Leslie Van Houten up for parole again

[Madeleine74]

Depending on the value you place on life, one murder is enough. Look at Jodi Arias. She was only one juror away from the Death Penalty.

Well, you asked what the difference was between the various Manson family killers and why LVH was considered to be eligible for parole, and that is one of the differences I could determine.

 

[sonjay]

Depending on the value you place on life, one murder is enough. Look at Jodi Arias. She was only one juror away from the Death Penalty.

Van Houten didn't participate in the Tate murders because she wasn't selected by Manson to be part of that group that night.

The night of the LaBianca murders, she asked to go.

That speaks volumes to me.

 

[KaaBoom]

In some cases the perp isn't arrested until they are elderly- justice denied as with the Nazi guards and with the ex-priest killer of Irene Garza. Should they get to escape prosecution just because they've gotten to live their lives and are now only being prosecuted when they are elderly( because of the housing costs)??? I think NOT!!!

Prosecution of anyone 50 years after their crime is a waste of time, even if they are a Nazi war criminal. They got away with a crime for 50 years, then you are going to put them in prison when they are too old to care. The statute of limitations shouldn’t even allow that to happen. They have already gotten away with it.

Now if the person commits the crime when they are at an old age, then they should probably be kept in prison until they die. They have demonstrated that they are still a clear present danger to society, despite their age. But thats a big difference from someone who commits a crime when they were a teenager. A person’s likelihood to commit a crime peeks at about age 18, then drops every year until it gets to close to zero around age 60. So there is really no reason to keep senior citizens locked up for crimes they committed as teenagers.

 

[sonjay]

In this report from the California Dept. of Corrections:
http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Resear...s/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf

On page 30, it says that inmates released at ages 60 and above have a 3-year return-to-prison rate of 38%. That's significantly lower than the r-t-p rate of 68% for offenders released at ages 18-19 -- but it's still unacceptably high, IMO.

Also, it's significantly higher than zero.

 

[PastTense]

In this report from the California Dept. of Corrections:

On page 30, it says that inmates released at ages 60 and above have a 3-year return-to-prison rate of 38%. That's significantly lower than the r-t-p rate of 68% for offenders released at ages 18-19 -- but it's still unacceptably high, IMO.

Also, it's significantly higher than zero.

But most of these people being released after the age of 60 were probably committing crimes in their 50s: what we need is a table combining both age and length of sentence.

 

[sonjay]

But most of these people being released after the age of 60 were probably committing crimes in their 50s: what we need is a table combining both age and length of sentence.

Where did you get that? I didn't see it in the report.

 

[simba16]

Crime victims should be entitled to justice! & the jury verdict should mean something, like set to stone or close to it! Death should be death, a life sentence should be that. So what if the murder was 50 years ago the victim is still dead! And the family is still suffering 50 years later, so should the convicted. Build more prisons! We are going to need them.

 

[teeandcee]

It might save the tax payers some money if she was released, but we'd still be supporting her. She'd be on government assistance for everything; food, housing, healthcare. I'd rather my tax dollars go towards keeping her in prison. IMO, it really doesn't matter whether or not she (or any criminal) is a danger to society. I don't see prison as some social rehabilitation project but simply punishment for wrongdoing. She did the crime so she should do the time. There is a very simple way to stay out of prison; don't break the law. Millions of us somehow manage to do this our whole lives, and a lot of us weren't raised in perfect homes.

If we need more prisons use all those available bodies already in prison to build more. I know I'm dreaming.

 

[simba16]

What I'm trying to say is that ALL of society needs to trust the judicial system. We need to believe that justice will be done. It can't be a wishy washy system of "well, that murderer is pretty old and she probably wouldn't hurt a fly...so even though original jury sentenced her to death, let's let her out"

 

[Madeleine74]

The cost will be borne by the Californians. I paid my fair share as I lived there for a couple decades.

 

[LinasK]

The cost will be borne by the Californians. I paid my fair share as I lived there for a couple decades.

Native Californian here. I'll happily give my tax dollars to keep her in prison and build new ones!

 

[charminglane]

I don't want her coming back to Monrovia if let out!

 

[PastTense]

What I'm trying to say is that ALL of society needs to trust the judicial system. We need to believe that justice will be done. It can't be a wishy washy system of "well, that murderer is pretty old and she probably wouldn't hurt a fly...so even though original jury sentenced her to death, let's let her out"

This doesn't happen with the vast majority of sentences:

Guy sentenced to 20 years for rape: he will probably be out in 7 years or less.

 

[Montjoy]

This doesn't happen with the vast majority of sentences:

Guy sentenced to 20 years for rape: he will probably be out in 7 years or less.

Yes, not to mention countless domestic assault cases, in which the recidivism rate is probably closer to 70% -- certainly far, far higher than LVH.

 

[ladygator]

It might save the tax payers some money if she was released, but we'd still be supporting her. She'd be on government assistance for everything; food, housing, healthcare. I'd rather my tax dollars go towards keeping her in prison. IMO, it really doesn't matter whether or not she (or any criminal) is a danger to society. I don't see prison as some social rehabilitation project but simply punishment for wrongdoing. She did the crime so she should do the time. There is a very simple way to stay out of prison; don't break the law. Millions of us somehow manage to do this our whole lives, and a lot of us weren't raised in perfect homes.

If we need more prisons use all those available bodies already in prison to build more. I know I'm dreaming.

Exactly! Tax payers foot the bill no matter where she is. She's drained the system her whole life and won't be putting anything back in to it if she is released.

The only reason she has been able to apply for parole all these times is because of the death penalty being declared unconstitutional shortly after those sentences were handed out. She should still be on death row, as far as I'm concerned. She lucked out!!

 

[Madeleine74]

Exactly! Tax payers foot the bill no matter where she is.

That's actually not true. Parolees have to pay certain costs associated with their release.

But no matter that. She's not going to be released.

 

[Montjoy]

That's actually not true. Parolees have to pay certain costs associated with their release.

But no matter that. She's not going to be released.

Not to mention that the cost of an inmate is incredibly far higher than any welfare outside prison walls.

 

[KaaBoom]

Not to mention that the cost of an inmate is incredibly far higher than any welfare outside prison walls.

Outside prison, she would get at most $10,000 a year from SSI, food stamps and whatever else. Keeping her in prison will cost tax payers well over $50,000 a year. But she will probably stay in prison. Because Americans love to spend money on prisons. Same reason they won’t spend $15,000 a year to pay for a college student’s education, but if the student messes up, tax payers will be happy to spend $50,000 a year to incarcerate him.

California’s Annual Costs to Incarcerate an Inmate in Prison

 

[LinasK]

Who says we won't spend money on college? I'm all for education, especially higher education. I'm Liberal until it comes to crime. That's why I'll pay higher taxes to build new prisons.

 

[Montjoy]

Who says we won't spend money on college?

History does.

"There’s a direct relationship between how much money the Golden State spends on prisons and how much it spends on higher education, according to a report put out by the non-partisan public policy group California Common Sense. When one goes up, the other goes down. And, at least in California, the former has been going up a lot more than the latter."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/06/california-prisons-colleges_n_1863101.html