims' valuables were not taken, money, jewelry, and watches being found on their persons or in wallets and purses, as well as in open view in the house. Watson and the females who accompanied him and participated with him in the killings were blood covered when the slaughter was done. After the killings, the defendant and the others drove away, stopping to use a hose to wash the blood off their bodies. They also changed their clothes. And the defendant told Kasabian to wipe the fingerprints from the two knives and to throw them away. The LaBianca murders occurred because Manson said the Tate killings had been too messy. Manson, as well as the defendant and others of their followers, including Kasabian, drove around the Los Angeles area, somewhat aimlessly, eventually ending at the LaBianca residence. The bodies of the LaBiancas were found in their home. There was a white pillow on Mr. LaBianca's head and his wrists were tied behind his back. The letters of the word, quotes, war, end quotes, had been scratched into the flesh of his stomach. A long cord was wrapped around his neck and a carving knife was in his abdomen. The words, quotes, death to pigs, end quotes, were written in blood on the walls. Mrs. LaBianca's body bore puncture wounds. A pillowslip enveloped her head and a portion of her body. While Mrs. LaBianca's wallet and purse were missing, there were coins, money, jewelry and other expensive items found untouched in the house, together with a shotgun and a rifle. The word, rise -- that is in quotes -- was written in blood on the front door of the house. And the words, quotes, helter skelter, end quotes, on the refrigerator door. Mr. and Mrs. LaBianca each died from multiple stab wounds. Footnote 3, in addition to the word carved on his abdomen, Mr. LaBianca suffered 26 penetration wounds and Mrs. LaBianca, 41, in addition to three scratches."

And as to the prisoner's, and in his absence today, I will read his version as stated in the current Board Report prepared for this hearing in October of 2006 by D. Thomason. That's T-H-O-M-A-S-0- N, Correctional Counselor 1 at facility (indiscernible). Beginning on page two, the prisoner's version of the Board Report:

"Watson claims that the summary written above that references the Probation Officer's Report is correct. In reading the summary, he mentioned to me that he did not remember a rope around the necks of Sharon Polanski or Jay Sebring, nor did he remember a pillowcase of cloth over Sebring's head. He did recall that they had a rope, but he doesn't remember it being used. In discussing the matter, Watson made it very clear that he doesn't challenge the above facts, is not minimizing his participation in the crime, and accepts full responsibility for his actions."

And once again, this allusion is made to the summary of the crime as sourced in the Los Angeles County Probation Officer's Report and the Second Appellate District Court of Appeal decision filed March 201h of 1973. And both of those documents will be taken into consideration by this panel. As to pre-conviction factors, this inmate has no juvenile record. And I am incorporating by reference the California Investigation's -- Identification and Investigation, commonly called the CI&I Report of this inmate's criminal history. He also has a minimal arrest history with no convictions, with the exception of the instance offense. As to this inmate's personal factors:

"Watson is the youngest of three children born on December 2nd, 1945 in Dallas, Texas. He was raised primarily in Copeville, C-O-P-E-V-I­-L-L-E, Texas. His father owned a small gas station/grocery store in Copeville. His mother was a housewife and also helped in the small business. Watson graduated from Farmersville High School in the top quartile of his class. While in high school, he participated in athletics as a halfback on the football team. He attended North Texas State University, majoring in marketing. His grades ranged from A to F, with an overall average of C. He was a member of the Phi Beta -- Phi Kappa Alpha fraternity. Following the completion of his junior year, he moved to Los Angeles, quotes, just for the adventure of it, end quotes. He enrolled in California State University Los Angeles, but dropped out after attending a few classes. He never served in the military. Watson worked at his parents' business at an onion packing concern in Farmersville and as a cargo handler for Braniff Airlines in Dallas, Texas. Before his conviction, his last stable employment was as a wig salesman. He worked at this job for approximately eight months and quit because he was not being paid his commission. It was after this that he joined the Manson family. As to religion, he stated in the Probation Officer Report, the POR, quotes, "I grew up a Methodist, but now, more or less, I just believe in the Bible," end quotes. Watson claim in his Probation Officer's Report that he considered himself a moderate drinker. He stated that he smoked marijuana one time before his arrival in Los Angeles. Once in Los Angeles, he started smoking marijuana, quotes, pretty heavy, end quotes. About a month after his arrival in Los Angeles, he chewed rosewood seeds (one occasion). This was his introduction to hallucinogens. From there, he proceeded to use numerous and varied types of narcotics, including hashish, DNT -- that's David Nora Tom THC and LSD. He also chewed types of belladonna root, has eaten peyote buttons, dropped, end quotes, mescaline capsules. He claims to have never injected anything intravenously and has never used heroin or cocaine. He states that he used drugs from the age of 21 until just before his 24th birthday."

And that, again, is quoting as to pre-conviction factors, person history from the current Board Report. And also the panel notes that his statement that he used drugs from the age of 21 until just before his 24th birthday takes him up to the age of the instance offense, which he was a little over 23 years old. And now Commissioner Cater, would you please handle the post-conviction factors.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Yes. Thank you. I will be focusing on post-conviction factors items that occurred -- have occurred since Mr. Watson's last hearing. His last hearing was held October 10, 2001. On that occasion, parole was denied for a four-year period of time. The panel made some specific recommendations which included remain disciplinary free and see self-help and therapy as available. The C File reflects that Mr. Watson arrived at this institution in April of 1993. His classification score last reviewed and compiles September 20, 2006 reveals it's 28 points, which is the lowest possible he can achieve. And the record shows that he achieved remains at that level. His custody level's reflected as median A. With regards to gang affiliation within the C.D.C. setting, that is shown as clear per C.D.C. Form 812. Mr. Watson's current work assignment, an assignment he has had since approximately 1996, continues to be as a porter doing janitorial work.

The most recent supervisor's report is dated January 16, 2006. His supervisor rates him as satisfactory in those endeavors. As far as academics, the records show Mr. Watson has a high school diploma, as well as numerous college credits through North Texas State University, as well as Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. Vocational certifications documented are as follows: He has two. January 1990 vocational office machine repair certification. Secondly, vocational data processing and programming, the latter in 1992. The Board Report as well as the C File documents considerable self-help programming over the past five-plus years. When I get to the details of the Board Report, I will be capturing those. Concerning disciplinary history, at the last hearing, it was noted he had only one C.D.C. 115 during his commitment. That would remain accurate at this point in time. To say it another way, his last and only 115 serious disciplinary action was in 1973 for possession of contraband whereby at that time, he possessed some food and incense that was disallowed. That's the only serious disciplinary. He has three of the less serious custodial counts and chronos, none since his last hearing. The most recent, July of 1983, and that wrongdoing tied in to some excessive noise from his radio. As a footnote, Mr. Watson declined his C File review by documentation dated July 25, 2006. We have two current Board Reports, one from 2005, another from 2006. The 2006 report prepared for our review and consideration by D. Thomason, T-H-0-M-A-S-0-N, Correctional Counselor, refers us to the supplemental post-conviction progress reports. There we find Mr. Watson's participation in various activities of self-help. Going back to 2001, it confirmed that the inmate attended Christian 12 Step Recovery Program per a chronological entry dated August 1, 2001, and another dated December 2001. He completed an advanced 12 Step Recovery program and attended, quote, How to Counsel God's Way, end quote, per a chrono dated December 2001. In 2002, it's documented that he participated in the following study programs. Within 12 Step Recovery Program, quote, A Gospel of Peace, end quote, per a chrono dated April 1, 2002. Also attended, quote, Escape from Codependency, end quote, per a chrono dated August 1, 2002. And also attended, quote, How to Stop the Pain, end quote, per a chrono dated November 28, 2002. In 2003, chronos document Mr. Watson attended, quote, Grace - the Power to Change, end quote, which is a study group. This is affirmed by a chrono dated April 1, 2003. He also attended, quote, Taking the Limits Off Life, end quote, a study group, documented by a chrono dated August 1, 2003. Further, he attended, quote, Supernatural Ministries, end quote, per a chrono dated December 3, 2003. More recently, specifically April 1, 2004, he attended, quote, Breaking the Cycle, end quote, which is a study group. He also attended that as documented by a chrono dated December 1, 2004. Ongoing participating in a Christian 12 Step program is affirmed in a chrono dated December 30, 2004. Group activities in 2005 included Deadly Emotions, a study group, documented in a chrono dated April 1, 2005. It's also acknowledged that he consistently attended a Christian 12 Step program during that interval. I'd like to note that the 2005 Correctional Counselor report was prepared by G. Mayol, M, as Mary, A-Y-O-L. There's not an updated psychiatric or psychological assessment. We will be relying upon the same report that the panel relied on in 2001. The 2001 mental health evaluation was actually a revision of the 1998 evaluation. This 2001 evaluation having been prepared for the Board by Dr. Ronald Roston, last name, R-O-S-T-O-N, Ph.D. The clinical assessment, which begins on page seven -- these are numbered at current mental status and treatment needs. He's described herein by the evaluator as being highly articulate and uses very good grammar and syntax. He's described as functioning at a high average to superior level intellectually. He suffers no organic or neurological impairments. At the time of interview, the evaluator describes Mr. Watson as being alert, cooperative, candid and expressive.

His thinking is described as linear logical and rational, and that he tends to be quite intellectualized. On page eight of this evaluation, the clinician opines that Mr. Watson seems to invoke the devil to account for his criminal behavior while he takes full responsibility at the same time. The doctor notes that the inmate sees and feels no conflicts in these positions. The psychologist goes on to describe Mr. Watson as a man without psychiatric or mental disease or disorder. His drug use appears to be in sustained full remission and no longer an issue. His adult anti-social behavior, which was too grossly obvious over two years, is also in full remission and no longer likely to reappear. Thus according to the doctor, the inmate appears to have resolved many of the behaviors and attitudes that initially qualified him for an anti-social personality disorder diagnosis. The diagnostic impressions are reflected at the top of page nine of the doctor's report. Under Axis 1, we see hallucinogen abuse in sustained full remission. Axis 2, cannabis abuse in sustained remission, as well as adult anti-social behavior in full remission. Axis 3 reflects no diagnoses. Axis 4, psychological stressors reflected as being incarceration. And finally, Axis 5, both the current and past year -­again referencing 2001 -- global assessment functioning score, the GAF, is a rather elevated 90. Dr. Roston describes, on page 10, a belief that Mr. Watson's level of remorse and empathy is clear and deep. His insight into life crimes are couched in terms he understands best as a very devout fundamentalist Christian. It's the belief of the evaluator that Mr. Watson appears as if a young, naive, and gullible man got into drugs and bizarre company without appreciating the deviance of the company he was keeping. Towards the bottom of page 10, we see an assessment of dangerousness described by Dr. Roston. It indicates that Mr. Watson has not been a dangerous inmate. He has recovered from his psychological -- excuse me -- he has recovered his psychological balance. He managed to take good control of his behavior, has been a model prisoner. Were Mr. Watson released to the community, his psychologist believes that the inmate would try to be a model citizen and would probably succeed. The psychologist would predict unequivocally that he would not resort to violence and notes there are no significant risk factors. In the closing remarks of Dr. Roston's evaluation, it reiterates that the inmate functions very well and is free of mental and emotional disorder and disease. He has no weaknesses that the psychologist would consider as possible impediments to a good adjustment in the community if paroled. With regard to a parole release, the psychologist reflects no reservations. It closes by indicating any decision regarding parole for Mr. Watson should be decided upon grounds other than psychiatric or psychological factors. At this time, I would normally have a dialogue with the inmate to affirm the post-conviction factors reflect what's transpired. Obviously, since he's not here, I'll just simply return it to the chair.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. As to Mr. Watson's current parole plans, the panel refers to future plans as stated in the current Board Report referencing again the October 2006 Board Report prepared by Correctional Counselor Thomason. Under A, as to residence, Watson states that if paroled, he would want to parole to Fort Worth, Texas to the residence of James and Cheryl Schupbach. That's S-C­H-U-P-B-A-C-H. And address information is given. And as to employment, in B, citing International Prison the position would be of an evangelical speaker and computer consultant. As to secondary employment, that would be with SX Web Solutions in Fort Worth, Texas, with a position as a website designer. As to support letters -- well, first I should stop and check. Was there anything further in the material that you have regarding parole plans in the document that was provided there? I do have, I believe, the support letters. I think I have that one in my file.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: This is from a firm heading from Spring Valley --


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER:                 California, Dennis Ortiz?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: -- was going to that. Yes.


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: And then I also believe I have now got the Cheryl Schupbach -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: -- letter. Okay. I have that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Those are the only two


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: -- that appear under future parole plans.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: All right. That was given us immediately prior to this hearing. So I will cover those. First I have a support letter from Jan and Jan, attorneys in San Diego, and to -- this is November 16th, 2006. And it was written by Kendrick Jan, attorney. That's J-A-N. And an excerpt being from this letter:

"This office represents the referenced prison applicant, Charles Watson, and I, attorney Kendrick Jan, appeared before the Board at Mr. Watson's last parole hearing on October 10th of 2001. It is my understanding Mr. Watson has waived his right to appear personally and/or through counsel at his next scheduled hearing set for November 27th, 2006. Although neither Mr. Watson nor I will be appearing at the upcoming hearing, I thought I should send this letter to address a few points on Mr. Watson's behalf. This individual met the state's information which we have, in fact, covered as to the post-incarceration factors in custody, vocational training."

And as to post-release plans, it says:

"Mr. Watson has available to him two separate post-release vocational opportunities. The option offered to him in California is to serve on staff at a Training Center, a licensed drug and alcohol rehabilitation center in Spring Valley. Serving with the Training Center, Mr. Watson would be able to utilize his training and administration in Chapel Industries, as well as experience in substance abuse therapies. As this facility lies between my home and my office, I would be most happy to do anything I could to accommodate Mr. Watson, the prospective employer, or and the Board of Prison Terms in his transition into a productive life outside the walls of a prison."

Jan also then refers to the Texas positions and concludes (indiscernible) if there's a person whose long-term good behavior and positive plans are worthy of a parole date, it is Charles Watson. We also have the aforesaid reference letter of Cheryl Schupbach. And this letter does not have a date. It did appear in the current Board packet, however, and references the potential employment as well as residence. James and Cheryl Schupbach extended a residence invitation to Mr. Charles Watson in the event he's paroled by the State of California. It identifies the location of the house and describes it. And then it says James and Cheryl Schupbach has two adult children who live in Kern County, but no longer reside with their parents. In addition to residence, Mr. Watson would web development. His duties would consider -- excuse me -- would consist of production, DHTML, XHTML, and CSS for large web development projects, conducting manual tests for web applications, developing fast loading multimedia websites audio and video, and develop site maps and content distribution plans. This says that FX Web Solutions have been in business since 1997 providing web hosting, development maintenance and dialup unit and access. Commissioner Cater, I noted that as you were going over the vocational certifications for inmate Watson, you noted that he, in fact, had a certification in data processing and programming in 1992. Is there any indication that he's updated those skills in the past 14 years?


PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. Then we also have a letter from the Training Center that was referenced before. And this is written by Dennis Martinez, pastor of the Training Center. The Prison Life Training Center is located in Spring Valley, California. The date of this letter appears to be August 2nd of 2006.

"I'm writing this letter on behalf of Mr. Charles Watson to let you know that Mr. Watson would be accepted into our program. Not only to work immediately within our program doing administration counseling and pastoral staff. The Training Center is a crisis center, drug and alcohol treatment center, which handles all areas of men's lives from drugs and alcohol, anger management, co-occurring disorder, job placement and sober living. We are a state licensed facility located -- and it gives the address in Spring Valley. We understand Mr. Watson would be a high-profile case, but we would be honored to have him as part of our staff. We seem to have great success with our clients and staff."

And Commissioner Cater, did you have anything further that should be put into the record concerning parole plans or letters of support?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: None of those. I know you're not there yet, but with regard to the letters of opposition, they make reference in the confidential section. Are you familiar with those? Do you have copies of those?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Of the confidential materials?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Perhaps they removed -- retracted -- redacted the names, nothing like that? PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: No. cover them --


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: -- at the appropriate time.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: All right. And we have sent out 3042 Notices. Those notices go to agencies having a direct interest in this case. We have a reply from the Los Angeles Police Department, and this is dated November 8th of 2006. And it is authored by Kyle, that's K-Y-L-E, B. Johnson, common spelling, Captain, commanding officer, Robbery and Homicide Division, on behalf of William J. Bratton, Chief of Police.

"Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the life prisoner's Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing for Charles Watson. It is the position of the Los Angeles Police Department that Mr. Watson continue to be incarcerated for the remainder of his life. Mr. Watson was an active participant in the mutilation and murders of several people in the Los Angeles area. The crimes committed by Mr. Watson were such brutality and complete lack of humanity that it's clear he has no concern for human life. Victims Abigail Folger, Wojiciech Frykowski, Steven Parent, Sharon Polanski, Jay Sebring, Leno LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca were heinously murdered because of Mr. Watson's disregard for their lives. It is the opinion of the Los Angeles Police Department that the release of Mr. Watson will create considerable risk to the community, and that his freedom is unequivocally contrary to the interests of society."

We have a representative of the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office present, who will have an opportunity to make a statement regarding parole suitability prior to the conclusion of this hearing. Commissioner Cater, do you have anything further that you would like to read into the record?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: With regard to letters of opposition?


DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: There are numerous letters of opposition that are current, most of them dated or received by the institution October and/or November 2006. The overwhelming theme of each and every letter is opposing the release of Charles Watson on parole. I did not get a precise count of these confidential letters, but I would estimate that there are roughly 14 of them. Again, I'm not going to detail the source or the identities. Just to acknowledge that those are in the C Files. Thank you. I would like to invite the District Attorney to make a closing statement.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEQUEIRA: Thank you. I would ask the panel find inmate Charles Tex Watson unsuitable for parole for the following reasons: First and foremost, the crimes that Mr. Watson committed, the seven murders, were extremely heinous, brutal, cold-blooded and callous. This two-day spree of murders was, in and of itself, extremely horrifying. I think the facts that were read from the record clearly indicate that. There were seven victims that were killed in this case. Approximately 169 stab wounds, of which 90% of those stab wounds were personally inflicted by Charles Watson himself. But the horror of Mr. Watson's crimes, the seven murders over the two-day period at the Tate and LaBianca residences, merely a portion of an even larger horror that Mr. Watson and the other members of the Manson Family were involved in. The Manson Family has been called by the media and various sources a cult. They've been called sort of a group of drug-crazed hippies. But when you really look at the bottom line and what the Manson Family set out to accomplish, and which Charles Watson was an integral part, there are significant indications that these people operated as domestic terrorists. Prior to the included, as well as the females, were involved in planning and preparation that included what they called "creepy crawly missions." They would dress in dark clothing. They would go into unsuspecting victims' residences in the middle of the night. Sometimes they would take something; sometimes they wouldn't. Part of the plan was to just move around some furniture. Maybe make the people wake up the next morning and wonder, "Who's been in here? Why did they do this?" This was all planning and preparation for the concept of helter skelter and the concept of race war. These crimes, along with the other activities of Watson and the Manson Family, were designed to strike terror into the citizens of Los Angeles County. And in the grand scheme of things, as proposed by Charles Manson and his whole concept of helter skelter was that when these crimes were committed -- and when I say "these crimes," I'm not talking just about the Tate-LaBianca murders, because they started with the Gary Hinman murder approximately a month before. In that case, Mr. Hinman was tortured and murdered over a two-day period of time. Mr. Watson was not directly involved in this crime. But the signature aspect of that crime was after the killing, they wrote in blood at Mr. Hinman's house, the word, "political piggy," and they also put a paw print to signify the Black Panther symbol. And the idea of doing this was to blame the crime on blacks or members of the Black Panthers. The same thing happened a month later at the Tate residence. Sharon Tate's blood was written -- well, there was written in Sharon Tate's blood words to the same effect regarding piggies and at the residence of the Tate house for the sole purpose, again, of making it look as if there were blacks involved in the crime. The following night at the LaBianca residence, the same thing. In Leno LaBianca's chest, the word "war" was carved. And again, writings in blood also signifying or trying to identify the killers as being blacks who were involved. And in fact, in the LaBianca murders, this is another interesting point. Even though Charles Tex Watson was personally involved in the horrible murders of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, he was only part of a killing group that night because he and Leslie Van Houten and Patricia Krenwinkel were dropped off at the LaBianca residence and they were told to hitchhike home. The other people that were in the car, Charles Manson, Steve Grogan and Linda Kasabian were then -­proceeded to try to find some other victims to kill. Originally all six of them were in the same car and they were looking to kill people. They drove around for our hours looking to kill people. They decided on the LaBianca residence because it was next door to an acquaintance.

The Watts riots had occurred in 1968. There was the assassination of Martin Luther King. This was a time of turmoil, and so it wasn't quite as far fetched that racial tensions could be sparked and that riots could result. And that many, many more people than just the seven victims in this case would be injured or killed. And of course, the whole concept that Manson had was that after the race war concluded, the blacks would window, but because the blacks would be unable to govern themselves, they would turn to the Family. And he would rise up and be the leader, and basically be king of the world. And as part of the planning with this, not only were the Family housed at the Spahn Ranch in Los Angeles County, but they were also had a desert highway where they were going to go, in which they, in fact, they did go after the Tate-LaBianca murders to hide out in the desert near Death Valley, waiting for helter skelter to begin and to end. And then they would come back and rule the world. They would come back from the bottomless pit, as inspired by the Beatles White Album. All this is very significant because Charles Watson was not only an integral part of this ongoing crime family -- and I call it a "crime family" because they were involved not only in these murders, but they were involved in other murders as well. There's the Hinman murder. And then after the Tate-LaBianca murders, Charles Tex Watson was never charged. But he had been identified also as being one of the killers of Shorty Shea, who was a ranch hand at the Spahn Ranch, who they believed was going to be a police informant. And he was killed, brutally killed, and buried in the desert. His body wasn't discovered until seven years later when one of the co-defendants in the case, Steve Grogan, finally led the police to the body. Bruce Davis and Charles Manson and Steve Grogan were charged and convicted in that case. Tex Watson was not, by the accounts from Steve Grogan and from Bruce Davis, and they have all identified as Tex Watson being involved in that murder as well. And that was the murder to cover up the Tate-LaBianca and the Hinman murders. Furthermore, I mean the crime family extends beyond that. There are witnesses who testified they were almost killed. There was a tremendous amount of planning and premeditation. And the reason I'm pointing out the planning and premeditation, not only in these murders, but also in preplanning the creepy crawly missions, is that Watson has used this excuse at his trial that he was on drugs. And of course, now I think he knows that he wasn't on drugs at the time of the murders. And I think that this sort of drug use or not drug use has really led to what I believe is a very confused psychological evaluation. And I really have – really take issue with the current psychological evaluation because it really misses the point, and it doesn't really get to the heart of the issue as to what caused a high school star athlete, student body president, by all accounts, a middle class, intelligent individual to go and become, you know, this brutal mass murderer. And I don't think that's addressed. And that really - - it isn't reflective. In fact, it seems to be ignored because when the psychologist says:

"Well, of course, a psychologist cannot offer experiences between the versions found in Mr. Watson's records and his recollection of the crime itself, such recollections were not requested of him. Further, the psychologist doubts that the differences that one might find setting Mr. Watson's past review of his life crime are not great."

What does that mean? I mean isn't it important to find out exactly how he sees himself and how he sees what acts that he did in this case important to this assessment of future dangerousness? I would think so. But it points out that he describes him as this naive and gullible man. The psychiatrist talks about the media term of the Manson Family. The media says this. Most of the news articles were probably accurate. It's unlikely -- it's likely that there were many inaccuracies. I mean you read through the psychiatric report, and it's absurd. Even when he gets to the interview with Watson himself, Watson is reading from his own notes during the psychological interview. In fact, he says here on page -- I'm not sure what page it is on the psychological evaluation. He was discouraged from using his notes. And instead of asking the inmate about the different crimes and what he did to these victims, all he asked was Watson described put himself in the shoes of one of the victim. But yet, even then he had to use notes. I note that in I think one of the earlier statements, I think it was read by Deputy Commissioner Cater, it talks about Watson saying he doesn't really like to think about the crimes because it would be harmful to him psychologically. Well, I find that to be a very cold-blooded statement. Who's more important, himself or coming to grips with the horror of this crime? In fact, it says:

"He now expresses that he is reluctant to concentrate on the crime because of the emotional and psychological damage that it would do to him. He believes that he has been forgiven by God for his crime, that he concentrates on his new Christian life rather than on the negative side of his past life." When you look at Charles Tex Watson's involvement with the Manson Family, it really isn't much different from what he has done since he's come to prison. Yes, he's been disciplinary free. Yes, he hasn't committed crimes, but his whole theme of sort of rehabilitation revolves around his Christian beliefs. Well, you have to understand that the Manson Family was a quasi-religious group. I mean Charles Manson referred to himself as God. He referred to himself as Satan. He referred to himself as the devil. And his followers and the people that followed his beliefs were following a religion. So to now say that Charles Tex Watson has found religion, that he has a ministry in prison, isn't much different than what he was doing on the outside when he was involved with the Manson Family. And, in fact, I think if you look through his C File, you'll also notice that when he was at the California Men's Colony, San Luis Obispo, he ran a prison ministry there with who else? With one other inmate by the name of Bruce Davis, another Manson Family member. And, in fact, I believe there's some indications that there were some abuses of prison ministry at CMC, where Tex Watson and Bruce Davis were basically using this ministry to retaliate against other inmates and for 115s or 128s they might have received. I think it should be somewhere in the file. Nevertheless, has Mr. Watson rehabilitated himself to the point where he's no longer a danger to society? I discussed how I think that the recent psychological evaluation is flawed. If you look through the past psychological evaluations, you'll see that there's been many mental process. I mean he was put in a cast at (indiscernible) State Hospital after -- I think right after the trial or before the trial. He was declared insane and brought back. The early psychological evaluations that are detailed showed numerous schizophrenia and psychological problems regarding anti-social personality disorder, which I believe still exists today, although the current psychiatrist doesn't, but the previous one did. Additionally with respect to his parole plans, I see a job offer in Texas. But as I understand it, and I don't know this to be a fact, but I don't see any mention of living with his wife. And I'm led to believe that now he's divorced from his wife and there's some marital instability. I don't know if it's reflected in the file. This is just something that I had heard. But I don't see any mention in the current Board report about any plans to live with his wife or his children. So I'm assuming that there's some split in the actual marital relationship, which may be why he chooses not to appear at the hearing, because his parole plans really aren't in order. I also note, I think the Commissioner noted, that there hasn't really been any upgrading in terms of his vocational training since 1990 or 1992, which could obviously affect his ability to handle the job offer, which is extended in the city of -- or in Texas. But all in all, you have an individual who has committed seven brutal murders and is connected with other murders and was part of a plot to cause even more mayhem and murder. And who knows how many countless people might have been hurt or killed as a result of his activities as a domestic terrorist and as a member of the ongoing criminal enterprise in the Manson Family. So the gravity and the circumstances of the offense are extremely serious, not only the fact that there's multiple victims, the planning and premeditation involved, the subsequent unstable social relationships that he had prior to the crime also I think played a big part in all of this. His lack of parole plans and a lack of what I would call really solid job offers and a place of residence all make him an extremely unsuitable candidate for parole. And it is the People's position, Los Angeles County District Attorney's office position that he still remains an extreme danger to society. And we would ask that parole be denied. And it's unlikely that he would be suitable for parole in the near future. We would ask that it be a five-year denial. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. We have next of kin present. And according to Penal Code Section 3042(b), you have the right to adequately and responsibly express your views concerning the crime and the person responsible, and the impact that it has had upon you. And I believe both the District Attorney and (indiscernible) will be speaking. And so whoever speaks first, please reidentify for the transcriptionist.

MS. TATE: My name is Deborah Tate. I'm the sister of Sharon, the slain actress, Sharon Tate. And I am here to reflect my views on Charles Tex Watson as a human being, and discuss with you what I believe his fate here today should be. Each and every one of us is a sum total of our past experiences. Although each and every one of these Manson killers do reflect benefits of the programming that they have received while incarcerated, I have to personally reflect to what they were prior to their incarceration. I am not convinced that any of these people should be suitable for parole ever because of the heinousness of the acts and the number of individual acts of murder that they perpetrated on others. Numerous nights, numerous days, numerous times, numerous victims. For me and my family, I'm the last survivor of my family. The stress of all of this has a great deal to play in health issues and the ultimate demise of my other family members. I would like the Board to consider that it's very much like a pebble being thrown into a still pond. The effects are outreaching beyond the initial acts that Mr. Watson chose to take place in the sixties, much further than the loss of my sister and my friends. In that household, each and every person in that house, with the exception of Gary Hinson outside the house, were people that I spent a lot of time with. They were my world, my support, my life, my love. And I mean that in the purest sense. They were my everything. And I can't imagine what my life would be -- had if they were still here. That has been taken from me by Mr. Watson and his friends. My daughter and my sister's children have also been affected, and I suspect that it will -- the outreach will be even further than that. Although I'm very grateful to have the opportunity to speak, the effects that these people have had on many lives is very, very obvious to me. It's more than the black and white paper that you have in front of you. I base this on what's in my heart and my knowledge of these people. I would like to ask you for a five-year denial. There are people in this world that I believe are redeemable. However, these -- none of these people are among them in my opinion. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. All right. Mr. Sequeira.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEQUEIRA: Thank you. There is another family member. I see two other family members that wanted to appear today, but because of their -- they're stuck at -- because of airport traffic delays over the holidays, they were unable to make it. So they've asked me to read a letter that was faxed to me just this afternoon for the hearing. And to point out this is from Anthony DiMaria. And he says:

"First of all, we deeply regret that we will not be able to attend the hearing because we are stuck in the airport due to flight delays."

So on his behalf, I will read the letter.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: Would you spell the last name, please?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEQUEIRA: Sure. The last name is spelled D-I, capital M, A-R-I-A. And the letter begins:

"My name is Anthony DiMaria, nephew of

Thomas J. Kummer, also known as Jay Sebring."

First I have two letters from the victims' next of kin. I would like to submit these to the Board. One is from Lou Smaldino, the nephew of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. And the other one is from my uncle, Fred Kummer, the younger brother of Jay Sebring. May I pass that to you? Thank you. And the panel has copies of these letters.

"The murder of Jay Sebring at the hands of the so-called Manson Family ripped our family apart and devastated beyond description. Tragically, the long list of Manson victims is many and yet to be determined. Dozens of our families across this nation know firsthand the hell and suffering resulting from the Manson murder spree. Charles Tex Watson was the essential instrument of the Manson murder organization. It carried out is despicable racist, terrorist ideologies in ways most lethal and inhumane as he plotted and conspired, tortured and killed and desecrated eight human beings. We ask that you deny parole to Mr. Watson for reasons too many to list, so I'll mention a few. Number one, the cruel and heinous nature of these killings alone is enough to deny parole. The murders that occurred on the nights of August 8th and 10th -- the 8th and 10th of 1969 included seven gunshots, 170 stabbings, and 13 times an object was used to bludgeon. Charles Watson fired all seven shots, crushed the skull. He bludgeoned 13 times, stabbed over 100 times with a bayonet, a butcher knife and carving fork. The man you consider for parole butchered a pregnant woman in full term and her unborn baby, even as she cried out for the life of her child. Mr. Watson mutilated and disfigured his victims' bodies as they laid dead," in capital letters. "These crimes are despicable and disgusting. It is a sick travesty that parole would ever be mentioned for a mass murderer, let alone Mr. Watson's crimes, most horrible and inhumane. Subsequently, it is only fair that the severest crimes receive the severest punishment. Number two, there is no way to describe the pain and loss our families have incurred. The grief and suffering strikes at random and has become part of who we are. It will strike during these holidays as it has year after nearly four decades."

This is an excerpt from Mr. Smaldino's letter.


"I'm writing this the day before Thanksgiving and remembering the wonderful holidays we shared with all of our family in this house. At the same time, I will never forget the carving fork used for our family turkey was the same instrument stuck in the chest of Leno. The pain lives on. We have lost two beautiful and caring people because of this murder. Thank you for hearing the pain and loss of our family. Lou Smaldino."

End of quote. Number three:

"Regarding crime, justice and social implications, my uncle, Fred Kummer, wrote, 'Society must set a standard in cases of such monumental crimes that recognizes mere passage of time does not reduce the need for justice continuing to be served.' The justice system has, as its primary responsibility, the preservation of civil order by fear and reasonable methods. With certain crimes, there is no equivocation and no reason for sending a contradictory message to the general public and to other people contemplating crimes. In being spared the death sentence, all those convicted in these crimes have already received mercy. Society has a right and an obligation to require punishment appropriate to the crime. If the justice system rewards any convicted mass murderer and insurrectionist with time off for good behavior, it does so at civilization's peril.'" End of quote. "It is imperative to recognize Charles Watson -- that Charles Watson's crimes and the Manson legacies become a poisonous social cancer with disruptive and fatal consequences even today. I sadly call to your attention a Pennsylvania teenager, Jason Sweeney, who was murdered by four teenagers, ages ranging from 15 to 17. During the trial, the killers admitted to listening to helter skelter for several hours, over and over, before murdering the 16-year old with a hammer, brick and hatchet. To these young minds, the Manson murders were an inspiration. What message is sent to these impressionable minds if Mr. Watson is paroled for his crimes, most callous and inhumane? Of important note last year, three of Jason Sweeney's murderers, ages 17 to 18, were sentenced to life without parole. Our hearts and prayers go out to Jason and the Sweeney family. So I don't understand how my uncle's murder and mass murderer of such heinous magnitude could possibly lead to a parole hearing. I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of a man whose profound source of love cried for all of his family. I'm proud of his talents and many accomplishments. But most of all, I'm proud of who Jason really was, his character, what he stood for. The last thing he did was to attempt to defend himself from those stood to him at gunpoint. In the face of death, he stood up against an unacceptable evil and fought for what is right and precious. He was a beautiful and extraordinary individual whose loss is immeasurable. I would like to thank Patrick Sequeira for his hard work here and for providing us a legal voice. I must mention also our heartfelt gratitude to Steven Kaye, who for nearly 40 years, fought tirelessly and selflessly for justice in the memory of our loved ones. He has been a true champion of justice. Respectfully, I beg the Board to consider parole for Charles Watson only when his victims can be paroled from their graves. So I ask you that you please deny Mr. Watson parole for no less than four years."

I might also mention that at the time I spoke to Mr. DiMaria, he thought that the maximum denial period was four years, so he asked that that sentence actually be changed to deny parole for no less than five years. Lastly, he says:

"I must thank you members of the Board for your service and consideration. Sincerely, Anthony DiMaria."

And it's also signed Margaret DiMaria, sister of Jay Sebring. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you, Mr. Sequeira. We appreciate your comments. We will now recess for deliberations. The time is now (indiscernible).




PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: And the time is 1625. We have reconvened in the matter of Charles Watson, C.D.C. number B, boy, 37999. And all parties who were previously present have returned to the room. The panel reviewed all information received from the public and relied on the following circumstances in concluding that the prisoner is not suitable for parole and would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society or a threat to public safety if released from prison. This offense was the offense was carried out in an especially cruel and callous manner. Multiple victims were attacked, injured and killed in separate instances. The offense was carried out in a dispassionate and calculated manner. And this panel submits that these were execution-style murders. The inmate and his crime partners drove around Los Angeles over four hours seeking targets. These victims were abused and mutilated during the offenses. These offenses were carried out in a manner demonstrating exceptionally callous disregard for human suffering in that Counts 1 through 5 refer to the murders that occurred on August of 1969 at the Polanski residence, 10050 Cielo Drive, Los Angeles. Specifically as to Count 1, the victim, Abigail Ann Folger, died from multiple stab wounds to the body. The victim in Count 2, that's W-O-J-I-C-I-E-C-K Frykowski, F-R-Y-K-O-W-S­K-I, died from gunshot wounds to the left back and multiple blunt force trauma to the head. He also suffered stab wounds. The victim in Count 3, Steven Earl Parent, P-A-R-E-N-T, died from multiple gunshot wounds. The victim in Count 4, Sharon Marie Polanski, P-O-L-A-N-S-K-I, died from multiple stab wounds to the body. The victim in Count 5, Jay Sebring, S-E-B-R-I­N-G, died from multiple wounds. Counts 6 and 7 referred to murders which occurred on August 10th of 1969 at the LaBianca residence, 3301 Waverly Drive, Los Angeles, California. The victim in Count 6, Leno A. LaBianca, that's L-A capital B-I-A-N-C-A, died from multiple stab wounds to the neck and abdomen. The victim in Count 7, Rosemary LaBianca, died from multiple stab wounds to the neck and trunk. Count 8, conspiracy to commit murder, refers to Watson and his co-defendants conspiring to kill the victims in the first seven counts. As to priors, first of all, this inmate appears to have a normal -- have had a normal, positive childhood and upbringing. And, in fact, he has a minimal arrest history and no prior convictions either as a juvenile and as an adult. The instance offense represents his only convictions. This inmate started after he moved to California, a period of started, by his own account, with marijuana and progressed to LSD and other hallucinogenics, and escalated to methamphetamine use. As to this inmate's institutional behavior, he has up to the present been working -- from 1996 to the present, he's been working as a porter in janitorial, and in 2006, as was read into the record, he received a satisfactory work report. This inmate has a high school diploma. He came to the prison system with a high school diploma. He has taken courses at Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo. He has not upgraded his education in many years. As to this inmate's vocations, he has two vocational certifications, one achieved in 1990 in office machine repair, and one in 1992 in data processing and programming. He has not upgraded vocationally since that time. As to self-help and therapy, when first admitted into the C.D.C.R. system, inmate Watson partook of many courses such as A.A., N.A. He also had one-on-one therapy, as well as group counseling. In recent years, specifically since approximately 2001, this inmate has taken a number of classes in groups, but they have been -- and they have been largely Christian based self-help programming, including the Christian 12 Step programming which he began in 2001 and continues to the present. As to misconduct in prison, this inmate has a good record of only one 115 or serious disciplinary back in June 8 of 1973 for contraband food. So this inmate has displayed positive behavior as regards disciplinaries in prison. As to the psychological report, the most recent report available to this panel, dated May 3rd, 2001 by Dr. Ronald Roston, R-O-S-T-O-N, psychologist. Dr. Ronald Roston's report is generally favorable to parole for Mr. Watson. However, the report itself has brought serious conflict to this panel. And, first of all, a reference in the report, page eight, starting at the first full paragraph, and I quote:

"From Mr. Watson's perspective, the offense was the outgrowth of his unfortunate association with Charles Manson, whom he describes as a cult leader. His presentation discusses his life crime in terminology most frequently used by fundamentalist Christians. There are frequent references to such notions as the devil and sorcery and, quotes, evil and supernatural powers over people, end quotes. Though Mr. Watson takes several times in these notes full responsibility for the 'deaths, agony and grief I have caused, no excuse, no blame, no minimizing, no denial of guilt. It was my selfishness, rebellion, angry and total disregard for life,' end quotes. At the same time, he also, referring to strong leaders, suggests the charismatic leader slowly charms with lies and twisted demonic philosophy, filling the need of the follower, until there is a deadly hold, end quotes. To read the document, one gets the impression that Mr. Watson believes the devil, through Charles Manson, forced him to commit the crimes.' And now I'm going to quote from the third full paragraph on this same page eight, beginning halfway in the paragraph.

"In this psychologist's opinion, Mr. Watson's religiosity is external. And the basic principles of religion are not as well generalized in behavior."

And then the last sentence in the paragraph.

"Thus Mr. Watson seems to invoke the devil to account for his criminal behavior while he takes full responsibility at the same time. He sees and feels no conflict in these positions." And I will say that the panel does see conflict in these positions.

And then continuing, the psychologist says:

"This psychologist regards Mr. Watson as a man without psychiatric or mental disease or disorder. His drug use appears to be in sustainable remission and no longer an issue. His adult anti-social behavior, which was too grossly obvious over two days, is also in full remission and no longer likely to reappear. Thus he appears to have resolved many of the behaviors and attitudes that initially qualified him for anti-social personality disorder diagnosis."

And then I go to page 10 and quote:

"Mr. Watson's level of remorse -- this is the second full paragraph -- Mr. Watson's level of remorse and empathy is very deep. His insight into his life crimes are couched in terms he understands best as very devout fundamentalist Christian. His jotted words, quotes, 'I was declared a pardon by the court of heaven,' end quotes, might explain how his managed to recover preserved his mental health following his crimes. It also illustrates the concept of his thinking."

Now moving away from the doctor's report and his clinical observations, this panel feels that there is some question that, in fact, substituting one dogma for another is, in fact, representative of this inmate's adjustment or possible success in society in the future. This panel also would like to put on record this same clinician's report of Mr. Watson's marital history in 2001 at the time of this report, May 3rd, 2001. As to marital history, Mr. Watson told the clinician he married Kristen Svege, S-V-E-G-E, in 1979.

"He states they continue to be a happily married couple and have four children, all of whom are growing up without major difficulties. Son, Joshua, is 19 yes old and a college junior. He is currently looking for a college to attend in California. Benjamin is a 17-year old junior in high school. His father says he is doing, quotes, very well, end quotes. Mary is 12 years old and going into the seventh grade. He states she is, quotes, doing good, end quotes. Andrew, six years old in June, will be attending kindergarten. Mr. Watson stated concern about providing much information about his children and wife. He is aware of being well known, if not a notorious person, and does not want to provide any information that might lead to their being intruded upon. His reluctance was respected and no further inquiries were made."

And I would like to have input from Commissioner Cater as to what occurred in terms of the last hearing in this regard.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CATER: I did find it noteworthy that reference to his wife, Kristen, that we heard so much about in 2001 is absent today. That was my memory. And then when I went to page 48 of the transcript, it spoke to her, Kristen, his wife at that time. And I don't mean to say she's not his wife, but it spoke to Kristen being devoted -- that was the term used -- to him, and that's unexplained today. So I found that to be a curious omission.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: Thank you. As to parole plans, this panel finds inmate Watson's parole plans inadequate. He has provided this panel, knowing that we have only the authority to order him paroled within the State of California, he has provided this panel minimal plans in the State of California. In fact, they are comprised of this letter that we did receive as of August 2nd from the Training Center, which has already been read into the record. The pastor of the Training Center offers to accept Mr. Watson into their program, which is a crisis center, drug and alcohol treatment center, offering -­handling all areas of men's lives from drugs and alcohol, anger management, co-occurring disorder, job placement, and sober living. They are a state-licensed facility in Spring Valley, which is the of the documented parole plans presented by Mr. Watson, and basically since his last hearing, now five years ago. As to his marketable skills, this panel finds that he has unrealistic marketable skills. Skills of the type -- especially the type that he is claiming are certainly perishable. And they have not been updated for some time. Specifically the office machine repair certification he received in 1990, which was 16 years ago, and the data processing and programming certification he received in 1992, which is 14 years ago. And basically the technology has taken off since then and it would be imperative that he upgrade those skills in a major way to be able to claim to be marketable in the skills. As to Penal Code 3042 responses, the responses indicate opposition to a finding of parole suitability, specifically by the District Attorney of Los Angeles County and Los Angeles Police Department. In a separate decision, the hearing panel finds it is not reasonable to expect that parole would be granted at a hearing during the following five years. Specific reasons for this finding are as follows: This offense was the offense was carried out in an especially cruel and callous manner. Multiple victims were attacked, injured and killed in separate incidents. This offense was carried out in a dispassionate and calculated manner. And this panel represents that, in fact, these were execution-style murders. This inmate and his crime partners drove around Los Angeles for over four hours seeking targets. These victims were abused, mutilated during these offenses. And these offenses were carried out in a manner demonstrating exceptionally callous disregard for human suffering, for public safety. And, in fact, this inmate and his crime partners had clear opportunities to cease, but this inmate continued. Moreover, the motive for this crime was, this panel represents, deliberate acts of domestic terrorism. This panel's decision is based on the extreme gravity of these offenses, and the larger and still relevant factors of these deliberate acts of domestic terrorism, as well as deficient parole plans. In denying this inmate parole for five years, we're placing the prisoner on the 2011 calendar for his next subsequent hearing. The Board recommends that this inmate get self-help, that he stay disciplinary free, that he upgrade his vocational skills, that he get therapy as available. And this panel is ordering a new psychological evaluation per BPT Form 1000(a), which we're attaching for the staff at CDCR. Do you have anything further, Commissioner Cater?

RESIDING COMMISSIONER BRYSON: That concludes this hearing. The time is now 1642.

Please note:  I received this in it's current format - I have not personnally seen an original....I cannot attest for it's validity.....I did however, highlight a comment (above) I found interesting!