Manson Cult Member Leslie Van Houten Deserves to Be Free

As a scholar on cults, I have studied countless individuals and groups that have made headlines worldwide. The complex, highly controversial case of Leslie Van Houten, a former follower of Charles Manson and a convicted murderer, has been recommended for parole multiple times in recent years.

No discussion about potential parole should diminish the enormity of the crimes committed by the Manson family. However, decisions about parole for any individual warrant consideration of several factors: rehabilitation, remorse, risk to society, and the influence of cult dynamics on the person's actions.

The California Parole Board has, yet again, recommended parole for the Van Houten. She has been imprisoned for her involvement in the grisly murders for the past 54 years. She has been a model prisoner and has expressed deep regret for her actions as a 19-year-old. Now in her 70s, she will be released, if Governor Newsom does not take action to deny her parole.

This year, former Massachusetts governor Charlie Baker commuted the sentence of Ramadan Shabazz, who was released from jail after 51 years. He, too, demonstrated remorse for committing murder after he returned from Vietnam with PTSD and drug addiction. He, too, was a model prisoner.

Patty Hearst, born Patricia Campbell Hearst, is a notable figure in American history due to her involvement with the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA), a left-wing terrorist group. On the evening of February 4, 1974, Hearst was kidnapped from her apartment in Berkeley, California, by members of the SLA. In a surprising turn of events, she later joined the group and partook in their criminal activities, which sparked a national conversation about brainwashing and coerced behavior.

However, a key detail in Hearst’s case, which sets it apart from many others, is the commutation of her sentence. After she was captured, tried, and sentenced for her involvement with the SLA, President Jimmy Carter commuted her federal sentence to the 22 months she had already served. This decision was made in February 1979, eight months before Hearst was eligible for her first parole hearing. It is noteworthy that her release was under strict conditions, and she remained on probation for the duration of a state sentence related to her crimes.

In 47 years of studying the mechanisms of control and manipulation used by cults and other high-demand groups, I developed the BITE model of authoritarian control to explain how people can be manipulated into committing actions they might not otherwise engage in, such as serious crimes, and developed ways of evaluating undue influence predatory groups can exert and the results of that control.

Here are a few key points my model of cult behavior suggests about Manson’s cult and van Houten specifically:

The BITE model of authoritarian control describes Behavior control, Information control, Thought control, and Emotional control. Each category contributes to a totalistic environment that can dramatically reshape an individual’s identity and, therefore ,their beliefs and actions.

Behavior control involves regulating an individual’s physical actions and routines. The Manson family’s rigorous communal living standards likely eroded individual autonomy, including Van Houten's. Manson was to be obeyed without question.

Information control refers to the manipulation of information available to individuals. This would include spreading Charles Manson’s apocalyptic beliefs, leaving family members with an extremely limited or biased understanding of the outside world.

Thought control describes the manipulation of an individual’s personal thoughts. For instance, Manson's apocalyptic "Helter Skelter” narrative manipulated his followers’ cognitive processes, directing their thoughts toward violence.

Finally, emotional control involves the manipulation of feelings to promote guilt, fear, and loyalty. Manson was known for his charisma and ability to manipulate his followers’ emotions, creating a powerful sense of attachment and fear that was used to facilitate control.

Law professor emeritus Alan Scheflin has developed a social influence model (SIM) that highlights the social and psychological dynamics that can facilitate undue influence. These include the unique vulnerabilities of the influencee, manipulation of social context, authority, suggestibility, and other factors that erode an individual’s ability to make independent decisions. The influencer (or predator or predatory group) has its own characteristics, which often include malignant narcissism and exploitation of power, money, and sex.

Persuasion Essential Reads

3 Words to Win Any Argument

How to Talk So That People Want to Listen

The interplay of factors identified in both models could explain how a young woman could be influenced to partake in horrific actions such as murder. It is important to note that understanding the mechanisms at play does not absolve individuals of their actions but rather provides a framework for understanding how extreme social and psychological influence can lead to the commission of severe crimes. In the future, I believe, the justice system will begin to accept social science evidence of undue influence and take it into account in sentencing and parole decision-making.