Introduction
To his “family” Charles Manson was thought of as a visionary, a guide to understanding the world as it actually was and a self proclaimed savior who stated that he would guide the worthy towards his envisioned future utopia. In reality, based on the ghastly consequences of his actions and “teachings”, he is generally considered a pathological liar, a shrewd manipulator and a man guilty of not only coercing others to murder in his name but of psychologically twisting them to the point that they lost their sense of self and became akin to puppets moving to his every word and whim. The culmination of Manson’s deranged manipulation was the Tate and Labianca murders in which six people were murdered in an extremely brutal fashion by Manson’s “family members” (Youtube, 2008). They believed that the murders would be a sufficient trigger to bring about the race war which would come about as a direct result of growing tensions between the white and black population within the U.S. during the 1960s (Youtube, 2008).
While it may be true that Manson to this day has been considered a deranged manipulator, the psychological theory of personality development specifically states that an individual is born neither good nor deranged but rather is a product of his/her upbringing wherein observed behaviors and actions of parents, adults etc. are emulated, as such this results in the development of distinct individual personality traits (Gallagher, 1994). In fact, it can be seen in the A&E documentary on the life of Charles Manson that not only did he suffer from abandonment issues early on in his life but also his adolescent to teen years revolved around being confined to juvenile detention facilities and even jails (Youtube, 2008). In fact, as stated in the documentary, Manson spent half of his entire adult life in jail and was even purported to have said that he preferred his life in prison and didn’t want to leave since that was the only life he knew (Youtube, 2008).
It is this and other abnormal behavioral aspects of Manson’s personality that will be explored in a more in-depth level in this paper in order to try to connect Manson’s behavior with the appropriate criminological theory in order to explore the reasons behind his actions.
Biographical Sketch of Charles Manson
From an early age Charles Manson’s life could be considered “problematic” at best “atrocious” at worst. Born to Kathleen Maddox on November 12, 1934 Manson’s early childhood influences consisted of an alcoholic mother who moonlighted as a prostitute and an uncle who was eventually arrested alongside his mother when they tried to rob a gas station (Youtube, 2008). Researchers have speculated that it was this initial lack of parental love and guidance as well as subsequent exposure to criminal behavior via his mother early on his life that brought about the creation of Manson’s own criminal tendencies (Oney, 2009).
From 1947 to 1952 Manson’s early life was a constant cycle of criminal activity and correctional institutions (Oney, 2009). He was characterized as being anti-social, violent and dangerous. It was the period immediately after his release between 1967 and 1969 that characterized the creation of the “Manson Family” and the start of the brutal killings that shocked the Hollywood community. By 1967 during the “Summer of Love” Manson had moved to San Francisco and became known as a local guru resulting in him attaining a following of several individuals which included Mary Brunner and several others (mostly female) who became the initial members of his “family” (Oney, 2009).
The Manson “Family”
While Manson’s “family” members consisted of more than a dozen people the more notable members directly responsible for the Tate and Labianca murders were: Leslie van Houten, Patricia Krenwinkle, Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, and Tex Watson (Youtube, 2008). It is rather interesting to note that this family unit was comprised of individuals that initially believed in Manson’s philosophy of oneness and the power of love. This message though slowly changed as Manson grew increasingly more paranoid resulting in a twisted message that asked his followers to throw away their pasts and to follow everything he said. It was noted through interviews with various family members over the years since the arrest of Manson that the family lived a communal life that was in almost total isolation from the rest of the world (Youtube, 2008). Subsequent examinations of this particular lifestyle reveal that it was an intentional part of Manson’s plan to subvert their individual personalities in order for them to be more easily manipulated (Youtube, 2008). It was by 1969 that Manson had convinced himself that an impending race war was going to occur due to increasing tensions between the whites and blacks. This belief manifested itself in him associating songs by the Beetles as being secret messages to the family instructing them to prepare for the coming war (Youtube, 2008).
The Tate and Labianca Murders
The Tate and LaBianca murders occurred on August eight and nine, wherein Sharon Tate, Jay Seabring, Abigail Folger, Steven Parent, Leno Labianca and his wife Rosemary were brutally murdered as a way to incite Manson’s vision of an apocalyptic race war (Oney, 2009). The family members involved in the Tate murder consisted of Linda Kasabian, Tex Watson and Patricia Krenwinkel who under the orders of Manson drove to the home of Roman Polanski and brutally murdered its inhabitants (Youtube, 2008). Investigators described the murder scene as being straight of a macabre horror scene with blood everywhere, a rope tied twice around Sharon Tate’s neck while she hung from an indoor balcony, Steven Parent was shot dead in his car, Abigail Folger had multiple stab wounds and the word “pig” had been written on the front door (Youtube, 2008). All in all the victims had been stabbed 102 times in what can be described as a brutal murder of an almost sadistic nature. The Labianca murder was just as grotesque with Leslie Van Houten, Susan Atkins and Manson himself joining the group as they drove to the home of Leno Labianca that was right beside a home that Manson himself had once attended a party to (Youtube, 2008). This time the victims were husband and wife Leno Labianca and Rosemary Labianca who were summarily stabbed a total of 67 times with a carving fork prominently inserted into Leno Labianca’s protruding stomach as if marking him as some piece of meat, a knife was shoved to the hilt in his throat and the word “war” was carved into his flesh (Oney, 2009). Furthermore his wife was found with a pillow case on her head with a cord wrapped around her neck.
Examining Manson’s Actions
It is interesting to note that while Manson at this point in time seemed deranged and crazy his followers noted that even though Manson gave them copious amounts of acid (a type of drug known to induce extreme hallucinations) he himself didn’t seem to use it (Youtube, 2008). In fact his actions of slowly and meticulously subjecting his “family members” to practices meant to remove their previous personalities and sense of individuality seemed to speak of a great amount of planned action and calculation that a normally crazy person wouldn’t think of.
From a standpoint of an outside observer it can be seen that Manson was obviously deranged yet it seems rather strange that an apparently crazy person was able to brainwash well over a dozen well educated people. Furthermore it must be noted that various individuals have stated that based on Manson’s previous behavioral history of petty crime it was seen that he actually wanted to go to jail and didn’t want to leave. Considering the fact that as a direct consequence of the Tate and Labianca murders Manson was able to get life in prison it seems as if he got exactly what he wanted.
Applying Criminological Theory to the Case of Charles Manson
Social control theory developed by Travis Hirschi specially states that all individuals actually have the potential to become criminals however it is the “bond” they share with society whether in the form of friendships, recognition of societal rules and norms of conduct, parental influences etc. that prevent them from actually committing a crime (Payne & Salotti, 2007). Hirschi goes on further to explain that it is actually quite normal for an individual to desire to commit a crime or even think about it such as desiring to steal and object, injure a person or other forms of criminal activity however they are prevented from doing so because of a distinct fear of the impact of this type of activity on their position in society (Payne & Salotti, 2007). The concept of fear in this particular case comes in the form of the loss of societal bonds, careers, social relationships and other connections that individuals have come to rely on due to a person’s inherent nature to rely on social connections to retain a stable psychological state (Payne & Salotti, 2007). In other words people are normally so dependent on social bonds and maintaining them that the thought of losing them after committing a particular action is sufficient enough to deter them from committing a crime (Payne & Salotti, 2007).
Hirschi goes on further to state that crimes occur due to individuals either losing or weakening the various bonds which bind them to society and as such results in them not caring of the social ramifications of certain criminal actions (Payne & Salotti, 2007). In the case of Manson it was noted early on that from early childhood he did not have a particularly strong bond with his mother due to her incarceration and the fact that she rejected him when he came looking for her (Youtube, 2008). Manson even states in the A&E interview that his loss of trust in his mother taught him a lesson never to trust anyone and as such based on Social control theory this loss of a connection early on would have precipitated the occurrence of criminal behavior since there was no bond present to incite fear over its loss (Youtube, 2008). Similarly, it is suggested by Siegel (2011) that it is socialization and not the social structure itself that produces either positive or negative tendencies (Siegel, 2011).
Siegel explains that “the more social problems encountered during the socialization process, the greater the likelihood that youths will encounter difficulties and obstacles as they mature, such as being unemployed or becoming a teenage mother” (Siegel, 2011). As social learning theorists suggest crime is a direct result of individuals learning norms, values, and behaviors associated with criminal activity (Siegel, 2011). In fact the differential association theory created by Sutherland states that “crime does not originate from individual traits or a person’s socio-economic position rather it is a type of behavior that is created through a learning process” (Siegel, 2011). Thus, an individual would not have any apparent criminal tendencies while they were young but would develop such behavioral characteristics as a direct result of direct personal influences that result in the development of criminal behavior (Siegel, 2011). It was also noted by social learning theorists that people who develop criminal behavior as a direct result of differential association justify their actions based on learned behavior wherein ideas normally meant to prohibit crime do not manifest themselves resulting in a distinct lack of remorse for crimes committed.
This particular stance is proven to be true since throughout his childhood and well into his teens Manson had committed numerous crimes with apparently little to no remorse for his actions (Youtube, 2008). In fact it was even noted by various councilors in the reform institutions he was sent to at an early age that Manson possessed a distinct anti-social behavioral tendency which based on the theory of Hirschi explains his predilection towards criminal behavior (Youtube, 2008). It must also be noted that Social control theory is not limited to criminal behavior alone but also extends to other forms of what can be described as deviant behavior (Payne & Salotti, 2007). This can come in the form of bad behavior, rebellious violent temperaments or what can otherwise be described as behavioral tendencies which are looked upon as having negative connotations. For Hirschi these behavioral aspects are limited by punishments given for wrongful behavior with compliance to proper behavior often rewarded by parents or an authority figure (Payne & Salotti, 2007).
In the case of Manson there was a distinct lack of a sufficient authority figure to administer the punishment aspect of social control thus facilitating the continued development of distinctly negative behavioral tendencies (Youtube, 2008). Such a viewpoint is proven by the fact that he saw nothing wrong with administering drugs and psychological measures of control over members of this “family” in order to achieve his own ends. Furthermore it must be noted that his numerous instances of incarceration cannot be considered a form of punishment in the traditional sense. Manson actually wanted to be jailed it was even noted that his numerous crimes were just serious enough to merit a jail sentence and nothing more. In fact it has been speculated by researchers that Manson considered prison the only form of “home” he had and it has been seen in numerous interviews that he shows a subtle form of appreciation for being in jail (Youtube, 2008). As such instead of being punished what occurred was instead a form of reward for Manson which made it that less likely that he would have changed his conduct or behavior.
Conclusion
Based on the presented information it can be seen that from a development theory perspective Manson’s early childhood was a conducive factor in facilitating the development of his anti-social behavior which under Social control theory created the distinct lack of societal bonds which would have otherwise constrained his behavior. Not only that it can also be seen that Manson actually enjoyed incarceration and as such when combined with a lack of a sufficient authority figure to administer punishment for bad behavior results on his own adverse behavioral tendencies to keep on developing resulting in the man people know him as today.
One rather interesting thing to take note of is the fact that throughout his life Manson never truly committed a crime that was grave enough for the death penalty to be administered. In fact throughout his life crime appeared to be his only avenue in which he could be placed in jail from which he derived a certain feeling of being at home. Thus when examining his continued criminal behavior of escalating crimes with the idea that he wanted to be put in jail for a prolonged period of time, his actions involving the brainwashing of his “family members” which resulted in the Tate and LaBianca murders could even be considered a part of his plan to be jailed indefinitely. In fact his apparently deranged behavior could even be considered an act for the courts to believe he was just merely crazy in order for him not to get the death penalty. In end it is rather an irony of justice that by jailing him for life Charles Manson got exactly what he wanted in the end.
Reference List
Gallagher, W. (1994). How we become what we are. Atlantic Monthly (10727825), 274(3), 38-55.
Oney, S. (2009). MANSON. Los Angeles Magazine, 54(7), 94.
Payne, A., & Salotti, S. (2007). A Comparative Analysis of Social Learning and Social Control Theories in the Prediction of College Crime. Deviant Behavior, 28(6), 553-573.
Siegel, L(2011). ACP Criminology. (11 ed.). Cengage Custom.
Shiner, R. L. (2009). The development of personality disorders: Perspectives from normal personality development in childhood and adolescence. Development & Psychopathology, 21(3), 715-734.
Youtube. (2008). Charles Manson documentary. Web.