Newsom must now decide; he has reversed Krenwinkel’s two prior grants
California’s Board of Parole Hearings granted parole on Tuesday to Patricia Krenwinkel, 78, who has spent nearly six decades in prison for her role in the 1969 Tate-LaBianca murders as a follower of Charles Manson. It is the third time the board has found her suitable for release, and the decision now goes to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who reversed Krenwinkel’s two prior parole grants in 2022 and 2025. Krenwinkel, who was 21 at the time of the killings and is now the longest-serving female inmate in California, would be released into the community if Newsom allows this ruling to stand.
The decision puts Newsom at the center of a debate over how California weighs decades of rehabilitation against the gravity of crimes committed nearly six decades ago, and it comes amid growing concern about the number of elderly people incarcerated for decades in the United States. Advocates argue the case raises fundamental questions about a parole process in which repeated board grants do not result in release.
Krenwinkel was convicted in 1971 for her role in a violent crime spree over two nights in 1969 that claimed the lives of actor Sharon Tate, who was eight months pregnant, and her four friends, along with grocery owner Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary. The killings became one of the most notorious crime stories in the United States. Krenwinkel was 19 years old when she “fell under Charles Manson’s control” and was exploited and psychologically abused by the cult leader, her attorneys have said, and she was 21 at the time of the killings.
Over her decades in prison, Krenwinkel has had a clean disciplinary record, and nine consecutive psychological evaluations in the past 40 years have found her to be a low public safety risk, according to her longtime lawyer, Keith Wattley, who has represented Krenwinkel for 16 years. Wattley said she has participated in extensive therapy and group counseling, earned a college degree and trained service dogs for people with disabilities.
“Reaching this moment has taken decades of hard, deliberate work to confront who she was, what she did, and the devastating harm she caused,” Wattley said in a statement after the parole grant. “She fully accepts responsibility for her actions, everything she contributed to, and every life she destroyed in 1969. Pat does not excuse or minimize that harm.” Wattley added: “I have seen the depth of her remorse and the extraordinary work she has done to change her life. I firmly believe she is ready to return home.”
Debra Tate, Sharon Tate’s sister, has repeatedly objected to the release of Krenwinkel and other Manson followers.
When Newsom denied Krenwinkel parole in 2022, after the board first found her suitable for release, the governor acknowledged that she had been a “victim of Mr Manson’s abuse” and said she had “matured in prison and engaged in commendable rehabilitative efforts.” But he argued she had “not developed sufficient insight into the causative factors of her crime and her triggers for antisocial thinking” and was still dangerous. When Newsom again denied her parole in 2025, he also acknowledged her “serious chronic medical conditions” had diminished her strength, but concluded she “must do additional work to deepen her insight before she can be safely released.”
California law requires the governor to consider her elderly age and that she committed the crime as a youth when reviewing her case.
Krenwinkel’s attorneys and advocates have repeatedly argued that the governor was caving to political pressures by denying parole to people convicted in high-profile cases. Newsom previously vetoed the release of Leslie van Houten, another former Manson follower, but an appeals court sided with her and granted her freedom in 2023. Newsom also faced scrutiny for overturning the parole grant of Sirhan Sirhan, convicted of assassinating Robert F. Kennedy, even after two of Kennedy’s sons favored his release.
Wattley, founder of UnCommon Law, a non-profit organization that represents people at parole hearings, urged Newsom to “uphold the law” and approve Krenwinkel’s freedom: “The parole process exists because people can change, rehabilitation matters, and public safety must be grounded in evidence. Pat’s case raises a fundamental question: if three parole grants don’t lead to release, what is the point of this process?”
The push for Krenwinkel’s release comes at a time of growing concern about the increasing number of elderly people languishing in U.S. prisons after decades of incarceration. Krenwinkel’s longtime friends from inside California’s women’s prison told the Guardian last year that she was a mentor and support system to others in the prison.
Spokespeople for Newsom did not immediately respond to an inquiry on Wednesday.