Introduction
Charles Manson, born 12 November 1934, was a notorious criminal and cult leader. He was the leader of the Manson Family, and intending to start Helter Skelter, a race war between the blacks and the whites. This case is significant to the study of law because although Charles Manson did not kill anyone himself, he was charged with 7 counts of first-degree murder. It was also one of the longest and most costly cases in Californian history.
Summary
July 1969 – Gary Hinman is killed by Manson family member Bobby Beausoleil, Mary Brunner, and Susan Atkins. August 8-9 – A small group of the Manson family, Tex Watson, Susan Atkins, and Patricia Krenwinkel with Linda Kasabian as lookout, murder 5 people at the Benedict Canyon home of director Roman Polanski. Victims are actress Sharon Tate, writer Wojciech Frykowski, coffee heiress Abigail Folger, and celebrity hairstylist Jay Sebring, as well as Steve Parent who was a friend of the family gardener. August 9-10, 1969 – A displeased Manson accompanies a group of followers, Watson, Atkins, Krenwinkel, Kasabian, Leslie van Houten, and Steve “Clem” Grogan, on a search for more victims. These victims are supermarket executive leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary. November 6, 1969 – Susan Atkins (already charged in the murder of Gary Hinman) confesses to an inmate of her murder of Sharon Tate. November 18, 1969 – LAPD interview inmate Ronnie Howard about her cellmate, Susan Atkins, about her conversation about the confession. November 30, 1969 – Watson is arrested in Texas and his lawyers fights extradition to California for nine months. December 8, 1969 – Manson, Watson, Atkins, Van Houten, Krenwinkel, and Kasabian are indicted for the murders of Sharon Tate and co. June 16, 1970 – Trials for Manson, Atkins, Krenwinkel, and Van Houten start. Manson appears in court with an “X” carved into his forehead, defending himself in court with the help of attorney Irving Kanarek. August 1970 – Kasabian is given immunity for her testimony against Manson and co. (CNN Library 2018)
Facts or Prosecution Arguments
Vincent Bugliosi was the lead prosecutor in the Manson case. All of the following are from his prosecution transcript. He claimed Charles Manson was the ringleader and although he did not commit any of the murders himself the joint responsibility rule of conspiracy makes him guilty of all seven murders. Additionally, Mr. Spahn, the owner of the ranch the Manson Family lived on, claimed that the females did most of the work, cooking and cleaning and helping with office work, while the men took care of the trucks. However, Charles Manson did 0 work on the farm. She also said that the original group grew to between twenty and thirty. Shahrokh Hatami, who was a close and personal friend of Sharon Tate and Roman Polanski, testified that he was at Sharon’s residence in late March 1969 when Sharon, Abigail Folger, Voytyek Frykwoski, and Jay Sebring were present. He was in the living room of the Tate residence, looking out the window, when he says he saw Charles Manson walking towards the Cielo Drive residence. Manson said he was looking for Terry Melcher, a previous resident of the building who was supposed to sign a recording contract with Manson. Bugosli asked if Hatami was angry because this man had walked upon the Tate premises, and he responded, “Yes, because he was entering on property of a friend of mine, which I was concerned about because Roman isn’t there and Sharon is there” (Bugliosi 1971). He spoke to Manson, saying
He was coming in; I went toward him. He stopped and I asked him who is he looking for. He mentioned the name, and then I angrily, of course, I wasn’t happy that he was coming to that property, and looking at the people he doesn’t know, so I angrily pointed out, ‘This is not the place. The people you want is back there and you have to take the back alley.’ (Bugliosi 1971)
Hatami testified that near the end of this conversation with Manson, Sharon Tate came out the front door and asked who Manson was. Hatami told Sharon that Manson was looking for someone and that he, Hatami, told Manson to go to the back alley. Hatami testified that Sharon could see Manson and Manson could see Sharon. He says that the overall motive for these murders, and Helter Skelter, was that as long as the victims were white and members of the establishment, it did not matter so much who they were. In August of 1969, Manson sent out members of the family on the mission of murder, he realized that it would make immense sense to select a residence that he was familiar with, particularly one where he was treated poorly and the former occupant Terry Melcher rejected him.
Linda Kasabian, a member of the Manson family, came to the farm later on than the original girls. Kasabian testified saying that Manson told her of Helter Skelter and the revolution between the blacks and the whites, and all nonblacks, including brown people, that would be killed by the black people, specifically men. (Bugliosi 1971) Linda testified that Helter Skelter was a commonly-used, daily word in the Family. Helter Skelter was even painted on a jug in the parachute room. As well, Linda testified that all of the girls worshipped Manson and thought of him as Jesus Christ, that no one questioned him as everything he was doing was pure and right. (Bugliosi 1971). Most importantly, Linda testified that a few hours before the Tate murders, Manson said “Now is the time for Helter Skelter”. (Bugliosi 1971). Bugliosi then goes on to read the transcript from the Linda Kasabian trials, particularly about what happened the night of the murders and Kasabian’s involvement. Some key points are that Manson instructed Linda to get a “change of clothing, a knife, and my driver’s license” (Bugliosi 1971). Bugliosi says that, without question, Manson was sending Tex, Sadie, Katie, and Linda out on his “mission of murder” (Bugliosi 1971). They were all wearing dark clothing and dark Levi’s. Linda testified that when they drove off from Spahn Ranch, she did not know where they were headed, but Tex said he had been to the place before. Linda also testified saying she did not know what they were being sent to do.
As seen on Bugliosi’s testimony, there is more than enough evidence to convict Manson of conspiracy to murder. Linda gives a detailed, gruesome testimony, and Bugliosi does an excellent job at picking apart and analyzing key pieces of evidence.
Defence Presented
LAPD proposed granting Susan Atkins prosecutorial immunity in return for a testimony that could convict Charles Manson. However, the lead prosecutor, Vincent Buglioso, objected, stating “We don’t give that gal anything!”. (Legal n.d) The prosecution offered not to give her the death penalty but Atkins refused after testifying before the Grand Jury, and was sentenced to death in 1970 and convicted of 1st-degree murder. Van Houten’s first degree murder conviction was overturned when he appealed it, as Judge Older failed mistakenly failed to grant Van Houten’s motion for a mistrial following the disappearance of her attorney, Ronald Hughes. In her re-trial the jury was not able to reach a verdict. In 1978, her third trial, she was convicted of 1st-degree murder after the court after the jury rejected her defense of diminished capacity from use of halogenic drugs such as LSD. Patricia Krenwinkel’s attorney provided a weak defence. Krenwinkel’s fingerprints were found inside of the Tate’s home, so her argument would have been found weak regardless. Charles “Tex” Watson fought extradition to California long enough that he was actually tried separately from the others in the Manson family accused in the murder trails. His attorneys contacted 8 separate psychiatrists to try to prove that Watson suffered from severely diminished capacity or was insane. Additionally, Watson was trying to portray himself as Manson’s unthinking slave when he was on the stand. The major turning points in the trial were when members of the family Paul Watkins testified, and when Susan Watkins, in immense detail, described the crimes she committed. Charles Manson himself was convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentences to death. (Legal n.d) The defence presented were very weak. Most of the people involved in the murders had fingerprints found at the scene, and everyone was revealed when Linda Kasabian testified. However, this does not mean that the defence can merely give up, even going as far as not showing up (see van Houten’s attorney, Ronald Hughes). Additionally, the plea of insanity because of LSD use is not a viable argument and actually makes them less credible, as they are using an illegal substance.
Evidence Summary
LAPD and LASO were both placed in charge of this case, which complicated (and compromised) the findings of the case as there were much differences of opinion. LAPD inspector K.J. McCauley didn’t believe that the word “Pig” on Tate’s door was linked to the writing of “Death to Pigs” at the LaBianca scene (Figure 2). Evidence collection was influenced by the brutality and senselessness of the crimes and what happened to the victims. As a result of this there was some breakdown in the usual evidence collection procedure. When discovering the bodies, officers took bedsheets from the closet and covered the bodies (Figure 1). Some bodies stayed there for over week. When the bodies were taken to the morgue, the officers did not take the sheets with them. Officer DeRosa was in charge of securing the scene of the crime until the investigating officers arrived, but removed a fingerprint on top of the electric gate switch, effectively contaminating any evidence that could have been potentially found on the blood splatter. The .22 caliber gun was collected 2 weeks after being found by a small child, and the police did not dust the gun for fingerprints (Figure 3). The gun grip for the gun was found under a chair at the scene of the Tate murder. LAPD report shows that an officer kicked it underneath the chair, lengthening the amount of time it took to connect the two pieces of evidence. At the Tate scene, a white nylon rope was collected as evidence (Figure 4). The rope, initially, was tied to the victims of the Cielo Drive murders, Sebring and Polanski. After observing the evidence, the forensic scientists on the case found that the fibres of the rope matched the fibres of a rope used at the ranch where the Family lived and worked. The LAPD issued an arrest warrant for Kasabian, Krenwinkel, and Watson, for their involvement in the Tate-LaBianca murders. Atkins and Manson were already in custody from previous arrests unrelated to the murders, so there were no warrants necessary. Kasabian voluntarily yielded when she found out about the warrant out for her arrest.
Judge and/or Jury Decision and Sentence
Atkins was charged with seven counts of first-degree murder and given a death sentence that was changed to a life sentence when the death penalty was abolished. She died in prison in 2009. Van Houten was charged with seven counts of first-degree murder and given life in prison. She was recently denied parole for the 19th time. Patricia Krenwinkel was charged with 7 counts of first-degree murder and was given life in prison. She was denied parole for the 14th time in June of 2017, and will be eligible for consideration again in 4 years. Charles “Tex” Watson was convicted of seven counts of first degree murder and was given life imprisonment. He has been denied parole 17 times. Bruce Davis was convicted for two counts of first degree murder and is serving two life sentences. He was recommended for parole, but was denied in June 2017. Bobby Beausoleil was charged with one count of first degree murder, and was given life in prison. He is currently serving his life sentence at Vacaville, California, a medical facility. Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme was convicted in 1975 of pointing a gun at President Gerald Ford. She was given life in prison, and was released on parole in 2009 after serving 34 years. Steven “Clem” Grogan was released on parole after revealing the location of the body of Donald Shea, who was murdered in 1969 (Park 2017).
Theory
Charles Manson greatly relates to the criminal legal theory of socialization. Socialization “suggests the key influences leading to criminal behaviour are found in upbringing, peer groups, and role models” (Wozniak 2018). Charles Manson was born in Cincinnati General Hospital to Kathleen Maddox, just 15. Maddox spent her time “looking for fun in seedy Cincinnati bars” (Heffron 2013). Manson states she was a prostitute and an alcoholic. Additionally, when Manson was just 5 years old, Kathleen and her brother were arrested for armed robbery. Kathleen served 5 years. During those 5 years, Manson was sent to his aunt and uncle, who were just as bad as Kathleen. As well as being arrested for armed robbery, Kathleen was also arrested for grand larceny, although she was not convicted. Charles spent his childhood burglarizing stores and committing petty crimes, such as stealing a gun from his family. In his later teens, he moved onto bigger crimes, such as homosexual rape, pimping out young girls, and attempting to cash a forged United States Treasury cheque, as well as grand theft auto. It is safe to say that, surrounded by crime, Manson believed this was the only way to make a profit, and the only thing him and his family were good at. (Heffron 2013)
As well as Manson’s upbringing, the theory of socialization can also be used on the Manson Family. The reason they were so far into this cut was because that they believed Charles Manson was Jesus Christ, their deep faith in Scientology, and the fact that Manson was becoming established as a musician. Charles Manson said his name was Charles Willis Manson, which, if slowed down, says “Charles’ Will is Man’s Son”. A member of the Family, Patricia Krenwinkel, also said that a main attraction was the drugs and the sex. This explains why these people trusted Manson: he was a credible figure in their hippy eyes.