Page 19 of The New House

He nods curtly at me when he sees his wife pointing, and carries on talking to his neighbour, a middle-aged woman I vaguely recognise from a gardening show that was cancelled a few years ago. She looks as if she’s been kidnapped by a murderer and dressed in his mother’s clothes.

Harper waves enthusiastically from her table on the far side of ours. Clearly her presence at the gala is not a coincidence. She’s done her research: she’s found out where I work, the causes I support, the school my son attends. I assume it’s for much the same reasons I’ve gone to so much effort to make a friend of Stacey: until we exchange contracts, none of us have a done deal.

At least I hope that’s the reason.

SETtalks | psychologies series

Science♦Entertainment♦Technology

Inside the mind of a psychopath |Original Air Date 9 July

The transcript below has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Who remembers the name Susan Atkins?

Well, I don’t blame you for not recognising it: it’s a common enough name. What about Patricia Krenwinkel?

Ah. We’re getting closer now. Show of hands … a few of you.

Charles Manson?

Oh, you’ve all heard of him.

Of course you have. We all know whoheis. Charles Manson is the man who broke into Hollywood director Roman Polanski’s house with his so-called ‘Family’ and stabbed five people to death, including Polanski’s wife, Sharon Tate, who was nearly nine months pregnant with their baby.

Except he didn’t.

Charles Manson wasn’t eventherethat night.

Susan Atkins, Patricia Krenwinkel and a former airline baggage handler called Tex Watson were the ones who actually invaded the Polanski house on Cielo Drive on August 9, 1969.

According to Manson’s biographer, Jeff Guinn, even as a child Manson liked to recruit gullible classmates, mostly girls, to attack other students he didn’t like.

Afterwards, he’d swear to teachers his followers were just doing what they wanted – he couldn’t be held responsible for their actions. And because no one thought a six-year-old was capable of such Machiavellian manipulation, he got away with it.

Manson was clearly a psychopath, of course.

He showed all the classic signs: a devious, manipulative personality from a very young age, total lack ofempathy or remorse, callous arrogance and indifference to the suffering of others, thrill-seeking recklessness, superficial charm.

Just like me, in fact.

But what about his disciples?

Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkel were just twenty-one when they cold-bloodedly stabbed a heavily pregnant woman to death as she pleaded with them to let her live long enough to give birth to her baby. Weretheypsychopaths, too? If these young women had never met Manson, would they have still have become killers?

Or would they have drifted along in obscurity: settled down, married, raised children, become apple-cheeked grandmas?

It’s an interesting question, isn’t it?

Unlike Manson, neither of them had shown any sociopathic tendencies before the killings. In fact, Krenwinkel had considered becoming a nun before deciding instead to attend a Jesuit college, only to drop out after one term.

Admittedly, they both came from unhappy homes, which made them vulnerable. But until they met Charles Manson, they were just sad, lonely young girls. It’s enough to send a chill down your spine, isn’t it?

What if Manson hadn’t played guitar at the house where Atkins was living with friends?

What if Krenwinkel hadn’t bumped into him at the beach and been told, for the first time in her life, that she was beautiful?

Charles Manson was a natural born killer: his life was going to erupt in violence sooner or later. But if they hadn’t met him, those young women might have gone all their lives without harming anyone.

---