PAROLE HEARING

Thursday, August 27, 2015

BRUCE
DAVIS

SUBSEQUENT PAROLE CONSIDERATION HEARING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS

In the matter of the Life Term Parole Consideration Hearing of:
BRUCE DAVIS
CDC Number: B-41079

CALIFORNIA MEN's COLONY
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
AUGUST 27, 2015
9:30 A.M.

PANEL PRESENT:
PETE LABAHN, Presiding Commissioner
TIM O'HARA, Deputy Commissioner

OTHERS PRESENT:
BRUCE DAVIS, Inmate
MICHAEL BECKMAN, Attorney for Inmate
JOHN MORRIS, Deputy District Attorney
KAY HINMAN MARTLEY, Victim's Next-of-Kin
DEBRA TATE, Victim's Support/Victim's Next-of-Kin
BARBARA HOYT, Victim's Support
LEIF BREKKE, Victim's Advocate
SHANNON HOGG, Asso. Chief Deputy Commissioner, Observer
JAMES WEILBACHER, Deputy Commissioner, Observer
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER(S), Unidentified

PROCEEDINGS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: We're on record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The time is 9:30. This is the 29th Subsequent Parole Consideration Hearing for Bruce Davis, CDC number B-41079. Today is August 27th, 2015. We are located at the California Men's Colony. Mr. Davis was received on April 21st, 1972 from Los Angeles County. A controlling offense for which he has been committed is Murder in the First Degree, case number A267861, one count of Penal Code Section 187. There is however, a concurrent sentence also for Penal Code Section 187 as well. Mr. Davis has a minimum eligible parole date of December 1st, 1977. This hearing is being recorded. For voice identification, each of us will state our first and last name spelling our last name. Mr. Davis, when it is your turn after spelling your last name please provide us with your CDC number as well. I'll begin. We'll move to my right around the hearing room. We do have a number -- we have a couple of observers today. We also have representatives and victim's next of kin and I'm hoping that we'll be joined by a third via audio in short order. We'd ask that those who are seated away from the table introduce themselves after those seated at the table have done so and perhaps, the microphone to Mr. Morris' right would be good for that. And before we begin, also we do have a, as I mentioned, a third individual who we were expecting to be participating via audio. We have attempted to reach her on two occasions unsuccessfully. We've also called the Office of Victim's Services in Sacramento and no response but we're going to make another attempt just before we enter the hearing proper and then if we're unsuccessful we'll try again mid-hearing. It's not unusual for individuals to join these hearings mid-hearing and the Panel's fine with that should it occur today. I'm Pete LaBahn, L-A-B-A-H-N, Commissioner.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: My name is Tim O'Hara, O-'-H-A-R-A. I'm a Deputy Commissioner with the California State Parole Board.

INMATE DAVIS: My name is Bruce Davis, D-A-V-I-S, CDC number B-41079.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Michael Beckman, B-E-C-K-M-A-N, attorney for Mr. Davis.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: John Morris, Head Deputy Parole Division Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office, M-O-R-R-I-S.

MR. BREKKE: Leif Brekke, B-R-E-K-K-E, Victim's Service Advocate.

MS. TATE: Debra Tate, T-A-T-E, Victim's Support.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Victim's next of -- victim's support, all right.

MS. TATE: Victim's Support, next-of-kin --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Hold on. Let me make sure I understand.

MS. TATE: I am a witness for the Hinman family, a speaking witness for Evan Stein (phonetic) through Victim's Services in Sacramento. Papers have been vetted and cleared, a spokesperson for the Hinman family.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

MS. TATE: Is that better?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Yes, let's swap positions with the microphone here. Come on forward, Ms. Tate.

MS. TATE: Oh, I'm sorry.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I want to make sure that we're creating a record here and I'm not sure you'll be picked up. The Panel's -- that's fine. The Panel's understanding was that you were a representative for the Hinman family.

MS. TATE: That is correct.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Got it, we're good.

MS. TATE: Okay, thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you.

MS. MARTLEY: I'm Kay Hinman Martley, M-A-R-T-L-E-Y. I'm representing my cousin Gary Hinman.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You are Mr. Hinman's first cousin, correct?

MS. MARTLEY: Yes, I am.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, ma'am.

MS. HOGG: Shannon Hogg, H-O-G-G, Associate Chief Deputy Commissioner Board of Parole Hearings observing the hearing.

MR. WEILBACHER: James Weilbacher, W-E-I-L-B-A-C-H-E-R, Deputy Commissioner, observer.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And we will make another effort to reach Ms. Hoyt at this time. Let's go off the record briefly. It's 9:35.

(Off the record.)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Sir, we're back on record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And the time is not 9:36. Ms. Hoyt?

MS. HOYT: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Please introduce yourself.

MS. HOYT: My name is Barbara Hoyt and I'm a representative of Karen Shea, daughter of Donald "Shorty" Shea.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And the spelling your last name is H-O-Y-T, correct?

MS. HOYT: Correct.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Hoyt, I recognize that you've participated in previous hearings but just to be sure we're clear, participants may not record or transmit by any means any hearing or portion thereof which we conduct. Nor may participants allow any unauthorized individual to hear if you record or transmit any portion of a hearing. You understand that, correct?

MS. HOYT: Yes, I do.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. Mr. Davis, before we go forward we're going to discuss some ADA issues. You have college degrees I understand, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Are you currently using a cane?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: No?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You are not? Do you have any physical problems that would make it difficult for you to sit for an extended period of time or move around?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I don't.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Have you ever been part of the Mental Health Services Delivery System at CDCR such as CCCMS or EOP?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you use glasses to read?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I do.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And you've got them with you and they work okay, presumably?

INMATE DAVIS: They work fine, thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How's your hearing, Mr. Davis?

INMATE DAVIS: Sufficient.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, this hearing room has some challenges because of the ambient noise and a couple of people, at least in this room, do have some hearing impairment so we'll ask that you speak up and also that you speak directly into the microphone when you are speaking in order that we have an accurate record. All right?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And of course, if at any time you don't understand what's being said or you don't hear what's being said bring that to the Panel's attention. We'll be happy to repeat ourselves.

INMATE DAVIS: I will.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, we have had the opportunity to review your Central File. We have had the opportunity to review your prior transcripts as well. There are many of them and we've certainly paid particular attention to the most recent transcripts but we have them all in the room and have them available to us. You will be given the opportunity today to correct or to clarify the record as we proceed with this hearing. Nothing that happens during today's hearing will change the findings of the court. We're not here to retry your case. We do accept as true the findings of the court. We're here solely to determine your suitability for parole. The Panel is aware that on two previous occasions you have been found suitable.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Three, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Three? Thank you for that. I was aware of two offhand, thank you.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: 2010, 2012, 2014.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Correct, thank you for that, Mr. Beckman. In any event, you have been found suitable in the past. Today's hearing is a de novo hearing. You have not sat before this Panel before. This hearing will be conducted as this Panel sees fit. We'll go where we feel we need to go in order to gather the information that we need in order to reach an appropriate decision today. Mr. Beckman, did you discuss with Mr. Davis his rights regarding today's hearing and also the format that would be followed today?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Yes, I did, Commissioner, and with one exception his rights have been met. That exception is he did not receive a copy of the Subsequent Risk Assessment until this morning. I did not receive it until a few days ago. We've decided not to request a postponement based on the lateness of the report.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Mr. Beckman, if you could speak just a little louder.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I'll do the best --

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You're coming through great on the transcript but on the tape recording but some of the other folks can't hear you.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I'm doing the best I can and actually, I've got some allergies and you can hear it and my voice is a little lower than usual but I'll do the best I can.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, and Mr. Morris, obviously, if you don't hear what's being said let us know. If we need to modify the hearing room we can probably do that to a limited degree.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, Mr. Davis, the Panel is aware that the Subsequent Risk Assessment was recent in its arrival. The Panel received it just in the last couple days. You have been provided an opportunity to review that document, I assume?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Limited opportunity. If, Mr. Beckman, you feel that more review is needed this is our only hearing scheduled for today and we'd be happy to provide whatever information or whatever time you feel is necessary in order for you to further review that document with your client.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Okay, thank you, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: In any event, we would note that although there is a Subsequent Risk Assessment the Comprehensive Risk Assessment is still current and the Panel will certainly be referring to it during this hearing. Mr. Davis, you signed the BPT 1002 Form on June 12th of 2015 acknowledging that you received a copy of your Rights for Lifer Hearings Form.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you also have an opportunity to prepare for today's hearing with your attorney Mr. Beckman?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I did.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And do you have any questions before we go forward with this hearing?

INMATE DAVIS: No questions from me, thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Beckman, thus far have your client's rights been met?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Are there any objections at this time?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Yes, Commissioner. I'm going to reserve several objections concerning the official versions of the crime. I'll put a quick objection to Penal Code Section 3043. I'll refer to it as Marsy's Law. We know it's going to be used today but it is under appeal in the Federal Court so I want to protect my client's rights in the event of a favorable ruling. And I'll simply say that Proposition 9 violates the ex post facto clauses of the United States Constitution for the reasons set forth in the February 27, 2014 opinion of the United States District Court in Gilman versus Brown. The same holds true for the Governor's right to reverse my client's parole grants. We object on numerous grounds but I will mainly state that it violates the ex post facto clauses in the United States Constitution as a result of that same February 27th, 2014 ruling by the United States District Court in Gilman versus Brown, which is also under appeal right now. Now I don't think there's any confidential information that we're going to use so I'm not going to waste the time putting an objection on the record now. But I'll request that if during the course of the hearing or the course of deliberations you decide to use any that you reconvene to allow me to put an additional objection on the record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, is that it?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: That's it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: With respect to the objection concerning Proposition 9 the Panel will deny your objection. Proposition 9 is current state law and therefore, binding on this Panel. And with respect to the issue of confidential material, you're correct. Your client has a large Central File. He's been in prison for a long time and the confidential portion of his Central File is also large. If this Panel utilizes information contained within the confidential portion of your client's Central File, we will notify you of that and give you an opportunity to object at that time.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Beckman, other than the issue which we've discussed regarding the Subsequent Risk Assessment have you received the documents that you would expect to receive in order to prepare for a Parole Suitability Hearing?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Yes, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And, Mr. Morris, have you?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And, Mr. Beckman, do we have any additional documents to submit at this time?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I don't think so. I'll reserve the right in case we do but --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, Mr. Davis, let's swear you in. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you give in today's hearings will be the truth and nothing but the truth?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Davis, our task today, as you're well aware, is deciding whether you are suitable for parole, whether you would present an unreasonable risk of dangerousness if you were paroled. So our focus necessarily is to a significant extent on who we think you are today and who we think you're likely to be going forward. You've been in prison for a long, long time. The commitment offense occurred many years ago, over four decades ago, but we are going to spend some time talking about the past as well. Learning a little bit more about the past and about who you were should help us to visualize what we hope has been the process of change over the years. So we are going to spend a little bit of time, well, we're going to spend some time talking about the past and we'll move forward in time as the hearing progresses. To assist us in that, initially, I am going to be referring to the Comprehensive Risk Assessment as kind of a springboard. I will also be referring to the Subsequent Risk Assessment as well but at this point, I'm going to be referring to the Comprehensive Risk Assessment. You met with Michael Pritchard, the Forensic Assessment Division Psychologist on October 9th of 2013. And Dr. Pritchard referred the previous evaluations which you have received in a variety of formats over the years, 25 the clinician notes. The clinician describes the evaluations which you received in 2009 and 2010 as comprehensive and definitive and having reviewed those assessments I certainly note that they were conducted in a format consistent with the current format. You were born in 1942 in Tennessee. You told the clinician you have not -- you did not suffer what you would regard as significant abuse or neglect. You were never subjected to significant physical abuse. Is that true, as a child?

INMATE DAVIS: I was never bruised or cut or bled.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. You suffered some abuse and it was perhaps not physical, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, some was physical but it wasn't -- my skin was never broken or I was never bruised.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, tell us about it.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, my father's habit was to kick me with the side of his foot and whip me with his belt.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. Did you regard that as unusual at the time?

INMATE DAVIS: I had no idea of what to compare it to at the time.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What do you think back now 60 years or so later? Do you believe that your father's techniques of disciplining you were abusive?

INMATE DAVIS: I felt abused.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You believe that had a impact on you growing up?

INMATE DAVIS: I think it -- I think it shaped our relationship.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, in what way?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I felt -- I felt sad that I was being treated that way and so it colored my relationship to my dad and to authority in general.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, and for how long a period of time did you experience this type of discipline?

INMATE DAVIS: Probably until I was 13, 14 years old.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And why did it end?

INMATE DAVIS: I'm not sure, really.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. You did mention to the clinician that you experienced sexual molestation. You told the clinician on three separate occasions.

INMATE DAVIS: That's true.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And you were a adolescent at the time?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And do you believe these experiences had an impact on you as you were growing up?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, it did.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Tell us a little bit about that.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it changed my view of my -- of who I was. It changed my -- it affected, I shouldn't say it changed it, it affected my self-identification. It affected my self-worth. It affected what I thought about sexuality. It affected what I thought about men from a -- from an authoritative viewpoint.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How did it affect you?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it turned me -- well, it made me angry in a way, in a serious way, with authority figures because I took the teacher who was part of that as an authority figure. And it colored my opinion, my attitude toward authority.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Over how long a period of time did the molestation occur?

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, I'd say less than a year, probably maybe, well, less than a year.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And you mentioned that there were two individuals who molested you. Were the incidents related in any way? Were these two people involved together or --

INMATE DAVIS: Well, the two people didn't know each other.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So they were entirely separate incidents?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how old were you at the time?

INMATE DAVIS: I was in the seventh and eighth grade, probably 13, 14.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And were the perpetrators both male?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And did you tell anybody when you were a child?

INMATE DAVIS: No, no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: When did you first discuss the molestation?

INMATE DAVIS: About 1985 with my wife.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. So do you think the -- molestation, obviously, can be extremely impactful to people in different ways. How do you believe that it impacted you growing up as you became an adult?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it made me -- it made me feel like an object, a sexual object and it allowed my decisions to objectify women as sexual objects.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How did it extend to you objectifying women? The perpetrators were male and obviously, you're a male.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, as I felt myself being an object, and I didn't really put it in those words at the time, but as that attitude formed in me then I began to objectify everything around me on a sexual level, that was on a sexual level.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. At what age did you leave home?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I was back and forth. I was away from home and came back. I left home about 19, 1961 after a term in college. I left home for a few months. I came back and went to school again. Went on another trip to work in the -- in the canneries in Washington then I came back to Tennessee.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The picture that's painted by not only the most recent Risk Assessment, the previous Risk Assessments as well, and other documents available to the Panel is of a young man who after leaving home pretty much drifted from place to place, had a variety of jobs.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I did have a variety of jobs. I came back and forth to Tennessee from '61, '62, '63. Finally, the last time when I really left and didn't come back for a long time was in '64 and I was working in Southern California.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Why didn't you settle down anyplace?

INMATE DAVIS: I did settle down for a while. I was --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How long is a while?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, '64, '65, '64 and '65 I worked in a welding shop in Santa Fe Springs and then in '66 I was still working as a welder in the L.A. area and then I went to work for the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads. We were surveying in the Grand -- well, in Lake Mead.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How long did you do that?

INMATE DAVIS: The fall and winter of '66 then I went back to Tennessee for a while.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: It sounds to me like you were moving around a lot. Not that there's anything wrong with that but I'm curious as to why.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I would just get dissatisfied with what's happening. There was didn't seem like I wanted to stay where I was. When I -- well, when I -- when I first left Southern California from a welding job the motive was -- actually, when I quit my job I was embarrassed because I was asked to do a job I really couldn't do and I was so insecure I couldn't even ask for help how to do it. And so when that shift was over I walked away from the job.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: And then got a job with the Department of Commerce.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, well, you got jobs. I'll give you that. The clinician did discuss your substance abuse history. You indicated that you began drinking when you were a teenager occasionally.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Alcohol really wasn't your thing back then, true?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And later as you became a young adult you used marijuana, mescaline, and LSD and you described your use as abusive. It certainly seems to have been.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You've been clean and sober for quite some time and we'll talk about that. Are you -- you've maintained your sobriety to today. Is that correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you have a favorite controlled substance before the commitment offense?

INMATE DAVIS: Marijuana.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how often were you using it in say the months prior to these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Several times a week.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Anything else you were using on a regular basis, for instance, LSD or mescaline?

INMATE DAVIS: I'd taken LSD occasionally. Well, occasionally, that means maybe once a week, twice a week. I don't remember exactly. I just took it when it was available.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, so in your entire life how many times would you say you've taken LSD roughly?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it'd be pretty rough. Well, I --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Less than a hundred?

INMATE DAVIS: Less than a hundred.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: More than 50, less than 50?

INMATE DAVIS: I'd say about 50. I think 50 would probably be a fair guess.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. You smoked a fair amount of marijuana. Why?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it was the kind of thing that gave me pleasure. It let me, as I see it now, it let me not think about the kind of things that troubled me which were mostly personal relational stuff. Like I didn't -- I wasn't able to really have good personal relationships so I felt isolated.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: When you -- when you use the term personal relationships are you referring to relationships with women or social relationships with anyone?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, women and -- well, social relationships to some degree but I felt -- I felt isolated. So therefore --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Well, maybe if you hadn't been moving around every few months you wouldn't have (inaudible).

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I don't mean -- I didn't mean -- well, that's probably part of it but that was a symptom but the cause was I felt isolated from a pretty young age. I think my first feelings of isolation started when my father started cursing me and saying goddam you. And I took that as a -- from the highest power I knew to be true. So as I grew up, I had this underlying attitude that I was a cursed person and different from everybody else in some way that I didn't really understand.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You had siblings?

INMATE DAVIS: One sister.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Was she also subject to this type of discipline and cursing?

INMATE DAVIS: Not quite as much.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And at what age was your father using that kind of profanity directed at you?

INMATE DAVIS: I don't know when it started but it ended probably after I was 15, 16 years old.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you remember what precipitated that type of profanity?

INMATE DAVIS: His anger.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you remember what precipitated the anger?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, he was -- he was quite a drinker unable to, I'd say unable to deal with the situation he was in and that in kind of a general way. My diagnosis of his motives would be conjecture on my part.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Well, you were there, I wasn't and I'm a little curious about it. What do you believe drove him besides alcohol?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, he was raised by the same kind of father that I was raised by. In other words, my grandfather, according to my grandmother's story, was very hard on my dad. This is the family story, all right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, I've got -- I think I have the picture.

INMATE DAVIS: Okay.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you for that.

INMATE DAVIS: And so -- and so when I was born my father had the same kind of issues with me between me and my mom as he -- as he -- as his dad had between him and his mother.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Fair enough.

INMATE DAVIS: And so --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You ended up in Los Angeles. You met Charles Manson and you were finding some of your needs met.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What needs were being met by these relationships prior to the murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Acceptance by a person that I admired for his power, his talent, his influence with the women he was around. I admired that. And when I was accepted by him for what I thought was a pure relationship I felt rather -- I felt good.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how did you initially meet Mr. Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: I was introduced by a third party.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how did that happen? I've read the record --

INMATE DAVIS: Okay.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: -- and a variety of statements over the years but --

INMATE DAVIS: Okay. A friend of mine in Topanga Canyon had borrowed a saw from Charles Manson and we're down -- he said hey, take a ride with me. I want to return this saw so I drove him up to the house they were living in and that's when I met him.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And prior to the murders, you had known Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And had you known either Mr. Hinman or Mr. Shea before you met Mr. Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: No. No, I hadn't.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Prior to the murders, had you personally ever had friction or disagreement with either Mr. Hinman or Mr. Shea?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I had not.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Other than access it seems to marijuana and other drugs perhaps, and access to sex and women was there anything else about your relationship with Mr. Manson and other individuals in that group that was attractive to you at the time?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, like you say, it was the acceptance, the sex, the drugs. That really took care of my agenda at the time.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Let's talk about your agenda a little bit. You were a young guy. You'd had a fair amount of life experience some of it probably positive, some of it negative. You had some job skills and you'd lived in different places.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I had.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So can you talk a little bit more about what it was about the Manson Group that caused you to stick around for long enough to become involved in two murders?

INMATE DAVIS: I think that one turning point that I had was early in '60 -- I think March of '68. I was arrested for possession of marijuana and I wasn't in possession of marijuana and the case got dropped. But it took ten days I spent in the L.A. County Jail, my first time in jail. And I saw and heard things in the L.A. County Jail at that time that were beyond my scope.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Such as?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I mean the way people treated each other for different reasons, why one gang didn't like another, why one set of offenders didn't like another set of offenders, what jailhouse rules were supposed to be, et cetera. And it was pretty shocking and during this time my knowing that I really hadn't been in possession of any drugs when I got arrested I was -- it was easy for me to discount the fact that I would've had some if I could've but I just didn't have any then. I felt victimized because here I was put in. I was a tax paying -- I was paying taxes, I was going to work every day and so I -- it was pretty easy for me to adopt the victim view, which I did. And when I -- when I -- when I was finally released my car was in Malibu. I was up in New County Jail and I -- and one of those things that just really helped me to rebel, if you say, more than I was when they released me from jail I asked an officer if he'd help me get a ride to Malibu. And I thought that was a pretty mild request, right, I'd been cut loose, no evidence. I was -- I was freed so I thought I was back to citizen status where it would be appropriate to just ask for a ride because I knew the sheriffs went back and forth there all the time. Well, he gave me an answer that said you ought to be the next thing flushed down the toilet and that really disappointed me and hurt me. And that plus the things I'd seen and especially my assuming this victim of the system stance --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: -- that said I'll never support the system again. That was my foolish decision. Well, it wasn't long after that I met Manson so.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And you had been arrested on a number of occasions but that was your first arrest?

INMATE DAVIS: That was my first.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And that would have been in 1968, right?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir. I think, yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: There was a subsequent arrest and I have the CII. I viewed it but I'm referring right now to the Probation Officer's Report, which frankly, is a little easier to read at this point. And it reflects an arrest in, was that in Missouri or in California, Independence?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir. That's probably October of '69.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Correct. And that would have been -- that would have been completely unrelated to anything that happened earlier. That would have been subsequent to your involvement with the Manson Group, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: No, it was with the Manson Group.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: That was -- yes.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Correct. And then the subsequent arrests all had to do with, at least peripherally, the commitment offense, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes. Well, I -- when I -- the commitment offense I surrendered myself December 1st or 2nd in 1970 and that was the -- that was the arrest for this offense.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Understood, okay. So I'm not confused. Prior to coming to California as a juvenile in Tennessee were you ever arrested?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: In your travels across the country in any other location, in Washington State or elsewhere were you ever arrested?

INMATE DAVIS: Never was.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I'm certain you have read the Appellant Decision which provides a lengthy overview of the commitment offense, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I'll incorporate that contained within that document on pages 3 through 51 and the Probation Officer's Report, which is far shorter and as I'm certain Mr. Beckman will say not always infallible. You've read that as well, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And I'll incorporate specifically pages 4 and 5 of the document for the information conveyed within regarding these two murders. You have spoken regarding the murders of Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea consistently over time. I'm most interested in the statements which you've provided to the two most recent clinicians and you did speak with both -- with both clinicians. So I'll return to the Comprehensive Risk Assessment at this point. On page 10 of the Comprehensive Risk Assessment Dr. Pritchard has block indented a total of six paragraphs representing that they're direct quotes. I'll incorporate them by reference. Has the clinician accurately conveyed that which you related regarding these two murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Is there anything that you would care to add, correct, or modify to that which is conveyed by the clinician?

INMATE DAVIS: I don't think so.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The clinician notes that in discussing the murders that you did not rationalize, that you did not offer excuses, and that you expressed what the clinician believed to be remorse openly and without qualification. Those are the clinician's words. The clinician notes what he refers to as an exemplary history of responsible and cooperative behavior in the institution. Clearly, you have programmed actively over the years and as I think we will explore shortly, your programming has continued a pace since your last hearing, which wasn't long ago. The clinician states that your behavior in the institution for many years has been responsible, cooperative, compliant, and self-improving and notes your placement score, which is as low as it can be. The clinician administered the three test instruments which are used. At the time, the LS/CMI, which is intended to measure the likelihood that you would be involved in general recidivism when paroled, the psychopathy checklist, which is a measure of psychopathy, and the HCR-20, which is intended to essentially predict the likelihood that you would be involved in violent recidivism when you're paroled. And based upon the clinician's interview with you, the clinician's review of the record available to the clinician which, of course, includes your entire Central File and the results of the test instruments the clinician opined that you would present a low risk of future violence. I would note that this finding is not, overall finding is not significantly, or it's not inconsistent with previous findings as well. The clinician closes with a rather pointed statement and I'll read it into the record. "At this time, there seems little more he can do to further reduce his risk beyond just continuing to age." And I would certainly note that since October of 2013 you have -- you've done just that. You're a year-and-a-half older.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: More recently, you met with Dr. Goldstein who completely the Subsequent Risk Assessment. You met with Dr. Goldstein on June 24th of 2015.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The purpose of a Subsequent Risk Assessment is to explore issues, behavior, conduct, achievements that may have arisen since the Comprehensive Risk Assessment. Subsequent Risk Assessments do not generally supplant Comprehensive Risk Assessments. Rather, they add updated information to them. Dr. Goldstein briefly summarized your history in the institution, took particular note of your programming since you last suitability hearing and did discuss with you the murders. And Dr. Goldstein also includes a brief block indented passage suggesting that this is a direct quote. Have you reviewed the Subsequent Risk Assessment, Mr. Davis?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Very quickly this morning.

INMATE DAVIS: We had a few minutes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I'm currently on page 4 and we will be taking a break probably in the next ten minutes of so and provide you an opportunity to review it further. But I will incorporate by reference your statements as made in both the Comprehensive Risk Assessment and the Subsequent Risk Assessment regarding the commitment offense. And we certainly will provide an opportunity for you to make any corrections at any time during this hearing if you note something in the Subsequent Risk Assessment that you didn't previously note that you wish to comment on. Dr. Goldstein noted that in discussing these murders that you appeared to the clinician to be remorseful, that you appeared to be ashamed. Are you, in your opinion, ashamed of these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I am.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how would you define the term remorse, Mr. Davis?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, remorse is a sadness that leads to some kind of amends.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And do you believe that you experience remorse?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And do you believe that you have made amends for these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: I've made amends some directly. I've tried to make them directly and I've made some indirect amends.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And we will explore those issues. You discussed with this clinician perhaps more than previous clinicians in some respects the situation in your home. You told the clinician that when you were a kid you felt like you were walking on eggshells. What you described to me with your father disciplining you with his boot and yelling at you is unfortunate but, quite frankly, it doesn't sound too out of sync with that which we previously see here or which we frequently see. When you were growing up in Tennessee and you look to your left and you look to your right and you saw other young men your age was your father's treatment of you all that unusual in your opinion or do you have an opinion about that?

INMATE DAVIS: I never -- I don't remember ever seeing another father discipline his son in any way. That was just something I was unaware of. I'm sure it happened, you know. Well, I'm not sure it happened but I'm pretty sure that all the boys got disciplined some way. I just never saw it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Hence, your statement earlier that you didn't have a frame of reference concerning that. Did you ever complain to anybody about the way your dad treated you?

INMATE DAVIS: No. No, no, no indeed.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Why?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, that was the kind of world you don't complain about things like that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Understood. You discussed your experience in your first jail, ten days or so in jail, with the clinician and you discussed your relationship with Charles Manson and your desire to associate yourself with that which, apparently, you had greater access to through associating with him and that being drugs and women. You told the clinician that at the time of the crimes that you did not experience empathy for the victims. Did you experience remorse soon after these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you experience empathy soon after the murders?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I didn't.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you have any thoughts as to why? These were particularly brutal murders and you had a varying degree of involvement in criminality that extended far beyond these two murders. I'm curious as to why empathy and perhaps even remorse would not have crept in around the edges at least even back then.

INMATE DAVIS: I knew that I had broken the law but my feelings for Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea at the time I had a very blank emotional response to anybody. I had very little feeling. I did, in the Shea case, I did feel shock about what I'd done but it was more a feeling of what I'd done rather than what I did to him. It was a long time before I had empathy for Mr. Shea and Mr. Hinman.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: This occurred a long time ago and I'm referring to a portion of your life, obviously, that's long past but I'm curious. Thinking back, at that time of your life if you had been aware of something equally horrible happening to a family member what would your response have been, for instance, mother, father, sister, other family member?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, if I speculate I would --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And by family, obviously, I'm referring to your family.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah, my mother or my sister, my father. I very well might have been sad. You know, I felt isolated and I had decided that I would never be affected emotionally by other people and that's when I had a confrontation with my dad and in a sense, I remember it like right now and I turned the light off on him. I couldn't do anything physically. I was way too small but in my head, I decided I'm not hearing you anymore. I don't care what you say. I don't care. In other words, your feelings about the whole thing are of no value to me.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And after leaving home in Tennessee and before you became involved with Mr. Manson and the group were there any occasions at all that you can recall where you experienced empathy for others? I mean that was a -- well, it's an interesting time today but it was certainly an interesting time then. There was a lot going on in the world. There's a lot of turmoil, a lot of ferment, a lot of things happening and a lot of emotions in society. Did you experience empathy for what other people experienced at that point of your life?

INMATE DAVIS: Okay, for instance, the Vietnam War. There were a lot of people protesting and while I didn't really feel sorrow for all the terrible things that were happening, I mean the people that actually died in the war, the anger of the protestors that I saw sort of gave encouragement to kind of the overall anger I felt about myself and everything. And so I identified with that in a certain way.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. Well, how about -- how about if you read about somebody getting murdered or if you witnessed somebody struck by a car or if you -- things happen in life that are unfortunate and sad and we all experience them directly or indirectly or we hear about them and we experience them in that manner. Did you experience sadness, or empathy, or sympathy, or anything similar to that in other circumstances prior to these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Okay, if somebody got hurt on a job I would help -- I'd want to help them right there so I'd want to be a help, right. But and so that's sympathetic, a sympathetic action and I'm sure I must have had a sympathetic feeling but I never really identified it like that, never thought of it like that. But I was -- I would help people in trouble, right, so in that way but as far as something I read about or was told about unless I really knew the person that was telling me, right, I wouldn't -- I would say well, that's really sad. But I didn't really have a big feeling about it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Had you experienced any significant losses before your involvement in these murders? Had anyone close to you, anyone you loved died?

INMATE DAVIS: No. I think before that the loss I experienced when I was molested, when I felt my father's animus, those are the kind of losses that I see now that had colored everything and --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Never had a loved grandparent, or uncle, or aunt, or childhood friend die?

INMATE DAVIS: You know my family lived a long time so I never had -- I never had somebody close to me die.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, when my grandfather died, I was really young and I felt bad about that. I was about -- that was before I went to the first grade. I remember because he lived with us a while so that was a sad situation but we didn't have a death in the family.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, interesting, interesting area. The clinician again noted that you reported that you had no empathy at the time but that empathy developed and remorse developed and we'll discuss those issues, I'm certain. You are a religious man I gather?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You're a Christian?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I am.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And have been for some time?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The clinician opined that your level of insight since the Comprehensive Risk Assessment, which was year or year-and-a-half prior to the Subsequent Risk Assessment, seemed not to have changed. And the clinician notes that you stated that you were able to pretty much regard yourself as blameless at the time that you were involved in these murders and that's pretty much the picture that I think you've painted. Is that your view?

INMATE DAVIS: I felt no guilt. Well, with the exception of in the -- right at the end of the Shea murder I was -- I felt shock and I'm sure there was guilt right there but I didn't really identify as that. I just knew I felt depressed and shut down.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. I'm going to touch on an area which certainly caught my attention in the Subsequent Risk Assessment and it probably more logically and traditionally would be addressed later in the hearing. But I do want to address it now because I'm going to proceed right through the Subsequent Risk Assessment and then we'll probably take a short break and then we'll come back. We'll probably come back with either perhaps some more questions or we'll move straight to post-conviction factors. But reading the Subsequent Risk Assessment (and I'm now on pages 6 and 7) I note that the clinician quoted you and expressed some concern regarding the potential that you might go on a lecture tour due to public interest, as the clinician puts it, in your association with Mr. Manson and crime partners. Can you help me to understand what you said to the clinician? I didn't notice anything of this nature in previous Risk Assessments so it caught my attention.

INMATE DAVIS: What I said, what I certainly meant to say, what I wanted him to know was there was interest in the Christian community about instances of redemption and hope. And that my focus would be on where I came from to where I am from the darkness I was in to where I came to now. It was certainly not about the crime itself other than admitting I was guilty of it but it was no details of anyone else or any other situation and it has never been -- that's never been something I want.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, well, I want to make certain that I fully understand and we will talk about your plans for release later in the hearing. And I'm sure these issues will come up later in the hearing when we're talking about your faith and whether your faith plays a role in your plans for parole and income and your age, and so forth so we'll explore this in depth. But there's a lot of people out there in our society with what I would regard as unhealthy views of high profile crimes. Have you ever expressed to a clinician, did you ever express to Dr. Goldstein that it was your intention to, and these are now my words, essentially capitalize on the notoriety of these crimes by going on a lecture tour in which you would presumably profit from your involvement in them?

INMATE DAVIS: I don't -- that'd be the last thing. My intention of a lecture would be from a pulpit in churches that I'd be invited to, to talk about what happened to me and talk about the grace of God in my life and it certainly wasn't to be -- it wasn't a public as far as media, nothing like that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, thank you. Actually, I'm not quite done. I'm now on page 7, third paragraph. I'm going to read the clinician's statements which I have highlighted and underlined and so forth so obviously, they were of interest to me during my preparation for today's hearing and perhaps of less interest now but I'm going to address them anyway. It reads as follows: "His belief that he could capitalize financially due to his involvement in two murders associated with the Manson Family raises concerns regarding his insight and remorse for the life crime. Furthermore, his desire to go on a lecture tour does not present as a concrete plan to earn money to support," (there's a typo here), "himself if paroled." Can you discuss the clinician's statement here, or react to it, or correct it if it's incorrect?

INMATE DAVIS: I don't want to go on a lecture tour in public like what we think about the lecture tour, not that. My only involvement -- or to capitalize. I don't want to make money on the crimes. That is a shameful thing and the last thing I want to do is make money on that. I believe I'll support myself through the ministry. I have skills there and I have experience and I have other skills I can do when I get out so I'm not going to take that as something I'm going to have a -- have to have a fee to do.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. Why would it be shameful? Why would you feel it's shameful for you to capitalize on your role in these murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, the shameful part are the what -- the victims are the people that I would rather be concerned about, how they feel about what I would say, or what I might say, or what they think I'd say. They don't deserve to hear that from me and I have no intention of saying anything like that. I would admit to what I did that I was involved in two murders and I did that. But as far as going around about the details of it, about the bigger picture of it, my involvement in that, I have no interest in talking about that in a public way.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You mentioned the victims and certainly victims' family members and others who have been directly impacted over the years by these murders. If someone who committed crimes similar to those which you committed were years later to, as the clinician puts it, go on a lecture tour how, in your opinion, might that impact family members of the victims?

INMATE DAVIS: I think when they experience something like that it would very likely take them back to the initial -- to the initial event and they would begin by some degree to re-experience all the things they experienced in the very beginning. And I certainly have no interest in reestablishing their feelings, making them relive what has already been so painful.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Commissioner, for the record, over the last three or four years I've been approached multiple times by various media outlets requesting access to Mr. Davis to talk about his crimes, his role in the family both while he's in prison and after his release. I've relayed as I'm obligated to do those requests to Mr. Davis and he's told me very expressly, no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. Thank you, Mr. Beckman. The clinician notes that based upon your behavior and performance in the institution for many years you do not demonstrate problems with stress and coping that would aggravate your risk for future violence. I did not mention at the outset but we certainly discussed your age. You are 72. Is that correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir. I'll be 73 next month, October.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So elder parole would apply and the clinician being aware of that did discuss issues related to your physical condition and your overall health, which could be a function of your age. The clinician mentions that you've been diagnosed with emphysema, that you have some hip problems but that -- and, of course, you're older but nonetheless, you appear to be in good shape and sitting across the table from you I would concur with the clinician's opinion in that regard. I'm not a, obviously, a medical doctor but you seen to be in good shape. The clinician suggested that your medical condition does not significantly diminish your physical capacity. The Panel obviously is aware of your age and we'll consider that as we go forward in today's hearing. The clinician suggested that perhaps, and it appears based upon your having adopted Christianity, having accepted Christianity as your faith that you have a deep need to affiliate and be part of a community of believers and that this aspect of your personality could remain a vulnerability to you. I found that kind of an interesting comment. Religious faith is apparently helpful to many individuals who are experiencing prison. I'm not certain quite what to make of the clinician's comment in this regard but I'm interested in any response that you might have. Society is full of people who are experiencing what you were experiencing at the time that you took up with the Manson Group, disaffected young men who feel isolated, who don't have employment stability, who are looking for that in life and are dissatisfied with their access to women or sex partners. That's not unusual. It's very unusual for -- extremely unusual, unfortunately, for individuals to become involved in violent criminal groups that commit murders. On the other hand, it's quite common for people to become deeply religious and have their faith be a positive aspect of their lives. Do you have any comments regarding the clinician's observations in paragraph four of page 9 of the Subsequent Risk Assessment?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I'd say this. I believe that my religious faith is in my self-interest. I think it helps me be a prosocial person, to say the least. It gives me a chance to think. It makes me self-reflective. It keeps me from making snap decisions. It keeps me from going from zero to 60 on the anger, all that, so I think it's a very positive thing for me. It's good for me and I don't know the clinician's insight what he thinks about it. He probably thinks something. Obviously, he wrote it but I don't really -- I can't -- I can't imagine why having a spiritual family, a community that wants to help other people that's kind of a procreative, that is creation as a metanarrative outlook could be bad at all.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. I think your -- okay, I thank you for that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: (Inaudible). I think what the clinician was driving at you got a guy who, I don't know what the name of the personality would be but at an early age gets involved with drugs, wanders the world looking. Many of the people who are using drugs are looking or hiding from something. You're moving all over the place, picking up, picking up and moving either looking or (inaudible). You go and mentioned a church family. You found a family all right, a cult family and you looked at Manson as a father figure.

INMATE DAVIS: Absolutely.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: In prison, you found another family and (inaudible). That's what I took from that --

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- the mention of that. So if you'd like to expound on that.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I think that God the creator is a greatly superior father type and I think I made a great decision to abandon a very negative one for to choose a very great one. So, yes, I chose God as my father or he chose me, really, but I'm glad He did and I'm glad to be -- to have broken off allegiances from this lesser thing that was so destructive to my life and so many others.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. Now the clinician noted that you seem to have significant support in the community. We'll explore that later in this hearing and the clinician again noted your age which does suggest a statistically reduced risk of violence. Overall, the clinician completing the Subsequent Risk Assessment did not find any significant changes in your degree of insight into what led to your involvement in the commitment offense. The clinician found that there were no significant mitigating or aggravating factors that had come up since the Comprehensive Risk Assessment and overall, supported the risk rating assigned by the clinician who completed the Comprehensive Risk Assessment. And with that, I do want to provide my colleague an opportunity to ask questions at this stage before we move forward. However, I think there might be a desire in the room for a quick break judging from the head nodding. No? All right, well, let's continue then. Commissioner?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And I may have missed this particular point. The Commissioner took you to the Subsequent Risk Assessment and mentioned page 6, second to last first full paragraph. And he touched on halfway through that paragraph but I'd like go into the first point of that paragraph. Mr. Davis reportedly believes he was able to participate in two callous and brutal murders because of his needs for acceptance. However, Mr. Davis has not addressed what aspect in his character that allowed him to participate in two murders despite his acknowledgement that he felt sick and depressed after the first murder of Gary Hinman. I kind of thought you said to the Commissioner that after the Shea murder you got depressed. Was it Hinman or Shea? You said one or the other and I can't remember which one.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I heard Gary had been murdered. I was -- I felt -- I felt something, right. I knew something bad was going to happen now, right. I didn't -- I didn't have sorrow for the victim, sorry to say, but I knew that I was in -- I was exposed to being part of the murder. However, I had convinced myself since I didn't actually stab him that I was okay. Now I realize that's a big self-deception that I -- that I put on myself and I had always -- I'd described my crimes in terms of what I didn't do rather than what I did for many years.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: When did you come to that epiphany? When do you make that change, come around the corner?

INMATE DAVIS: In the piece I wrote you'll find in the 2010 transcript my role and responsibility in the crime. I talked about four different turning points that I came to in 2009 when I really began to wake up to how I had been actually minimizing, thinking that I was telling the truth.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, so --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Commissioner, have you seen that document?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I have seen it. I'm just kind of curious, you know, you talked about some of the points where you moved forward in life and so it was in preparation for the 2010 hearing.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So this remorse letter that you wrote to the (inaudible) --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: No. It was after the -- it was after the en banc denial.

INMATE DAVIS: I don't know the date on that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: December 19th, 2009. Are you there yet or not?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Let's get the date of the document so we don't --

INMATE DAVIS: It was September of 2009?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: December.

INMATE DAVIS: December?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, we'll talk about that in your --

INMATE DAVIS: I had written letters before this --

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

INMATE DAVIS: -- to the family.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Do you have a more recent one?

INMATE DAVIS: That's as recent as I -- you know I was told don't write letters so.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: The letter a lot of times is for you as much as they are for the family.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I could -- I could write one.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, we'll leave that for a minute. I just noted that the clinician here says however, Mr. Davis has not addressed what aspects of his character that allowed him to participate in two murders despite his acknowledgement that he felt sick, depressed from there. That's kind of a strong statement after all these many years and the evaluations you've had for Dr. Goldstein who conducted this on 6/24/2015 indicate you haven't addressed the aspects of your character that would allow you to participate in these (inaudible). I wanted to give you an opportunity to respond to that.

INMATE DAVIS: I'm sorry that he hadn't read much of the record because I've talked about a lot, what let me do that, right. Okay, first my feeling that I was isolated and very insecure. I felt like a failure. I felt cursed so and emotionally just dead. So when these -- when these things happened, when these -- when these -- when these murders happened they were part of just a picture of what the family was doing, what I wanted to be accepted in. They were a part of just a happening around me and I didn't object for one minute my part.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And you talk about the family and that acceptance. There was -- did this connect to you? Did they connect on a level where you felt this acceptance and emotional growth? It's my understanding they're out playing guitar all the time and singing songs and really trying to have this, I wouldn't say religious epiphany, but they're having some form of -- worship wouldn't even be the right word. But there was a camaraderie, there was the family unit.

INMATE DAVIS: There was the lying. I'm sorry.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: There was a goal, there was a leader, there was people who were part of it and they seemed to all have the common goal. Let's get rid of worldly things. Let's get ready for this apocalypse. Did you find that acceptance? I mean did you create any emotional --

INMATE DAVIS: Getting ready for the apocalypse came much later.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: But initially, it was just people together. When I met Manson, he was very attractive to me for the reasons I said. He had -- he had influence with women that I never had and I admired. He had access to drugs. He had access to things that I wanted. I admired that. I wanted some of that and I took his acceptance as real acceptance. I think now it was probably manipulation but I took it as acceptance and keeping company with the girls I took for love. I see now that far from that but I took it for that. It was good enough for me at the time so it met those needs. I felt accepted. I felt valued. I felt like my opinions mattered. I felt like I was significant in that -- in that group. I felt that. I never had it in those words, right. I never was saying oh, I'm feeling significant now. I never thought of it like that but I can tell that I was. I was feeling okay. I was feeling part of a family. And at the time that somebody said you're just looking for a group to belong to I would have oh, no, I'm very independent. I would have had all kinds of answers why I wasn't but that's what I did. So, yeah, I was looking for a family.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: But the point didn't you sell everything?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I thought I read something that you sold your vehicle and kind of got -- decided to get rid most of your worldly possessions.

INMATE DAVIS: I didn't sell it. I gave it away.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You gave it away?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You gave away your vehicle?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I did.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And didn't you have some firearms and --

INMATE DAVIS: No.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: No firearms?

INMATE DAVIS: No firearms.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I mean I thought there was firearms (inaudible). All right.

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, you was thinking about the vehicle.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: What's that?

INMATE DAVIS: One of -- one of the friends -- one of the people we knew said they needed a car. Well, I came with a extra car. There was -- there was other cars and a bus and different things so it was -- it was extra for us. I was extra for me so I thought okay.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and that sort of begs the question why you took Hinman's car. You got all these cars lying around.

INMATE DAVIS: I was asked to take it. I took it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. How old were you when you committed these crimes?

INMATE DAVIS: Twenty-six.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You think you'd be old enough to kind of know better.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, hey, I knew better. I knew it was illegal. I knew it was wrong by certain -- but I disregarded all that and because frankly, Gary Hinman and his resistance to give them the money they thought they had, or we thought he had that he didn't really it was like it was an obstacle. It wasn't a person at the time and Donald Shea the same thing. As I look back, I can hardly believe I felt that way or had no feelings for it but I understand I did and I understand how I got there. But it was an horrendous thing and very terrible thing that I -- terrible choices I made and things I did and the results were dastardly. But at the time, I had no -- I had no guilt. Sometimes I would feel -- I think the shock I felt was more like physical stuff. I mean it wasn't -- I wasn't in touch that I should care. I wasn't in touch with that and the shock I felt and the depression I felt was sort of on a very gut level that I was not in touch with in my walking around days.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So Hinman was just to get money and things?

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay. You didn't feel anything at that time --

INMATE DAVIS: Well --

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- except a physical shock?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah. You know I had some lightweight reservations but not enough to stop me. So any feelings I had to the contrary weren't significant enough to change my behavior.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and my recollection is your gun was used. You drove them up there and then drove Manson up a couple days later when he got the call that Mr. Hinman wasn't being compliant.

INMATE DAVIS: That's true.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So what were you and Manson doing while everybody's up here at the Hinman house?

INMATE DAVIS: We were back at the Spahn Ranch.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah. Just you and him?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, there's a lot of other people there.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: (Inaudible) going?

INMATE DAVIS: There was only three people I think, maybe four, three people at the Hinman house.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay. And you indicated your position was only just sort of a hanger-on. You weren't a second in command for Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: I wanted -- I wanted to be Charlie's favorite guy.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

INMATE DAVIS: The second in command, there was no such thing as second in command. That Charlie --

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And everybody else?

INMATE DAVIS: -- Charlie was the man.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So you didn't have any real reservations about this Hinman murder. It's done, you guys take the stuff. Any discussion afterwards?

INMATE DAVIS: Not a lot, not a lot. I don't remember having any, you know, remembering a discussion about it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and Manson never -- you never felt threatened by Manson or anybody else in the group to go along with this?

INMATE DAVIS: The threat was not implied by anybody if there was a threat. I felt -- I felt that I was doing it because I wanted to be part of the family.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Your insecurities?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir. And in my mind at the time, that was -- that was the top priority by any means necessary.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, so any means necessary these crimes committed. How much later did you get notice that the Tate-LaBianca hit was going to go down?

INMATE DAVIS: I found out it was going down the day it came out on TV that it had happened.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, somebody, one of the girls came to you and said we're going to go. We're going to do this.

INMATE DAVIS: They didn't say what they were going to do. They said we're going out. I didn't -- I didn't have an idea of where they were going or what it was about. They had been going out on little forays and this was, as far as I knew, one of those. But as far as they had a target, no, I didn't know -- I didn't know anything about that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, so it wasn't a matter of turning them down worrying about your acceptance?

INMATE DAVIS: Not at that point, no, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, so why did you feel this worry about acceptance again and (inaudible)?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, we were standing on the boardwalk of the -- of the ranch early in the morning. Bill Vance, Steve Logan, Charles Watson, and me and Manson says we're going to kill Shorty because he's a snitch. I knew that, man, I'm not going to walk away right here. That would not be healthy so I went with it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay. You know the psychologist also indicates on page 5 of the SRA that, and this would be the first not full paragraph on the page but the last sentence of that paragraph. Mr. Davis also clarified that he was not addicted to drugs but he was addicted to being accepted. You think you were addicted to drugs at the time or not?

INMATE DAVIS: No. Okay, let's say this. If by some -- I suppose by some standards of addiction you could make a case for it. By other standards, no. Here's what I'd say on the negative side. The negative side was if I had them, I was okay. If I didn't have them I wasn't going to big measures to get it. I was always -- I always figured they'll come along when they come along so I never sold property. I never stole. I never took big steps to get drugs. Now the part that I was addicted says well, you took them every chance you got and you sure had fun and you didn't think life was quite as good if you weren't high. So under those -- under those rules, yeah, I was addicted.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah, I'm just curious did it impact your life, your decision making?

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, well, absolutely.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: (Inaudible) relationships?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, of course it impacted my life from the time in 1965 my first LSD experience whatever moral fabric I had began to deteriorate, began to deteriorate. And the things that had been completely verboten became acceptable, became negotiable. The people I was with, the things I would tolerate became okay because they had the drugs. So, yeah, it certainly affected the way I thought. It certainly did.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: With what you'd put up with?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I'd put -- a lot.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah, okay.

INMATE DAVIS: So yeah, absolutely. Now if that's part of addiction I was -- I was rightly addicted.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Commissioner?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: We talked about the experience of remorse. During this timeframe prior to your arrest there was a lot of publicity, obviously, a lot of coverage in the news media. These were a series of events which were high profile. Were you experiencing remorse during that timeframe prior to your arrest?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What emotions were you experiencing during that time which elapsed prior to your arrest?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I knew that I was -- I and the rest of the members were in big trouble. I knew that and I feared for my future. So I was just -- I was like a person on a sinking ship. I knew the ship was in big trouble but it was the only one I had and I wasn't going to jump in with the sharks that I thought the family had saved me from. So I wasn't going to jump the ship, so to speak, right, so I just hung with it. And I said, well, we'll see what happens. Then in probably November, it was before -- it was before Thanksgiving 1970 we're camped out. I was -- I was wanted and I'd been wanted since probably April or May and I was on the run, so to speak, camped out in the desert. One morning I woke up and I knew -- I knew I was going to turn myself in and I couldn't explain it to myself why in the world I'd want to do that at one level. And then the more practical level was well, this is a purely survival decision because what am I going to do with the next law enforcement officer that recognizes me and the one after that, and the one after that. So it came pretty clear that this was a no-win situation.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And I read a number of statements regarding that process. There were a number of you present when you arrived at that decision, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, there were --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You and several women?

INMATE DAVIS: Me and two women.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And I'm curious. It may not matter for our purposes today but how were you providing for yourself during that time you were, as you put it, on the run?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, we had some friends. Of course, see there was a lot of people involved with here and very few were arrested, relatively speaking. So they would meet us from time to time with a pickup truck full of supplies and so we worked out the time that we would meet and they'd resupply and --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. After the murders of Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea were you involved in any other murders?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: After the murder of Mr. Shea were you involved -- well, after the murders of Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea were you involved in any physical altercations?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Prior to your incarceration?

INMATE DAVIS: No, no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And other than the fights when you were a child in school which had been mentioned and which you've mentioned and which your sister reported accurately or not, prior to your involvement with the Manson Group were you involved in physical assaults on other individuals?

INMATE DAVIS: One time in a fit of jealousy, oh, here's a shameful story for me. My girlfriend was talking to my best friend. They were standing in front of the kitchen. They were doing dishes and I walked into the house and they were just having a fun conversation. I don't know what they were talking about and all of a sudden, I was -- I was jealous. And I walked over and I pulled the earring. It's not a -- it wasn't attached. It didn't make her bleed but I'm sure it hurt. I pulled the earring out of her ear just because I was jealous.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: How old were you?

INMATE DAVIS: What?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: When was this?

INMATE DAVIS: This was 1960 -- oh, about '65, maybe '66.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And where were you living when that occurred?

INMATE DAVIS: We were -- I was living in Orange County in Stanton, I think in Stanton -- Westminster.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. Other than that incident, were you involved in any other incidents where you were in a physical altercation with another individual?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: My colleague made reference to a handgun which you possessed, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Prior to the possession of that handgun, did you ever own any other firearms?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Under what circumstances?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, all the time I was growing up I had .22 rifles. I was in the NRA during the early -- during the 50s. I had rifles.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: When you were traveling around the country did you -- were you typically armed?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you have a gun with you?

INMATE DAVIS: You know I never carried -- I never carried a rifle with me unless I was going to a target shooting.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. Prior to your involvement with the Manson Group, had you ever committed any firearms related crimes?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Other than perhaps not documenting a purchase directly?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, buying a firearm with a phony ID, that's --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Other than that?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Commissioner?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Nothing further at this point.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: We're going to take a short break. The time is now 11:02.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Ms. Hoyt, I'm going to leave you --

(Off the record.)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Sir, we're back on record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And the time is 11:30. Commissioner, I have one question before we move to post-conviction. You may as well. Mr. Davis, you have a daughter?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I do.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I did not mention her earlier. You have one child, is that correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Is this a biological daughter?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And how did she come to be? Not biologically speaking but when and where and what stage of your life.

INMATE DAVIS: I know what you mean. Well, during the -- from about the middle 70s to the middle 90s we had family visiting in the institutions of California.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: So your wife and you created --

INMATE DAVIS: And my wife and I got married in '85 and we had family visits until '96 and my daughter was born in '93.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And this would be the wife from whom you are currently divorced as of 2010, if I recall? Is that about right or is this a different wife?

INMATE DAVIS: Fortunately, only one.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You've been married (inaudible) 2012?

INMATE DAVIS: Twenty-five years and the divorce I think was final in 2012.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, you've been married one time?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And you have one child?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And what is her status today?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, she's living in Grover Beach. She's into missionary training with YWAM.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You have a relationship with her today?

INMATE DAVIS: Rather distant, I'm afraid.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, thank you. Commissioner?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So after the murder of Mr. Shea what happened?

INMATE DAVIS: The moment after?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, let's go with the moment after.

INMATE DAVIS: The moment after I walked away, went down the -- down the -- down the hill to a creek bed, turned and walked up the creek to the ranch, went into one of the bunkhouses and slept for a long time. I was -- it hit me physically for sure. I came back to my average, I suppose we'd call it, in a few days and we just carried on with life at the ranch.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and how long did that go on before you left?

INMATE DAVIS: Left for where?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, y'all split up at some point. Didn't you head off and do some traveling?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, that was way, way before any murders.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, because I thought for -- and I've seen it referenced in two different ways. One that you went away and then you came back and Charlie was there to gather you up or at the airport but that was before the murders?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So how did you end up in the desert on the run for -- I know you went home for a minute.

INMATE DAVIS: I never went back after the murders.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Your parents told you they're looking for you. I don't know --

INMATE DAVIS: I already knew they were looking for me.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, so --

INMATE DAVIS: And my dad was dead by that time.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: So no, I never went back home.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. So how did you end up in the desert?

INMATE DAVIS: I was indicted for the Hinman murder.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah.

INMATE DAVIS: I found out I was going to be. I was in -- when I found that out, I went to the desert.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So was Manson incarcerated by this point or?

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: He was?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: Because he was incarcerated about October of '69.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And you were arrested in December of?

INMATE DAVIS: '70.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: '70, okay. All right, and after this crime, the Shea murder, you indicated sort of life went back to business or back to usual for the folks on the ranch.

INMATE DAVIS: Is there a -- is there a question there?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah. You indicated that life went back to normal for the family members?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, and so did that include going out on little night raids and things that they seemed to have been doing consistently?

INMATE DAVIS: No. As far as I know, that was all over.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and so what was the main dealings of your each day?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, basically, it was we were going to -- we were going to move up to Barker Ranch and it was a matter of getting the gear on the trucks and taking it up there.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and then when they came and got Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, first we took a lot of it up there. That's before October.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

INMATE DAVIS: They arrested Manson around the 5th of October and then I came to Barker Ranch a couple days later and they had another sweep and I got arrested then.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You got --

INMATE DAVIS: And that's where I ended up in Independence, California.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And how long were you there?

INMATE DAVIS: A week, two weeks, I'm not sure. We were -- was in the -- in the Indio County Jail.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right. And did you then go back to the Manson Family, the followers?

INMATE DAVIS: I went back to the ranch, that's right. That's where a lot of people that hadn't -- weren't arrested still were.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And who was in control at that point?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, Squeaky was there.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Who was?

INMATE DAVIS: Lynn Fromme was. They were taking care of the ranch.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Did you try to take a, I want to say director's position or a position of authority?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So you just took --

INMATE DAVIS: I just went there ate and slept. We didn't have a -- we didn't have any kind of a program going on because Charlie was arrested so everything went into suspension.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, understood but what I'm -- and how long did you stay there after that?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, that was the end of -- to the end of 1969 and then for a few, I guess maybe a month then I got arrested by the Feds for the handgun I illegally bought. And so I was in the L.A. County Jail for a while then they took me up to Sacramento and then I came back. This was just a long road trip and that lasted a week or so it seemed like and then I was back in L.A. County. They took me back to the -- to the district court to have trial for the Feds and they set bail. And fortunately or unfortunately, really, I think Mary Brunner had some money. She bailed me out.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Mary Brunner is another one of the family?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Did you go back to the -- to the ranch at that point or back with the family?

INMATE DAVIS: I went -- I went back for a while and then we heard from some of the lawyers, because they had a lot of lawyers going on for the -- for the Tate- LaBianca was and the investigation and there was a lot of stuff happening and we heard that I'd been indicted.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Keep going.

INMATE DAVIS: That I'd been -- that I'd been indicted in the Hinman murder.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Just one minute, Mr. Davis. My error. I neglected to bring Ms. Hoyt back online. I'm going to do that right now. Ms. Hoyt are you with us?

MS. HOYT: Yes, I am.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: My error. We resumed several minutes ago. I apologize for that, forgot you were there. The hearing will continue at this point. Let's go back on the record. We are on the record.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, let me -- let me hold you in that answer for a moment. What I'm understanding is Manson's gone at this point. He's out of the picture.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You think he's coming back?

INMATE DAVIS: Not really.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and so you indicated you joined the family because of basically Manson, he's your father figure, drugs, and women. Still the drugs flowing?

INMATE DAVIS: Some, not nearly as much.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Not nearly as much. The women?

INMATE DAVIS: They were there.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: As amenable as they were before?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah, good enough.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Good enough, okay. So there's a little bit of drugs, a little bit of women. Still better than nothing I guess. And Squeaky Fromme is sort of holding it together?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah, that's right because Squeaky always stayed with Mr. Spahn and the girls followed her lead and they were keeping everything fine. I didn't -- they didn't need me to help them manage.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

INMATE DAVIS: So I let them manage.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: At what point did you get up and go?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, when I was -- okay, I got arrested and was picked up by the Feds for the -- for the gun. When I got bailed out -- when I got bailed out I was told I'd been indicted for the Hinman murder and that's when I left.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. And you had grown up with firearms and such to my understanding?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And did you ever have a pistol prior to the one that was utilized in the Hinman crime?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You never had a pistol before?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: But you had long guns?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. So why'd you buy the pistol?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I bought it because I was obviously willing to take somebody's life.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, that begs the next question. So when you bought the gun you had nefarious intentions?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, you know, it kind of came around like this. About this time when I first got back from Europe was with the family. Now the -- now the scenario had changed to peace and love to Helter Skelter. I was gone from the family from June '68 until probably April or, I guess April, March, April of '69. Okay? The scenario had changed so when I got back it was about we've got to get -- we've got to be armed and there's going to be a race war, et cetera. And so I wanted to be like the rest of the guys and so I bought a pistol.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay. And I thought you told other folks that you bought it for target practice, target shooting.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, that was one of the things to use it for.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: But I see now. I mean even though I felt well, I'll go out target shooting but I, you know, when I -- when I bought a gun I know it's a serious thing and I know the kind of implications it has no matter what I talk to myself about it at the time, right, I bought the gun.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, anybody tell you to buy that gun or you just do it on your own?

INMATE DAVIS: I didn't get a direct order to buy the gun but since there were other guns, the guys had guns so I thought I'll have a gun.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: So I decided to do it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And how did it come about that your gun was elected to be used in the Hinman murder?

INMATE DAVIS: When I was getting ready to drive Bobby and Susan Atkins and Mary Brunner to Gary's house Bobby said can I take your -- can I -- can I have your pistol and I said yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: That's a leap of faith in this gentleman.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, it was -- it was very misplaced faith to be truthful and I was not very analytical at the time and so I just gave it to him.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And how'd it come about you just had to drive them?

INMATE DAVIS: That's all I was asked to do.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So Manson put the team plan together what positions and such and you were just driving?

INMATE DAVIS: That's all I was asked to do.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And I'm just curious why you did have that fear and the shame. You had no problems before. You'd given up your gun to Beausoleil I think is his name and that murder had gone forward with torture for a couple days.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah, yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And then you were there and Manson is cutting this poor fellow's face, pulled a gun on him.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You know things had sort of escalated at this point but I mean you're one of the family and yet, there was no repercussions for you not going on the Tate-LaBianca whether you knew what they were going to do or not. One of them comes in and says let's go and you say no, I'm not going to go. And then all of a sudden, all these guys, it seems like quite a few folks are going to take Mr. Shea and do what they got to do.

INMATE DAVIS: Four of us.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: Three, I'm sorry, three in the car. Manson showed up later in another car.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, and did everybody strike Mr. Shea equally or at least get a stab in there?

INMATE DAVIS: I wasn't there except at the very end. When I came in Mr. Shea had already been stabbed. The only person I actually saw stab Mr. Shea is Manson.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, you came in at the end of this?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Before or after Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: I was there and saw him stab him.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, but you said Manson came in later.

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah. Well, the reason I say that I stayed in the car from which Mr. Shea was taken down in the underbrush. I stayed there. But when Charlie came in another car behind he came by and said come on, let's go so I went.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Which sort of brings me around to you've indicated you weren't trying to be a leader but each time Manson shows up at the end of these crimes you're with him.

INMATE DAVIS: He asked me --

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Kind of in the coup d'├ętat on things. Does that make sense?

INMATE DAVIS: I hear you. You know I would have been as happy just to stay in the car. I didn't go until Charlie came by and says come on. At that point, I was -- I was committed just I'll do what he says.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And did Charlie break down who's going to do what --

INMATE DAVIS: No?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- in all of this?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: My understanding you had about ten minutes notice that this was going to go down.

INMATE DAVIS: It was short.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: So it was just a matter of go take him and --

INMATE DAVIS: Okay, let's see. Watson was going to sit in the passenger, front passenger seat. Grogan was going to sit in the driver's seat in the back behind the driver in the back seat and I was -- I was on the passenger side of the back seat. So we're going down the road. We told -- we asked Mr. Shea if he'd take -- we were asking him to take us to get some car parts. The part store was open or would be open soon. So when we drove -- we started down the hill Mr. Watson says to Mr. Shea pull over and he hesitated and that's when Mr. Watson stabbed him the first time. They had I don't know what kind of struggle went on but the car stopped and they pulled over to the side of the road. Meanwhile, Steve Grogan hit Mr. Shea in the back of the head with a pipe wrench and they pulled him out of the car down the hill into the brush. I stayed in the car.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Didn't worry about any repercussions from Watson and --

INMATE DAVIS: They were gone.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, I understand that but they're going to come back at some point and say you're a damn sissy. Where were you?

INMATE DAVIS: I wasn't -- I didn't -- I wasn't thinking about being worried about it until when Charlie came by and said -- when Manson came by and said come on, we're going, going down here. I went down there and then Manson stabbed Shorty who had already been stabbed a lot. He was -- he was sitting down virtually -- but he did say why are you doing this, Charlie, and Charlie said this is why and he -- and Charlie stabbed him. So then Manson handed me a machete and said I want you to cut his head off and I took the machete but I knew I couldn't do that and I dropped it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I thought you said you put it up to his neck but you didn't break any skin.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I made a motion in that direction.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: But I knew I wasn't going to do that. I had hit a limit. I didn't know I had a limit at that point but then I found out I had a limit so I dropped the machete. So Manson hands me a knife. He said well, you better do something. So I looked around and there was Mr. Grogan and Watson and Bill Vance with bloody knives. I knew I wasn't going to just do nothing so I reached forward, I cut Mr. Shea on his right shoulder about this part of his armpit in this direction in an upward slice.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Upward slice from the armpit up?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: And then I dropped the knife and I walked away and that's when I left the scene.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Do any puffing or talking later about cutting off Mr. Shea's head?

INMATE DAVIS: That was a story we made up. That was a story we made up because when the body was recovered the medical examiner said there's no evidence of that in any way. So that was just a story we made up.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Oh, I understand that but I guess soon thereafter you're telling everybody what a despicable act you'd done and --

INMATE DAVIS: Soon thereafter, I didn't say I done a despicable act.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Somebody was puffing about --

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, oh, yeah, I said it. I just didn't describe it as despicable like you just did.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, it (inaudible) --

INMATE DAVIS: It was a despicable act but I never said it like that. I said it in a braggadocio way.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay, all right. I'm going to hand it back to the Chair.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Let's move to post-conviction factors.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, let's take a moment and talk about your post-conviction factors. Sir, I've pulled this from a lot of different sources so it may not be in any particular order and I, of course, will give you and counsel an opportunity to fill in any of the blanks that I may have left. In regards to your education, you're a high school graduate. You graduated in 1961. You then attended some University of Tennessee from '61 to '64 sort of on and off part-time and that has been confirmed in your file. In 1998, you received a masters of art from Bethany College, Bethany Bible College, and then in 2002 you received your doctorate in religion.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: And philosophy.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And philosophy, thank you. And you have been teaching biblical classes since then, even before that. I notice that you're very involved in the -- in the chapel. So let's touch on a couple of other things at this point. We've already talked about you being 72 years old. We talked about the two dates you -- three dates you had prior. You have been working most recently as a PIA print plant.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And you're dealing with the tags, car tags?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir. I'm an inspector.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, got to make sure that they're legible or readable.

INMATE DAVIS: They call -- they euphemistically call us quality control engineers.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: There you go, there you go and you've been at that since let's see like 2009?

INMATE DAVIS: 2009.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And throughout you've always received very good marks. The last smattering I saw were all ones, which is exceptional. Prior to that, you were in a cook. You were at the chapel from '06, '08, '06 sack lunch crew, building crew, yard crew, rec aide, chapel, building porter. The gist of this is that you've been consistently employed while in custody --

INMATE DAVIS: Oh, yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- and you've received good marks. You seem to take pride in your work. You have been certified in drafting. Are you certified in welding as well?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, and you received that certification while in custody?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, any other vocations that you have completed?

INMATE DAVIS: Drafting, welding, none in prison. Well, actually, the quality control I got a certification in that through PIA.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, and the vocations are sort of they're a non-paid educational program while PIA is paid but you can get a certain number of hours and your boss will say you have competency in this. And I figure from 2009 to current and the fact that you've always received very good marks that you would be competent in the quality control area.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, and you indicated that you stopped your substance abuse use in 1974?

INMATE DAVIS: 1974, yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. And you have been diligent in your self-help and therapy and I'd like to go back a little bit. A lot of folks go since your last hearing. I tend to go forward before that because I don't believe your last hearing is -- since your last hearing is a consistent view of your whole life. A snapshot of what you've done recently and I find that with the changing of the laws all of a sudden people are truly engaged in self-help and therapy for the last year while they had done nothing in the numerous years beforehand. What I note with you is that you have been consistently engaged while you've been in custody. I see back in '81 Gestalten Guided Imagery. Moving forward, you've had self-help and therapy in every year, at least something along the way. I did want to focus in on some more recent things. In 2015, your Life Awareness Program, Law and Grace, In Death to Life, a Biblical Program. And I'm not going to go through every one of the Biblical programs that you have been involved with but it seems to me that you're consistently finishing one and moving to the next whether you're teaching it or taking it.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And you been involved in Family Project, Truth Project. You were assigned to the Long-term Offender's Program as a full-time assignment and how long have you been in that program?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I'm almost finished two tracks which are about three months apiece so I've probably been in six, maybe six months.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, and a lot of these like the Family Project and the Truth Project aren't those under one of those tracks?

INMATE DAVIS: No, those were -- those were sponsored in the chapel and I was a facilitator in those.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, and you teach class with the Protestant Chapel. You've been involved in Alternatives to Violence Program and I've seen reference to that back in 2002, 2009, 2010, 2013, 2015.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: He's facilitated that for years also.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Yeah, and Yoke Fellows as well.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You have been in that program I saw all the way back to 1980, '82 --

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: '86 all the way up to very recent. Purpose Driven Life 2015, Creative Conflict Resolution 2014, a Felon's Life 2014, Life Awareness is a 16 week program and you've been through that program three times it appears, 2013, 2014 --

INMATE DAVIS: I'm a facilitator. I'm a facilitator in that program.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. And I did note that you were in a 12 step program back in the day and I've seen two references one that you stopped in 2012 and that's in the Subsequent Risk Assessment. And then I thought I saw something in 2014 about a 12 step program.

INMATE DAVIS: You know in the 90s I was involved in a 12 step program where I was -- I was a facilitator in a duel -- what they call duel diagnosis.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: No psych issues?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I was a facilitator.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Okay. All right.

INMATE DAVIS: All right. Anyway, I went over there for Dr. Moberg in C-Quad so I'd go over there once a week. I was living in A-Quad so I'd go over there so I was involved in that for I don't know how long.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: What about recently?

INMATE DAVIS: Recently, I've been in AA since 2008, '09, something like that.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: 2006.

INMATE DAVIS: Is that right?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: 2006.

INMATE DAVIS: 2006?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Are you familiar with your steps?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I think you've been vetted on them in prior hearings so I'm not going to delve into too deeply on that. And you've received two 115s.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Commissioner, he did both the advanced and beginning Creative Conflict Resolution last October after his last hearing.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Creative Conflict Resolution in 2014 and actually, I did include a lot of this stuff past 2013 backwards and made reference that you have been engaged in just about everything that comes through.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Okay.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And you're not a Johnny-come-lately to the self-help therapy venues.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Two 115s 1980, 1975. They have been covered extensively at prior hearings. I did note that you have a listing of your 128s and there had been two, four, five, and these are just negative informational chronos. There are five. The last was in 1992 but I was wandering through your copious and extensive file and I came across looked like a 128 that was stuck in the just general chronos. And it indicated 7/23/94 you had another inmate's chapel key?

INMATE DAVIS: Could be.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: You know I don't -- tell you the truth, I don't remember that. I can imagine it happening. I might have been -- somebody probably left their key in the chapel and I was taking it to them, something like that.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: And I guess it was Johnson's key. Do you remember Johnson from the chapel but not a big deal because this is just a negative informational chrono but I want to make sure that our files are up-to-date. And so they have the last one as 8/15/92. I found this 7/23/94. Apparently, you had this guy's chapel key and you said you found it so they take it to Johnson. Johnson said, oh, no, I loaned that key to Davis so they wrote you up for not being particularly truthful. But again, it's a negative informational chrono --

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- just to bring the record current and make sure I've got all the documents I need. All right. You indicated, or counsel indicated that you had done a relapse prevention plan or something in preparation for this hearing?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I did --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: That was last year.

INMATE DAVIS: -- I did one for 2010. It hasn't changed.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, that's still current?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right, and I started in about this remorse letter to the family of Donald Jerome Shea, December 19th, 2009. Was that something -- I know you haven't changed your relapse prevention plan. Was this you feel is appropriate letter, truly epitomize your position?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I believe I thought it did at the time I wrote it. I haven't read it recently, to tell you the truth.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: All right. Well, I'm going to ask you about this thing because it is dated December 19, 2009 to the family of Donald Jerome Shea. I know you miss Donald every day and I'm truly sorry for hurting him and you. I cannot have made -- let's see, I'm sorry. I knew Donald and had nothing personally against him but I chose to join a criminal gang which senselessly murdered and robbed him. That makes me responsibility for your endless sorrow and the loss of your innocent husband and father and loss of family you have -- he would have become. You think that's appropriate to say that I chose to join a criminal gang which senselessly murdered and robbed him?

INMATE DAVIS: I certainly did.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: You still believe that's true today?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, it is.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Don't you think that when you're stepping one step away when you said I joined a gang and that gang senselessly murdered him.

INMATE DAVIS: Okay, I hear you on that. They knew I was part of it. I didn't -- I certainly don't mean to accuse the gang for my crimes. I was my crimes. I chose to do it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, okay. I know you miss Donald every day. I'm truly sorry for hurting him --

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- and you.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Well, you know you told every Panel that you didn't kill him you just --

INMATE DAVIS: I attacked him with a knife.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right.

INMATE DAVIS: And I went along with his murder.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Right, but when I read this letter, "I know you miss Donald every day and I am truly sorry for hurting him."

INMATE DAVIS: Well, you know, I could have used more explicit language. I probably thought that, you know, that was sufficient because they knew that I was guilty of murdering him and they had heard my confession many times so.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: I just wanted to touch on that. That's the only thing I really noticed that gave me concern in regards to your parole plans, I'm sorry, your institutional adjustment, your remorse letters, that type of thing. Let me ask counsel at this point is there anything else about institution adjustment you think is appropriate to put on the record (inaudible)?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: You got the essence of it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Sir, is there anything you feel that --

INMATE DAVIS: Just one thing and thank you for bringing that up on that remorse letter. The first track I took in LTOPP was called Victim's Impact and it was not recommended that I go to LTOPP so I went and signed up. I said I'm going to go because --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I'm sorry, it was not recommended?

INMATE DAVIS: It was not recommended that I do anything with LTOPP because I'd been found suitable.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, go ahead.

INMATE DAVIS: But since when the governor's denial came through then was kind of eligible so I went and I said what are we looking at and they gave me a list of courses that were given and I said I want to be in the next Victim Impact. I can learn -- I can always learn something about that. And so when I went through I found out that well, here's what it let me do. It let me realize that I had forced a relationship with the Hinman's and the Shea's and that now I was in their life. They didn't invite me but I was in their life and now I should take a responsible position, a role. And then I began to see the crimes that I'd committed from Donald's point of view and from Gary's point of view and that really highly refined my empathy and remorse when I began to see it from his point of view, from their point of view. It had never crossed my mind until this course but when I did, I've never felt so sad about it in my life and so bad about it.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Thank you, gentlemen. If there's nothing further in regards to your institution adjustment I'll hand it back to the Chair.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. Mr. Davis, we'll have more questions for you later in the hearing but right now we are going to talk about your plans for parole.

INMATE DAVIS: All right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And I'm going to go over a number of letters of support and probably acknowledge some letters of opposition too of which there are many. So what do you plan to do when you're released from prison? Where do you plan to live and how do you plan to support yourself?

INMATE DAVIS: I plan to go to the Francisco Homes in L.A. and they're committed to giving me -- they have an AA program and a job search and employment scheme or ever how they do it. And they said they're going to help me, you know, find work that I can do and that's principally how that will begin.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. If things didn't work out at the Francisco Homes, obviously, a legitimate entity with a number of housing options. We're familiar with them. If for whatever reasons things didn't work out at the Francisco Homes do you have other options?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, what happens is as long as I'm on parole then being a ward of the state the Parole Department now is highly motivated to make sure you find a place where you'd do well. And so if something happened at Francisco Home where I can't imagine what but let's something I had to leave. Well, the parole officer would -- if I was -- if by that time I hadn't accumulated the income and things that I could -- that I could --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Your plans have changed since your last hearing?

INMATE DAVIS: No, no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Since your last couple hearings?

INMATE DAVIS: Francisco Home.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. After you spend some time at the Francisco Homes what's the plan?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I believe I can -- I'll find work through the Francisco Home. I'll be involved in ministry. I'll be involved in teaching. There will be other -- there'll be opportunities. I have -- I have -- I have friends who say I'm going to help him get a job, I'll do all that stuff so I'm sort of dependent on them.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, I did note that and we'll touch on that shortly. You seem to have quite a network of individuals who are offering and seem to be in a position to provide you assistance.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So let's talk about finances. How are you fixed, Mr. Davis?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I'm not a high profile capitalist. I've saved a few hundred dollars in the -- in TIA. I'll have a social security check monthly.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You have your quarters in so to speak or you'll get because of your wife?

INMATE DAVIS: Because of my wife.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: Those are -- those are -- that's something I can count on.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So you've got some baseline income there. What about from your family? Is there any residual from your family, any inheritance or anything like that?

INMATE DAVIS: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: My sister in North Carolina has -- she told me, she said we'll make sure you're okay. In fact, that want -- they've offered for me to go there and live. So I'm feeling pretty good about at least somebody wants me to come there, right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And there is a process by which you can work to potentially transfer your parole to another state. All right.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir, that's what I understand.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. I think you still have a reasonably friendly relationship with your ex-wife. Is that --

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And I think, if I recall correctly, she's still part of your support network, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Well --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I mean it's changed but.

INMATE DAVIS: It's changed.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. Okay, well, tell us about that.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, you know the divorce made a big change.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Divorces have a way of doing that.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right. And I don't make light of it but it hasn't got any better since the divorce. We are -- we've both committed that our daughter is number one so that's the focus we have.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: And so we're cordial. We write, not a lot but we talk about -- we talk about Taylor my daughter.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Taylor visited you just a year ago. That was your last visit with her, right?

INMATE DAVIS: That was my last one.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, by lifer standards that's not long ago. That's like yesterday by lifer standards.

INMATE DAVIS: It goes by pretty quick.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Who is Wesley McCree (phonetic)?

INMATE DAVIS: He's a friend in the New Life Community Church who knew my wife and knew people in the ministry and he asked if he could come visit. He visited. He just had a recent visit.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Yes.

INMATE DAVIS: But before that, about I think it was about 2010 and '11, we visited quite a bit and then he left for a while. He was living in Arizona.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, he's still a friend, right?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. And who is Herbert Lucas?

INMATE DAVIS: He's a friend. He's a friend. He used to be a volunteer --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, got it.

INMATE DAVIS: -- in the chapel then after he got through being a volunteer --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, I'm good.

INMATE DAVIS: -- he come to visit.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And who is Paul Kinney (phonetic)?

INMATE DAVIS: Paul Kinney a person who I was going to work for if I had paroled in San Luis.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. In the past, you did have plans to parole to San Luis Obispo County, correct?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And those are no longer your plans?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Or you may come here in the future but right now they're not your plans.

INMATE DAVIS: My plan for a parole to my wife's house.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, that explains the change in county of destination.

INMATE DAVIS: It does.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, fair enough. So we have quite a few letters here. Mr. Beckman, I'll rely upon you to bring to my attention any letters that you feel that I fail to give adequate emphasis to. There are quite a few. I am not going to read every one. Obviously, I will try to acknowledge those that appear to have particular significance. There's a letter dated February 23rd of this year from Sherry Sichrist (phonetic). She's been communicating with you for quite a while. She's in your faith-based community I guess would be a good way of putting it.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, that's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, she's very supportive. She says she lives elsewhere. She lives in Pennsylvania actually, but she's very supportive and says she probably can't help with living and working obviously, but she is a source of other support to you. There's a letter dated February 9th, 2015 from Judith Ward, your sister. And she describes herself as your only sibling and she believes you've changed dramatically. Family would be pleased to see you released and she makes reference to she believes to be your ability to provide assistance to others through your faith. And there's a letter from someone whose name I cannot read. It looks Tomie, or Tommy, or Tory, or something of that nature received on February 6th of 2015, somebody who you apparently exchange letters with, very supportive.

INMATE DAVIS: From Kansas?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Don't know. There's a letter dated November 23rd, 2014 and this is now in the category of letters of opposition and I'm going to hold off on that and make sure that I get these letters of support in. There's a letter from a individual who signs his letter a Captain Frank Huggins, Retired.

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Who is Mr. Huggins?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, he was a friend of mine in high school.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: He retired from the Atlanta Police Force or something.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, well, he's very supportive. He doesn't say what he -- well, actually he does say that he retired from law enforcement and he talks about your religious faith, says he's stayed in touch with you. He says he's ready to support you in any way he can given the geographical distance. He's also prepared to help you financially. And there's a letter from the Francisco Homes dated July 27th, 2015 offering you housing. There's a letter dated July 25th, 2015 from Matthew Genovese (phonetic).

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Pardon me?

INMATE DAVIS: Genovese.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Genovese, a retired chief petty officer from the Navy. He's been corresponding with you for seven years or so. He's very supportive. I think that may be it. Mr. Beckman, do we have additional letters you'd like me to address at this time?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: There's a folder of letters that still are valid but you got the gist of it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The Central File does have additional letters that are older. All right, so you're in good health, Mr. Davis. I mean you're 72 but you're in good health.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Well, he's got emphysema, Commissioner.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Pardon me?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: He's got emphysema.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Well, yeah, right. I'm not forgetting that but I mean you're in pretty good health.

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I'm walking.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Yeah, yeah, so what do you see yourself -- let's say you're found suitable. Let's say you're released this time. What do you see yourself doing in five years? What's the picture?

INMATE DAVIS: Depending on what kind of work I get involved in would have a big impact on what I'd be doing in five years. I hope to be involved in the ministry and I hope to be involved full-time by then. Now that's my hope. Practically, in five years I could be working at whatever job I'm fit to do. I like to work and I have skills so I believe I'll be employed and I hope to be full-time in the ministry and supporting my daughter.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Why would your daughter need support? Does she have special needs?

INMATE DAVIS: No, except she's my daughter.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: How old is she?

INMATE DAVIS: She's 22 now. Hey, she's my kid. I'm going to take care of her as good as I can.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: Not that she absolutely will need it but she wants to be a missionary.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay.

INMATE DAVIS: And I know that's an expensive proposition.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: It can be. Okay, got it. All right, Commissioner, any questions regarding plans for parole?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: No, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I have a few general questions and kind of covering a bit of a range here, Mr. Davis, going back to the time of the commitment offense and prior to it. I'm going to ask you to -- I wasn't there, obviously. Obviously, like most people who were alive then I had some awareness of this series of events. But you were there and you knew Mr. Manson and you knew the other participants, your crime partners, basically.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You've talked quite a bit about what motivated you and what led to the actions that you took at various junctures in your life. What do you think motivated Mr. Manson?

INMATE DAVIS: I'm going to speculate here but I'd say this. Manson is a small person, probably 5'4", and he grew up in a rough situation born in a river town in West Virginia. And from what I can tell, he got passed from pillar to post as a child. His mother was somewhat young at the time. He probably found himself in rough situations that he couldn't deal with physically because he just wasn't that big. So I believe Mr. Manson becomes a negotiator and he needs control in his life. His life is chaotic and the -- probably very little certainly in it. So in his quest for survival, whatever he thinks is good for him, all that that got him into jail at a young age because he made bad decisions, of course. But through the time, going to get to his motivation here, I believe he was looking for power in his life so he could insure the future in some -- in some way. And so that meant kind of a control of his environment that he -- so he could be out of harm's way for unexpected things. So in this he got in touch with Eastern Enlightenment in Zen Buddhism and in the Indian styles of what is enlightenment. And I believe that there came a time when he saw something in that where there was real power or what he identified as real power and control. And I believe there was a certain place where he gave himself to that and when he did, he became its captive in a way. And then his motivation was to retain power and to retain control in his life and when things were out of control he was willing to -- he was willing to commit murder. But leading up to that, he had -- he had learned things, psychological forms of observation, as far as I can tell, and he knows how to read a person. And I've seen this. He would sit with a person for a few minutes and talk and at the end of it the person he's talking to believes that this guy knows what I need and he's going to be -- he's going to help me get it. And so Manson becomes the source of what this person wants the most.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. What about the motivation for setting off a race war, the animus that must have existed? Do you have any thoughts about what motivated that or where that came from?

INMATE DAVIS: You know, that's hard to say. It was -- it was definitely a hot issue with him. I mean a race war is not a small thing and to even suggest it is shocking to anybody that thinks very much about it. But Manson had a kind of a god complex in this way. I believe, well, he talked like he actually believed that when this race war came down he was going to be kind of the last man standing. Now that's how he told it. How much he really believed that I have no idea. But I tell you what, I believe he believed it enough to do what he did so that's pretty substantial.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. When you were -- when you were getting that from him did you then believe that by extension if you weren't the second to last man standing you'd be one of the last guys standing or was it the other benefits that were occurring to you at the time that kept you involved?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, the other benefits were the main thing for me. The fact that there was going to be a race war in a certain way connected itself to the Watts Riots, to the riots in Chicago about the same time, the assassination of Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, the race wars in Newark, New Jersey. There was just a lot of unrest. And so his proposal about a big race war was not a complete jump from nothing. I mean it had what felt like at least, some kind of basis.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You're suggesting there was a context during that era that was unique to that era and might not exist in other eras in the same way. That's what I'm hearing anyway. Am I right?

INMATE DAVIS: I'm sure it existed then.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, fair enough.

INMATE DAVIS: So his motivation was control and power.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay. So you've been in prison for a long, long time but you're a bright individual. Obviously, you're educated and I think you're pretty, stay pretty plugged in to current events, I would imagine. I'd like you to discuss if you would your views regarding the impact that this series of crimes, including, obviously, the murders of Mr. Hinman and Mr. Shea have had on society, on greater society in the United States. That's a big question and might require some speculation on your part but I'd like you to go there if you would.

INMATE DAVIS: When I think about the loss, the pain, the fear, the anger, the hopelessness for especially the Shea and Hinman family in particular, the Tate-LaBianca people that are associated with that family and a little less particular but I feel some responsibility. And then, you know, one of the most painful pictures I have is a fetal position of all these people, of all the -- of all the victims that died and their families and all the stuff they have to go through and the emotional expense and what it cost them physically and the physical ramifications of this kind of trauma.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What about society in a larger sense? I'm asking you to put on a sociologist cap if you would.

INMATE DAVIS: I know this. In Southern California, where I found out later, all the -- all the local gun stores sold out. That tells me there was some serious fear. The price of guard dogs really went up. Home security companies had a bonanza. People were very afraid. One personal experience I had was an officer on our tier talked to me one day and he said I was eight years old. He lived in L.A. He said my friends and I when we heard about this we were afraid that you guys were going to get us. And then we heard that the Manson people were only after rich folks and boy, we weren't rich so that relieved the tension. I had never thought about what all this did to children. I mean the parents are devastated. The friends, it's devastating to them, okay, and the people in general that just had to hear this stuff, that just had to hear it. It was like I wouldn't say it was the same as 9/11 but it had a general sociological impact in Southern California that had waves that went who knows how far.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right.

INMATE DAVIS: But I'm aware that it was -- it was a world changing incident for many, many people, millions of people.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. And there are some, Mr. Davis, out there who in some ways tend to glorify behavior that is as destructive as that which you just described. You're aware of that.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, I am.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What is your reaction today to that because it's still occurring?

INMATE DAVIS: It's a sad situation. I get letters sometimes from people, young kids. Oh, man, I bet you and Charlie were really what's happening back in the day. I mean they weren't even born and it's still affecting them. And I'm trying to -- and I'm telling them watch what you choose. Watch out, this is not good. You're about to bite into bait that's really poison. But what do I think about people that glorify that? They are very -- they are very -- they're dangerous. They're dangerous. They're dangerous to public safety because people that glorify that will not only condone it but sooner or later, they're very apt to be active.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. Do you have any ongoing associations with people such as those you just described?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. Commissioner?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Nothing further.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Morris, clarifying questions for the Panel?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Thank you. If you could please ask the inmate other than the 9 millimeter handgun he took to the Hinman murder did any other members of the Manson Family take any weapons at that time?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Firearms?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Any weapons.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: At the Hinman murder were there any other weapons, firearms or edged weapons, or any other type of weapon other than the handgun which you brought?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, there were.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you recall what was present?

INMATE DAVIS: Bobby Beausoleil had a sheath knife. Charles Manson had a broken sword, actually, that had been re-sharpened. It was probably over a foot long so yeah, there was two knives.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: And at the Hinman murder can you please ask when the inmate returned with Charles Manson did Manson take the sword with him.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: When you returned to the site of the Hinman murder did Charles Manson have the sword with him?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, he did.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Can you please ask in what car did they drive there in?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Commissioner, is this relevant to anything?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Possibly marginally, but it's not entirely clear to me at this point. Do you recall what car you drove back in that day?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And what car was that?

INMATE DAVIS: If I have my years right it was a '59, about a '59 or '60 Ford Fairlane four door yellow and white. It belonged --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: It belonged to?

INMATE DAVIS: It belonged to Johnny somebody. I don't remember his name.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Morris?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: And if you could please just ask after the -- after Manson slashed Mr. Hinman and the inmate and Mr. Manson left, in what car did the inmate leave in and what car did Mr. Manson leave in?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Which cars did you and Mr. Manson leave in or which car did you and Mr. Manson leave in after that murder?

INMATE DAVIS: Mr. Manson and I did not leave at the same time. I left before he did and I drove away in a Toyota that belonged to Mr. Hinman.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you know what car Mr. Manson left in?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I don't.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Morris?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: And on the Shorty Shea murder will you please ask what happened to Mr. Shea's car after the murder occurred?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you know what happened to Mr. Shea's car after the murder of Mr. Shea.

INMATE DAVIS: Yes, it was driven down into the valley.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: The San Fernando Valley?

INMATE DAVIS: San Fernando Valley, yes, sir. I think somewhere in the San Fernando Valley.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And what happened with it?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I was at the car after that and I opened the trunk and I don't remember seeing anything very significant in the trunk but I did leave a palm print on the -- on the -- on the trunk.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Do you know what the final disposition of that car was?

INMATE DAVIS: No, I don't.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Morris?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: And if you'd please ask why did the inmate open the trunk.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you open the trunk of that car?

INMATE DAVIS: Yes -- well, I don't remember who opened the trunk but I closed it with my hand.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: What was going on at that time?

INMATE DAVIS: Around the truck -- around the car?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Yes.

INMATE DAVIS: I was there with, I don't remember. I'm remember was there -- I'm not sure that there was another guy. I think there was a couple of the girls. They were going through the -- through the truck to see what was there. It was a car. It's not a truck.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Looking of items of value?

INMATE DAVIS: Something of interest I suppose.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. Mr. Morris?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Thank you. I have no further questions.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: I do. When my colleague was asking you questions about your activities prior to the murder of Mr. Shea you indicated that when the topic of murdering Mr. Shea was introduced you felt uncomfortable with it but that you also were hesitant to go in a different direction.

INMATE DAVIS: Absolutely.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: You indicated that you felt fear or trepidation or something similar to that.

INMATE DAVIS: I felt sort of trapped.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Okay, did you have, and I'm going to try to express myself here, did you have a movie playing in your head of what would happen if you said I've had enough; I'm out of here.

INMATE DAVIS: I wasn't even going to try that.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you have a movie playing in your head or did you have any specific thoughts about what the consequences could be, negative or positive, if you were to take steps to distance yourself from what was occurring at that point?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, I knew that it would be dangerous to say no.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And when you say that you knew it would be dangerous I assume you mean dangerous to you?

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: So did you have any specific thoughts about why it could be dangerous? I mean in what form that danger would come?

INMATE DAVIS: You know I had heard Manson ask Susan Atkins if she would die for him and Watson too. And of course the standard answer was oh, yes. And then one time he asked Charlie, he said --

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Asked what?

INMATE DAVIS: Manson asked Watson would you kill Clem for me and he said yeah. So when it came to we're going to kill Mr. Shea I didn't think there was much room, much wiggle room here.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right, and was there -- did you observe violence or participate in -- well, did you observe violence between members of the Manson Group? For instance, did you ever see Manson batter a member of the group? Did you ever see any other member of the group batter another member?

INMATE DAVIS: Yeah. I saw Charlie Manson beat up Gypsy, a girl we call Gypsy, Catherine Share. Yeah, and he wasn't -- I saw him slap Sadie (Susan Atkins), I saw him slap her one time.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Did you ever see Mr. Manson assault any other male member of the group?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And was Mr. Manson ever assaulted by any other male member of the group?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: All right. I'm sorry, Mr. Morris, anything further?

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: No, thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Beckman?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Yeah, I just have a couple of questions relating specifically to the Governor's letter. Have you ever shielded any members of the Manson Family from prosecution by withholding information about their crimes?

INMATE DAVIS: When Mr. Shea was killed there was an individual at the scene, Larry Jones and I shielded Larry Jones. I took the law into my own hands very illegally and decided to be the judge of his involvement in this murder scene. I had not seen Larry Jones do anything to Mr. Shea. He was a really young kid. He looked like he didn't want to be there so I decided to leave him out of the scene so I think it's just recently in the last few years I ever mentioned his name. But I did a big disservice to Mr. Shea and his family and the whole community and to Mr. Jones by teaching him it's okay to cover up a crime when I should have been showing him a cover up is part of the crime.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Other than Mr. Jones, you shielded any members of the Manson Family from prosecution by withholding information about their crimes?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Do you have any knowledge of any crimes committed by any members of the Manson Family that have not yet been prosecuted?

INMATE DAVIS: Well, we stole a welding truck once.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Pardon me?

INMATE DAVIS: We stole a welding truck one time. I don't think anybody was ever prosecuted for that.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Okay, any acts of violent crimes by the Manson Family members that have not yet been prosecuted?

INMATE DAVIS: No.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Louder.

INMATE DAVIS: No, I never have.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Okay. I have nothing further.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Commissioner, anything further?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Nothing further.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Morris, for a closing please.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Thank you. This inmate is a multiple murderer. He committed his crimes to bring on a race war, which was Helter Skelter, and that's why he robbed Gary Hinman which was to finance supplies for the race war. He killed Shorty Shea because the Manson Family believed that Mr. Shea cooperated with the police. So we have multiple murders for robbery and a race war and killing a police informant. The murder of Gary Hinman was not a typical murder. It involved extortion, robbery, hitting Mr. Hinman with a handgun, mutilating him with a sword, and holding the victim hostage, and then multiple family members stabbing the victim. I'm sorry, fellow Manson Family members stabbing the victim multiple times and then as he lay on the floor they smothered him to death with a pillow. The impact on the victims' families has been devastating and here we are years later while they still grieve and this murderer is still here living a long life and even having married and having a child. For Gary Hinman, the crime began on July 25th of 1969 when the inmate drove Manson Family members to the home of Mr. Hinman to extort money. To prepare for the robbery and the killing the inmate armed himself with a handgun and Bobby Beausoleil took a knife. When the victim refused to provide money because he had none the family members beat him and they forced the victim to sign over ownership documents for the victim's two cars. When the victim eventually fought back Inmate Davis drove Charles Manson to the victim's home. Davis pointed a handgun at the victim and Manson slashed the victim with a sword severing his face and slashing his ear in half. And, of course, I should mention that handgun was the one that he falsely purchased and he had given to Bobby Beausoleil to commit the robbery. When Mr. Davis came with Charles Manson and the sword Mr. Davis took the gun back from Bobby Beausoleil and then the inmate drove off stealing one of the victim's cars. Now the conspirators terrorized the victim for days holding him hostage and torturing him and then on Sunday evening is when Bobby Beausoleil finally stabbed the victim multiple times including in the heart and then they smothered the victim to death. And echoing the motive of this crime, which was Helter Skelter, a family member used the victim's own blood to draw a Black Panther symbol of a cat paw print on a wall. And wrote political piggy on the wall to blame the Black Panthers for the murder as part of the plan to incite a race war between blacks and whites. A few weeks later the inmate, Charles Manson, Tex Watson, and Steve Grogan abducted Shorty Shea, beat him and stabbed him to death because they believed the victim had cooperated with the police to get the Manson Family off the Spahn Ranch property. Now Mr. Davis was intimately involved in the planning and execution of both murders. For Gary Hinman, he drove the assailants to Mr. Hinman's house where they held him hostage. He provided a gun. He later drove Charles Manson to that residence when the victim fought back and he held the gun on the victim while Mr. Manson mutilated the victim's face with a sword. For Shorty Shea, the inmate, Manson, and other male members of the Manson Family planned the killing. They fanned out around the victim and surrounded him. They took him for a ride. They beat him and they repeatedly stabbed him and this inmate slashed the victim from his armpit to his collarbone. And on top of everything else, just like at the Hinman murder they stole the victim's car and we have now found out I believe for the first time that they also searched the trunk of the car looking for other property to steal. Now as to his remorse, this inmate relished in the murder of Shorty Shea. When Charles Manson was describing the vicious murder the inmate nodding repeatedly, smiled and said, "That was far-out." The inmate also provided the reason for the killing in his own words to witness Alan Springer when he said they had ways of taking care of snitchers and that they had already taken care of one. And he bragged they cut off Shorty Shea's arms, legs, and head and buried him at the ranch. Now this was not the victim's first involvement with criminal activity. We've discussed the 1969 giving false identification to obtain a firearm and that was the 9 millimeter that was used in the murder and hostage taking of Gary Hinman. Also we have to look at crimes for which the inmate was not caught and these are addressed in the CRA back in 2009. He obtained a false driver's license to buy that 9 millimeter gun. He purchased and used drugs prior to the killing and he also committed credit card fraud. And although in recent years he has conformed his behavior to the requirements of the State Prison System it's important to note that the victim has not had a perfect record. He has the CDC 115 violations first in 1975 for sharpening a spoon, which could have been used for a weapon. Fortunately, the prison officials were able to intercept it. In 1980, he had a CDC 115 violation for violating procedures to eliminate unauthorized inmates from congregating and he also has two 128 citations in 1994 for having another inmate's key and in 1996 regarding the improper receipt of a package. At the time of the crime, the inmate showed no remorse. First, the killings to commit or to incite a race war, stealing Mr. Hinman's car. After the killing of Mr. Shea stealing his car as well, bragging about the murder and as we found out today, the inmate also jumped bail on his federal case so he could hide out from the authorities after he'd been indicted on these crimes. And he didn't turn himself in until other Manson Family members negotiated with the sheriff's department to drop some of the charges against some of the female Manson members. He has repeatedly changed his story of what occurred and minimized his involvement. Initially, he told the probation officer he didn't kill them and even said he wasn't sure that Shorty Shea was dead. When he arrived at state prison he continued his lies back in 1972. He denied he'd ever been at the Hinman house since early 1968 and also denied knowledge that Shorty Shea was even dead. And to quote him he had stated, "I wasn't there when those things happened and I don't think he was either," he meaning Charles Manson. So even back then, he was covering for Charles Manson and minimizing his crimes. For years he still minimized. Even in the 2009 Comprehensive Risk Assessment he claims he only cut Shorty Shea on the arm after Mr. Shea was dead and only later admitted, I believe it was two years ago in 2003 (sic) that he stated that he had cut the victim from his armpit to his collarbone. And for the inmate, regardless of how much time passes some things don't change. Back in 1968, he believed he was entitled to live off the system. As he stated in the Subsequent Risk Assessment of 2015 he believes the same today. He has no offer of employment and no realistic job prospects. He has no concrete plan to support himself. He plans to live off others and to live off the system including remarkably trying to live off his ex-wife's social security. And his recent lies about why he bought the gun at the last hearing he said it was just for target practice. It's only today that he admits he bought it for criminal purposes. And the lack of the inmate's true remorse and insight is shown by the other way that he plans to support himself. In the most recent SRA he states that he can go on a lecture tour exploiting the public interest in the Manson Family. That is interest that is produced only because of the horrible murders that the Manson Family committed and it shows that he has no regard whatsoever to the victims he murdered nor of their families but he just wants to profit off the crimes that he committed. Rather than him saying he was ashamed he shows no shame at all and no empathy. He just wants to profit again. Now there have been many murders in Los Angeles over the years including serial killers but there's never been anything like this. These and the other Manson Family murders terrorized Southern California and the murder of Gary Hinman was the execution that started the Manson Family crime spree. It held all of Southern California in the grip of fear and the gravity of the offense cannot be minimized. This was a coldblooded torture and execution and the underlying motive was to ignite Helter Skelter, a race war. The murder of Shorty Shea after the Tate- LaBianca murders was not some afterthought. It was part of the inmate's and the Manson Family's homicidal lifestyle. It was to protect the family so they could take over after Helter Skelter occurred. The inmate was a leading player in two murders and in the Manson Family and even after all these years, he shows no true remorse or insight and he's still a danger. There are many reasons to deny this inmate parole and the People of the State of California ask you to do so.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Mr. Morris. Mr. Beckman?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Thank you, Commissioner. Bruce Davis has been found suitable for parole three straight times over the last four years. For political considerations, those grants have been reversed so here we are again today. Rather than reiterate all the reasons why it's clear that Bruce Davis has rehabilitated himself I'm going to incorporate by reference my closing arguments from the 2010, 2012, and 2014 hearings.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Can you orient yourself and point that way? I see everybody leaning forward. The rest of us can hear you pretty well. Thank you.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: And instead, just focus on the -- on the reasons the Governor gave most recently for reversing and then discuss briefly his exemplary programming since his last hearing. The first ground, life crime especially heinous. We know that. But crimes committed 46 years ago by themselves do not provide any nexus to current dangerousness. And the Governor needs to get his facts right. He said that the family chopped up and beheaded Shorty Shea's body. That's wrong. You have in the file the autopsy report and a Board investigation showing that this is flat-out not true. Further, because Mr. Davis' role was minimal, although he doesn't believe it to be such and his conduct did not aggravate the life crimes the issue is individual culpability. So the fact that these crimes occurred you still have to only consider Mr. Davis' role in them and his individual culpability for them. The California Supreme Court has made that very clear. Mr. Davis was found guilty of the Hinman murder for aiding and abetting. He was convicted as an accessory to the Shorty Shea murder. Steve Grogan, the actual killer of Shorty Shea, was paroled 30 years ago because he knew where the body was buried and he cut a deal. Mr. Davis couldn't cut that deal because he didn't know where the body was buried because he didn't bury it and he didn't kill Mr. Shea. How can a justice system condone the actual killer being released 30 years ago and still keeping the accomplice in prison? The Governor says my client is still dodging responsibility for his active role in the Hinman, Shea, and Tate- LaBianca murders. He says he still maintains he did not participate in the planning of the murders of Mr. Hinman or Mr. Shea. That is flat-out false. On page 10 of the 2013 Comprehensive Risk Assessment Bruce Davis states, "I participated in the planning and drove my codefendants to Gary Hinman's house. I held a gun on him while he was attacked and I did nothing about it then I drove away in his car. In the Shea case I was present in the planning to kill him." The Governor gives my client a hard time for claiming he refused to go on the Tate-LaBianca murders. It's true. He did. The Governor is still holding Bruce Davis responsible for crimes he had nothing to do with and he was not charged yet. But more importantly, my client does take responsibility for those killings as well. Take a look at the 2010 Psychological Evaluation pages 7 and 8. Take a look at the addendum Mr. Davis wrote to his role in the crimes. At last year's hearing on pages 33 and 34 Mr. Davis stated, "I'm responsible for nine people in my mind. Two directly, but I supported the cult, the gang, the family, whatever you call it so whatever they did I never no. I never said you ought to stop so my presence supported it." The Governor says my client claims he reluctantly participated in the stabbing of Shea. That's not -- that may have been true in the past but it's not true now. The 2013 Comprehensive Risk Assessment again, at page 10 my client stated, "In the Shea case, I was present at the planning to kill him. When it came down I cut him with a knife. I later bragged to people what we had done. I cut him from his collarbone area to his armpit area." The Governor says my client was not simply a follower. My client doesn't say this. He's acknowledged that as one of the older members of the family people looked up to him and had he said no or walked away maybe these crimes wouldn't have been committed. But let's be clear. Bruce Davis was not a leader of the family and don't take my word for it. You can take the word of the Court of Appeal in the original conviction. People versus Manson identified Charles Manson as the sole, undisputed leader of his followers and I can leave the opinion with you if you want but I'm going to quote briefly from it. "Without doubt, Manson was the leader of the family. The scope of his influence ranged from the most simple to the most complex of matters. He decided where the family would stay, where they would sleep, what clothing they would have, and when they would wear it, when they would take their evening meal and when they would move. Manson's position of authority was formally acknowledged. It was understand that membership in the family required giving everything up to Manson and his followers were compliant. They regarded him as infallible and believed that he was a god man or christ. Family members testified we never questioned Charlie. We know that what he is doing is right. The family's willingness to follow Manson's directions is saline to the People's theory of the case. The establishment and retention of his position as the unquestioned leader was one of design." That's People versus Manson, 61 Cal. App. Second at page 127. So the Governor's assertion that the evidence shows that he was a leader who actively championed the family values is simply false. While the Governor is entitled to deference in interpreting the evidence he's not permitted to make up or misstate evidence, which is what he has done here. The truth is that Bruce Davis has, at least since 2009, taken full responsibility for not only the Hinman and Shea murders as if he was the actual killer but for all the family murders and the last two Panels have made very clear that they believe that. The Governor said that Mr. Davis needs to explain why he shielded other family members from prosecution by withholding information about these crimes and to finally reveal what he knows. I asked him about that. It's false. He's not withholding information about anybody other than Mr. Jones, which he mentioned three years ago. He's told everything that he knows and the Governor's assertion to the contrary is just speculation. The 2013 CRA again found Mr. Davis to be a low risk of violence, again determined he had full and genuine insight, responsibility, and remorse for his life crimes. That was the sixth evaluation going back to 1999 who says my client is a low risk of violence, the seventh if you include the SRA, which despite some of the rather interesting things the doctor said still found that the low risk of violence rating is valid. For this doctor to suggest that my client was planning on exploiting his notoriety for financial gain and going on a lecture tour is just absurd. For him to say that my client has not addressed what aspects of his character that allowed him to participate in two murders despite his acknowledgement that he felt sick and depressed after the first murder of Gary Hinman is just absurd. He obviously didn't read any of the three prior reports or any of the documents that my client has written. This proves why we say that insight is such a subjective thing and why the courts have said that although lack of insight may describe some failure to acknowledge and accept an undeniable fact about one's conduct it can also be shorthand for subjective perceptions based on intuition or undefined criteria that are impossible to refute.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Mr. Beckman?

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: We've talked about his record both prior to and since the last hearing. Each time he's had his freedom taken away from him he hasn't wallowed in his self-pity. He's accelerated each time his programming. He's now served 44-plus years of a seven to life sentence, a terms that excels well beyond the matrix for this crime for the actual killers. As held by the California Supreme Court no prison can be held for a period closely disproportionate to his individual culpability for the commitment offense. Such excessive confinement violates the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the California Constitution. Based on the Board's codified matrix, Bruce Davis' base term exclusive of good time credits is at most, 21 years and inclusive of good time credits resulted in an adjusted base term that lapsed in 1973 plus the fact that one of the actual killers was paroled 30 years ago. Bruce Davis remains incarcerated for over 44 years, a period that is clearly, grossly disproportionate to his individual culpability for the life crimes. Necessity requires that I skip a lot of what I wanted to say. I'm going to discuss what the District Attorney said. There's no point. They will be unalterably opposed to my client's being released no matter what the truth is. It's pure vengeance at this point. He's earned a chance to go home. The last three Panels of this Board believe that to be the case. Bruce Davis went from someone who took lives to someone who saves lives. I don't know whether you've seen the declaration of Richard Kelley (phonetic). It was marked as an exhibit to the 2010 and 2012 hearings. I'm going to leave it for you because this talks about Bruce Davis' suitability for parole better than anything but it's my only copy so I'll need it back. Thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you. I'll pass it to Mr. Morris and he'll --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: They have it.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: That's very good, thank you.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I'm done.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Mr. Beckman. Mr. Davis, this is your opportunity to address the Panel directly regarding your suitability for parole. If you wish to do so, we'd be happy to hear from your now.

INMATE DAVIS: Thank you. I appreciate the energy and the detailed analysis and thank you for that. But I'm suitable for parole because I'm sober now and I'm in my right mind. And being sober I chose a creator who values human life and with that, I realized for the first time that my life was very valuable. And by reference, the life of every other human being is very valuable so my personal values have to do with respect and helping others. Now, at last, I am secure in my person. I have a strong sense of self-identity and I have compassion for other people and I value them as my own family. I value justice. I love mercy and appreciate humility and I am not the man who came to prison in 1970. Now my boundaries are governed by self-respect and love for others. I'm composed, I'm focused with long-range plans for life and right now I have impulse control and appropriate gratification to lay. I have a positive purpose to help others be fulfilled and to celebrate their potentials through obtaining their goals. My purpose is to encourage people in the gospel of Jesus Christ and my aim is to see their lives transformed like mine was and I'm confident that I'll succeed. I've had four decades of practice at growing more confident, more empathy, closer to God, and I have a realistic future in the transition home, and the people who support me and in the body of Christ that has shown that they'll give me help and appreciate what I'm doing. And I believe with the help of people like Mr. Beckman and other friends that are noted that I'll have a good future. And I intend to keep making amends by living a positive life, encouraging people away from violence, encouraging people into law and order, and to encourage public safety at every level. Thank you very much.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Mr. Davis. We've now reached the point in the hearing where we will receive impact statements from those wishing to make them. Mr. Morris, did we have an order in mind? Anything is acceptable to the Panel.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: Yes. If Ms. Martley is allowed to speak first?

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: That would be fine, thank you.

MS. MARTLEY: I'm Kay Hinman Martley. Good afternoon. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on behalf of a member of my family who cannot speak for himself, my cousin Gary Hinman. Gary was a musician who left his home state of Colorado to live and work as a musician in the Los Angeles area. Gary was kind and outgoing. He was a goodhearted person who often gave others in need a place to stay for a few days or a few dollars to get by. Gary's charity is what led him to befriend the wrong kind of people, the kind of people who tortured him for several days before killing him. Bruce Davis was among that group of people and that group of people are known as the Manson Family. It is well known that the Manson Family is responsible for the murders of Sharon Tate, her friends, the LaBiancas, Shorty Shea, and other who had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm here today to speak on behalf of our family and remind this Panel of the devastating impact Gary's death had and continues to have on our family. Gary's mother died only a year after Gary's murder at the age of 61. We watched the stress and grief eat away at her and it killed her with a massive stroke. Gary's sister Carol barely brings herself to talk about what happened to her brother. She remains afraid even now to speak out for fear of retribution from other Manson followers which are still active in society. I have traveled 15 hundred miles to be here today. I am a member of the Hinman family. I grew up with Gary. I'm here to tell you that Gary's murder had a lasting impact on our family. Unfortunately, the word Manson always brings notoriety. Every time Mr. Davis comes up for parole the surviving members of Gary's family must relive the horror of his death. These people cut -- held Gary captive in his home, stabbed him, cut off his ear, and tortured him over a period of three days. When they found him, the carpet was soaked with Gary's blood as well as the walls. This wasn't a crime of passion or impulse. This was slow, calculated, and coldblooded. This is what Bruce Davis did. The problem is you can't undo a murder. You can't undo the death of a mother, of her only son. You cannot undo the paralyzing fear that a sister lives with on a daily basis. You cannot undo the empty space in a family where a living, breathing person once was. Above all, you cannot change history but that is exactly what Bruce Davis wants you to do. He wants you to look past the fact that a jury of his peers gave him the death penalty. Because of changes in the law, the death penalty was taken off the table but he should remain in prison. He does not deserve to be returned to society by the very nature of this crime and I can see no justification for giving him parole. He committed a heinous crime and should remain incarcerated. I understand that Mr. Davis is a model prisoner, volunteers in a variety of activities which helps his fellow prisoners. Mr. Davis knows the system and it is to his advantage not to cause trouble and to be cooperative. It is good that he contributes to the prison society. It seems appropriate for him to improve his surroundings as penance for his heinous crimes. Mr. Davis should remain in prison. There is never a reason for Mr. Davis to be returned to society. He lost those rights when he murdered Gary and others. He can continue to contribute to the prison society where he lives. I do not believe in revenge but I do believe in justice and I ask you to honor the judgment Mr. Davis received from a jury of his peers who never intended for him to walk free among society again. Although it has been 46 years since Gary was murdered the passing of time has not diminished the impact of this horrendous crime and our family continues to serve a life sentence of heartbreak, grief, and loss. I hope that I do not once again have to rely on the office of the Governor of the State of California who has three times previously revoked parole for Mr. Davis granted by this Board. I'm here today to respectfully ask the Board to require Mr. Davis to serve a sentence that is no less than the one my family is now serving, a term of life. And I have two copies if you would like them.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, ma'am.

DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MORRIS: And perhaps we should have Barbara Hoyt who's on the teleconference speak next.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: That'll be fine. Ms. Hoyt?

MS. HOYT: Hello. My name is Barbara Hoyt and I lived with the Manson Family from April to October 1969 during the time of the murders. I know Karen Shea very well. We had communicated a lot. In fact, she moved next door to me for a year. The murder of her father affected her greatly. She has had trouble all her life and I don't know about going into all the specifics because I don't know if she'd want me to do that but she was molested at a very early -- well, at an early age and suffered years of abuse. She has been addicted to drugs. She did time in prison for it. She was told when she was a young girl that her father was a bad person and deserved to die by another child and believed that until she was 16 years old and when she finally said that to her mother, her mother straightened that out. The family has moved from one place to another being fearful of the Manson Family and never got the security of owning their own home because they kept fleeing the state of California and, you know, everywhere they went they ended up fleeing. So it's affected her, her whole life. There is some discrepancies in Mr. Davis' rendering of the facts. Shorty was not killed in the afternoon or morning. He was killed at night. I heard him screaming. I heard a single scream and then I heard multiple screaming over, and over, and over again and this was at night and I remember the position and the shape of the moon by looking out the trailer window that I was in. And it was by that it was determined that --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: Commissioner?

MS. HOYT: -- Shorty had died on the 27th --

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I need to put an objection.

MS. HOYT: -- or thereabouts.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Ms. Hoyt, stop for a minute please.

MS. HOYT: Yes.

ATTORNEY BECKMAN: I need to put an objection on the record. Ms. Hoyt is giving personal testimony. She's only permitted to give victim impact testimony from Ms. Shea.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: She is indeed. Ms. Hoyt, the Panel's familiar with transcripts from past hearings. We welcome your input today. I am going to permit you to continue. I would encourage you to focus your comments to the extent possible on your understanding of the impact of the murder on the family members of the victims. That would be I believe most helpful. With that, please proceed.

MS. HOYT: Okay. Both Karen and her mother suffered a great deal because of this and it's kept them in poverty. It's -- what do I want to say -- and kept them in fear for years, and years, and years, and years. I am -- I am disagreeing with the possibility of him being paroled for several reasons and one is because he has a cult following of his own as most of them do. Also there's still not telling the truth about the facts of the murder and like the time and the hour of the day and I think that's about all I have to say.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Ms. Hoyt. Ms. Tate?

MS. TATE: Coming, sir. Hello. I feel very privileged to be here and be able to talk on behalf of the remaining family members involved in Mr. Davis' heinous crime. I know firsthand how devastating these acts of extreme ugliness in the fashion that our loved ones were taken from us has. It is a fashion which never goes away from your memory and all of this has been concurred by the Hinman family as well as Shorty Shea's divorced wife and child. It causes great pain, strife, fear that has caused me also to lose family members. It is an extreme stress. I personally don't see enough remorse in any of these people and I do look for it. I represent other families and when I see it, I give it. I just don't see it here, the fact that the family members feel that seven years to life but somehow these good Christian people feel entitled to take it to the minimum sentence, which is seven years, is quite offensive, to tell you the truth. It has a low end and a high end and the high end being life. We believe that these people need to pay with life. The American public believes that these people need to pay with their life. The American people believe that these folks need to stay in jail for the rest of their life and they are trusting that that is exactly what is going to happen. It's actually quite a chore to prove that any one or all of these people are not going to receive just that. So it is the collective of the remaining victims' families as well as the rest of the United States and many other countries in the world. And based on that fact, Commissioners, I would implore you to give Mr. Davis an appropriate amount of time equal to his heinous, ugly taking of two viable, useful members of society's life and did nothing and in that way planned and ultimately was a part of, although not in person but in spirit, of the loss of my sister. Thank you very much.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Ms. Tate. The time is now 1:20. This Panel will recess to deliberate.

RECESS

--oOo--

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS DECISION

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Sir, we're on record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And the time is 2:10. The Panel reviewed all relevant information. Let's start a new track here. Thank you, Ms. Hoyt.

(Off the record.)

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Sir, we're on record.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: And the time is 2:10. The Panel reviewed all relevant information that was before us today. We concluded that Bruce Davis is suitable for parole and would not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to society or a threat to public safety if released from prison. This finding of suitability is based on weighing the considerations provided in the California Code of Regulations Title 15. The record does reflect some circumstances which could suggest unsuitability. Some of these are addressed in, quite frankly, the last two reversals from the Governor. The Panel acknowledges in reaching this decision the enduring social impact of these crimes. And certainly, the Panel has been reminded again today of the enduring personal impact that these two murders have had on family members, extended family members, and on individuals who were impacted by Mr. Davis and his crime partners directly and indirectly. Our decision today does not diminish the fact that the life crime Mr. Davis committed was cruel and remains disturbing to this day. Mr. Davis' actions resulted very directly in the deaths of Gary Hinman and Donald Shea. These were brutal murders. There is simply no justification for them and seeking rational explanation for them inevitably results in disappointment. In reaching our decision today, we did consider what we believe to be Mr. Davis' significantly unstable social history prior to the commitment offense. He was 26 years old, a young man, but he had apparently suffered rather significant abuse as a child. As a young man when he was making his own decisions and responsible for them he led what appears to have been an itinerant lifestyle. He abused narcotics and he appears to have been profoundly susceptible to negative influences, willing to be susceptible to negative influences if he felt that he would benefit in some way. The Panel does recognize however, that after a long period of time factors such as the commitment offense and unstable social history may no longer indicate a current risk of danger to society when considered in light of a lengthy period of rehabilitation. In this case, 46 years have passed and in the Panel's judgment, many of the circumstances that tend to show suitability pursuant to Title 15 are present. Specifically, Mr. Davis did not possess a history of violent crime while a juvenile nor was his criminal history as an adult prior to the commitment offense of particular significance. Subsequent to his incarceration, for over four decades Mr. Davis has demonstrated an exceptionally stable social history in the institution. We believe that Mr. Davis does experience remorse for these murders. The issue of remorse has been a topic of conversation and consideration over the years at many junctures and certainly, the mechanics of these two murders and the mechanics of the criminality of Mr. Davis and his crime partners have been and continue to be at issue. However, again, well over four decades have passed and the Panel is able to view Mr. Davis' history in the institution, his behavior in the institution, his housing status in the institution, his relationships with other inmates and with staff are well documented. How he has chosen to spend his time is well documented and we believe in total the latter, in particular, suggests that Mr. Davis does indeed experience remorse. Mr. Davis is 72 years old today. The Panel is mindful of the Elderly Parole Law. Despite the fact that Mr. Davis appears to be a pretty healthy guys he has some medical issues as might be expected of one of his age. Nonetheless, we certainly note that at 72 he is statistically less likely to become involved in any type of violent act in the future. We also note that at the time of the commitment offense (age 26) he was obviously susceptible to negative peer influence, willing to participate with negative peers and crimes of violence. We believe that his behavior and conduct in the institution for well over four decades suggests that he is no longer susceptible to negative peer influence. Certainly, he has ample opportunity here in the institution to demonstrate that susceptibility should it exist. In short, we believe he has matured significantly and sufficiently over the last 46 years. He has engaged in institutional behavior which does suggest an enhanced ability to function within the law upon his release. We'll discuss that in more detail in a minute. The Panel again notes that Mr. Davis had no juvenile criminal history of which we are aware, a limited prior criminal history, has maintained what appear to be positive and virtually conflict-free relationships with both staff and inmates during a lengthy incarceration. He has demonstrated no subsequent criminality or violence during his entire term. Mr. Davis has not been involved in a single documented act of violence since his incarceration. He has upgraded educationally to a significant degree having received an undergraduate degree and graduate degrees as well. He has upgraded vocationally over the years having received certificates in welding and drafting. Moreover, the Panel certainly notes concerns by the most recent clinician notwithstanding that at age 72 verging on 73 Mr. Davis is unlikely to earn a living through physical labor. We believe that his education and his experience and the work that he's been doing in the institution for many years suggests two things. One, he's willing to work and two, he is sufficiently educated and apparently committed to his faith to be able to pursue the vocation which he appears interested in pursuing, that being in the ministry. We believe that Mr. Davis does have sufficient insight into his previous criminality, that convergence of factors in his life from childhood on that led to his willingness to actively involve himself with his crime partners including Mr. Manson and his willingness to become directly involved in the events surrounding two murders. We believe that he accepts responsibility for these two murders in appropriate fashion. He has identified issues from his childhood, issues from his young adulthood which contributed to his thought process and decision making at the time of the commitment offense. Mr. Davis has consistently involved himself in positive programming in the institution. He has been involved in self-help that is wide-ranging and consistent. Even to this day after three findings of suitability and three reversals his programming continues a pace and his programming and his activities in the institution include activities in which he provides direct assistance to others and takes a leadership role in that process. Mr. Davis, to his credit, at an age when the Panel is aware many inmates have essentially retired in the institution continues to labor, continues to work, and continues to present with positive work reports. With respect to his plans for parole, we find them to be realistic. We believe that Mr. Davis has sufficient marketable skills to earn a living. The Panel is not troubled by his plans to utilize benefits which may be available to him, legitimately so, and we acknowledge that there are individuals outside the institution who are part of his network of support who have expressed a willingness to assist him financially should that be necessary and appear to have the willingness to do so. Mr. Davis has expressed a desire to transition to the Francisco Homes in Los Angeles County. That may work fine for him. The Panel has no particular objection to that. However, we do note that Mr. Davis is nearly 73 years old. He has some fairly specific career objectives and his case has particularly notoriety and based upon these factors, we acknowledge that between today and his ultimate release from prison the situation may change. Another option, another destination may become available to him, may be determined by him or by the Division of Adult Parole Operations, or his support network to be more appropriate. Should that occur, as long as it's acceptable to the Division of Adult Parole Operations it is acceptable to this Panel as well. So this grant is not dependent upon any specific residence plan. The Panel does note that the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office participated in today's hearing and requested that this Panel find Mr. Davis not suitable for parole. The Comprehensive Risk Assessment prepared by Dr. Michael Pritchard and approved on October 28th of 2013 found that Mr. Davis would present a statistically low risk of reoffense in the free community. The Panel reviewed prior Risk Assessments as well and we found them to be largely consistent with Dr. Pritchard's assessment. We also reviewed the Subsequent Risk Assessment competed just weeks ago by Dr. Goldstein. That Risk Assessment also supported the findings of the Comprehensive Risk Assessment. It did raise issues which this Panel explored to our satisfaction today chiefly concerning Mr. Davis' insight into his previous criminality and his plans for employment subsequent to release. The Panel trusts that our dialogue with Mr. Davis as contained in the transcript of today's hearing will reflect that we were satisfied with his responses. Commissioner O'Hara and I conducted our own independent hearing today and we reached an independent finding concerning Mr. Davis' suitability for parole. However, we do note that in 2010, 2012, and 2014 previous Panels, entirely different Panels, also conducted independent hearings and also concluded that Mr. Davis would not pose an unreasonable risk of danger when released from prison. Commissioner, did you have input?

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Thank you, sir. You know I concur with the Chair, the artfully put decision. And you know it is tragic that my job each day I get to meet people who change the world. Everyone of them has changed the world to the better -- or the worse, I'm sorry, to the negative.

INMATE DAVIS: That's true.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: In your particular case with your particular group, what a change. Far ranging impact that still repercusses today.

INMATE DAVIS: That's true.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Songs, books, everything and, you know, Lawrence talked about certain crimes that shock the conscience and this is one of them. There just really is not -- I could never get a handle on these and I've dealt with some of the Manson folks and there's so many different versions, and tales, and twists and turns. But the reality is setting that aside and just the visceral response that anybody would have to this and I understand where the people come from. I understand where the victims' family come from. You know there's crimes and then there's just senseless, senseless crimes, brutality, what went on with these poor folks for almost no reason and then the circumstances around it. Setting that, our own sort of innate response to that aside, we are tools of the law the Commissioner and I and we follow the law. The law says that you have rehabilitated yourself and if so, then you're no longer a danger to society we are to set you free and you have done those things. And I suspect, and it's just my own surmising, that has been the religious foundation for you because you've been looking or running from something your whole life and from home or to some other else and never quite found it. Went to the drugs and that never quite did it. You ran to Manson and that whole family environment and that didn't do it for you although it (inaudible) did. And you came to prison and you found religion but I do hope you found yourself because all these things are outside you and it does seem as though you have because you have done an exemplary program and I'm not going to go over it again. The Commissioner's covered it. You have earned your way out of here. You have not paid your debt. There's no way you'll ever pay your debts --

INMATE DAVIS: That's right.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: -- for what you took but you are no longer a danger to society and that is the rule we look at here. So I want to commend you for your efforts and wish you the very best of luck. Good luck, sir.

INMATE DAVIS: Thank you very much.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Commissioner. Based on our findings we conclude that Mr. Davis would not pose an unreasonable risk of danger or a threat to public safety if released from prison. We do find him suitable for parole. Mr. Davis qualifies under Elderly Parole Law, therefore, no term calculations will be provided. The Panel would request that the following conditions of parole be applied: that Mr. Davis attend an outpatient clinic for an evaluation and treatment if treatment is deemed appropriate by Adult Parole Operations, that he not possess or consume alcoholic beverages, that he submit to random narcotic testing. We believe there's a sufficient nexus. Substance abuse clearly played a role in the lifestyle that Mr. Davis and his crime partners were living at the time of the commitment offense. We also require that he maintain an approved residence in order that he may be properly supervised and he abstain from any, I'll use the term gang activity, and that he not associate with any gang member. Clearly, the criminal associates with whom Mr. Davis affiliated at the time were decidedly gang-like and therefore, we believe there's a sufficient nexus to support this condition. Finally, that he not have any contact with surviving victims or victims' next-of-kin and that Mr. Davis not seek to profit financially either directly or indirectly by capitalizing on the notoriety of the commitment offense or by capitalizing on the criminal activities of his network of crime partners in any manner. The Panel in applying this condition certainly acknowledges and, frankly, approves of Mr. Davis' desire to continue utilizing his life experience and perhaps by extension certain aspects of his criminality within the context of his ministry. And I trust that I've made our intention clear in that regard with that. I join my colleague in wishing you well. The time is now 2:30. That will conclude this hearing.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O'HARA: Good luck, sir.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER LABAHN: Thank you, Ms. Hoyt.

ADJOURNMENT
--o0o--