Susan Marie Atkins Denied Parole
Criminology Research Project, Inc., received a telephone call hours ago that Charles Manson Family Member Susan Marie Atkins has been denied parole.
A Compassionate Parole Application, filed by Ms. Atkin’s attorney husband, James Whitehouse, has been denied by the California Powers-that-Be. Officials chose “status quo,” the safest political option. The medical care and specialized housing required by law for Ms. Atkin’s exceeds $1,450,000 annually, however there is no price on “politics.” The economic hardship currently being experienced by the State of California was not enough to over power the taste for revenge and retribution.
Ms. Atkin’s met all parole requirements: length of sentence, adequate home plan, and absence of threat of danger to society. Nevertheless, we are talking about the infamous Susan Atkins, the Manson follower that took a direct role in the Cielo Drive, Los Angeles, murders of actress Sharon Tate and Tate’s several guests. Susan Atkins is Susan Atkins and America has not forgotten.
Mass and serial murder holds a distinct position within criminology and, apparently, within society in general. In Ms. Atkin’s case it was not the actual murders but the method that inflamed society. This attitude over murder’s method is as strong today as it was forty years ago. Murders go unreported daily but muders with distinct methods do not.
The Project conducted an unofficial survey on it’s web-site approximately six weeks ago and the overwhelming response was to deny parole. This denial is now reality.
Ms. Atkins, 80% paralyzed and suffering terminal brain cancer, will die in prison. The Compassionate Parole Application was not nearly enough to over power the taste for revenge that remains paramount in the minds of most of society. Yes, it was, no doubt, the safest political move for California’s elected and appointed officials.
Ms. Atkins, a number of years ago, accepted Jesus Christ as her personal savior. However, most inmates do. How legitimate are these jailhouse conversions? Research indicates that approximately 7 to 10% are real, the remaining are moves on the part of inmates to gain favor with the institutional chaplain, counselors and parole officials. The Project does not deny this. The ultimate decision as to the sincerity of an inmate’s spiritual conversion is only known by God. We can only pray that Susan’s conversion was real.
Criminology Research Project, Inc., takes no official stand, however, professional research raises the question of the purpose of incarceration. Are criminals housed in overcrowded correctional institutions for punishment, protection of society or rehabilitation? In Ms. Atkin’s case it was not protection of society nor was it rehabilitation. In the beginning it was punishment, however with the elements of parole having been met one must consider politics. Never, ever, discount the strength of political decision making and the reasons behind such decisions.