RunningHead:MEDIAANALYSISTHECHARLESMANSONMURDERS

Media Analysis - The Charles Manson Murders

Intro to Criminology MW; 8:10 9:30 AM
UC Riverside
Kathryn Respicio

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

Section A
Description of the Tate Murders
On the early morning of August 8, 1969, Charles Tex Watson, Susan Atkins,
Leslie Van Houten, and Particia Kwreninkel entered the Polanski household in Cielo
Drive. As Linda Kasabian, the designated driver of the group, pulled into the driveway,
18 year old Steven Parent got into his car to leave the household. Watson approached
Parent. Without warning, Watson shot Parent times in the head. After Parent was dead,
Watson gave a signal for the other women to enter the household with him.
The guests who were staying at the Polanski household included: Roman
Polanskis wife, Sharon Tate, who was eight months pregnant at the time; Abigail Folger,
heiress to the Folger Coffee fortune, who was also spending the night with her lover,
Voytek Frykowski; and Tates friend and stylist, Jay Sebring. Polanski, who was working
overseas to direct his latest picture, had allowed Tate to invite guests over to keep her
company while he was away.
After Watson had given the signal, him, Atkins, van Houten and Kwrenwinkel
entered the house. Kasabian stayed behind in the car to be the lookout for the group. The
four individuals entered the house, armed with bayonets and knives. They began to tie up
all the guests with cords. However, Folger was able to loosen herself and ran to the back
door. With orders from Watson to make sure she would not get away, Kwrenwinkel
chased her outside through the backyard. Kwrenwinkel was able to catch up to her and
pin her to the ground. As Folger begged for her life, Kwrenwinkel stabbed her multiple
times and left her to die in the yard. As this was going on, Watson proceeded to pistolwhip Frykowski in the head. However, Frylowski was also able to untie himself. He

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

made it to the front door before he was fatally shot in the back by Watson. Watson then
ordered Atkins and van Houten to stab him. He stabbed a total of fifty-one times in the
back.
Back in the living room, Kwrenwinkel entered with a knife in her hands. As she
came towards Tate, Tate begged for her life to be spared for her baby. Without remorse,
Kwrenwinkel replied, I do not have any mercy for you bitch. With her pregnant belly
exposed, Kwrenwinkel stabbed her sixteen times. After Tate was killed, Watson shot
Sebring through the lungs. Then the three women stabbed him a total of seven times.
After both lives were gone, the women got a cord and proceeded to tie one end around
Tates neck. The other end was tied around Sebrings body.
After the murders, Watson collected enough of Tates blood to write the word
PIG on the front door. They marked their territory on the Polanski home to make the
world aware of what they had done. Leaving the home in tact, the strangers headed back
to Spahn Ranch to get their next mission from their leader, Charles Manson.
Description of the LaBianca Murders
Later that evening, Charles Manson ordered those same individuals to go on
another mission. This time, they drove to a home in Silver Lake, fifteen miles away
from where the murders occurred in Cielo Drive. They were directed to the home of Vice
President of Gateway Markets, Leno LaBianca, and his wife, Rosemary.
The individuals entered the household. After hearing the break in, Mr. LaBianca
ran down to the kitchen to find the strangers in his kitchen. Before he was able to do
anything, Watson ambushed Mr. LaBianca and forced him to the living room. During the
struggle, Mrs. LaBianca ran down the stairs to find out what was going on. Atkins and

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

van Houten ambushed her and brought her to the living room. As the victims were being
tied up, Watson went to the kitchen to find knives. After returning to the living room, he
delivered a fatal wound to the throat of Mr. LaBianca. He offered the other knives to the
women, under the order that each of them get their hands dirty. Atkins and van Houten
found themselves unable to stab Mr. LaBianca. But when Kwrenwinkel was given the
knife, she stuck it in his side. After Mr. LaBianca was killed, the women proceeded to tie
another cord around Rosemarys neck. As she was held in place, Atkins and
Kwrenwinkel stabbed her sixteen times.
After the murders, Watson commanded that each of them take turns marking their
symbols on the home. A series of crosses and the word WAR were carved on the back
of Mr. LaBiancas body. More phrases, written in the LaBiancas blood, were drawn on
the walls. Death to pigs and rise were written on the living room. Helter Skelter, a
famous Beatle song off their White Album, was written on the fridge.
Even though testimonies from Atkins and Kasabian state that Manson had come
to the LaBianca household that night, his involvement with the murders is often
questioned. Because he was not physically present at the Polanski household, it is hard to
decide whether he was also involved with the LaBianca murders. Manson has often stated
that he was not involved with the LaBianca murders. However, the offenders have
testified that Manson did step into the house to tie up the victims and left before the
killings started.
Section B
Our criminal justice system states that murder is an unethical crime that cannot be
justified. According to Adler, Mueller and Laufer (2004, p. 238), murder is defined as

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

the intentional killing of another person with malice afterthought. While malice has
been defined by having an evil mind, it is now recognized as the awareness that he or
she had no right to kill but intended to kill anyway.
The brutality of the crime scene and Mansons motives, also known as Helter
Skelter, illustrated the malice afterthought associated with the crime. However, the Tate
and LaBianca murders do not fit this definition perfectly. According to news reports,
Susan Atkins, Linda van Houten, Linda Kasabian, Patricia Kwrenwinkel and Charles
Tex Watson, who was tried in a separate case, were the ones who physically committed
the murder. Manson did not physically participate in the murders himself. So why was he
being tried with the murderers who physically committed the crime?
Vincent Bugliosi, prosecutor of the Manson case, had difficulty prosecuting the
offender. By the legal definition of crime, the perpetrator must physically commit the
crime in order to be tried. In order to prosecute Manson, Bugliosi had to bring Manson
in by way of circumstantial evidence and by law of conspiracy (Goldberg, 1998). This
proved to be an advantage for the defense. Because Manson was not physically present at
the time of the murders, the prosecution had to defend that he had control over the
followers and their actions.
His dominance can be traced back to his childhood. From a young age, Manson
lived a very tumultuous life. He never knew his father and was abandoned by his mother
at the age of twelve. After the rejection of his mother, Manson was sent to live in
different reformatory schools all over Indiana. He refused to be educated by their system
and constantly ran away from school. He also committed petty crimes such as stealing
cars and armed rowbbery. As he got older, his crimes escalated. This included forgery

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

and pimping. With each passing conviction came harsher sentences. By the time he was
thirty-two, he had already spent seventeen years in jail.
Bugliosi states in all those years Manson was in jail, he only went through three
psychiatric interviews. One of these interviews took place at the National Training
School for Boys when Manson was sixteen. Dr. Block, a psychiatrist who interviewed
him, noted the marked degree of rejection, instability and psychic trauma (Bugliosi &
Gentry, 1974, p. 139). She had also marked Manson as an institutional youth.
Characteristics of illegitimacy, small physical size and a lack of prenatal care and
support causes Manson to strive for status among his peers.
Manson sought after acceptance and status from his peers. This would explain the
influence he had over his followers. Manson sought to make a family that could act as
the support system he never had. Every member of his family had also dropped out of
society and were heavy drug users in the hippie movement. The Family members were
offered sanctuary. Because he was very persuasive, he gained control over them and
enforced his perverse philosophy on life. By going on drug trips with his Family, he
tried to breakdown their ego and pride. On these trips, he would dig down deep into
their psyche and try to remove many of their long standing convictions on life
(Goubeux, 2001). By implanting his perverse philosophy, he was able to convince his
followers to commit these horrible favors. Since his followers were willing to do
anything for him, there was never a question about these acts.
Mansons control over his followers proved to be very powerful and horrifying. In
an interview with ABC News, Bugliosi states, While other serial killers were
frightening, Manson reached a whole other level of terror by figuring out how to get

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

seemingly respectful young women from middle-class families to kill at his command
(ABC News, 2009). Even though his influence was powerful, Manson cannot be held
fully accountable for their actions. As stated earlier, the Manson family members came
from middle-class families with no history of mental illness. Media spectators suggest
that on some conscious level, these individuals allowed themselves to be brainwashed.
Because Manson had given them support when no one would, they gave their love to him
in return. Bugliosi argued that the Family members would not do anything without his
explicit instructions. Even in the face of murder charges, the women continued to show
no remorse for their actions. In a news report by TIME Magazine, the codefendants
(Atkins, Kwrenwinkel and van Houten) were described as chattering animatedly at
times, three essentially ordinary appearing young women accused of extraordinary
personal violence (Nation, 1970). Manson had them plan out what antics they would
do so the media could get an image of who they were. The defendants did everything
they could to make a farce out of the trial. They would often enter the courthouse singing
one of Mansons folk songs. Whatever interpretation the media got, whether deranged or
satanic, would be the message they would send to the people. This was a way Manson
had control over the public by getting the public to fear him.
Section C
The LAPD vs. The LA Sheriffs Department
To kick off the investigation of the Tate murders, the police arrested 19 year-old
William Garretson. He was the only known survivor at the Tate household. At the time of
the murder, he was staying at the household as a gatekeeper. There are some
discrepancies as to whether he saw the murders or not. After taking a polygraph test, he

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

was declared innocent of the murder charges. It was also declared that he did see the
murders taking place, but did not do anything to stop it or call the police. Police
questioned him about this before releasing him two days later.
For the next three months, police hard a time connecting the Tate murders and
LaBianca murders. Even though the killings were similar in nature, there were several
reasons as to why police refused to look into any relations between the murders.
According the Marilyn Bardsley of Crime Library, the LAPD refused to help investigate
the LaBianca murders because they were squarely in the territory of the LA Sheriffs
Office (Suspicion, 2009). The second reason, according to Biography: Charles Manson
Journey Into Hell, was that the LAPD believed that the second murders were copycat
killings, based on the news reports of the Tate murders (Goldberg, 1998). Bugliosi
expressed high criticism on the role of the LAPD and their refusal to cooperate with the
LA Sheriffs Department. If the LAPD had worked with the Sheriffs Department, then
investigation for these murders would not have taken so long. However, it was not until
Susan Atkins came forward with the murders that the police and detectives are able to
link the Tate and LaBianca murders to Charles Manson.
Investigation Breakthrough: Susan Atkins and Linda Kasabian
Susan Atkins, one of the women involved in the August murders, was held in
custody at Sybil Brand Institute. Manson, herself and other Manson Family members
were arrested on charges of grand theft auto and larceny. During her stay, Atkins bragged
to her cellmates that she was in on the Tate and LaBianca murders. She had also boasted
of the Familys plan to travel throughout the states and kill celebrities like Frank Sinatra,

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

Elizabeth Taylor and Steve McQueen. Fearing this information to be true, Atkinss
cellmates went to the police with Atkinss confession.
On November 18, 1969, a day after Atkinss confession, Vincent Bugliosi was
assigned as the prosecutor for the case. With an enviable record of successful
prosecutions (Nation, 1970), Bugliosi decided to use the testimony to kick off the
investigation. While testifying under oath before a grand jury, Atkins explained the
planning and execution of the murders of August 1969. She claimed that Manson had
ordered her and five other Family members to commit these murders. In Masnsons
words, he told them the more we did it, the more we would like it. She was able to
provide the prosecution with the indictments needed to prosecute the suspects associated
with the murders. On December 1, 1969, arrest warrants were issued for Watson, Houten,
Kasabian, Kwrenwinkel and Manson.
Investigators and prosecutors agree that if had not been for Susan Atkinss
confession, they would not have been able to link the murders to Charles Manson.
However, by the time of the actual trial, Atkinss surprised prosecutors by withdrawing
her testimony. Even though Atkins had provided the information for the indictments
against Manson and herself, her allegiance to Manson proved to be powerful. She
accepted the charges and refused to testify in court.
As the trial began on June 15, 1970, Kasabian replaced Atkins as the key witness
for the prosecution. In an interview with CNN, Bugliosi agreed to use her testimony
because she [was] the only member to be at the crime scene to not enter the Tate or
LaBianca household. She did not kill anybody (Goubeux, 2001). Media spectators often
portrayed Kasabian as a sympathetic person someone who made mistakes and was

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

10

caught up with the wrong crowds. At the time of the trial, ABC News reported that
[Kasabian] had even went into the house during the massacre to stop it (ABC News,
2009). However, eyewitness accounts from Atkins and Kasabian herself never stated
such an act. It is clear that she drove and acted as a lookout for the group. Her
involvement with the murders did not extend beyond that point.
During the trial, her credibility was heavily questioned by the defense. Her avid
drug abuse and admissions for theft came under question. Kasabian admits that she was
using LSD heavily at the time. However, it remains fact that all of Mansons Family
members heavily abused LSD and other drugs. So to question Kasabians testimony
would also mean the defense would also have to question the legitimacy of Atkinss
testimony who had already admitted to committing the murders. In the end, Kasabian
was granted immunity in exchange for her testimony and proved to be the star witness of
the case.
Manson and the Media
While on trial, Manson would frequently change his appearance. When this
happened, his followers would do the same. When Manson shaved his head, the Family
members did the same. When Manson carved an X into his forehead, his followers did
the same. The carving of the X caused a major media frenzy.
Media spectators were not sure of what to make of the X. According to defense
attorney, Paul Fitzgerald, the media branded Manson as a basterd (Goubeux, 2001).
The marking represented his removal from society. This was especially evident when
Manson was denied permission to represent himself. Other media spectators interpreted
the symbol as a cross. In an interview with TIME magazine, Manson said, I stand with

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

11

my X, with my love, with my God and by myself. I know what I have done and your
courtroom is mans game (Nation, 1970). In this perspective, the cross represents
Mansons interpretation of love as interchangeable with death. He believed that it was his
will to start a race war, known as Helter Skelter, and that he would be granted as the
Second Coming. Infamous acts like this fueled the medias obsession with Manson.
According to Entertainment Weekly, [Manson] understood all too well that in a media
saturated society, even homicide could a twisted form of showbiz (EW, 2009). Forty
years later, the medias fascination with Manson still lives on. He is not only known for
the murders and fear he instilled in people. He has become the personification of evil
(ABC News, 2009) where he will forever live in pop culture.
The Verdict
After deliberating for ten days, the jurys verdict for Manson and his followers
was pronounced guilty for every account on the indictment on January 5, 1970. The trial
lasted for nine and a half months. It broke records for the longest and most expensive
murder trial at one million dollars. They were all sentenced for the death penalty. But in a
stunning change of events, the Supreme Court ruled Californias death penalty as
unconstitutional. Manson and the women were sentenced to life imprisonment. It has
been criticized that Manson and the women should not have lived as long as they have. It
reflects how flawed our judicial system is in that a person who could commit horrible
crimes would be given a second opportunity to live life.
Section D
Structural and Value Differences Perspectives

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

12

In the structuralist functionalist perspective, Emilie Durkheims anomie states that

social structure is the cause of crime. It is the breakdown of social orders. When social
order is gone, all norms and values are lost. This perspective can be responsible for
explaining the Family members actions. Manson had used drugs to break down the
psyche of his followers. He was able to replace their convictions with his beliefs. By
replacing their convictions, he broke down the social order that is enforced by society.
The members followed rules that deviated from the social norm and committed atrocious
acts that shocked society.
The value difference theories are also similar to the structural perspective. In this
perspective, certain cultures have different values that deviate from the norm. Deviance is
defined by the members in its subculture. Because the culture has different standards,
there is a conflict of what is right and wrong between the subculture and the middle class.
It also suggests that the behavior is learned through the environment and reinforced
through associates. As stated earlier, Manson was able to reinforce his ideas onto his
impressionable followers. The Manson Family represents the subculture. Mansons
beliefs represent deviant behavior that breaks down social order. It is through this
behavior that the subculture is able to learn and perform criminal behavior. None of the
Family members had a history of criminal behavior. Since they learned the principles of
criminal behavior from Manson, he was able to brainwash them to perform the murders.
Other Manson Family members also reinforced the behavior. Members were accepted
according to whether they accepted Mansons beliefs or not. Seeing that everyone was
willing to do anything for Manson, he was able to get people to do whatever he wanted
them to do.

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

13

Labeling Theory
The labeling and power theory explains the criminalization process of Charles
Manson. The primary act of labeling occurs when the person performs a deviant act.
Authority figures parents, teachers, or the police - bring attention to this act and start
the labeling process. They begin to label and stereotype the person as a criminal. After
this, the person is expected to commit more criminal acts. The secondary act of labeling
occurs when the person internalizes the criminal behavior. Because no one expects
anything better from the individual, he or she assume the role of the criminal. Petty
criminal acts escalate into more serious, illicit and illegal acts. Because Manson
developed a rap sheet at a very early age, he accepted reformatory schools and jail as his
home. Since he grew up without authority figures, his moral development was stagnated.
Because he was never fully disciplined for his behavior, Manson did what he wanted to
according to his rules. Lastly, since society never expected anything less than criminal
behavior, he assumed the role of a criminal. He decided to become the thing that society
would fear.
Over time, the publics fascination with him grew. His legacy continues to live
through the media. Because the media has fashioned him into a legend, Manson will
forever live in the dark place of pop culture. He is known as the personification of evil.
His reign of terror will always mark the end of the hippie movement the age of
innocence.

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

14

References
Adler, F., Mueller, G. O. W., Laufer, W. S., (2004). Criminology and the Criminal
Justice System. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Bardsley, M. (2009). Suspicion. Crime Library: Charles Manson Ch. 7. Retrieved from
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/manson/suspicion_3.h
tml.
Bugliosi, V., & Gentry, C. (1974). Helter Skelter: The True Story of the Manson
Murders. New York: Mass Market Paperback.
Goldberg, A., (1998). Charles Manson: Journey Into Evil. Decoeur, L., Lerea, Y.,
Cambou, D., Aasen, S., Scheer, H., DeWitt, M. A&E Biography. Boston, MA:
A&E.
Gleiberman, O. (Aug 2009). Charles Manson: 40 Years Later, The Movie About Him
You Have to See. Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved from http://moviecritics.ew.com/2009/08/09/charles-manson-40-years-later-the-movie-about-himyou-have-to-see/.
Goubeux, Rob. (2001). The Manson Murders. Peltier, M. J., Milio, J., Hufnail, M., Gray,
E. Historys Mysteries. New York, NY: The History Channel.
Nation: The Other End of Society. (1970). TIME. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/10/california.manson.murders/index.html.
Netter, S. (Aug 2009). Charles Manson Reign of Terror: 40 Years Later. ABC News.
Retrieved from
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/MansonMurders/story?id=8266725.

MediaAnalysis:TheCharlesMansonMurders

15

ONeill, A. (2009). Mansons Lasting Legacy: Live freaky, die freaky. CNN.com.
Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/10/california.manson.murders/index.html.