Politics | 06/19/2008 11:45 am

Manson Murderess Begs for Mercy

By The Staff at wowOwow.com

Susan Atkins in 1969 © AP

In August 1969 she slit the throat of a pregnant woman begging for mercy. Today, she’s hoping she has better luck when asking for the same from the government.

A former member of the Manson family, Susan Atkins, 60, has requested a "compassionate release" from prison on the grounds that she is terminally ill and has less than six months to live, Department of Corrections spokeswoman Terry Thornton told wowOwow.

The Golden State’s longest-serving female inmate, Atkins was convicted in 1969 for the murders of actress Sharon Tate (who was eight months pregnant) and four others. Perhaps the most gripping detail from the case file was that, before leaving the crime scene, Atkins wrote "PIG" in blood on Tate’s front door.

Atkins received the death sentence, which later was commuted to life in prison at the California Institution for Women in Corona, CA, where she remained until she was hospitalized in March. She’s listed in serious condition and, while Thornton declined to comment on her illness, it’s been reported that she has been diagnosed with terminal brain cancer.

According to Thornton, the prison did an evaluation of Atkins’s release request and found that she met the two necessary criteria — she is terminally ill with an incurable condition that would cause death in six months AND she has a supportive family with the means to care of her – to be recommended for review by the corrections department. If the corrections department makes a positive recommendation, the decision then goes to the sentencing court, which will do one of three things: deny the request, recall the original sentence and re-sentence to a lower term (which could result in a full discharge) or recall the original sentence and place her under parole supervision.

The Los Angeles Times’s op-ed says that Atkins should not be granted the release. What are your thoughts on this?

Click here to vote: Are you in favor of the death penalty in the United States?

Read more about: Charles Manson, Law, News, Susan Atkins, Terry Thornton

251 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Why the - bleep - should she have a “compassionate release” ? Did she show any compassions for her victims? I think not. She shouldn’t even had her sentence commuted into life imprisonment.

By Christina on 06/19/2008 12:21 pm

e-mail alert

Christina— Totally agree. Here is a website by Sharon Tate’s sister remembering all the victims including Sharon’s son. Abigail Folger, was a Harvard grad, a great artist, and worked with youth in Watts. There is a letter from Sharon’s father who saw the house and what they did to his daughter. And in court had to endure Susan Atkins giggling and mocking the victims families. On the site are also various addresses for contacting Parole Board authorities although the above form will get where it needs to go, just be sure to put “Susan Atkin’s” in the subject line. http://crimeshots.com/Remember1969.html Here is a video of Sharon Tate who could be the twin of my friend Diane. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpdMQZGvjDU&feature=related I’ve posted this information on other sites, and was surprised that even very liberal sites the comments were 100% no way on this release.

By Get Sporty on 06/21/2008 5:22 am

e-mail alert

I voted yes; however, if the penal system would be reorganized in that parole would no longer exist, I would vote no. Murders, rapists and such wouldn’t be back on the streets to commit these crimes again! Lets take a lesson from countries where there is no such thing a parole. If you receive 25 years, you serve 25 years. Period! I truly believe this would eliminate many crimes in fear of being having to “serve your time”. Repeat offenders would be a thing of the past. As far as Ms. Adkins, sorry, but please stay right where you are. Hey, would you consider allowing Charles Manson out of prison if he had terminal cancer? I think not.

By Barbara Broussard on 06/19/2008 12:25 pm

e-mail alert

As a bleeding hearts liberal with an inclination to want to forgive and move on, and compassion for anyone suffering from cancer, in this case a resounding No. As the result of the her beautiful daughter’s senseless and brutal murder, and while 8 1/2 months pregnant, Sharon Tate’s mother became a strong advocate for victim’s rights laws. An alternative that would show infinitely more mercy than she and the rest of the Manson murderers showed, would be to separate her from the general prison population and permit more visitation time. I was young and lived in Southern California at the time of the chilling murders (which included the butchering of an elderly couple in a nearby home days later). Beautiful and completely innocent Sharon Tate and her unborn baby, Jay Sebring who tried to save her, coffee heiress, Abigail Folger, and the others who were chased down and butchered in a nightmare of a gruesome brutality begged for their lives and were mocked as they were stabbed repeatedly. Sharon Tate was also hung from the living room beams in the secluded mansion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Tate It was monstrous. We were all beyond horrified. Her mother lost her beautiful daughter at age 26, and her grandchild. Absolutely no.

By Get Sporty on 06/19/2008 12:34 pm

e-mail alert

OH boo hoo…..she wants out because she is sick. Deal or No Deal is the question. I’m sure her victim begged for her life, but this Atkin woman reined supreme as the judge and the jury. “Death” she ruled. And two lives were zapped ….. a woman’s and a baby’s. Let her now beg for her life on the outside….and may the answer be “no deal”.

By doll lady on 06/19/2008 12:49 pm

e-mail alert

I don’t know her. I suspect most of the other people responding here don’t know her either. I did just read the wiki article on her, and was surprised to see that she has been married twice since she went to prison. I was also surprised to hear that she had become a born again Christian, had saved several lives while in prison and so forth. I don’t exactly understand why she wants to be released with just six months to live or what the advantage is for us as a society to keep her in prison. Her prosecutor believes a release would be a good thing. The prisons in California are overcrowded and under federal receivership. Some one is going to have to be let out. Why not someone with staggering medical bills and no likelihood of causing further harm? The comments that say she should suffer as much as she made her victims suffer—why should we as a society be exactly as brutal and merciless as the perpetrators of the original crimes? As a society I think this makes us all brutalizers. In fact, most of those convicted of first degree murder in California are given sentences of 25 years to life, and rarely serve as long as Susan Atkins has served. I am not saying she should be let out, but her request should not be rejected out of hand. And it should not be rejected because her victims were well known. Or because the family of the victim objects. Revenge should not be the main purpose of the criminal justice system.

By Elizabeth Bennett on 06/19/2008 1:15 pm

e-mail alert

Elizabeth: Been waiting for you: and I concur whole-heartedly. If this society is about revenge then we have a great deal of growing to do. That is not what the justice system is about and i believe fully in that system. To say that persons cannot change is as injudicious as the revenge motif. Well done Elizabeth, truly honestly well done. It is such a pleasure to know that you are on this board.

By Frank Peterson on 06/19/2008 1:46 pm

Frank—This is about the LAW. The victims families have spent the last 37 years fighting to keep the mass murders in jail, who got out of their death sentences by a fluke of timing Everyone of them is in for 7 or 8 first degree murder convictions. In 1970 when they were sentenced fetuses didne’t count as they do today as another person, otherwise it would be 9 first degree murder convictions. ie the musician she kiiled two weeks before her Tate residence massacre and the two murdered the following night. The law is that she gets to APPLY for a compassionate release based on an illness, very few receive them, especially NOT mass murders of completely innocent people, any more than Scott Peterson, Richard Allen Davis, Mason, or that Steiner man who murdered the two teenage girls and one of the girl’s mothers would be released. The Director of the CA prison system has already turned her down. She has been in as hospital near the prison since March. Since her atty is her husband he can visit any time. She now can apply to the Parole Board that’s turned her down 12 times before, or the court that convicted her with a death sentence. Mass murderers die in prison. That’s how it the rule of law goes. The State of California is not going to start releasing mass murderers because they are close to death, because they all will be eventually. This person committed some of the most most grisly murderers in the 20th century. The large majority of people, the State, the laws, her victim’s families do not want her released. The only remorse she had after her murders was that she hadn’t had time to cut out the baby and the eyes of the victims. She mocked them while stabbing them to death, and their families in court. She bragged that it was fun to kill, and more fun each time. Her innocent victims, their friends and loved ones have been robbed for 37 years. She hasn’t changed, outwise she would have been paroled in 2005, her last hearing. Her next is in 2009. This isn’t about you and Mugsy feeling feeling more noble than people less ‘principled’ because they are for the victims and not the mass murderer. Doris Tate, Sharon Tate’s mother, was in serious depression until 1982 until she started to tirelessly work for victims rights, including going to every parole hearing to make sure these killers are never out of prison. If you and Mugsy don’t like the laws about mass murderers rights then I suggest you work to change them instead of infer about others principles because they are all for the victims and not for these ruthless killers. It is about justice for the victims and their families. If you and Mugsy were listening then you’d hear all the pain Dona and JB were in and are in because their loved ones were killed and did not receive justice. Were any of the innocent victims shown any compassion, mercy, clemency, do they ever get to climb out of their graves that this monster put them in? This killer has been in prison a little more than 4 years for everyone of her completely innocent victims that she killed senselessly. The compassion should be for the 100 family members that are emotionally tormented every time their loved one’s killers attempt release and they must relive everything all over again to fight it. The laws said she gets to apply. She did. She was denied. End of story. You want to change the laws then get to work instead of joining in the very cheap shots that others lack compassion, mercy or principles, or that their motive is revenge because their concern it the victims justice and rights. Doris and Patti Tate dedicated the remainder of their lives to working for victims right and justice. I respect that. they would have had a very different quality of life had it not been for this ruthless killer. The Tate’s changed laws and started support groups, and attended every parole meeting the killers stayed behind bars where they belong. She can now go to the parole board that’s denied her 12 times, or the court that sentenced her to death. I guess the killing part was only fun when she was doing it. Now that she’s dying everyone is supposed to care,. What was that she said to 8 1/2 months pregnant Sharon Tate as she pleaded to live and have her baby and as she stabbed her to death? “”Woman, I have no mercy for you. Your’re going to die.” In June 2005, Atkins had her 17th parole hearing. This hearing was attended by Debra Tate, the Sebring family and other victim family members again had to relived everything, travel to Corona, and asked her parole be denied. She received a four-year denial, the next hearing is scheduled for 2009 . Debra Tate, the only surviving member, of Sharon Tate’s immediate family, spoke in opposition to a compassionate release for Atkins. Seems that people might respect that. Mugsy is wrong. It ISN’T about US. It’s about the LAW which has been followed. And it is about the mass murderer and her actions, it’s about precendents, and it’s about justice for the victims. When they can all climb out of their early graves then I’ll be all for their cold blooded killer getting out.

By Get Sporty on 06/23/2008 6:12 am

e-mail alert

how could you live on this planet in this galaxy without knowing something about the tate murder case…charles manson and his followers should have been stood on the wall and shot…

By theCHEROKEErose on 06/20/2008 9:14 am

e-mail alert

Cherokee…..I agree —

By Lady Gator on 06/20/2008 2:05 pm

e-mail alert

Well Lady Gator—we finally agree on something. I wasn’t for her release, but thought Cherokee’s opinion was rather harsh until I saw the crime scene photos. Even lefty sites that are posting on this are saying unprintable things. People are angry she’s even asking. And after looking at the photos, I am too.

By Get Sporty on 06/21/2008 5:31 am

e-mail alert

Totally agree with you,Elizabeth. She should be released! Enough of “torture and watch them die” brutality through human history! Time to evolve!

By sibelle daubigne on 06/20/2008 12:13 pm

e-mail alert

It isn’t about revenge……it’s about justice for the totally innocent victims who were denied their lives, including the baby, and their families who are still suffering and more because of this release effort after they just went thought this in 2006. Maybe google the crime photos of Sharon Tate and the others and then say this woman should be released. The Director of Corrections and from what I’ve seen on websites, even lefty sites, it’s 100% no way. People will email the Board of Paroles and shut any effort down. She deserves no other consideration. None.

By Get Sporty on 06/21/2008 5:28 am

e-mail alert

Elizabeth- ” Her prosecutor believes a release would be a good thing.” That is NOT what Vincent Bugliosi said. “In fact, most of those convicted of first degree murder in California are given sentences of 25 years to life, and rarely serve as long as Susan Atkins has served.” She mass murdered 7 innocent people plus the 8 1/2 month fetus in the most grisly of manners. She ruined countless lives and was giddy in retelling it and mocked her victims and their familiies. She was sentenced to death, and this was overturned when the California Supreme Court elimanated the Death Penlaty, then it was reinstated, but not for those like Atkins who had their sentences altered to life in prison. “Or because the family of the victim objects.” The family of the victims DO have rights as do all citizens to comment to the Parole Board and these comments are taken seriously. Her poor sister has gone through this process 11 times, the last time in 2006, and now again. Revenge is not the motive. Justice for all her victims is. “Some one is going to have to be let out. Why not someone with staggering medical bills and no likelihood of causing further harm?” The mental torment and anguish she is causing to the victims of her crimes, ie the families, to people who lived in the area at the time, is severe. 7 people and an innocent baby were butchered…she got to live and she had a life in prison. they did not. It would be great if people had sufficient, and accurate, information before they stated opinions. “The comments that say she should suffer as much as she made her victims suffer” the comments are that justice for her victims should be served….the victims include all the survivors of this hideous mass murder of totally innocent people.

By Get Sporty on 06/21/2008 2:35 pm