LIFE AFTER MANSON 2014
“Life After Manson” is a short film based on Patricia Krenwinkel’s alleged experience of what lead her down the path to follow Charles Manson, and eventually be a part of the Tate-LaBianca murders. I originally watched the film years ago, sometime around 2021, but decided to rewatch it for the sake of reviewing it, and seeing if what was said holds up to the truth as seen in actual documentation.
From the start, it’s clear that the viewer is supposed to feel bad for Patricia, like as if she was wrongly locked up in this women’s prison. The early part to the film shows her in some sort of group, where it seems that Patricia was trying to play that she was in a bad intimate relationship. (At one point, probably around 2014, Patricia’s legal team did try to say that she was a victim of intimate partner violence, and should be one of the reasons that she should be released on parole).
Patricia goes on to talk about her early life, and there’s a few snippets of quotes from her mother, Dot. Dot stated that Patricia was a normal girl that did all of the normal things that kids did. Patricia then went on to say that she grew up in household where silence was the way of life. It’s strange to see Patricia nearly contradict what her mother said, where her mom made it seem like Pat had a warm and cuddly early life, where Pat herself nearly says she did not.
It’s like we’re supposed to believe that Patricia came from a broken home, but really, but at least broken enough for her to be potentially not at fault for committing her crimes.
Pat seems to place part of the blame for her descent on her now deceased older sister, who was remembered as having been “incorrigible”, suicidal, and mixed into drugs. It appears like a cop out, so that Pat doesn’t have to take accountability for her actions. The way this is portrayed in the movie, it’s like as if Pat was some innocent lamb, led to the slaughter. It’s like as if Patricia was so unaware of anything going on, like as if we’re really supposed to believe that she had no sense of self preservation. There is so much blame placed on everyone else, yet Patricia herself.
Pat goes on to lie on camera, saying that “her name was changed immediately”, and she had no money of her own, that she had nothing of her own, was in the middle of nowhere, with no way to get back. This is not true! Various pieces of Manson literature have all stated that Patricia quit her job after meeting Manson, not even picking up her last check! She would then get money from her father, which of course, Manson would use. Joseph Krenwinkel, unintentionally financed many parts of the Manson family, under the idea of helping out his daughter.
According to Jeff Guinn’s book, “Manson”, Patricia even wrote a letter to her father where she said: “For the very first time in my life, I’ve found contentment and inner peace.”.
On top of that, the Manson family would travel around, Patricia being one of these people. Dianne Lake’s book even stated that Patricia would stay and help out with the remaining members at “The Fountain of The World”.
What’s interesting, is how Patricia really tried to portray Manson as this crazy person who forced her to stay with him, making it seem like she was obligated to have sex with him. Yet ironically, Tex Watson’s book “Will You Die For Me?” seems to disprove this. According to Watson, he stated that Patricia would only have sex with Charles Manson, this is because Charlie was the only one that would have sex with her.
To quote: “Even though she was the sweetest of the girls, none of the men except Charlie ever got involved with her sexually. She was a little standoffish and, probably more important, unattractive. When Charlie started trying to get bikers involved with the Family by offering them girls, they all complained that Katie was too hairy. For all the talk about love and oneness, I think she must have felt the rejection from the men and that made her all the more devoted to Charlie. No matter what the others thought, Charlie loved her, and would make love to her. Why shouldn't she do anything he asked?”
Some of the other books, like Paul Watkins’, did mention Patricia having sex with some of the other members, such as Clem, though it seems true that most did not find any attraction to her.
So, of course, it seems like Patricia was devoted to Charlie, because he was the only man that showed her any sort of romantic attention, ever. Some people, are just like that. They will throw their lives away for the sake of attention.
In the film, Patricia goes on to say that Charlie made fun of her in front of the other members of The Family, making it seem like he was attacking her only. This completely glosses over the fact that many of the members would be naked in front of each other, exposing themselves; Susan Atkins being one of these people, where she exposed her butthole, because Manson told her to.
Patricia makes it seem like she gave up her life to Manson, because she was brainwashed by him. The film as whole tries to portray her as this gullible person who just did what she was told. She states that she started to come to reality when on Death Row, admitting that she would finally have to take responsibility of the damage and horror she had done. It’s interesting to hear this, as she cries crocodile tears for sympathy.
The film completely glosses over the crimes she was a part of. It states nothing about Rosemary LaBianca, or Abigail Folger. Patricia is never heard saying their names in this film. They show a recording of one of her parole hearings, where she claimed that she was “doing what she was told”. They had the audacity to show Patricia’s fake tears during this parole hearing, yet never any footage of her saying the victim’s names. How disgusting.
Not once, is the crime at Cielo Drive talked about by Patricia. It’s never mentioned how she hissed as Susan Atkins, “Kill Her!”, telling her to murder Sharon Tate. This is recollected in Susan and Tex’s books. Patricia puts so much emphasis on how her ability to make choices was taken from her by Manson, yet, she tried to force Susan to make a choice, did she not? Patricia took away any choices from Abigail Folger, Sharon Tate, Rosemary LaBianca, and Leno LaBianca, when she participated in their murders. She almost took away William Garretson’s ability to make choices, when she couldn’t get into the guesthouse that night at Cielo. If the door wasn’t locked, she would have gone in and killed him too.
The movie speaks nothing of what happened at Waverly Drive. It never mentions how Patricia took the knives out of the kitchen and brought them into the bedroom with Leslie, where they stabbed Rosemary LaBianca to death. Didn’t Patricia technically take away some of Leslie’s ability to choose, when she encouraged her to participate in killing Rosemary? What about the part where she mutilated Leno LaBianca’s body?
Patricia complains that Manson is the reason why she’s in prison, but she can’t seem admit that she took away the ability for multiple people to choose, with the actions she committed on those two nights.
I found the film disgusting, and completely tramples over the victims. Why should we feel bad for this convicted killer? The only reason she is still alive to this day, is because the state of California overturned the death penalty.
The end of the film concludes with Patricia spewing all of this garbage she clearly learned at all of the classes and lessons she’s had from being in prison for so long. It’s clear to me that she is some sort of Sociopath, that thinks that if she says the right things, she’ll get what she wants, even without actually doing the right thing or putting in the work. To me, she was repeating everything she was taught, with the hopes that it would appear genuine. But how genuine is it to never even apologize to the murdered or their families?
The film makes it seem like we should feel sorry for Patricia, because she was “just a gullible woman in a bad relationship”. Yet, if someone were truly this naive, that still proves that they shouldn’t be released to the public. If you can be convinced to kill, then what would stop it from happening again? What’s also gross to me is that it’s like Patricia was trying to portray herself as not a convicted serial killer, because she was a woman. Like as if, women can’t commit crime. Ironically, this is misogynistic. Just because someone has XX chromosomes, doesn’t mean that they can’t be criminals too. I think that this mentality goes back to when she was initially locked up; it seems that early news articles were shocked that the Manson girls committed the crimes, because of the mentality that women are typically loving, sweet, and kind.
Unless you’re deep in the Manson rabbit hole like me, this isn’t worth the watch. Honestly, you’d have to be deep into it, to understand how much Patricia is lying in his film. She was clearly preying on the gullible, who didn’t know the full extent of her participation in the crimes, for people to feel sorry for her. I think that much of Patricia’s defense has been making people feel sorry for her, because she’s often seen as “The Ugly Girl”. Like, “Oh, it’s not her fault, she’s unattractive and no-one likes her. She committed the crimes because she was lonely!”. But that’s not the case. She chose to be at the murders on both nights. Don’t let her shallow arguments fool you.
I gave this film half a star on letterboxd. The lowest you can go while still rating it. This is all clearly just a ploy for sympathy, in the hopes of her getting parole. Which thankfully, hasn’t happened.
I suppose the only thing I can truly say about this, and to Patricia by extension, is “You’re only fooling you. Look at your game girl”.
My video: https://youtu.be/MZ90rup7zG4
