Summary of the case
Leslie Van Houten was one of the Charles Manson followers
that committed a series of murders in 1969. She was 19 years at the time of
committing the murder and a committed member of the cult. She even stated that
she thought Manson was Jesus Christ. Initially sentenced to death, but the
verdict was later overturned to life incarceration following the Constitutional
changes in California regarding the capital punishment at the time. She has
applied for 19 paroles over the last 46 years that she has served her jail
term, and the now 66-year-old lady has had a chance to be paroled following her
recommendation for parole. One of her counterparts to the Manson cult named
Bruce Davis had his parole overturned by the California Governor Jerry Brown in
2013 because he was still a danger to the society.[1]
Introduction
Parole is a form of provisionary
release of a prisoner that agrees to certain conditions to the completion of
certain sentence period. It is associated to the Middle Ages whereby the
prisoners were released based on the fact that they gave their word.[2]
Te paroled individual is not offered amnesty of commutation of their sentence
but rather is still considered to be serving their sentences and hence may be
returned to prison at any time if they are in violation of the agreed upon
terms of the parole. Some of the conditions of parole include the obedience of
the law, maintaining contact with a parole officer and also obtaining a
productive and legal form of employment. Parole was introduced through a
concept by Alexander Maconochie, who was a Scottish geographer and captain of
the Royal Navy upon his appointment as the superintendent of the British penal
colonies in the 1840s.[3]
It was part of his plan to prepare the individuals for their eventual return to
the society and was based on the excellent overall performance of such an
individual. In the United States, it was introduced by Penologist Zebulon Brockway
in a direct attempt to manage and control the prison populations and also to
rehabilitate those incarcerated. In the majority of the states in America, the
parole decision is vested in the parole board that conducts hearings to
ascertain whether such an inmate is up for parole or not. Good behavior is not
merely the only thing that guarantees parole but proves of the preparedness and
also rehabilitation of the prisoner as the form of readiness to rejoin society
is needed. Such a criminal needs to demonstrate that they are ready and also
have the means to be productive members of society.[4]
Before the parole is granted, the
inmate has to have an interview with the board and also undergone some
psychological examinations. They are also required to agree to abide by the
conditions of the parole and is therefore liable to signing a parole
certificate or ca form of contract that contains the conditions that the inmate
is bound to follow. Upon release, the individual is attached to a parole
officer that becomes like the watch for the parolee making unannounced visits
to the house and place of work of the parolee.[5]
The parole officer is the one that now checks for any signs of contravening of
the parole conditions.
It is, therefore, clear that parole for
any inmate that is eligible as is the case with Leslie Van Houten is not just
freeing the prisoner but is a continued process of rehabilitating the
individual and also reintroducing them back to society. It is a second chance
to the person to be able to serve their country and make right the wrongs that
they may have done in the past that landed them in jail in the first place.
Therefore, Leslie Van Houten just like any other inmate in the United States
deserves parole hearing. Furthermore, it is within her basic human rights. She
deserves the parole hearing subsequent release if she is in line with the
parole principles and meets the conditions of receiving her parole.
Justification for punishment that
should be used
The justification for punishment that
should be utilized in the Leslie case should be rehabilitation. Punishment is
the authoritative instituting of an unpleasant outcome or an undesirable
outcome to an individual or a group of people as a response to particular
actions. In the legal criminal justice system, punishment may take the form of
fines, confinement or even penalty. Regarding the legal process, the punishment
accorded to the violators of crime is referred to as penology and in modern
contexts, it is called corrections that happen through the correctional process.[6] There are four primary justifications for
punishment that guide the United States Justice system. These are deterrence,
incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retribution. Incapacitation involves trying
to stop or bar the felon from committing any further harm to society or
individuals since they are imprisoned. Deterrence, on the other hand, works on
the principle of trying to deter others from committing similar acts. It is the
threat of punishment through the justice system that serves to discourage or
scare people from engaging in illegal activities. Retribution is and of serving
justice to the society and also the victims of an illegal act.[7]
It is like causing similar harm to the perpetrator as the caused to the victims
and also the society in general. Retribution causes a form of rebalancing
whereby the criminal who had gained benefit over the victim or caused a loss to
society or the victim also suffers so as to return the balance in society. The
deterrence and incapacitation models of punishment are majorly inclined to
reduce future crimes by individuals through making it more costly and also
removing the offender from society. On the other hand, the rehabilitative model
assumes that the crime is determined by the social forces and not based on the
decisions of the criminals while the just deserts doctrine believes in
punishments being commensurate to the offenses committed.[8]
For the case with Leslie Van Houten she
has gone through the entire process of punishment. It is because she has been
behind bars for over four decades when she was taken to be a threat to society.
It means that she was deterred from committing any further atrocities to the
society and was also incapacitated to do so through the confinement in the
prison cells. The community and also the family of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca
have had their retribution and also restitution for the case of Leslie.[9]
It is because she has felt the pain of incarceration as her freedom was taken
away from her for the last decades. As an individual, she has also faced
immense separation from her family and also what would have been a bright youth
and she has had to spend her entire youth and middle age within the confinement
of the prison cells. There is no greater restitution to the crimes committed
than that. It is also a form of retribution to the family as they have
inflicted the psychological and emotional pain that they also felt as they lost
their families. It is also a punishment for society as such events cause a lot
of psychological harm to the entire county because of the intensity of the
murders that she committed. It is, therefore, imperative that the law now seeks
to offer a kind of rehabilitation to the felon.[10]
It is counterproductive, and also, it beats the purpose of having a justice
system if the needs and also the views of the criminal are also not heard.
Rehabilitation as a purpose of punishment is aimed at changing the criminal so
as to make her a better member of society. If the individual is no longer
offered an opportunity to contribute to society and also a chance to change
their actions or behavior, it will make the legal justice system a form of
vendetta and not a correctional opportunity as it is called. Therefore, the
guiding punishment justification principle that should be used in the case of
Leslie should be rehabilitation.[11]
Moral responsibility of Leslie Van
Houten
Leslie was part of a larger community
and society and was an essential part of society even during his committing of
the murder. She was under the moral responsibility to acts a unit of the
functional society through acting in a manner that is good for all and not just
for her. Her actions should also have been helpful to the welfare of the
society and not just cause harm. It is, therefore, this that calls upon her to
follow certain norms that guide the community. For her case, she actively
supported the Manson Cult, and even she cited that she thought he was Jesus
Christ. It was apparent that Leslie’s sense of moral reasoning was based on her
strong belief in the cult and also on the teachings that came with them. It is
also arguably true that she may have acted in the manner that she did with the
thinking that she was still in line with the moral reasoning and the moral code
in society as she was doing an act that was necessary according to Manson who
she thought was the basis of the moral reasoning. As an individual with clear
indications of mental health and psychological problems at the time of
committing the crimes, her moral responsibility lay with Manson cult since in
her world it superseded the general moral obligations.[12]
Leslie also had a duty that is an
obligation to the society and therefore was expected to fulfill the
requirements such as the upholding of the laws of the country. She also needed
to observe the rights of the individuals such as the right to live for the
victims of her atrocities. She was, therefore, contravening with the rights of
other which meant that she was not observing her moral obligations and duties
at the time of committing the crime. However since her conscience that is the
guiding principle of moral responsibility did not recognize the wrong in what
she did, she may be taken that her moral responsibility at the time lay with
the Manson cult that guided her actions and also directed her conscience.
In the present day, Leslie has had the right form of
rehabilitation and also retribution. There are indications that over the years
she has not violated any of the major roles in the prison cells according to
the correctional officers. She has also faithfully served her prison term and
continues to do so since it is her moral responsibility at the moment to offer
the retribution to the victims and also the society for her contravening with
the moral principles that guide the community. She has further engaged in her
moral responsibility and holds the promise of continued service to the
community as she has gone ahead to earn degrees and even support others while
serving her prison sentence over the past four decades that she has been
imprisoned. When asked about her crimes, she is clearly regretful of her acts,
unlike the others that held to the fact that they were victims of the flawed
justice system. When interviewed she even apologized to the family of LaBianca
and is also viewed as a model prisoner to others. Her attorney also
acknowledges the fact that she had been back by all standards to society but
over the years, she has changed and also gotten a sense of moral guidance and
reasoning.[13]
Conclusion
The primary principle that guides the
parole boards are that the protection of the society is of paramount importance
while considering whether to allow the parole of an inmate or otherwise.[14]
Furthermore, the purpose of the justice system is to protect society and
individuals from harm and also ensure that individually abides by the laws of
the nation. For the case of Leslie, there are indications that she is no longer
a danger to society. As her lawyer states, she has been a role model to the
other inmates over time having served for over four decades with utmost
faithfulness and without any major violations of the laws within the correctional
facility. She has also become a model citizen in that over time she has even
earned a degree which is an indication that she is ready and also has the tools
to become a productive member of society. Moreover, there are over 18
psychologists that assessed Leslie on her current state and have given a clean
bill that she is fit to rejoining society and poses no further danger to the
community.[15]
Furthermore, she was a victim of a broken family and also brainwashing at a
tender age of 19 following the traumatic experiences she went through over the
course of her young life. Her family divorced at the age of 14 and her mother
forced her to have an abortion with the events shuttering her ambitions and
dreams in life.[16] It is
this that led her to a destructive path in life due to the lack of guidance and
also the emotional and psychological consequences of the ordeal and losses she
went through. Her actions may have been as a result of the poor young age
choices coupled with psychological distress that made her an easy target by the
Manson cult. At an age of 66 and also having served her jail term for over 66
years, she has paid the price in many ways. Furthermore, she has also been a
subject of rehabilitation over the course of her prison sentence. It is this
that has led to her taking responsibility for her actions and even taking a
step to apologize to the LaBianca family. She has also taken a path of
restoring her life through education and also taken the initiative to mentor
others within the prison walls maintaining a high discipline and integrity
which is needed in society. Therefore, Leslie Van Houten should be paroled.
[1]
Steve Almasy, "Leslie Van Houten, Manson Family
Member, Recommended For Parole", CNN, last modified 2016, accessed
May 6, 2016,
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/14/us/manson-family-leslie-van-houten-possible-parole/index.html.
[2]
Howard Abadinsky, Probation and Parole: Theory and Practice
(New York, NY.: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2011).
[3]
Ibid
[4]
Ibid
[6]
Thom Brooks, Punishment (Abingdon, Oxon:
Routledge, 2012).
[7]
John Wilson, "Correspondence: The Justification Of
Punishment", British Journal of Educational Studies 19, no. 2
(1971): 211.
[8]
Ibid
[9]
Ibid
[10]
Ibid
[11]
Ibid
[12]
Joel Samaha, Criminal Justice (Belmont, CA:
Thomson/Wadsworth, 2006).
[13]
Ibid
[14]
Ibid
[15]
Ibid
[16]
Ibid
Additional articles
Downward mobility happens when someone experiences an important decline in wealth, income, or occupational respect, from their preceding position. When the Garcia household moved to the United States, they went through a descending economic mobili...Economic-mobility …
Read Article1.0 Introduction The unsustainable agricultural practices are the source of food problems. It is significant to consider both the food policies and practices so as to make sure that there is a sustainable food system. According to Curran, April...Unsustainable-Food-Practices …
Read ArticleWorking Mothers- Effect on Children All through history women have been viewed as the weaker gender, physically as well as intellectually. Therefore, the roles delegated to women have a tendency to revolve around the home along with the raisin...policies-affecting-american-families …
Read Article