Bruce Davis' pending parole and those "Tex Tapes"
This morning while drinking my coffee, I was thinking about Bruce Davis' parole situation and those "Tex Tapes". Those of course, are our two current (pending if you will) TLB situations. If anyone has any updates on either situation, please share in the comments section.
RE Davis:
Revisions/Updates - 1/6/2013 - 9:10pm...
Brian re-broadcasted the Michael Beckman interview this evening.
(Beckman is Bruce's lawyer)
I listened closely. Here are some important revisions to my original post:
#1) The entire review process actually spans 150 days (not 160).
#2) During the first 120 days, the parole board conducts a mandatory "in-house" self-review.
#3) The final 30 days is the Governor's review period.
(Yes... the governor only gets the last 30 days)
**Being that the original parole hearing was October 4th, 2012... the review will be hitting the Governor's desk (on or about) February 1st.
Revisions/Updates - 1/6/2013 - 9:10pm...
Brian re-broadcasted the Michael Beckman interview this evening.
(Beckman is Bruce's lawyer)
I listened closely. Here are some important revisions to my original post:
#1) The entire review process actually spans 150 days (not 160).
#2) During the first 120 days, the parole board conducts a mandatory "in-house" self-review.
#3) The final 30 days is the Governor's review period.
(Yes... the governor only gets the last 30 days)
**Being that the original parole hearing was October 4th, 2012... the review will be hitting the Governor's desk (on or about) February 1st.
I apologize for the
previous inaccuracies.
Personally... I think Davis has a pretty damn good shot.
For starters, this is Bruce's second consecutive approval by the board. Secondly... Governor Brown has a track record which heavily favors Davis. Percentage-wise... Brown approves many more parole candidates, than Schwarzenegger did (while in office). The economy is also on Davis' side. And lastly, Brown is pretty damn old. He's probably ready for retirement. He has no worries in regard to any backlash, which could hamper his political career. His career is essentially over.
RE the "Tex Tapes":
The story of the "Tex Tapes" had a brief resurgence in the California media, ironically in the week(s) preceeding Davis' hearing. Since that time, the story has pretty much fizzled-out. It's my belief, that Debra Tate was fanning those flames (during Davis' parole week).
I haven't heard anything since.
If anyone has any tasty updates on either pending situation... please share below. Thanks!
For starters, this is Bruce's second consecutive approval by the board. Secondly... Governor Brown has a track record which heavily favors Davis. Percentage-wise... Brown approves many more parole candidates, than Schwarzenegger did (while in office). The economy is also on Davis' side. And lastly, Brown is pretty damn old. He's probably ready for retirement. He has no worries in regard to any backlash, which could hamper his political career. His career is essentially over.
RE the "Tex Tapes":
The story of the "Tex Tapes" had a brief resurgence in the California media, ironically in the week(s) preceeding Davis' hearing. Since that time, the story has pretty much fizzled-out. It's my belief, that Debra Tate was fanning those flames (during Davis' parole week).
I haven't heard anything since.
If anyone has any tasty updates on either pending situation... please share below. Thanks!
I'm from California and I remember when Brown was the Governor back in the 70s. Besides bumping uglies with Linda Ronstadt he was known as a Governor that was very liberal and willing to go against the grain.
ReplyDeleteI think that he would be much more willing than Ahnold to give one a second chance. If I were a betting man I'd bet that Davis gets his parole.
Thanks Doc.
ReplyDeleteI agree.
Davis has a better chance with Brown, than he did with Arnold.
Brown's reputation and cold hard statistics, both support your assertion.
I don't see how anyone would intlligently argue otherwise.
Doesn't Brown have a nickname like "Moonbeam" or something like that??? LOL
As a parole candidate... always roll your dice on a politician named "moonbeam"! LMAO!
Godfather,
ReplyDeleteI beleive that your conclusion is accurate, however, Brown is far from being done. As discussion goes on about his next term, he is looking create his legacy upon California, which cannot be completed in two years.
With the passage of Prop. 36 last November, which Brown supported, California has now changed how it's Three Strikes laws operate. Brown is promoting this as a cost-savings issue, but he must be careful not to be seen as softer on crime than he is already seen. We all know his prior history with crime & punishment, so he is sensitive to how his decisions are viewed. That being said, I believe that he will not oppose Davis' parole, and that he will put a spin on it. Brown already paroled Richard Shoenfeld, one of the Chowchilla School Bus kidnappers, believing that 36 years was a sufficient time to serve for kidnapping 27 people, 26 of them children. The thought was that Schoenfeld was the follower of his older brother and fellow kidnapper, Fred Woods, who was recently denied parole. The same justification can be used with Davis. Not saying I agree with it, but what the process is most likely to be.
As always, an honor, Godfather..
LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...
ReplyDeleteDoesn't Brown have a nickname like "Moonbeam" or something like that??? LOL
-------------------------------
Yes he does. It has to do with the way he comes off when discussing issues. He is a true intellectual and at first glance his statements come off to some as weird. I'm in no way a Brown fan but I will admit that the man is one of the most 'book smart' people I've ever heard speak. Unfortunately I wouldn't be surprised to find out that he's so book smart that he wouldn't be able to tie his own shoes.
Thank You, Consigliere Dilligaf.
ReplyDeleteExcellent information, as always...
So what you're saying (if I understand you correctly), is that Governor Brown will likely release Davis, with the justification that Davis was a "follower", and as such, has served ample time... and society can still sleep at night, knowing full-well that the "leader" (i.e., Manson) will continue to be punished accordingly.
That sounds like an excellent prediction to me.
I will act upon your advice at once, Consigliere Dilligaf...
MattP, get the Colonel on the horn.
Arrange a "sit-down". LOL
If Bruce makes it out it must be only a matter of time before Pat and Leslie get a release.
ReplyDeleteIn re a sit down, remember to leave the gun, take the cannoli...
ReplyDeleteIsn't the Governor dying of or has some type of cancer?? Think I saw this on the news, wonder if that will delay Bruce's parole chance
ReplyDeleteI am not from California but I believe I have heard more about his reforms on economics (given the states current problem in this area) and has had a harder than normal outlook on crime.
ReplyDelete"Brown refused parole for 71 first- and second-degree murderers whose release had been recommended by the state parole board in 2011."
I think setting such a high profile inmate free would hurt his new tough stance on crime. Plus he is up for election next year...I don't think he would risk having this mark against him.
But I could be completely off the mark. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on my part.
I was wondering about Bruce's parole decision the other day as well. I knew that the final decision on whether he is released is due fairly soon. I agree that this is Bruce's best, and I would even say his last, shot at freedom. The stats on Brown releasing murderers on parole are incredibly high when compared to Davis and Arnold. I don't know that there is anyone that would be more likely than Brown to grant Bruce his freedom. If Brown keeps him locked up, I don't think anyone will ever release him or any other Family member.
ReplyDeleteDill that was interesting info on the Chowchilla bus kidnappers. In light of that I am even more inclined to think that Bruce will be out.
I bet Leslie is following Bruce's parole decision more closely than anyone. If Bruce is freed, I think she will be granted parole this summer. Like Bruce, her parole denials have usually been for the minimum time allowed. While the board has never found her suitable before, I think the decision on Bruce's freedom will impact whether she is found suitable this summer. I don't think any of the rest of them get out though.
and it may very well go to show ya that when imprisoned for murder it is much better to dabble in christianity than in child pornography, as referenced by the eviliz blog vis a vis Bobby Beausoleil...
ReplyDeleteMattP, get the Colonel on the horn.
ReplyDeleteArrange a "sit-down". LOL
said L/S
I think for a sit down with the Colonel I'd bring the Cannoli AND the Gun.
just in case.
So...are we really envisioning a warm autumn evening in 2013 when Bruce and Leslie get together for old times sake and take a ride in his convertible up the coast and maybe cruise by old Spahn for a look-see.
ReplyDeleteIt's damn hard to wrap my mind around those two being freebirds. Not that I disagree with it, just that it seems surreal.
It will be interesting to see if Debra has one last card up her sleeve or did she bet the whole pot on the Tex Tapes.
yeah, Starship, that Bobby B child porn story blew me away. I had never heard of it. How does a guy who goes out of his way to renounce Manson and paint himself in the best possible light so he might get parole, have both the chutzpah and the stupidity to peddle child porn from his jail cell.
ReplyDeleteAllot of folk seem to want to give Bobby B a break, but I have long felt he just may have as much evil in him as Charlie and Tex.
Bobby B. was selling child porno? Gross.
ReplyDeleteBruce might have a shot, but I think that if Susan didn't get out on her deathbed, he might not make it.
And Susan didn't really kill anybody.
Consigliere Dill, I have a question.
ReplyDeleteIf the Gov does decide to vote for Bruce's release, isn't there another Board that meets to review his decision?
Viewed objectively, an allegation has little or no force unless substantiated. The 'Bobby B child porn story' may be just that - a story.
ReplyDeleteThe quotes on the eviliz site are partisan - read down and you will see how Prahl comes back:
This whole business about this art gallery business and this -- and, you know, I'm really offended by the notion, this B&B Enterprises or whatever Mr. Sequeira wants to tattoo him with. You know, if you've got the horses to pull the wagon, hitch them up. Charge him with something. If he did pornography, if he did child .... That whole business about this B&B Enterprises and child porn and all this other stuff, if he believes that, charge him. If he believes that, if the district attorney in whatever county that was, charge Mr. Beausoleil. Take him to trial. But they don't do that. They just want to create innuendo. We'll accuse him of child porn because that will really taint him in the eyes of the Commissioner, that will really make him look bad. He's not just a murderer. He's a child pornographer ...
And no more reference is made in the hearing, nor, as far as I have read, anywhere else. The 'story', if true, would surely have been highlighted in Anderson's decision statement (it wasn't), and surely would have led to further investigation. And been seized upon earlier (this was 2010) by one of the many 'researchers' out there.
That's the way it seems to me.
FrankM
even if davis is paroled he's not going to get out immediately. his release date could be set many many years from now and after that he has to serve two years in a federal pen. for a gun charge. i think davis will be paroled but he won't be walking the streets for at least a few years.
ReplyDeleteMary,
ReplyDeleteJerry Brown is not known for his hard stance on crime, in fact, he is just the opposite. In his first term as Governor, he gave us the Ros Bird Court (which voters ultimately removed when they tired of her extremely liberal decisions on criminal matters), he gave California the Inmate Bill of Rights, and has given us the prison realignment which has sent thousands of inmates back to county jails to serve their sentence, rather then a prison. The problem occurs when you have a full jail, you end up using a catch & release method of law enforcement, resulting in higher crime rates.
Katie,
In California, if a governor approves a parole, that is it. Their decision is final. If he denies parole, the inmate may file a suit in an attempt to overturn the governors decision.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDilligaf said...
ReplyDelete"In California, if a governor approves a parole, that is it. Their decision is final. If he denies parole, the inmate may file a suit in an attempt to overturn the governors decision."
From an old CNN report (2002), at one of Van Houten's parole hearings, by Charles Feldman, He said "it is the Gov. who then decide wether or not she can ever be a free woman,that is, unless a judge here, which would be a precedent for this state, decides to over-rule any decision the Gov. may make."
This is the first and only place I have heard this.
I agree Bobby. Frank always does a good job of applying reason. I admit to 'jumping the gun' on child porn allegations due to family history with Catholic Church. I lean towards the old "where there is smoke there is fire" mistake. It is a bad habit. That is why I love blogs and posters like Frank who offer a different perspective.
ReplyDeleteI do confess, though, to being really annoyed with the "fizzle of the Tex Tapes". The LAPD made the tapes a valid news story when they went public with their belief that there just might be information on the tapes about additional crimes. When you make a charge or allegation like that there has to be a resolution of some kind. Most of us clearly doubt there is anything of substance on the tapes, but a comprehensive resolution should be within the realm of doable.
ReplyDeleteCome on, Debra, make some more noise.
Louis,
ReplyDeleteYour comment dovetails exactly into what I say. If an inmate has their parole decision by a governor, they can file a suit, or appeal if you will, against the state, in an attempt to overturn that decision. However, if parole is granted, a typical citizen cannot do the same thing and file a suit, as they lacking any standing. It is a win-win for an inmate, not so much for society...
I must apologise - the quote I cited earlier was not from the Beausoleil Parole Hearing of 13 December 2010 as I had thought, rather from the earlier hearing on 22 December 2008. In the interest of accuracy I should make this clear, but it actually helps my case insofar as the child porn allegations made by Patrick Sequeira in 2008 are not repeated or referred to in 2010.
ReplyDeleteMy thanks to those who made such kind comments on my post.
FrankM
It seems to me I seen a vid on YouTube about Grogan's release on parole. A week or 2 before, a notorious murderer was paroled and there was a large "media circus". They decided when Grogan was released, to avoid a repeat, he was released in "secret" in the middle of the night. It was like a week or two before the media was even told Grogan was out.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that if Davis is actually paroled from prison, the same thing might happen. It's not a certainty by any means, but it is a possibility that has happened in the past.
ReplyDeleteVery nice to see you posting again Frank.
Dill thanks for answering my question. It seems that in order to get released on parole there are so many hoops to jump through. I'm really mystified how Clem even got out when he did.
ReplyDeleteFrank...always a pleasure! :)
I was reading through Bobby's 2008 parole hearing over at the cielodrive.com website (great website with lots of interesting info).
After Patrick Sequeira got through speaking this is how Bobby's attorney started out. I thought it was funny:
ATTORNEY PRAHL: I was just wondering if I could have a few minutes to go unbolt a kitchen sink that we can throw at Mr. Beausoleil. I'm surprised that -- And I do appreciate the work of the District Attorney's Office. It's their job to make the best case in opposition, especially in a case with this kind of notoriety. I'm surprised that we haven't been able to link Mr. Beausoleil either to the Kennedy assassination or the Lindberg baby kidnapping, but -- And in a further note of irony, I'll pass along that Bobby Beausoleil was -- there is a note in his file that he was convicted of a leash law violation, I think, in 1966 in Los Angeles, and maybe next time the district attorney can throw that in...
If I can remember correctly, or how I viewed the 2008 Bobby B. parole.. The art show in LA that featured his work, had some images/artwork that were viewed as pornographic per CDC rules/regulations. And this was brought up in the hearing.
ReplyDeleteHoops and Hoops Katie
ReplyDeleteClem was the smart one...
ReplyDeleteI came across this article yesterday while looking for info on Brown's parole decisions during his current stint as governor. I thought it was pretty interesting, particularly the parts where he says that Arnold and Davis did not apply the law correctly in overturning so many of the parole boards decisions, and that he is less susceptible to political pressure because he is at the end of his career anyway. After reading the article, it seems like Bruce is exactly the type of person whose parole grant he would let stand; he's 70, has served 40 years, and has not been in trouble while incarcerated.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Brown-paroles-more-lifers-than-did-predecessors-2373800.php#page-1
Thanks Michelle. Interesting article. It looks like Bruce's chance of getting out could be pretty good. But like Beauders said, it won't be overnight.
ReplyDeleteLouis Clem was a lot smarter than he let on. I'm still scratching my head over how he got out so long ago and the others are still in.
Sam, there was mention about some pornographic art work that Bobby had painted that sold in an art show. It also mentioned some pictures of young supposedly kidnapped kids that were mailed to Bobby's wife's house. I'm with Bobby's lawyer...if that's the case why wasn't he charged?
Actually I think they should turn them all loose. Let them wonder how to make enough money for the rent, utilities, groceries & medical bills.
ReplyDeleteBut...with the following parole requirements:
Leslie: Must work at a high end dress shop for 10 years, trying on at least 18 outfits per day. She must also stay at least 200 miles away from John Waters.
Pat: Has to drink at least 8 cups of Folgers coffee per day for 10 years. She also has to live in a doghouse with her pooch collection.
Bruce: Must start a prison ministry and serve in every prison in the US and Canada. Can't be within 200 miles of a dune buggy.
Bobby: Cannot inflict his music or art on anything living...ever.
Tex: Must put flowers on and manicure the graves of all his victims daily for the rest of his life. He must also start a traveling salvation show and save at least 100 souls per day. And if he crosses the border into Texas he'll be shot on sight.
Charlie: 2,000,000 hours of community service, which would include helping old ladies across the street and serving muffin stumps in the soup kitchen. He also must counsel young people against "carving swastikas" on their foreheads.
LOL.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDilligaf - my words were misunderstood. I was piggybacking off the first sentence in your first comment...about his legacy and wanting to create it but needing more time. I do not believe Jerry Brown was ever hard on crime nor is he known being hard on crime. I meant that it is perceived that he has been harder than normal on crime after being Attorney General. He is still extremely liberal...and we are talking CA - I simply meant to agree that if he is looking for legacy and re election next year...and him denying parole last year to 71 inmates that were otherwise approved for parole...releasing a Manson family member is not the kind of legacy I think he is looking for.
ReplyDeleteI also said that it might be my wishful thinking. Unfortunately, I think that is the case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_FLrrrqd1E
ReplyDeleteClayton Moore played The Lone Ranger. He knew George Spahn and even visited George at the ranch while the Family lived there. Check out the opening scene on this Lone Ranger episode. The part where the Lone Ranger gets his horse to stand on his hind legs while he screams hiyo Silver was filmed just down the road from Spahn Ranch but not on Spahn Ranch. If you turn onto the road that runs into Santa Susannah Pass Road where Shorty was murdered at the turnout and drive up that road 2 blocks you can see the rocks stacked on top of each other from the opening scene.
BTW, Lone Ranger Rock is just off Redmesa Rd which was not a road when they filmed The Lone Ranger. I have scanned through many Lone Ranger episodes and never found any exterior scenes that were filmed on Spahn Ranch. The ranch may have been the only buildigs in that area at the time of the series so Spahn Ranch was more than likely the base camp for actors.
ReplyDeletehttp://claytonmoore.tripod.com/Iverson1.html
ReplyDeleteThe Iverson Ranch was probably another base camp for The Lone Ranger. The rock is on Iverson Ranch which is walking distance from Spahn Ranch.
For any musicians out there who might be interested, checkout torontothrash.blogspot.com. They are taking submissions for an ATWA tape to be released later this year. All proceeds go to ATWA. So knock the dust off that old guitar and send in those songs!
ReplyDeleteHell, we could probably form our band and write a song here on the blog!
I seem to remember hearing that parts of Bonanza were filmed at or near Spahn? Anyone able to confirm that?
ReplyDeleteThere is something surreal about the all-American, apple pie Cartwright family sitting down to a righteous family lunch mere metres away from the degenerate slippies of Manson fame.
Or maybe it's just the remnants of the drink I'm attempting to recover from.
FrankM
Lynyrd (I'm being nice), didn't you just recently say you would not tollerate subject matter beinh hijacked from other blogs to be discussed here?
ReplyDeleteFrank you should be ashamed.
Suze
ReplyDeleteWhat do I have to be ashamed of? I was responding to a post (see above) of Mr P's where he mentioned filming of the Lone Ranger at Spahn Ranch. It reminded me (quite independently of whatever anyone else may have posted elsewhere) of Bonanza.
I've not seen this theme on any other blog, and can hardly be expected to be familiar with what is posted on other sites around the web.
Or do you have another agenda?
FrankM
I couldn't find an exact list of what was filmed at Spahn, there are various internet sources that say various things including:
ReplyDelete"Located along the south side of Santa Susanna Pass Road near the entrance to Iverson Movie Ranch, the former Spahn Ranch was seldom used for filmmaking, failing to attract the attention of A-list producers, directors and stars like its neighboring movie ranches -- Iverson and Corrigain -- did. It was mostly used for B-Westerns, although exterior locations from Bonanza and The Lone Ranger were shot here."
and
"Many western-themed movies and television shows were fimed on the ranch, including Duel in the Sun (1946) and television episodes of Bonanza, The Lone Ranger, and Zorro. It was also the filming location for the B-movie The Creeping Terror which is widely considered one of the worst movies ever made."
Katie...that is funny what Bobby's lawyer said...classic.
ReplyDeleteBut I think Manson is scratching more then his head over Clem LOL
Btw, Manson does drink Folger's coffee. Over at Charliemanson.com, they have a copy of one of his old cantene lists, and sure enough, there's Folger's coffee on the list.
Mary shared:
ReplyDelete""Brown refused parole for 71 first- and second-degree murderers whose release had been recommended by the state parole board in 2011.""
I'll tell everyone upfront, that I know nothing about California politics or politicians.
I also have no idea, what type of volume crosses a Governor's desk, in regards to parole decisions.
Having made those points clear...
I think we have to look at percentages, to get a true picture of Brown's actual degree of "leniency".
What I mean is:
The figure of 71 denials, really carries little significance, unless we know how many decisions Brown made in total.
If Brown denied 71 inmates parole, out of 75 possible candidates... that would indeed, be indication of a man who is "tough on crime".
If Brown denied 71 parole candidates, from a pool of 700 candidates... that would indeed, be considered lenient.
The last set of statistics that I viewed (which admittedly was some time ago), indicated that Brown was much more lenient than Arnold regarding parole candidates..
Anyone care to dig-up some fresh statistics?
That would be very helpful.
Katie said:
ReplyDelete"It seems that in order to get released on parole there are so many hoops to jump through. I'm really mystified how Clem even got out when he did".
The same notion has crossed my mind, several times.
The parole process is quite elaborate... as well it should be.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but, I believe Grogan served just 13 years.
Considering the uphill battle that the others have had... it seems almost incredible.
Grogan (again correct me if I'm wrong)... was also, the only one who (to my knowledge) was not given the death penalty.
According to Hendrickson's original film... the judge granted Grogan leniency, because he considered Grogan to be "functioning just above the intelligence of a horse" (or, something to that effect).
Jeez...
If we were lenient on every criminal who is missing a few cards from their deck (LOL)... they'd ALL be free.
You've gotta be a little stupid to commit murder in the first place, don't you?
Doesn't that go without saying??
Grogan was ultimately released because he located Shorty's body for the police... or, so we are told.
I've often suspected that Grogan had some connection to an important high-court judge... or a high-powered politician.
Do the math:
First Grogan avoids the death penalty because he's stupid... and then... he's released because he points-out his victim.
It all seems kinda frivolous to me... and who's luck is THAT freakin' good??
Jeez...
I'd bet dollars to donuts, that EVERY murderer in the world, would bring us directly to their victim(s) discarded body... if they knew the jailhouse bars would fly open, the next day!
Shit... I'd bring my victims skull to you on a stake, if I knew I was gonna go free.
What kind of justice is that??
Something's going-on.
The rest of these shmucks have been jumping through hoops... begging for release... and crying crocodile tears of remorse, for over four decades... and yet, they're still rotting-away.
Heck...
Davis was already approved based on his own merits... twice... and he's still in prison, awaiting the Governor's mercy.
Grogan walks after serving 13 years??
Something's going-on...
They must have REALLY wanted to know, where Shea's body was... that's for dang sure!
If Shea was my brother... I'd rather not find his body ever, than release his murderer.
But, that's just me...
Adam said...
ReplyDelete"If Bruce makes it out it must be only a matter of time before Pat and Leslie get a release".
I believe Bruce's release would benefit Leslie and Bobby.
Debra Tate seems to adhere to that notion, as well.
She has stated similar sentiment on camera.
I agree with you (and Debra) on that point.
As for Pat:
I like Pat.
I find her the most genuine and remorseful of the bunch.
However, given the gravity and volume of her crimes... I just don't see her getting released.
She participated both nights.
The carving of Leno's chest, and the kitchen fork left in his body, are difficult to forget.
Talk about "callous disregard for human life".
Just like Tex... I think she's in jail, to stay.
That's my prediction... but, who knows.
I always believed that Leslie would be released first... but Grogan is already out... and Davis isn't far behind.
Looks like Leslie will be third, at best.
So, go figure...
If Bruce gets released... it will benefit the others... that's safe to assume.
Here's another thing that will benefit them:
Manson's death.
Once the "boogeyman" is gone, the "followers" will appear less consequential.
If Manson had died ten years ago unexpectedly... these folks would be in a much better position.
Unfortunately, Manson may live so old, that that "factor" may not come to fruition.
Well..yes, the case of Grogan. My feeling is that the only reason he has gotten released is because his victim was not rich and/or famous. It really kinda pisses me off a bit that evidently, a rich person's life is worth more then a poor man's life. Personally, I couldn't disagree more.
ReplyDeleteSeems he got a get-out-of-jail free pass on Labianca. Since, it does appear that he was there, with Sadie. No more or less as guilty as her.
Beauders said...
ReplyDelete"even if davis is paroled he's not going to get out immediately. his release date could be set many many years from now and after that he has to serve two years in a federal pen. for a gun charge. i think davis will be paroled but he won't be walking the streets for at least a few years".
This leads me to a question for Consigliere Dilligaf:
Exactly how is a release date determined... and by whom?
Can the date be "arbitrary" at someone's personal discretion?
What are the parameters?
I read on a blog once (many years ago), that an inmate has to serve two additional years after they've been granted parole for each murder charge.
IE... a parolee must serve additional time, according to a chart.
If memory serves me correctly... the "chart" corresponded to violent crimes only.
That's what I read, anyway.
Is there any truth or accuracy to that information??
Louis said:
ReplyDelete"Well..yes, the case of Grogan. My feeling is that the only reason he has gotten released is because his victim was not rich and/or famous. It really kinda pisses me off a bit that evidently, a rich person's life is worth more then a poor man's life. Personally, I couldn't disagree more".
I agree.
If Grogan had murdered Frank Sinatra, Lucille Ball (or Sharon Tate), he'd still be in jail.
It's bullshit, really...
>>>Frank said: There is something surreal about the all-American, apple pie Cartwright family sitting down to a righteous family lunch mere metres away from the degenerate slippies of Manson fame.>>>
ReplyDeleteThat's true. I'd love to see Ben, Hoss, Adam & Little Joe square off with Charlie, Tex, Bobby & Bruce.
Hoss could probably whip them all by himself. LOL.
>>>Louis said: Seems he got a get-out-of-jail free pass on Labianca. Since, it does appear that he was there, with Sadie. No more or less as guilty as her.>>>
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way. Why pin that on Susan and not Clem? Susan did a lot of big mouth bragging, but so did Clem.
>>>Lynyrd said: I'd bet dollars to donuts, that EVERY murderer in the world, would bring us directly to their victim(s) discarded body... if they knew the jailhouse bars would fly open, the next day!>>>
Isn't that the truth! That's like telling Scott Peterson "if you'll just tell us how you killed Laci & Connor, we'll have you on the next bus back to Fresno."
Grogan was convicted of murdering Shorty but they had no body to prove Shorty was even dead. It's quite amazing they convicted anyone without a body. Better to release Grogan early and get that all important body in order to prove that a murder was even committed because it was known that a key witness' testimony as to the location and time of Shorty's murder was wrong.
ReplyDeleteBTW, as the crow flies; Shorty was buried two blocks from Lone Ranger Rock.
ReplyDeleteGood point Mr. P. It would have been rather embarrassing to the DA if Shorty had walked in one day after having had a serious bout with amnesia or something.
ReplyDelete>>>Lurch said: Hell, we could probably form our band and write a song here on the blog!>>>
Sounds like a plan. I don't play guitar but I can play a mean set of "spoons". LOL.
While Governor Brown has reversed parole decisions on 71 cases, he has approved parole on 80% of all parole decisions placed before him. Not all of the paroles approved or denied are necessarliy related to a murder, but they are certainly a large number of the decisions.
ReplyDeleteGodfather, of the questions you ask, it is all determined by the BPH. They can set the date, whether it is a short period, or a longer period, to allow the process to follow it's legal course and to help an inmate prepare for release. It is not advantageous for anyone to be released cold turkey, as that can, not will, but can contribute to a re-offending in a very short time.
Thank You Consigliere Dilligaf.
ReplyDeleteNow that you mention it... I distinctly remember Michael Beckman (Bruce's lawyer) explaining that paroled inmates must undergo a process to "decompress" (as he termed it) before being released.
One last question for Consigliere Dilligaf.
ReplyDeletePoirot raises an interesting point.
Is it common for folks to be convicted of murder... without a victim's body in the morgue?
It seems the authorities went to pretty great lengths (releasing Grogan) to recover Shea's body.
Is it possible (as Poirot suggested), that the authorities were a little worried, that Shorty Shea might one day be found working on a horse ranch in Canada?
They'd certainly look like fools.
I've always wondered why recovering a bunch of bones was worth so much to the authorities.
Does Poirot have a point here?
>>Lurch said: Hell, we could probably form our band and write a song here on the blog!>>>
ReplyDelete>>Katie said:Sounds like a plan. I don't play guitar but I can play a mean set of "spoons". LOL
I've got some songs but I don't trust what ATWA would do with the money.
They'd Probably use it to buy charlie a new smartphone and stuff like that instead of helping the planet.
Dill will know this better than me, but I believe that the body ('corpus') in the expression corpus delicti refers not to a physical, rotting body but the body of evidence necessary to prosecute a suspect. In other words, corpus needs to be understood figuratively, not literally
ReplyDeleteA reference book I just consulted cites People v. Scott 176 Cal. App. 2d 458 (1960). I'm assuming that this was in force at the time of Shorty's [presumed] murder and the trial of his [presumed] killers.
If you look up People v. Scott you can read "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused".
But over to the Consigliere.
FrankM
Thank You, Frank.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletefound a story about statistics that even mention the Manson murderers...
ReplyDeletehttp://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/politics&id=8538506
As I said, it was only wishful thinking on my part.
Hi Mary,
ReplyDeleteYour link didn't work. : (
I see the website... but it's a blank search page.
Just past the whole article here. LOL
(Assuming it's not 6 pages) LOL
If it's real lengthy... just paste the good parts.
I'll allow up to two full posts-worth. LOL
From http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/politics&id=8538506
ReplyDeleteSACRAMENTO, Calif. (KFSN) -- Victims' rights groups are outraged that Gov. Jerry Brown is allowing more convicted murderers to be paroled, than previous governors.
Crime Victims Action Alliance is calling on Brown to release more detailed information on the convicted killers whose release he declined to stop last year. The state parole board approved 400 releases -- just 10 percent of the cases -- and the governor reversed only 71 decisions. That gives Brown a higher release rate than his two predecessors.
Brown's release rate stands at 80 percent. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was less generous, denying freedom nearly a quarter of the time. And Gov. Gray Davis was the stingiest, keeping most lifers behind bars, letting only 2 percent go.
"Under this administration, it seems very much the flood gates have been opened and just let them go free. That concerns us terribly," said Christine Ward from the Crime Victims Action Alliance.
"The rates may be different, but the result has been the same," said Brown's spokesman, Evan Westrup.
The Brown administration points out this governor is only following the law, that other governors were not. Under the Schwarzenegger administration, for instance, the courts stepped in and let almost paroled killers go despite what that governor wanted.
"Other governors have routinely flouted the law and ignored the law and what the law says is that if an individual has been deemed not a threat to public safety, then the governor must allow the parole decision to stand," said Westrup.
Brown's aides say the streets are not any more dangerous. Stanford University found that of the 860 murderers released since 1995, only five were arrested for another crime, none violent --- that's less than one-half of 1 percent.
"We feel good about these decisions. They're reasoned, they're thorough and we're confident," said Westrup in reference to the Governor's reversals.
While Charles Manson follower Tex Watson was denied parole for the 17th time in 2011, crime victims groups wonder about the next time.
"Many of the Manson clan have done perfect in prison and they could very well end up being in front of the governor someday who unfortunately, at this rate, may let them out," said Ward.
The governor's office also says that a federal court order to reduce the prison population was not a factor in parole dictions.
(Copyright ©2013 KFSN-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)
Updates...
ReplyDeleteBrian re-broadcast the Michael Beckman interview this evening.
(Beckman is Bruce's lawyer)
I listened closely.
Here's a few revisions:
#1) The entire review process actually spans 150 days (not 160).
#2) The first 120 days constitutes the in-house review by the board themselves.
#3) The final 30 days, is the Governor's review.
So... the governor only gets the last 30 days.
Being that the original parole hearing was October 4th, 2012... the review will be hitting the Governor's desk (on or about) February 1st.
---------------------------------
Also according to Beckman:
Governor Brown reversed less than 20% of the board's decisions.
(This mirrors the figures in Frank's post)
According to Beckman:
Arnold reversed approximately 75% of the board's decisions.
(This seems to conflict with Franks article. I'm interpreting Beckman's statement to mean, that Arnold released only 25% of the candidtaes... and the above article seems to suggest that he denied 25%).
Maybe I misunderstood Beckman.
----------------------------------
According to Beckman:
When the "release memo" is received by the prison, the inmate is generally released within 5 days.
Bruce would go directly to a semi-structured "transitional living home" to "de-compress".
(Basically a halfway house)
It's a religious-based environment which offers counseling, etc.
Beckman expounded on how difficult it is, for parolees to transition from fully structured life, to completely unstructured life, etc.
Lynyrd, you forgot to mention that Katie volunteered to 'pick Bruce up' in the prison parking lot...
ReplyDeleteOf course, it would be with the right bumper of her car as she channels her 'inner Doris' and takes Bruce for a helluva ride at 80 mph.
Hi Johnny.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't reading the chat room discussion.
I feel the need to reiterate how great it is, to have Frank back on the blog.
ReplyDeleteHe's one of the most knowledgable, well-respected, top-notch bloggers in cyberspace.
I can't say enough positive things about him.
Frank ROCKS.
There's no other way to say it...
Great to have you Frank!
Frank, you are correct in your understanding. It is the elements of the crime, not a physical body. You are also correcti in your cite of People V. Scott. What was once a rarity, we have seen many more convictions over the past 30 years in which a body has not been found, but all existing evidence points beyond a reasonable doubt, not a certainty, that a murder has occurred. While some believe that circumstantial evidence is not enough to secure a conviction, California prisons are filled with inmates convicted on circumstantial evidence.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not have much faith in Governor Brown, given his history on crime, I spent a couple of hours today reading the report that was filed with the state on the paroles that he blocked in 2011. I will go on the record that the reasoning used in his decisions indicate that he is capable of making sound analysis in reviewing Davis' parole.
i think part of the reason it appears grogan got out easily is that the purpose of prison has changed since his release. at the time of grogans release ca. prisons were more geared toward rehabilation and now they are more geared toward punishment and confinement. also the fact that his prosecutor and judge were involved in promoting his release had to help considerably. if one wants to go the conspiracy route the only thing i know is one of his brothers was a trainee cop at the time, so most likely nothing there. clem came from a working class family, so nothing there either. maybe he just earned his release by the standards of the time.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that the reason Grogan was released was because he led the police to the remains of Shea. I think those remains were found in 1978, Grogan wasn't released until 1985 according to Wiki, that's another 7 years. The news story about Grogan's release can be seen HERE.
ReplyDeleteDavis attorney Beckman indicated what the "official formula" for releasing Bruce Davis apparently is. However, I know from experience that deviations from that formula are commonplace.
I still had about 2 weeks left on my 3 year sentence when I was released. I was told at 9 a.m. I'd be released, by 1 in the afternoon I was dumped out of a police car about 30 miles from the prison.
I'm sure Davis won't be released that way, the governor may "waive" the last few days of Davis sentence and he is released secretly, the governor may completely ignore the case, Brown may take an active role himself and block his parole, there are several options.
I will be watching to see what happens as best I can. It will probably be a condition of his parole that he not associate with any former Manson family members. I suspect that's why you hear very little in person, from former family members that have been in prison, it may violate their parole.
>>>Sunset said: I still had about 2 weeks left on my 3 year sentence when I was released. I was told at 9 a.m. I'd be released, by 1 in the afternoon I was dumped out of a police car about 30 miles from the prison.>>>
ReplyDeleteWow that's amazing Sunset. They just drove you in a police car for 30 miles and dumped you out?? Was this in California?
No, Katie, it was not in CA, not even close. Yes, they just drove me about 30 miles (it might have been 20) I never knew exactly, and dumped me out in front of a post office. I was about 200 miles from home with 50 cents in my pocket. I remember standing in the sunshine, which was a quite a switch from being confined in concrete cells for nearly 3 years.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how people are "normally" released from prison, but that's how I was. From my cell in a super max prison, to standing on the sidewalk within a few hours. I think they gave me a pair of prison blue jeans, a T-shirt and a pair of sneakers.
That's been close to 15 years ago I guess.
Your legal articles are very informative and helpful. I would like to publish some your articles on Attorney Online. Morover, I create there an Attorney Directory (lawyers can submit their contacts for free) and Attorney Forum where lawyers can meet clients and discuss professional issues. Please, join to this community of legal professionals and invite there other good attorneys. I belive this will be useful both for legal community and for people who need legal services.
ReplyDelete