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

Well, Suzanne, I actually know quite a bit more about the trial than many because I was very close to people in the human rights community who attended a good part of it as international observers, and I got the day-by-day blow-by-blow, complete with the vomiting and sobbing and so on. Everyone was horrified by these murders. There is no discussion that it was a godawful terrible thing that happened. Have you ever seen someone killed? Because I saw someone shot five feet from me in cold blood, and had the blood all over my face. And I have personally been the victim of violent crimes. If you would stop shouting stfu at everyone and listen to what Ms. Dona is saying, you might actually learn something. And, if under California law, as someone else said, Atkins is eligible for compassionate release on account of her terminal illness, then she is eligible under the law, the same as anyone else to whom this law applies. Anyone who believes the State of California, whose number one legitimate industry is prisons would actually let her out if they believed for a second she could hold a pen to write a book is loony. I personally don’t think she should be released because in prison she is safer than she would be without armed guards protecting her from people like you.

By Mugsy Peabody on 06/22/2008 6:52 pm

e-mail alert

Mugsy, Oh, so now you are stating that I am capable of doing harm to this mass murderer whose only remorse for her brutal killing of 8 innocent people pleading and a baby, is that she didn’t have time to cut out the baby and her victims eyes and smash these against wall. You are stating that I am somehow capable of doing something to this demonic woman other than sending emails to make sure she stays where she belongs, in prison. Sh isn’t ELIGIBLE for compassionate release—-because of the fluke that got her off death row she is eligible TO APPLY. The DIRECTOR of the California Prison System has ALREADY DENIED HER APPLICATION…..however she will undoubtedly try to go to the Board of Parole and/or the Jurisdictional Court or file another one of her lawsuits…..because this lowlife does whatever she can to have what she denied 8 other innocent people and a BABY. “stfu at everyone” —-that is directed to YOU not everyone. So you’re incorrect about the law, you’ve just contradicted yourself here with your other posts about ‘compassion and mercy” BS for a mass murderer….and then follow it up with stating that I am capable of doing anything to this horrible woman. You are a piece of work, lady. So the REASON you give for her NOT GETTING OUT IS “I personally don’t think she should be released because in prison she is safer than she would be without armed guards protecting her from people like you.” That’s really cool. Misdirected mercy and compassion for a mass murderess. Then she should stay in prison, not because of her heinous crimes, because you are concerned that “someone like you” is a danger to her (as if I am, or ever have been, to anyone.) You are an extremely foul individual. Extremely, lousy, horrible, despicable, foul individual. Compassion and mercy for a mass murderer…..and then concern for her safety and that she should stay in prison to be safe from people like me. Wow. Yes, like blond yuppie, size 6 mothers who’ve never gotten so much as a jay-walking ticket are quite a treat. Horrible. Horrible. Horrible. Horrible. Woman.

By Get Sporty on 06/22/2008 9:15 pm

e-mail alert

Oops, “Wow. Yes, like blond yuppie, size 6 mothers who’ve never gotten so much as a jay-walking ticket are quite a treat.” I meant as if a ‘threat” but yes…..blond, yuppie, size 6 mummies are quite a treat, too.

By Get Sporty on 06/22/2008 9:34 pm

e-mail alert

Fluffy in the City……….. This makes me so sad. Here are two intelligent woman coming from a different view on a subject that is so horrendous. You know the man who killed my daughter and kidnapped my granddaughters didn’t even have to go to jail. He went to trial and because one of the detectives had lied to the Grand Jury he got off Scott Free……..to boot he sued the City and County and won a settlement of $400,000……… Can you even begin to imagine what that did to me and my family………I thought I would go crazy with the hatred and anger. Yes, I felt like taking revenge…….laid awake at night thinking of horrible ways I could torture him. This went on for several years. My health began deteriorating….I couldn’t think about anything except trying to find my granddaughters. After about 10 years when all resourses dried up, I had nothing left except this hatred that was destroying me and doing terrible harm to the rest of my family. That’s when I was able (It wasn’t easy) to let go of the hatred………..I made up my mind I was not going to allow him to dictate my life anymore. As long as I hated……he owned my soul. This is how terrible crimes like this are………..The acts of violence affects all of us. The family’s are the true VICTIMS But all Citizens in a Civilized culture become the victims also. My heart has gone out to the Tate family for years………I knew what they were going through. I do know that my loved one and all those other victims are in a better place…….

By Dona Howlett on 06/22/2008 10:40 pm

e-mail alert

Dona, “This is how terrible crimes like this are………..The acts of violence affects all of us. The family’s are the true VICTIMS But all Citizens in a Civilized culture become the victims also.” Anyone who cares about the law and innocent victims want the murderers, especially anyone as vicious, callous, heartless and a multiple murderer like Susan Atkins, to stop torturing the families and stay locked up. I could care less what she has, what her symptoms are, what her life expectancy is, how many AA classes she took in prison, or if she does or does not pose a threat. None of that matters. What matters is that she is the mass murderer of 8 totally innocent victims and a baby and all the people who were and continue to be impacted. She and Tex Watson were absolutely the worse and they should have gotten the death sentence years ago. It makes me sick what our perverted system of justice does. Like the man who killed your daughter and gets a big settlement and then takes off with your grandchildren. Or OJ etc. Everything about what these people did was so heinous, they stole so many lives, and wrecked so many more. It is disgusting, despicable, and demonic beyond belief. I could care less that this woman is sick. I wish she’d get off the planet and on to her karmic reward for what she did to those poor people….all of them, and all of their families. And that man for what he did to your daughter and your family too. I don’t need to ever feel revenge because they will receive what they deserve elsewhere. What am concerned with is justice in the here and now. And every time one of those ungodly monsters pulls something like this they just bring it all up again. Just like the father of Polly Klaus, not only did he lose that precious little girl, but that monster who killed her would torment him further in court. If that horrible monster gets cancer, or Scott Peterson, or any of the Manson killers, none of them should be given any kind of clemency whatsoever. It’s always the monsters that take away the good people. Doris Tate said she wanted people to see the crime scene photos of her daughter to see what they did to that lovely, totally innocent woman who begged for her life and for her baby’s life. That is unforgivable. I hope she burns in hell for what she did. She is a total, total monster. At least the Director of Prisons said no to the request for release. Now they’ll have to go through a lenghty process and it can be turned down by any number of steps…so I doubt she get out. And thank god for that. I guess Mugsy/Frank also think if that Stenier or whatever his name is that murdered the two teenaged girls and the mother in the mountains above Fresno should be released too if he gets sick….the killer of Poly Klaus, of Lacey Peterson and her baby. Just let them all out if they get sick. It’s disgusting to support that and even more disgusting to make the insane claim that bloggers are a danger to that mass murderer Susan Atkins and so for that reason she should stay in prison, after just arguing for clemency. A real jerk.

By Get Sporty on 06/22/2008 11:43 pm

e-mail alert

Fluffy………I don’t know what Peggy believes, but I believe when monsters like the ones we’ve been talking about die and go to the’Other Side’……….There is a special place for those monsters. It is totally dark…….totally alone… alone with their terrible memories and crimes…….No soul contact of any kind. I find it hard to believe they are candidates for redemption. Perhaps (God) has a plan for them. But I don’t think they should ever be reborn and inhabit this Planet again. Their Vile energy poisons anything it touches. These people who marry these monsters in jail must have mental problems. This business of “They found Jesus” just makes me sick. What a cop out…………

By Dona Howlett on 06/23/2008 12:16 am

e-mail alert

Dona, Oh yeah, they always ‘find Jesus.” Then she doesn’t need to be out, because he can visit her anywhere. She’s not even in prison, she’s been in a nearby hospital to the Corona, CA prison since March. Doris Tate said, “You can’t make sense out of the innocent slaughter of Sharon and the other victims. The most that I, or any person touched by violence, can hope for is acceptance of the pain. You never forget it, not even with the passage of time. But, if, in my work, I can help transform Sharon’s legacy from murder victim to a symbol for victims’ rights, I will have accomplished what I set out to do.” She was a brave woman, but family and friends said she never fully recovered from the loss. In response to parole eligibility for her daughter’s killers, she founded The Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau. The organization assists families and loved ones of murder victims, with particular emphasis on organizing opposition to early release of their killers. I just read today that she died on July 10, so did my first husband. 7/10 at 7:10PM. Her husband, Sharon Tate’s father was an intelligence officer requiring much international travel, so they lived in many parts of the world. When Sharon became pregnant she helped decorate the planned nursery. “Doris Tate was horrified by Atkins gloating attitude and remarks in her confession, including the statement, “Killing people is fun. The more I do it, the better I like it.” Doris watched with disbelief as the ensuing trial dragged on for over a year while the defendants engaged in bizarre, disruptive behavior, seeming to gloat over what they had done. It was an enormous relief when the killers were found guilty and sentenced to death in 1971. However, in 1972, the California Supreme Court overturned the death penalty. Throughout the 1970’s, Doris Tate was profoundly depressed and became a recluse, unable to even talk about her late daughter without falling apart. That changed in 1982, when she learned that former Manson follower Leslie Van Houten was being considered for parole and had gained 300 signatures in support. This outraged her, and although Van Houten hadn’t participated in her daughter’s murder, she launched a public relations campaign to keep all the killers in jail. After making several television appearances and an interview with The National Enquirer, she succeeded. She then proceeded to appear at parole hearings of her daughters killers, vigorously opposing their releases. She became a nationally known advocate of victims rights.” I’m sure than Doris Tate if she were still alive, if Sharon’s sister Patti were still alive, they’d be fighting this latest outrage too. Here’s an interview that Sharon Tate’s best friend Shelia Wells gave: “Sharon Tate was my best friend. Once, we were roommates. She introduced me to my husband. She was the godmother to my baby daughter who is named for her. In the six years time that I knew her, she never said an unkind word about anyone. My friends used to tease me. ‘How can you wake up in the morning and look at that face of hers?’ It was a good question. Sharon was so over whelmingly, so incredibly beautiful that anyone not knowing her might think it took a lot to live with such a beauty. But you see that was another thing about Sharon. With all her beauty, everyone loved her. I never heard anyone say a bad word about her, not even another actress. And in this town that’s not only a rarity, it’s an impossibility! Sharon was the type of a girl who had no defenses, no pretenses, she was just herself all the time… She was so trusting, so eager to accept people as they were, so generous… Sharon never shut her door to anyone. She always had a way of finding such goodness in others. If someone hurt her, she’d say, “Oh, Sheliah, I’m sure they didn’t mean to.’ She’d always make excuses for others. Sharon was just totally loving and also totally vulnerable. She was just a remarkable person, she never gave up on anybody. As far as Sharon’s marriage was concerned, Sharon and Roman were in love. They were a combination of beauty and genius. She was always going out on a limb for everyone. Everyone but herself. There was an ethereal quality about her. She had this thing I sometimes wished I’d had, even though I knew that eventually it might be bad for me. Do you understand? She had this kind of beauty and fragility, and you just knew she was bound to get hurt because of it. But still you couldn’t help but admiring that quality in her. She was just such a special person. In just the last few months Sharon was beginning to come into her own. She never cared about being beautiful. She never even really cared about acting. She just wanted to love and be loved. And have her baby. I know that if she’d lived and had the baby everything would have been different for her. Because that is what Sharon really wanted. She was just a little girl from Texas who was so incredibly beautiful that she got swept up in all of the Hollywood nonsense. But all she ever wanted was what every woman wants — a man to love and a baby of her own. I can’t believe that the murderers knew her. To know Sharon, to really know her, was to love her. There is just no way that anyone who knew her could have hurt her so.” It’s incredible to me that any person could murder a pregnant, innocent, beautiful, completely blameless, angelic young mother. It defies belief. On a scale of evil it is at the very top. The karmic retribution on that one is going to be Dante’s 9th ring of Hell level.

By Get Sporty on 06/23/2008 2:17 am

e-mail alert

Dona, you have my sincerest heartfelt sympathy for the overwhelming grief you have faced and for the insight that forgiveness is an outward demonstration of internal pain. Yours is a loss I pray I’ll never face, but I know that through your willingness to share such a painful experience, you have strengthened me. “I had nothing left except this hatred that was destroying me and doing terrible harm to the rest of my family.” Perhaps, that anger kept you going until you reached that point of release. I’ve always had great respect for your ideas and opinions expressed on this site………..and now even moreso. Peace and grace

By beth willis on 07/01/2008 7:30 pm

e-mail alert

Mugsy, “And, if under California law, as someone else said, Atkins is eligible for compassionate release on account of her terminal illness, then she is eligible under the law, the same as anyone else to whom this law applies. Anyone who believes the State of California, whose number one legitimate industry is prisons would actually let her out if they believed for a second she could hold a pen to write a book is loony.” All of this defies logic. 1) “And, if under California law, as someone else said, Atkins is eligible for compassionate release on account of her terminal illness, then she is eligible under the law, the same as anyone else to whom this law applies.” She can apply all she wants. THAT isn’t the point, nor was it the question. It was it does she deserve, should it happen. Mute point now, because the the Director of Prisons said NO. So she’ll be dead before the process runs its course if she wants to protest that decision and try other avenues. It would be defeated anyway. Few of these releases are granted, and the State is not going to release a mass murderer of 8 innocents plus a baby. It doesn’t matter if she is sick, just like it didn’t matter to her when she was stabbing a pregnant mother to death when she was begging for her child’s life. Neither the court nor a parole board is going to go against overwhelming public opinion, nor are they going to grant any kind of clemency for a mass murderer and set that precedent. 2) “Anyone who believes the State of California, WHOSE NUMBER ONE LEGITIMATE INDUSTRY IS PRISONS would actually let her out if they believed for a second she could hold a pen to write a book is loony.” First of all,The State of California has a number of ‘legitimate’ sectors beyond prisons: #1 is Education—with K through higher education receiving 41.3% of the State budget. The University system is the #1 employer. #2 Is Health and Human services which receives 25.3% of the State budget. #3 is Business, Transportation and Housing which receives 9.5% of the State budget. #4 is Corrections and Rehabilitation which receives 7.3% of the State budget. ANYONE who thinks that whether the mass murderer can, or cannot, hold a pen to write a book is given ANY weight whatsoever in deciding whether or not to grant a release is as you so eloquently put it, ‘loony.’ Logic 101. Try it.

By Get Sporty on 06/23/2008 12:28 am

e-mail alert

Fluffy, the recommendation of Suzan Hubbard, the Director of Prisons, is advisory only. It is not the end of the matter. For what it is worth, the statute that governs compassionate release can be found at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=01001-02… [scroll down to subsection (e) of Penal Code Section 1170.] As you can see, the nature of the crime is not even a consideration when considering compassionate release. Whether the person remains a danger to others is a factor. So it looks like it goes to the Board of Parole Hearings, and after that, to the court. By the time the legal process is complete, Atkins may have died already. So you may very well get your wish that she die in custody. I do not understand your fury at Ms. Peabody. It seems to me that you said in another thread that your father had advised you that people have the right to disagree. That is what she appears to be doing, just disagreeing. Not everyone is blonde, size six or with the experiences that you have had. Thus it would be not natural for everyone to agree with you. We are all a product of our experiences and our information. I think you should let go of the arguments in this thread. You have made all your arguments, you have evidently even written the Board of Parole Hearings. No one is going to look here to the opinions of a bunch of bloggers to decide whether Atkins should be released. More than likely, they are going to follow the facts and the law. George Carlin died last night. This makes me very sad. He was so full of fun, made me laugh so much for so many years, from when I first saw him on That Girl. I know this is off topic, but it just seems that this thread is at an end anyway.

By Elizabeth Bennett on 06/23/2008 8:11 am

e-mail alert

Elizabeth—Yes the Director of Prisons recommendation is advisory, as she said when she made it, and as the news stories covering it also replayed, also adding tha the Board rarely go against the Director of Prisons recommendations. Nor do they often grant these requests. Only 10 of the last 60 last year were approved. Why the ‘fury’ at Mugsy. Because I don’t appreciate her shoddy and lazy way of supporting her stances on things. She’s made others quite ‘furious’ too over her same cheap tricks. Nor siding with the mass murderer. Surprise—side with Richard Allen Davis and Scott Peterson et all and get the same response. Those of us who are for victims rights and justice and the families that have worked so hard for 37 years to keep these mass murderers in prison don’t appreciate her lack of principle, or mercy, or compassion put downs and the stupid ‘it’s about us.” NO it isn’t—-its about those victims including an innocent baby that were butchered for fun. If a person has a deeply held conviction based on actual weight and thought they can convey that without inferring that hers alone is the moral high-ground and that others lack ‘principle’ ‘mercy’ compassion etc because they aren’t siding with her, and for the mass murderer of these poor victims, and against what the victim’s families have worked so hard for for 37 years. She ALSO said those who should rightly answer are those who’ve actually had the experience. She is incapable of answering a simple question from her perspective without putting others who hold an opposing view down in the process. This is why JackieOh, Renata, taylor, Lorraine and others have left or been angered. Because the point is she must have her Clique look up to her and she took an unpopular position and then couldn’t support it with anything of any weight. The courts, the overwhelming public opinion, the victims families, the presidence setting reality of such a decision all have import she wants to wave that away and then support her stance down by putting others down as unprincipled, unmerciful, uncompassionate. Those kind of cheap tactics might work with her self-congratulatory falling all over each other LOL at every banality Clique—try it with me and expect that it will come right back. I am not the unprincipled one here. I don’t expect or care if others agree with me or not—that isn’t the point. The point is that siding with the mass murderer over the victims families who’ve worked tirelessly to keep these monsters in prison, including not wanting her released now, is not ‘unprincipled.’ She furthers her ridiculous put downs by recanting her first response saying the monster should stay in prison where she’ll be safe from bloggers. Her tactics are basically low and illogical. The Board and the law always looks at setting legal precidence. Do the people who support this vicious murderer of innocent 8 innocent people and a baby being let out because she is ill, extend that to Manson, Richard Allen Davis (killer of Pollly Klaus), Scott Peterson, and the 600+ death row inmates. Because the fact is that those who commit horrendous crimes die in prison due to the lenght of their sentences. What’s the point here. That she’s a woman? There are few crimes in the 20th century that were as vicious, there aren’t many on death row who did as much, and she escaped death row by a fluke of timing. MP also made numerous factually wrong statements (that prisons are the State of Californias foremost legitimate industry—-that is just so wrong and by a longshot). Because the point isn’t an honest moral conviction but one to bolster others beliefs that she is a good person and on some superior ground. And her usual victim default, ie the mass murderer somehow wasn’t getting a fair shake because she’s a woman. If she wants to hold a view she better do it honestly without inferring others are lacking in principle etc because they don’t share it—otherwise she’ll continue to be the target of fury from people who aren’t going to accept her cheap shots—-even though her Clique is so obsequious and blind to them.

By Get Sporty on 06/23/2008 2:02 pm

e-mail alert

I do not believe your argument is really with Ms. Peabody. Your argument is with the law. The law permits compassionate release without looking at how heinous the crime was, provided that the prisoner is terminally ill, death is imminent, and presents to danger to anyone. That you continue to discuss the crime indicates that you think the law should not apply, but it does. I did not respond to invite another unfortunate tirade against Ms. Peabody. You have made factual misstatements in some of your arguments as well, and yet you rail against Ms. Peabody [and anyone else who is trying to discuss the oddities of this particular law as her “clique”] as “just so wrong.” “Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye but fail to notice the beam in your own eye?” Besides, I am not sure it is far wrong to assume that a person near death from brain cancer is unlikely to be healthy enough to be going on talk shows, yet you claimed this was wrong and insisted on a web link as evidence and then claimed it was insufficient evidence when it was provided. I posted the link to wikipedia elsewhere about ad hominem arguments because they are the weakest of all possible arguments. They are the arguments one uses when one does not have the law or the facts, according to Cicero. [And Cicero knew his arguments.] You have no business using ad hominem arguments. It just makes you look bad. And it does not improve the level of discussion; it makes people leave, get bored or have a sudden desire to watch game shows. You are not the only one who ever uses ad hominem arguments, but they still make you look bad. One expects a little more from a cat.

By Elizabeth Bennett on 06/23/2008 2:31 pm

e-mail alert

Sorry, I should proofread better. That was “…and presents no danger to anyone.”

By Elizabeth Bennett on 06/23/2008 2:40 pm

e-mail alert

Yes, well when she or others next support the release of Scott Peterson or whatever…and then infer than others are unprincipled and lacking mercy and compassion for not doing the same…can expect the same response. Please don’t tell me what I am responding to I know very well.

By Get Sporty on 06/23/2008 3:13 pm