Sunday, September 17, 2017
I'll never understand law or lawyers.
The DA and Judge both agreed/determined that "Van Houten cannot obtain evidence after her conviction, because she does not face a sentence of death or life without parole".
If that's "the law", then that's the law.
But what confuses me, is this:
Richard Pfeiffer is a lawyer.
It's safe to assume, that Pfeiffer knows the law (just like the DA and Judge).
Why would Pfeiffer even bother trying to get the tapes released, when he knows darn well, what the law states? He certainly must know, that Leslie is not entitled to the tapes (because she does not face a sentence of life or life without parole).
Restated another way:
If the law clearly states, "Van Houten cannot obtain evidence after her conviction because she does not face a sentence of death or life without parole", then WHY THE HELL did Pfeiffer even bother petitioning for the tapes (in the first place)???
Are lawyers like Pfeieffer just trying to "slip one by" the DA and Judge?
Was Pfeiffer just hoping that the DA and Judge wouldn't know, or look-up the applicable laws???
Dilligaf described Pfeiffer's petition (for the Tex Tapes), as a "Hail Mary".
Jeez. I guess so...
It seems to me, if "the Law" was against Pfeiffer from the very start (and he knew it), then it was more of a "complete waste of everyone's time", than a "Hail Mary". LOL
Am I missing something?
In retrospect, the whole thing seems like a stupid exercise in futility to me.
Friday, September 1, 2017
Follower: Manson threatened grisly death if she left cult
LOS ANGELES — A woman once under the spell of Charles Manson testified Thursday that the violent and manipulative cult leader threatened to have her die a painful death if she left the ranch where they lived.
Catherine Share told a Los Angeles Superior Court judge that Manson once severely beat her and got a male cult member to vow that if she ever fled the man would hunt her down and drag her back behind a car.
The unusual testimony nearly 50 years after Manson’s followers terrorized Los Angeles during two nights of bloody rampages that killed seven people, including pregnant actress Sharon Tate, was to support a parole bid by fellow “family” member Leslie Van Houten.
Van Houten’s lawyer wants to show a state parole board that his client was under the sway of the twisted leader and more likely to make bad choices at the age of 19.
Share acknowledged in her testimony that she didn’t know for a fact that Van Houten had been prohibited from leaving the cult, or hadn’t actually left at some point. She also acknowledged that others had left the Manson clan without being harmed.
A recent change in California law enables those who committed crimes when they were younger than 23 to seek a hearing on the role their youth may have played. The issues can later be introduced at a parole hearing to evaluate whether a prisoner is fit for release.
“Everyone is confused about how could someone who grew up like she did end up there,” attorney Rich Pfeiffer said.
Van Houten, 68, and serving up to a life sentence for the deaths, did not attend the hearing in part because she recently broke her knee cap, Pfeiffer said.
Van Houten was 19 when she and fellow cult members stabbed Leno and Rosemary LaBianca to death in 1969. The killings took place a day after other so-called Manson family members murdered Tate, the wife of director Roman Polanski, and four others in crimes that shocked the world.
Share was not involved in the killings, but served prison time later for armed robberies. Police said she also was involved in a plot to break Manson and other family members out of prison, though Share denied that. She said the plan was to help a boyfriend’s brother get out of jail.
Last year, a parole panel recommended Van Houten be released after she had completed college degrees and been commended for her behavior as a model prisoner. But Gov. Jerry Brown denied her parole, saying she failed to explain how she transformed from an upstanding teen to a killer.
Pfeiffer asked Judge William Ryan to compel prosecutors to turn over decades-old recordings of a conversation between former cult member Charles “Tex” Watson and his attorney in the hopes they may benefit Van Houten and help secure her release.
Prosecutors, who have vigorously fought Van Houten’s release, objected to giving up the tapes. The judge began reading some 300 pages of transcripts of the recordings to see if there was information relevant to Van Houten’s case.
Ryan said there were at least eight references to Van Houten in the 85 pages he had a chance to read before the hearing.
Authorities had once asserted the tapes included evidence of other killings and their release could jeopardize those investigations, Pfeiffer said. But Ryan said a detective acknowledged during a meeting in his chambers that there are no active investigations related to them at this time.
Van Houten was the youngest Manson follower to take part in the killings after joining the cult in the 1960s.
During her parole hearing last year, she said the murders were the start of what Manson believed was a coming race war that he dubbed “Helter Skelter,” after a Beatles song, and that he had the group prepare to fight and learn to can food so they could go underground and live in a hole in the desert.
Van Houten’s parole hearing is scheduled Wednesday. She was convicted in 1978 of two counts of murder and conspiracy after an earlier conviction was overturned on appeal.
Manson, 82, and other followers involved in the killings are still jailed. Watson and Patricia Krenwinkel have each been denied parole multiple times, while fellow defendant Susan Atkins died in prison in 2009.
Family member Bruce Davis also was recommended for parole, but Brown blocked his release.
She does not think Van Houten or any of the Manson cult should ever go free.
“It was particularly vicious,” Tate said outside court. “This was an act of domestic terrorism, in my opinion. And there was group collusion with a much larger agenda and for that reason I don’t think any of these people should be paroled.”
Saturday, August 19, 2017
Judge to Rule on Tex Tapes
Ohta heard arguments from Pfeiffer and Deputy District Attorney Donna Lebowitz at a motion hearing today at the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center. The motion hearing was a prelude to the Franklin hearing originally slotted for next week but delayed until the 31st to allow more time for discovery briefs to be filed.
Attorneys for Van Houten have sought the Tex tapes for nearly four years and argue that tapes contain information relevant to the Franklin hearing.
Some former Manson family members are also expected to testify at the hearing.
In January, Van Houten filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to People v. Franklin, contending she was entitled an opportunity to create a record of mitigating evidence in support of youth offender parole. After a series of briefs from Pfeiffer and Lebowitz, Ohta ruled in Van Houten’s favor, granting her the hearing.
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
"Tex" Watson insists that he has already told the truth... and furthermore, that he has already revealed everything he knows (within the pages of his book). He says, the recently-released "TEX TAPES" will prove it!
Tex also states that many websites refuse to accept the truth... are still living in the 60's... forming conspiracy theories... creating falsehoods... and raising-up fanatical groups.
Sounds like Tex is referring to the blog world... no?
Excerpted from Tex's Abounding Love Website (Dated July 2013):
"Others are angry at me because to them, I must know more about the murderers in the 60’s. Instead of resting in the truth and living in the present, they choose to live in the 60’s. So much so, they form conceptual views and beliefs, then become fanatical, raising up groups, forming conspiracy theories and creating falsehoods through websites, Facebook pages and tweets.
Life is too precious to waste on views that are not sound. When you read my book Will You Die For Me?, you’ll see how irresponsible I was with my views of life. If you read the book carefully, you’ll see that I’ve shared absolute truth and all the facts I know [as confirmed by THE TAPES released from the bankruptcy court]. In the 60’s, I made one bad choice after another. My friends tried to tell me that I needed help, but I was too prideful to listen."
Found Here... Halfway down the page:
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Judge: Manson Disciple Can't Keep Tapes From LAPD
DALLAS March 26, 2013 (AP)
A federal judge in Texas says the Los Angeles Police Department should be able to obtain the decades-old taped conversations between a Manson family disciple and his attorney. Judge Richard A. Schell ruled Sunday that Charles "Tex" Watson waived his right to attorney-client privilege when he allowed the lawyer to sell the tapes to an author. A bankruptcy court ruled last year that the LAPD should get the tapes, but Watson appealed. The LAPD has sought the tapes on the basis that they could provide clues to unsolved murders. A message left for an LAPD spokesman was not immediately returned Tuesday.