After so many years, what relevance is there in the Charles Manson case? I can think of two ways in which his case continues to play a role in the criminal justice system.
- Manson reminds us that our criminal justice system must be designed to handle the very worst crimes that human beings can imagine. Manson wanted more than murder, he wanted to start an entire race war. And he was as malevolent and cunning as he was charismatic. While we must also be careful to create a humane criminal justice system that does not mete out unjust or cruel and unusual punishments, we must also be prepared for what you might call the statistical outliers. The worst of the worst. The Charles Mansons of the world.
- The parole process plays a critical role in justice by serving as the formal system by which we revisit most cases and prisoners at regular intervals. For Manson, it seems crystal clear that he is guilty as sin and a continued threat to society. For other prisoners, as time passes, we may realize that our initial judgments (sentences) were misguided. Or, time and therapeutic programs may accomplish the rehabilitative goal of the correctional system and we may want to begin the process of releasing the inmate back into the community.
However, there are also dangers in giving the Manson case too much air time in the public and professional discourse about crime.
Image: Amazon
- Most offenders are not Manson. If Manson is allowed to stand in as a symbolic representation of all criminals, we will be too frightened (and in turn, too harsh) as a society to design and implement appropriate criminal justice system policies.
- The killer as celebrity encourages a culture which glorifies violence. While Son of Sam laws have helped to deal with offenders who attempt to profit from their crimes, these laws don’t address the fundamental consumer demand that drives the murderabilia and related industries. Watching Dexter may give the viewer a frisson of pleasure in rooting for the anti-hero, but celebrating killers in real life has ugly consequences for society as a whole.
With all that in mind, what do you think? Is Manson still relevant?
Anonymous
April 17, 2012
I believe he will always be relevent to some extent. He should serve as a reminder of how cruel and derranged some people can behave. If we forget about him then it opens the door for someone like him or worst to remind people of mans inhumanity to man. I do not believe in dwelling on the past or glorifying it but some things should always be remembered to serve as a warning to stay vigilant.
doubleyooteeeff
April 17, 2012
I think most people realize that Manson is not a typical criminal, and that you can’t use him to accurately represent average criminal activity. I do think the point about “celebrity” status is a good one. We know how many times a serial killer or mass murderer has had fame as their goal. To see how much attention Manson still receives from the media and the public must certainly encourage those who desire similar cultural recognition. As a recent example that I know of, there is a popular rock band in the UK called Kasabian, after Manson family member Linda Kasabian. The fact that people who hadn’t even been born at the time of the murders are still aware of Manson’s story, and referencing it, is proof of his enduring cultural impact.
thesilentdancer
April 24, 2012
Well, most humans are morbidly attracted by blood and violence. The media live on this. You will never find a newspaper or television news that start with a good news. It seems that only wars, disasters and crime sell.
Louise Behiel
April 18, 2012
it’s interesting to watch from across the 49th the media and cultural response to criminals. we do that a bit up here. we have our own brand of craziness and criminality (read about the Tory Stafford trials for vicious SOBs who deserve to die) but Manson was in a league of his own.
CrimeCents
April 18, 2012
Yes, the Stafford case is truly awful – as was the Homolka case. But I don’t see such a distortion of public response… just look at the difference in incarceration rates for evidence of who has the more reasonable policies and response.
Louise Behiel
April 18, 2012
I have no idea about incarceration rates – I’ll have to check. I know our prisons are crowded. so much to learn, so little time.
CrimeCents
April 25, 2012
Louise, you might check this out from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/04/22/us/20080423_PRISON_GRAPHIC.html
In 2008, per 100,000, the US had 751 inmates while Canada had just 108.
You might also be interested in this post on US mass incarceration:
http://crimedime.com/2012/04/05/the-terrible-price-of-mass-incarceration/
anotherboomerblog
June 7, 2012
Like Scott Turow I am a death penalty agnostic – there are some folks for which there seems to be no other viable option. However, I consider Manson to be less of a “martyr” for the whack jobs who follow him than he would be dead.
Most of the millions incarcerated here are nothing like Manson. If we would stop the (lost) war on drugs we would be better off. As it is the private prison systems drive the desire to incarcerate through mandatory minimum sentencing schemes.