Governor Gavin Newsom Reverses Bobby Beausoleil’s Parole Grant

Friday, April 26th, 2019


Apr. 26 – Robert Beausoleil was a member of Charles Manson’s cult known as “the Family.” In the summer of 1969, the group fervently embraced Mr. Manson’s apocalyptic and brutal worldview. Mr. Manson and his followers believed that a civilization-ending war between the races – known as Helter Skelter – was imminent, and that the Family would emerge from hiding in the desert at the end of the war to take control of the world. Mr. Manson and his followers came to believe that the Family would have to trigger the start of a race war by committing atrocious, high-profile murders of white victims to incite retaliatory violence against black people. See People v. Manson (1976) 61 Cal.App.3d 102, 127-130. The Manson Family’s stated goal was to prepare for Helter Skelter, physically, mentally, and financially.

In July 1969, Mr. Manson and a group of Family members, including Mr. Beausoleil, discussed ways to raise money to relocate their group to the desert. They identified an acquaintance, Gary Alan Hinman, as a potential source of funds. On July 26, 1969, Mr. Beausoleil was seen in the company of Mr. Manson and Bruce Davis. Mr. Beausoleil was carrying a sheathed knife, and Bruce Davis had a 9-millimeter gun. That night, Mr. Davis dropped off three Family members: Mary Brunner, Susan Atkins, and Mr. Beausoleil at Mr. Hinman’s residence. Two days later, the group of three called Mr. Manson from Mr. Hinman’s house and reported that Mr. Hinman “was not cooperating.”

Mr. Manson and Mr. Davis returned to Mr. Hinman’s house. When they arrived, Mr. Hinman had already been struck with a gun; during that struggle the gun had discharged. Mr. Davis took the gun from Mr. Beausoleil and pointed it at Mr. Hinman while Mr. Manson sliced Mr. Hinman’s face open with a sword, cutting from his left ear down to his chin. Mr. Davis and Mr. Manson drove back to the Ranch in Mr. Hinman’s vehicle. Ms. Brunner, Ms. Atkins, and Mr. Beausoleil remained at Mr. Hinman’s house for two more days while Mr. Hinman lay bleeding. Mr. Beausoleil eventually stabbed Mr. Hinman in the chest and smothered him with a pillow, killing him.

Inside the home, using Mr. Hinman’s blood, the group wrote the words “political piggy” and drew an animal paw print on the walls. Mr. Beausoleil fled, but later returned to the house to wipe the paw print off the wall. Mr. Hinman’s badly decomposed body was found on July 31, 1969. Police arrested Mr. Beausoleil in Mr. Hinman’s car on August 6, 1969.




I acknowledge that Mr. Beausoleil’s crime was committed when he was 21 years old and that he has since been incarcerated for more than 49 years. I also acknowledge that Mr. Beausoleil has made efforts to improve himself in prison. He has participated in self-help programming, including Alcoholics Anonymous, Anger Management, Parenting, and Effective Communication. He earned a GED, completed two vocational programs, and has received positive ratings from work supervisors.

I carefully examined the record for evidence demonstrating Mr. Beausoleil’s increased maturity and rehabilitation, and gave great weight to all the factors relevant to his diminished culpability as a youthful offender — his immaturity, impetuosity and failure to appreciate risks and consequences — and his other hallmark features of youth. I have also given great weight to his subsequent growth in prison during my consideration of his suitability for parole. However, these factors are outweighed by negative factors that demonstrate he remains unsuitable for parole at this time.

Mr. Beausoleil helped perpetrate the first of the Manson Family’s atrocious, high-profile murders in an attempt to start a civilization-ending race war. Mr. Beausoleil and other Manson family members kept Mr. Hinman hostage and tortured him over several days in an attempt to finance their apocalyptic scheme. When Mr. Hinman refused to cooperate, Mr. Manson sliced Mr. Hinman’s throat and severed his ear, before Mr. Beausoleil stabbed him to death.

The circumstances of this brutal killing are not the only evidence that proves Mr. Beausoleil remains unsuitable for parole. The 2016 psychologist found that Mr. Beausoleil demonstrated only partial insight into the motives behind the crime, noting that he “lacks appreciation for the predatory, antisocial motivations for the crime, especially his willingness to engage in violence in order to achieve a goal.” The psychologist also concluded that Mr. Beausoleil’s lack of insight into his prior substance use makes him vulnerable to relapse and contributes to his risk of future violence. The psychologist noted that Mr. Beausoleil’s prior drug use led to his involvement with the victim, continued into his incarceration, and “caused significant impairment in his overall functioning.” While Mr. Beausoleil has participated in substance abuse programming, the psychologist determined that he “continues to demonstrate limited insight into his substance abuse” and “underestimates the significance of his prior use, as well as the risk of relapse.”

Over the course of his incarceration, Mr. Beausoleil has made admirable efforts at self-improvement. While Mr. Beausoleil reports to have accepted responsibility for his crime, I am troubled by his lack of insight into his underlying motives for committing such extraordinary violence. I am also concerned that Mr. Beausoleil will relapse into substance abuse if released. Given the heinous nature of this crime and Mr. Beausoleil’s limited insight into his violence and substance abuse, I do not believe he can be safely released at this time.


I have considered the evidence in the record that is relevant to whether Mr. Beausoleil is currently dangerous. When considered as a whole, I find the evidence shows that he remains an unreasonable danger to society if released from prison. Therefore, I reverse the decision to parole Mr. Beausoleil.

Decision Date: April 26, 2019
Governor of California

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Governor Gavin Newsom Reverses Bobby Beausoleil’s Parole Grant

  1. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Justice wins again.

  2. SHERRI HELMS says:

    This is just crazy, how is the man still dangerous? Would he be less dangerous if Manson name wasn’t all over his case? Most murders are brutal, but there is know problem letting 100’s of murders out.

    This is a gov that won’t kill someone that has been giving death in a court of law but he will keep a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

  3. Cybele Moon says:

    Good for Newsome. Yes, Sherri he deserves to be in a cage. Everything I have seen regarding this man seems to indicate he is a sociopath. Not dangerous!!? He tortured a man for three days before stabbing him to death. What!!

  4. Janet Palirano says:

    You call this crazy? Crazy is torturing a man for three days, then stabbing him in the chest. Boo-hoo that his murderer (who was found to be selling child pornographic cartoons to admitted pedophiles and sending them questionaires asking them if they were turned on by getting spanked as a child) gets three meals a day, a roof over his head, is allowed internet access to sell music and make money, etc. Boo- Hoo!

  5. Fred Bloggs says:

    Guv Newsome said…


    I think that here, Bobby has reaped what he has sown.


    I thought this was rather interesting. I wouldn’t disagree with Newsome but given that he’s the guv of a state in which recreational use of marijuana is legal, I wonder how he squares that. What substance is he concerned Bobby will abuse ?

  6. Fred Bloggs says:

    The Guv said…
    I carefully examined the record for evidence….. When Mr. Hinman refused to cooperate, Mr. Manson sliced Mr. Hinman’s throat

    He didn’t study it that carefully !

  7. Michael says:

    I’m pleasantly surprised. I’ve always been against parole for any of the former Manson followers in custody, but Bobby’s the one I have the most reservations about, even if he didn’t rack up the horrendous body count that Watson and Krenwinkel did. I’m no fan of Newsom, but I appreciate his decision.

  8. Columbo says:

    Newsom said: “When considered as a whole, I find the evidence shows that he remains an unreasonable danger to society if released from prison.”

    That would be just fine, if it’s accurate and true. I have no idea if it is, or not. However, the problem is…..the man (governor) it’s coming from is a complete farce, as was his predecessor.

    Bleeding heart liberal politicians go out of their way every single day to ignore our nation’s laws when it comes to protecting citizens from those who are an “unreasonable danger to society”. When it comes to applying existing immigration laws to hundreds of thousands of illegal lawbreakers from Mexico and South Americans, Newsom and his cohort, Jerry Brown, open the floodgates in California to MS-13 members, general lawbreakers, drug smugglers, drug addicts, terrorists, people who are not immunized against major diseases, and people who bring disease to the State and our country.

    They put these people who have no regard for our country or our laws on welfare, and the citizens of California pay for it. They cause the State’s educational system to overflow and make conditions in the public schools much worse than they have to be. And why do they do these things? Because they know these same people will vote illegally for Democrats and they will stay in power in California for as long as they choose to run. It’s all about staying in power, so they don’t care what laws they break or what citizens they hurt int he process.

    So Newsom is not qualified to decide who is an “unreasonable danger to society,” because HE willfully ignores the REAL dangers to the citizens of California every day. He refuses to punish criminals every single day that engage in crime in California. And now, he is even refusing to put murderers to death in his State.

    Newsom has made the entire state of California a sanctuary state for those who don’t even attempt to enter our country legally. In doing so, he actively goes against federal law of the United States of America.

    Yet, here Newsom is hypocritically judging others when he, himself, should be imprisoned for allowing crimes against the citizens of his state.

    Is there any doubt that Newsom won’t say Leslie Van Houten is also an “unreasonable danger to society?” All he has to do is make that proclamation and no one will question him….just like no one questions him about committing treason against the citizens of California and the USA every day.

    What a total joke and sorry state of affairs this is. But….Californians deserve it, because they continue to elect politicians who turn away from enforcing the law as their leaders.

  9. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Columbo, that Hannity bullshit ring around your mouth is getting larger by the minute, masked only by the phallic shaped tin foil hat upon your head.

    Boo! *cue maniacal liberal laughter*

  10. SPC says:

    Those of you who are/were arguing for his release, need to stop, and find a better way to spend your time.

    What is so hard for you to understand?

    Beausoleil took a life. He murdered a man.
    It does not matter what has happened in the years that followed,
    or who he is today.

    He murdered a man. Coldly and brutally.
    He belongs in prison until he takes his last breath.

    And that’s all there is to it.

    Please find something better to do!

    Thank you.

  11. Cybele Moon says:

    oh boy Columbo, you really have a soap box going on with the politics. Obviously some must like him (Newsom) and agree with him just as some agree with Trump. There’s a huge divide between the two parties and it’s going to bring you all down if you aren’t careful. I’ve never seen this before in other American governments of the past.

    All this talk about illegal aliens being criminals. Some are, but most are not. 500 years ago people flocked to North America to escape persecutions and poverty. Now many want to close the doors not realizing that what’ is happening out there directly affects us in here any way, and we’ve had a hand in much of it. Closing the doors to immigration isn’t the answer.

    Interestingly my partner manages a big kitchen. He said it’s the local workers with whom he has problems. Some of them call in sick or just don’t show up.The ones that are here from other and third world countries are willing to work very hard, are very appreciative. They want a better life than what they had.

    I’m not surprised Newsom denied Beausoleil. I think he’s a sociopath.

  12. Columbo says:

    Ever notice how NJNP is all full of piss and vinegar….ready to hang all the lawbreakers from the highest tree? But then he goes and supports a weenie governor who is against upholding existing laws and has taken it upon himself to ban the death penalty in California. Now he doesn’t know what or who to support. It’s just so typical of his kind. Liberals say one thing and then do another.

    That’s always the way with people like NJNP. He doesn’t really know what he’s for or against, or why, and he sure as heck can’t communicate it.

    One thing that’s clear about NJNP…..he must be a true lib. When libs can’t debate others effectively in the arena of ideas, all they know to do is to start name-calling and writing in such a non-sensical way that nobody is exactly sure what they are talking about. I guess he does that on purpose, because it’s impossible to debate someone who speaks in incomplete sentences and makes no sense.

    Good luck with Biden, Sanders and Warren, NJNP. I know it’s got to be a hard decision for you. LOL…what a winning group that is, huh? Maybe you should just go with Beto by default! Beto’s the real deal for guys like you! 🙂

  13. Peter says:

    Why did Bobby go back to clean the walls? I could never figure out the reason for this. I think he did it because Manson told him to, but why?

  14. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Someone is off their meds. Lock him up! lol

    Calm down Columbo, you’re embarrassing yourself and some wanton lib may feel sympathetic to your mental health.

    The irony is this: You support a murderous cult of socialists. tsk tsk

    Stick that up your snowflake pipe.

  15. Stephen Craig says:

    I’m glad to see that B.B. will remain exactly where he belongs, at least until the next “go around”, and hope that his parole reversal and the governor’s rationale for doing so, is an indication for what awaits LVH ( and before anyone comments on the differences between the two and their prison records, I am aware of them. However, I am also aware of their similarities: Each participated in human slaughter, and for me, it doesn’t matter how long ago or how young they were, etc…They are destroyers of the most precious of gifts; human life, and are exactly where they should be).

  16. Cybele Moon says:

    Columbo I find it very interesting that you seem to indicate any candidate that is interested in supporting environmental issues (for future generations?) is a left wing nut job or at worst a criminal. I”m assuming you support Trump’s xenophobic ambitions because all foreigners must be criminals or terrorists. As America doesn’t have the great reputation among nations it once did there might be some candidates who have a more world wide view as opposed to just making corporate America great. You believe in the death penalty while supporting those who have escaped it (Manson family).

    I lived briefly in California at one time and it has always been a “liberal” state as far as I can see and most Californians do not feel as you do. I do not agree with belittling on either side. Yes, you are right it doesn’t look like this bodes well for the other Manson family members.

    Fred, besides the pedophilia allegations against BB was he not also at one time a member of the Aryan Brotherhood? I am not sure that Newsom was referring to recreational use of marijuana.

  17. Jason says:

    Thank God! Hopefully now Gov. Newsom will follow suit and deny parole for Leslie Van Houten as well.

  18. Columbo says:

    Jason said: “Hopefully now Gov. Newsom will follow suit and deny parole for Leslie Van Houten as well.”

    Oh sure…..and is he going to say that she’s an “unreasonable danger to society,” too? He has NO problem admitting drugs, addicts and MS-13 members into the country….THEY are no problem and NOT dangerous. But who IS dangerous is a 69 year old woman that has had perfect behavior for 50 years in prison. And we’re supposed to believe that.

    Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that the liberal governor of California can see a valid reason to open his “oh so bleeding heart” to San Franciscan sidewalk shitters and people that shoot up in public, but he just can’t parole a dangerous person like Leslie Van Houten. He can look the other way when MS-13 members slice up innocent Californian citizens and burn their bodies, but he just can’t take the chance on that mean ol’ Van Houten woman! It would be laughable if it weren’t so stupid and pathetic.

    You can bet that Newsom isn’t going to take his responsibility into account and do the right and fair thing when it comes to Leslie. You can bet he’s not going to take advice from his own parole board members and allow her parole to go forward. He’s ONLY going to do what’s best for himself.

    No, if/when Newsom denies Leslie parole, it obviously won’t REALLY be because she’s a danger to society. It will be because he thinks that’s the best thing for him POLITICALLY. Leslie is ONLY in prison now because she’s a political prisoner. She should have been released 30 years ago for her part in the crime, and even the lawyers admit that. And if she wasn’t associated with Manson, she would have been. But, she MUST be kept in prison because John Q. Public wouldn’t understand if she were released. She MUST be kept in prison because Newsom’s not going to take a chance on pissing off the voting public by letting a “Manson killer” out of prison (even though he did exactly that by banning the death penalty in California).

    Democrats are ONLY true to themselves. Nobody is better at looking the other way and shirking their responsibilities than liberal California governors. They will give you a thousand good reason for raising your taxes and why California should be flooded with illegal immigrants who don’t even attempt to enter America legally. And Californians are so dependent and brain-washed, they fall in line and continue for those that make their life worse, and harder.

    By the way, NJNP, thanks for proving my point on your “deficits”. I know you’re incapable of actually engaging in a good debate. Keep up the name-calling though! 🙂

    Cybele…I think you should have stayed in California. You have swallowed the liberal talking points (which make absolutely NO sense to rational, common-sense people) hook, line and sinker. You’re nice though! 🙂

  19. Cybele Moon says:

    Columbo, thank you for saying I’m nice. Does that really mean kind of bleh- haha. I love how both parties call each other snow flakes. I’ve been called worse!! lol. Columbo let me explain about this El Salvadoran gang thing etc. It is terrible I do agree. However, I am very interested in history and how we come to these situations on a global as well as national scale. I actually do read various accounts of different events, certain questionable policies in third world countries etc. Anyway Ms 13 is not unlike your own Hell’s Angels organization which by the way has become a world criminal organization and has taken over many tourist spots in Asia and other countries much to the dismay of many law enforcement agencies. Again though you might call me liberal, I must emphasize that both our countries are made up of many different nationalities. Most people trying to get in are not criminals.
    We have plenty of home grown criminals and terrorists. So we digress a bit from the Manson family though I did notice Newsom brought that aspect of domestic terrorism up re: helter skelter’s race war thing.

  20. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Pot and kettle, meet Columbo.

  21. Cybele Moon says:

    NJNP is that a witticism to do with marijuana? lol As a former and famously controversial PM of Canada when asked what he thought of the “pot” issue replied that everyone should have a little chicken in their pot. Of course it is legal now in Canada, Reefer madness and drug crazed hippies notwithstanding.

    I am very curious now about the others like Bruce Davis who is coming up for parole and possibly Tex Watson? Of course LVH as well. Very interesting that on the No Parole for Manson member site to see who has the most signatures against. The one whose supporters claim she did not kill anyone.

  22. Pam says:

    A great day for justice. Next up LVH, she was convicted of two murders as compared to one for Bobby so we may have a preview of her fate.

  23. Pam says:

    Hey Columbo, isn’t Leslie one of those murderers who the state refused to put to death?

  24. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Cybele, I’m at that age where my mind still thinks I’m 29, my humor suggests I’m 12, while my body mostly keeps asking if I’m sure I’m not dead yet. (fav meme) As for LVH supporters saying she didn’t kill anyone, that is about as convoluted as political knee jerking. And yes, you are nice.

    Fred, I noticed that throat reference too. Not good. One could argue Newsom did not review the case seriously. Nope, not good at all. The drug reference could very well be about legalized marijuana, and wasn’t there a meth deal somewhere involving Cupid? Or was that Tex?

    Pam, if Cupid had not been caught, is it safe to say he too would have been involved in the other murders? He had proven his worth after three days of torture and murder of a supposed friend. Wonder why he was riding around in Hinman’s stolen car? Did he know what was coming down fast? We’ll really never know.

  25. Michael says:

    Newsom’s remark about the cut throat was sloppy, but in fairness, that slice Manson inflicted on Hinman did seem to go from ear to throat, so I can give him some wiggle room on that.

    NJNP, yes, the meth deal played into Bobby’s crime, as Bobby alleged Hinman sold him some bad dope and needed to refund him. That seems to have been part of the motive.

    And if he hadn’t been caught, he might well have been assigned Tex’s role in the Tate/LaBianca killings. After all, Charlie chose him, not Tex, to oversee the first murder (that we know of) Then again, Tex seemed more sold out to Charlie than Bobby, so maybe Bobby was only chosen for Hinman because of his prior relationship with him. Interesting question you posed.

  26. Columbo says:

    Gov. Gavin Newsom: “Mr. Beausoleil helped perpetrate the first of the Manson Family’s atrocious, high-profile murders in an attempt to start a civilization-ending race war.”

    Wrong. How ridiculous is it to have the governor in a position to make the final decision about someone’s suitability for parole when they know less about the facts of the case than probably most of the people on this board? This is why they ought to just go with what the parole board recommends. At least they know what happened.

    Newsom’s reference to Beausoleil “cutting Hinman’s throat” should have disqualified him from making a final decision on his parole, and lawyers should be able to overturn his decision as a result of it in a court of law, IMO. It’s hard to believe no one caught that obvious error. But it just goes to show how the Governor’s office doesn’t take any of this seriously.

    In all probability, governors assign someone else to write up the reasoning for their decisions. Newsom probably doesn’t know much about the facts of the case at all. In this case, even the dummy that wrote Newsom’s opinions for him couldn’t even get the facts straight.

    Newsom was also obviously struggling to search for reasons NOT to release Beausoleil when he cited the a psychologist’s opinion.

    ‘While Mr. Beausoleil has participated in substance abuse programming, the psychologist determined that he ‘continues to demonstrate limited insight into his substance abuse’ and ‘underestimates the significance of his prior use, as well as the risk of relapse.”

    LOL…yeah right. Newsom directly quoted the psychologist in his decision to make denying Beausoleil’s parole easier (which is what he had planned all along). Newsom also used the psychologist’s opinion to erase blame from himself in denying Beausoleil’s parole. He essentially just made the psychologist the bad guy, making it appear as if he (Newsom) had no choice but to deny parole. Why? Because he has no intention of letting Beausoleil go, whether he’s suitable, or not! Will he do the same in Leslie Van Houten’s case?

    Anyone knows that the opinions of psychologists are a dime a dozen. The psychologist Newsom quoted may have had that opinion of Beausoleil, but it would have been just as easy to find another psychologist with a totally different opinion of Beausoleil’s likelihood to screw up again. So the psychologist stuff is totally bogus. That said, you can use their opinions in the reasoning for your decisions, so Newsom took full advantage and did so. But anytime you pull out the “psychologist said” card, you know they are LOOKING for reasons not to allow the parole.

    Newsom’s decision in this case is of no consequence to me. But if he uses the same BS reasons for why he just can’t release Leslie Van Houten because she’s SO dangerous, it will clearly be a decision made only for political ramifications, and will have nothing to do with Leslie. And that would be a total travesty.

    Prisoners deserve to have their suitability for parole examined by the governor based on legitimate reasons and facts. It shouldn’t be a game. Politics should have nothing to do with it. But in all the Manson cases, it will likely have EVERYTHING to do with the decisions.

  27. Cybele Moon says:

    it’s interesting though, as Columbo said they are looking for reasons not to allow the parole. Hmm, that must mean that they think these people are a danger in some way even if the governor is being swayed by politics or the people or the emotional impact. Maybe they will not go off to murder others again but their whole story of what they believed and acted upon was a danger and a great affront to society in general and all of them including Ms. Van Houten really have ended up reaping what they sowed. To me this crime still resonates with it’s social/ political/psychological ramifications and as stupid as they may have once been they can’t blame politics, or governors or as we know, most of the general population, etc for not wanting them free. Whether they will or not remains to be seen but the reluctance to free them has substance I believe.

  28. Columbo says:


    I really don’t t think that’s the case at all. I think if the parole board has recommended them for parole (much less multiple times), governors must know deep down that the person’s rehabilitation is legit or the parole board wouldn’t have recommended letting them out. It’s not like parole boards are a bunch of softies sitting around just looking to let prisoners out. Don’t forget, they recommended NOT letting Leslie out for over 4.5 decades. But there came a time when they simply couldn’t say “no” to her anymore because they knew she had earned her release and they knew they couldn’t keep her if she had met all conditions for parole. She was eligible for and earned parole, so she needs to be let out. It’s as simple as that.

    Look at it like this…California governors have a history of being soft on criminals and illegals, yet, they have been consistently tough on the high profile Manson prisoners. So the writing is on the wall and there’s only one thing to logically assume. And that is that the governors aren’t really considering parole for the Manson prisoners…..EVER….no matter WHAT the parole board does or says.

    Why not? They aren’t going to consider parole because they know the voting public will raise hell, and they want no part of that. The governors likely know deep down that Leslie Van Houten isn’t going to return to what she was 50 years ago, when she was out of her mind on drugs and crazy from Manson’s brainwashing. The probability of that happening again is realistically 0%. They know she’s nothing like that now. She was a messed up and totally confused and troubled teen. But that doesn’t matter to them. They are looking to stay in office and stay in power, so it would take a rare governor that would be willing to stand up to the public’s wrath and let any of the Manson clan out. One would think if there’s going to be an exception to that, Leslie would be the exception, but who knows?

    That’s how I see things. You think your typical governor cares about doing what’s right for any of the prisoners? Most likely, they only care about themselves and their political futures. They likely feel if they let any of the Manson clan out, they won’t HAVE a political future. So their mind is made up way before the parole board recommends parole.

  29. Cybele Moon says:

    you made an articulate point Columbo but at the same time why doesn’t the public feel safe to let them out? That’s what I was trying to say. I do see your point but at the same time it does seem that public opinion does matter here if that is what Governors go by.
    Just for argument’s sake I have known a few messed up and troubled teens, rebellious teens and teens on drugs, as a volunteer at a local kid’s club. Outside of robbery, selling drugs and/or shoplifting I have never seen the type of crime the Manson gang did. Most of these kids have had quite horrendous home lives. And as I said before I have always found it hard to sympathetic with the Manson gang women ( except maybe for Atkins) because they did have a “reasonable” upbringing (compared to most who find themselves running amok with the law). They had advantages and options in their lives.

  30. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Michael, I was thinking along the same lines you posted. Just read the arrest report and Cupid stated he purchased Hinman’s car for $200 from black men.

    For him to be not as touched by Manson, he sure did direct the HS narrative by blaming black men.

  31. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    What Happens to a Parole Decision?

    ‘Once a decision is final, generally after the 120-day decision review period, the Governor has statutory authority under Penal Code sections 3041.1 and 3041.2 to review parole suitability decisions. Up to 90 days prior to a scheduled release date of an inmate, the Governor may request that the Board review its panel’s decision. When such a request is made, the matter is placed on the Board’s public meeting agenda and the public has the opportunity to give a 5-minute statement on whether the Board’s hearing decision should be upheld. If an inmate was convicted of murder, the Governor may reverse or modify the Board’s decision without referring it back to the Board for review.’

    **Wonder if Newsom will go this route. Make the board face a public hearing, listening to the public’s view on LVH’s parole. Dollars to donuts the majority will rule and she’d be sent back to fester in her life choices another year. Interesting as it will no doubt be about the savage brutality of her crimes. Just as the current governor and past governors have stipulated in each reversal of parole. **

    ‘Approximately 1,400 out the of nearly 1,600 lifers that were reviewed in California’s prisons have been released over the past three years in California since Jerry Brown became governor. Under previous administrations, murderers and others sentenced to life with the possibility of parole almost never got out.
    Governor Brown has affirmed 82% of parole board decisions, resulting in a record number of inmates with life sentences being released.
    Brown’s predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, authorized the release of 557 lifers during his six-year term, affirming a BPH decision to grant parole about 27 percent of the time. Before that, Governor Gray Davis approved just two lifer parole decisions during his entire three-year term.’

    **Oh really? And yet if you keep reading it is highly political without mentioning political leanings.**
    I hate research. I’d rather bitch and moan.

  32. Lee says:

    I call complete bullshit on that ridiculous drug burn motive. BB simply doesn’t want to admit that he went to Gary’s on Manson’s orders. Listen to the recording of Ella Jo Bailey on this website. Listen to the recording of Al Springer, who was a Straight Satan motorcycle rider. He was appalled at these people. Danny DeCarlo is a piece of shit too, but listen to his recording. How could anyone actual give any sort of credibility to this jackass story. Every fucking participant in the Hinman murder says that BB was sent there to get money. If this was a drug thing, where did the money go? Gary had been saving money to go to Japan. You think it he had $1,000 cash on him, he would’ve been that stubborn to not hand it over? BB, Mary Brunner & Susan made that man wait in scared agony, then killed him and left him to rot. BB is an egotistical, delusional slob. He thinks himself some sort of celebrity and that’s his biggest problem. He doesn’t deserve parole whatsoever. He has tarnished his victim’s memory by labeling Gary a drug dealer. That’s truly nauseating!

  33. Lee says:


  34. Stephen Craig says:

    I have to agree with Lee, for, although I too read that GH had allegedly “burned” the family in a drug deal despite assertions from others that there is actually no basis/truth in this claim and that BB had simply been sent to GH’s home to get money, Manson believing that GH had recently received an inheritance. What occurred to GH in those horrible few days at the hands of those whom many today sympathize with was simply a slaughter, and demonstrates, why, in my opinion, that many of us feel these murders should stay locked up until their own demise (and here I am in total agreement with PK who stated once “what we did is unforgiveable”): if any crimes demand incarnation for life, it is crimes like those perpetrated on the victims of the Manson killings. I concede that there have been countless crimes with levels of brutality that are mind boggling, and knowing that in many cases the ones responsible for such atrocities now walk free; however my feelings are that these occurrences are truly a travesty of justice, and the problems/concerns are not the continued incarceration for the Manson killers, but the fact that those of their ilk who were convicted of committing similar crimes are now free. And if the notoriety of the case/perpetrators/victims is the driving force that keeps these destroyers behind bars, good. It’s too bad that life without parole was not an option when the U.S. Supreme Court abolished the death penalty back in 1972. Then at least the families of those lost during this killing spree would (perhaps) have more of a sense of closure, and not be subjected to attending parole hearings in their search for justice (and believe me, having attended two parole hearings for the man who murdered my dear, sweet cousin many years ago, it is one of the most brutal experiences you’ll ever go through).

  35. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Lee I agree with you about the drug burn being crap, but that is the narrative from Cupid and he’s stuck with it. They wanted money for dune buggies and supplies to prepare for HS, which was the proven motive. I also believe there was the big get even due to Manson not making it musically. I believe it was the prosecutors mistake not to introduce that part of the motive as it has left speculation wide open. I’m speculative of Newsom including the drugs as part of his reversal. Glad he did, just wondering why.

    Gary Hinman was the first victim and he is always forgotten or at best receives a mere mention. (as does Shorty Shea) His murder was just as horrific as the others suffered, if not more so due to the three days of torture preceding his death.

    Stephen Craig, I truly am sorry for the murder of your cousin. No one really understands unless they go through it, being member of a club no one wants to belong to is a terrible experience. Guess that’s why I’m the curmudgeon of the board. Victims just want their loved ones to never be forgotten, to not be known as a murder victim or statistic, but that they lived. They had a life brutally ripped from them.

    It’s up to us to never let them forget.

  36. Stephen Craig says:

    I appreciate your thoughts, “NJNP”, and it because of my family’s experience dealing with the murder/aftermath, that I feel the way I do about people like those discussed in this forum. Loosing a loved one to murder is a “unique” experience, and one that evokes emotions that are hard to describe. The utter “unfairness” of it all is staggering, and the way the brutality of the act forever taints the way you look at the world, others, and personal safety is overwhelming. The man responsible for my cousin’s death served 25 years of his 25 to year life sentence, after which he was up for parole. My other cousin (the victims brother) and I “represented” not our family, but more importantly, our murdered loved one at this hearing, and, although we had “steeled” ourselves for the experience, once the perpetrator was brought into the room and the hearing began, I felt such an overwhelming sense of sadness, so “deep” that I thought I was literally going to be sick. I remember reaching for my cousin’s hand under the table and throughout the whole ordeal we sat there, gripping each other’s hands under this table, as if to give each other the strength to make it through this process. And believe me, we needed all the “strength” we could get, for it was a horrible experience on many, many levels. Yet we were willing to go through it for Kenny (my cousin), for we were determined to demonstrate to the board that we were not there to talk about a “footnote” to this crime, but a person; a real-life human being who had his hopes, his dreams, his fears, his triumphs (and more importantly, that he was loved and missed in ways that words cannot describe). Kenny’s killer did not receive his parole that go-round, but he did three years later. His family was there to greet him as he left prison, laughing/smiling/all dressed up and carrying balloons and flowers. A local news reporter asked what he was planning to do when he got home, and he said something along the lines of “eat some good home cooking and get my life back” When asked if he had anything to say to the family of the victim, he replied (something along the lines of) “I’m moving forward with my life. So should they”. Of course, that was easier said than done because for us, there was no homecoming, Kenny wasn’t getting his life back, our family wasn’t “whole” again. Kenny was dead, and his killer was now a free man. So anyway, when I read people say that Manson killers have spent enough time in jail, that so-and-so is a political prisoner, that holding someone down while someone else tries to stab them is not so bad, etc…, I do have to wonder about their levels of compassion. I know that in our case there were defense attorney’s/supporters/family members of my cousin’s killer who wanted my family to just “go way” for they were taken aback by family’s refusal to back down from lobbying for continued incarceration. For them, we were simply a reminder of the slaughter their loved one had committed, and our continuous involvement in the process and support for Kenny was a reminder of what their loved one was: a killer. And they clearly didn’t want to be “confused” by the facts, and instead wanted to create a false narrative that minimized that actions/damages done to the victim, allowed them to rationalize behavior, and demonstrate a lack of humanity that was, for me, appalling. And I see the same thing happening here with Manson family members who we now comment on.

  37. Cybele Moon says:

    Stephen your post really resonated with me too and I agree! I don’t understand how anyone on being given the gift of freedom after committing such a crime can celebrate and rejoice knowing that some one else is grieving. Just go quietly and with shame!! I suppose if I was their family member I might be happy that they are coming home but not with fanfare etc.
    On saying that I agree with you that those that get out after committing such a horrendous crime are a travesty of justice usually. The Manson gang are really an example of those who should never get out. They were horribly cruel and callous and left such horror at the time and tragedy in their wake.

  38. NoJusticeNoPeace says:

    Well said Stephen, perfectly expressed.

  39. Lee says:

    Cupid has stuck with it, because he doesn’t have a choice. He started that ridiculous, asinine lie about Gary, just so he could try minimizing his Manson involvement. Why would every person involved other than him insist after 50 years that it was a planned robbery? It’s stupid. He isn’t ever going to get out, nor does he deserve to. Recording artist, my ass!

  40. Christy says:

    Snort, yeah, like a conservative republican Governor would grant parole to any Manson follower. They’ve got a better chance with Newsom.

    The only thing I can possibly come up with for the AA and substance abuse is Bobby is busy making pruno in prison.

  41. Christy says:

    BB is better off where he is right now. What is he going to do to support himself if he gets out tomorrow? He gets regular meals and health care where he is. He won’t get those once out and meth cooking isn’t a career. Which is about the only thing he’s qualified for.

    I simply don’t see this guy being able to support himself without turning to crime.

  42. Lee says:

    Christy, didn’t you hear? Bobby Beausoleil won’t need any job when released! The public will be so grateful that he will be out & free to start recording AND touring again, that he’ll have millions upon millions from record sales. His artwork will sell in galleries worldwide too! You see, Bobby Beausoleil was railroaded by Gary Hinman into wasting away in a prison cell for decades all because Gary sold him bunk and he was going to get beat up by the bikers at the ranch! The world has been a miserable & sad place without having access to this man’s recordings & tours! He was so well known and played in so many famous bands that people will be paying him simply for being free……NOT!

  43. Jo Hannah says:

    No one ever wants any of the Manson family out, no way no how. Their names and their crime are synonymous with senseless horror and will go down in history as such. Any one who could participate in such acts, brainwashed or not can never be fully trusted again, no matter how rehabilitated they are in a controlled setting.

Leave a Reply
