Monday, May 16, 2011

Olancha

Above: Olancha, CA in the 1940's

Item Two that was lost, reprinted for your enjoyment: (cached version available at http://www.zimbio.com/member/eviliz/articles/i6aVXZXjLRG/Charles+TexWatson+identified+1968+murder)
From Giovanni Di Stefano's site, Studio Legale (http://www.studiolegaleinternazionale.com), a portion of the correspondence between Di Stefano and Barack Obama regarding the murder of Karl Stubbs:

"Tex Watson was seen following a man named Karl Stubbs to his house and that man was later found dead on 9/15/1968 in Olancha, California. This the verbatim statement from the California Police Officer as below:

“I have another murder that I want to tell you about. The victim is an 80 year old man named Karl Stubbs who was killed November 15, 1968 in Olancha, Ca., almost a year before Tate/LaBianca/Hinman/Shea. A witness identified Tex Watson in 1970. There were also two unknown girls there when Karl was beaten. The murder was not followed up on. Why? Because Charlie was nowhere near Olancha then and it would show that Tex is the serial killer. There is no way the Bug could have convinced the jury that he had total mind control on everyone back in 1968!

I spoke to the witness that lived behind Karl. She told me that Karl crawled to her trailer and told her husband that there was a boy and two girls that came in his house demanding money. Every time the boy would kick him in the head the girls would laugh. The witness said that Karl was totally lucid but he could not see. He died hours later. A year later, Tex Watson confessed the Tate/LaBianca murders to Diane Lake while there were in Olancha. Olancha is the gateway to the Barker Ranch via Hwy 190.

The case was investigated by the California Department of Justice. Tom interviewed the investigator who said that the investigation "fell through the cracks". It was not until Tex was finally extradited from Texas, after everyone else was tried, that the clerk at the store recognized Tex on TV as one of the kids that followed Karl home from the store. It is unknown if this was ever reported to Law Enforcement.

To this day, DOJ will not do anything with this case. (I have talked with them). Why not?????
It would show that Tex was killing people almost a year before, independently on his own, as well as two of the girls. That would not support the Bug's Helter Mind Control/Helter Skelter theory.

Olancha is a very small town. Gas Station, Store and one restaurant. About 500 people scattered over many square miles on ranches. It was not local kids. The Hannum Ranch is in Olancha. David Hannum worked at the Spahn Ranch in 1969 and the family used his mother's ranch in Olancha to park a semi trailer full of supplies and use it as a base.”






37 comments:

MrPoirot said...

I don't think the Family was violent at the time of Stubb's murder. Charlie wasn't preaching murder until late Winter 1968. There are also two murders in Ukiah attributed to the Family which I also think predated their decent into violence. If these murders had occurred after December 68 I would be more inclined to believe the Family committed them.

ACFisherAldag said...

Um, MrPoirot, this isn't "THE FAMILY" or "Charlie preaching murder". This is Tex Watson acting independently... which is what we Manson Supporters have been trying to tell you all along! Tex Watson is the perpetrator. He did not need anyone to tell him to kill. He was the perpetrator of the Tate LaBianca crimes. Not Charles Manson. It is not possible to brainwash anyone and force them to kill. Tex Watson is a murderer, plain and simple.

St. Circumstance said...

AC- here is a time when I do STRONGLY agree with you...

Maybe instead of following the dogs around Barker and Spahn looking for bodies...

They should be tracing Tex's footsteps while he was in California..

Panamint Patty said...

What is so compelling to Patty is that she's been to Olancha. It is really really tiny...blink and you might miss it. In a town where the faces are few, far between and usually the same ones, you'd recognize a stranger and probably would not have much trouble identifying him or her.

lurch said...

The book "5 to Die" which came out in 1970 also mentions the Stubbs murder, even giving the impression that Katie was a "person of interest" in the murder. Is it possible the Stubbs murder was kept quiet as it couldn't be connected to Manson and the whole HS theroy? Wouldn't surprise me.

hendythefifth said...

"Is it possible the Stubbs murder was kept quiet as it couldn't be connected to Manson and the whole HS theroy? Wouldn't surprise me."

Lurch, I've been thinking that awhile..... I don't recall the Stubbs murder being mentioned in the Bug's Novel. (anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

"5 to Die" I understand, has become quite the collectors item and can fetch upwards of $100-$150 used these days. Wish I could find my copy. I bought it 25 years ago for $.50!

MrPoirot said...

ACFisherAldag said...
Um, MrPoirot, this isn't "THE FAMILY" or "Charlie preaching murder". This is Tex Watson acting independently... which is what we Manson Supporters have been trying to tell you all along! Tex Watson is the perpetrator. He did not need anyone to tell him to kill. He was the perpetrator of the Tate LaBianca crimes. Not Charles Manson. It is not possible to brainwash anyone and force them to kill. Tex Watson is a murderer, plain and simple.

May 17, 2011 2:02 PM

Mr Poirot rplies:

Once Tex met Charlie he ceased to act independently on his own. When Tex was peaceful it was because Charlie was teaching peace. When Tex murderd it was bcause Charlie taught murder.

GrumpFromPahrump said...

Panamint Patty said...

What is so compelling to Patty is that she's been to Olancha. It is really really tiny...blink and you might miss it.

True! It doesn't look much different now than it did in the picture either.

Panamint Patty said...

Hi Grump! There's the famous Fresh Jerky stand too, ever been there? BTW Patty thinks that fresh jerky is an oxymoron.

GrumpFromPahrump said...

hendythefifth said...

"5 to Die" I understand, has become quite the collectors item and can fetch upwards of $100-$150 used these days. Wish I could find my copy. I bought it 25 years ago for $.50!

I bought the new updated version of "5 to Die" for $14.99 in 2009. It only had a limited printing. It is identical to the first version, except an extra 10 or so new pages. No new information. This version is now going for over $200.00 on Half.com. I wish I would have bought a few more copies!

IMHO, the only thing you might like about 5 to Die, is the pictures. Most have them have never been published any where else.

BTW - I sold my 1970 version for $75.00!

leary7 said...

I am confused as to why anyone would think that proving Tex murdered earlier would automatically exonerate CM from Cielo and LaBiancas. Al it would really show was that Charlie most likely knew Tex had killed before and not wanting something like TJ backing off on Crowe. Manson wanted to be sure he had the right man for the job.
I respect AC and T&L and others who argue for Charlie's innocence but according to his own words CM was there waiting for the car to return from Cielo and demanded a report. And he did tie up the LaBiancas.
The Manson supporters are great and I love their loyalty and passion, but Charlie as an innocent is just never going to sell. There is just to much direct testimony and evidence otherwise.
sorry, every now and then I feel compelled to state the obvious.

St. Circumstance said...

I - for one- never said Charlie was innocent- but Tex did kill many more people than Charlie did- and if you want to say Charlie pulled the strings- I wont argue...

But charlie just did not personally do what Tex did. I say it takes a very certain type of person to do the gruesome things Tex did.. Charlie might have been a ring-leader- but he never personally did the most serious physical stuff. I dont know if it was because he was smart enough to keep his hands clean, or maybe deep inside he was just a puss..He picked on weaker, younger, mostly girls.. Maybe he didnt have the balls to actually listen to someone die close-up... Tex did

And I also dont think it has to be either or- they were both very bad guys.. But Tex did the physical things in these crimes- not Charlie.. It is fair to point that out...

ACFisherAldag said...

St. Circumstance: We might wanna trace Watson's footsteps in his home state of Texas, as well...

ACFisherAldag said...

I do not state that Charles is "innocent", as he had knowledge of the crime after the fact. This makes him an accessory. However, most people who have knowledge of a crime after the fact are only convicted of manslaughter or second degree murder. Most are out within 15 years in CA.

It is not possible for individuals to just simply suspend their free will, to be "brainwashed" into doing any action against their own consciousness. People who are psychologically browbeaten might choose to do nothing -- like, stand by during a crime -- but they will not act.

Watson is one foot taller and at the time outweighed Manson by at least 80 lbs. He was an athlete. He was not punked into doing any murders. Watson killed simply because Watson liked killing. That he killed prior to the Tate LaBianca murders isn't surprising.

Panamint Patty said...

I don;t think Charlie is "innocent" per se, but I do find it fascinating that those who are so "in" to personal responsibility can then turn around and say, "well yeah we couldn't prove that he actually killed anybody, but he must have MADE them do it!" Seems so contradictory to me. Either you are responsible for yourself, or you are not. Brainwashing shmainwashing...this is an outdated concept that belongs on the shelf next to the world being flat and getting AIDS off a toilet seat.

MrPoirot said...

ACFISHERALDAG said:

[quote]It is not possible for individuals to just simply suspend their free will, to be "brainwashed" into doing any action against their own consciousness. People who are psychologically browbeaten might choose to do nothing -- like, stand by during a crime -- but they will not act.[end quote]

Mr Poirot replies:

You are confusing brainwashing with hypnotism.

Stacey L. said...

I have to say I've always thought I love my husband, but if he told me to kill I'd tell him to f off, so why was it that Charlie could tell not only Tex, but Sadie, Katie, Linda, etc to kill and they just accepted it? There has to be something else besides the whole brainwashing thing. I personally don't by it, but to each their own and I respect people who don't agree with me....

leary7 said...

sorry guys, I need to pay more attention to semantics. I wasn't implying that anyone specifically felt a certain way about CM's innocence. I was speaking more to the general group -small in number -that argues for Manson's complete exhoneration.
And certainly Watson is the true hideous figure in this whole shebang.
ANd the culpability/control/brainwashing thing will still be debated a hundred years from now - just as it will be for My Lai and Jonestown and Waco and other events were seemingly rationale folk behaved insanely.
Maybe we all have the capacity to kill, maybe just a per centage of us...what circumstances can activate that capacity...can another person activate it?
Questions that have been asked forever and will be forever. Even Manson himself has asked them.

leary7 said...

It is a mind boggling thought though is it not - that Charlie Manson, the Face of Evil, may not in fact have the capacity - or balls - to kill personally. Hell, maybe his hero Adolph did not have that capacity either.
But of course CM did shoot Crowe and believe he had killed. So I still come down on the side of Charlie being able to kill personally. He may not have enjoyed it as much as the speed sicko Watson clearly did, but I do think Manson had it in him.

MrPoirot said...

Paul Crockett was the first person to tell police that Charlie had everyone programmed to think just like him. Crockett also said it would be difficult to prosecute Charlie for murder because he got others to do his killing for him.

fiona1933 said...

Really, is Five To Die worth so much! I found my copy in a tiny second hand bookshop in Krabi, Thailand. It was absolutely new, never been opened. It cost 140 baht. It's maybe 2 US$. Thailand's bookshops turn up top stuff. Lots of old hippies going through in the 60s and 70s, leaving copies of Christiane F and the Happy Hooker and all kinds of stuff.
The one I regret: I found here in HK the national Enquirer free book that spoke of the murders, before any arrests were made. I put it aside to buy and it vanished.

Panamint Patty said...

on brainwashing, from Wikipedia (BTW: Patty studied under Eileen barker in the 80's wich explans why she thinks Braiwashing is bunk):

"James Richardson observes that if the NRMs had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that NRMs would have high growth rates, yet in fact most have not had notable success in recruitment. Most adherents participate for only a short time, and the success in retaining members is limited.[29] For this and other reasons, sociologists including David Bromley and Anson Shupe consider the idea that "cults" are brainwashing American youth to be "implausible."[30] In addition to Bromley, Thomas Robbins, Dick Anthony, Eileen Barker, Newton Maloney, Massimo Introvigne, John Hall, Lorne Dawson, Anson Shupe, Gordon Melton, Marc Galanter, Saul Levine (amongst other scholars researching NRMs) have argued and established to the satisfaction of courts, of relevant professional associations and of scientific communities that there exists no scientific theory, generally accepted and based upon methodologically sound research, that supports the brainwashing theories as advanced by the anti-cult movement.[31]"

St. Circumstance said...

M certainly did shoot Crowe...

It is also fair for Leary to point out the fact Charlie never killed anyone- is only by pure luck...

I think we all agree Tex was the much more culpable-

but who was more evil

I still say Tex

St. Circumstance said...

Although- again- it may not have to be a case of either /or

MrPoirot said...

Panamint Patty said...
on brainwashing, from Wikipedia (BTW: Patty studied under Eileen barker in the 80's wich explans why she thinks Braiwashing is bunk):


Mr Poirot replies:

Patty how do you explain the Patty Hearst thing? They kidnapped her and brainwashed her. I'm curious how you can disavow that brainwashing occurs especially in the Manson case. It seems obvious that they all thought exactly like Charlie thought. They all became Charlie.

Stacey L. said...

I think the Patty Hearst case goes more along the lines of Stockholm Syndrome. I think with the family it was more of a "groupthink" type mentality. They did/said what they needed to do to fit in/bs part of the Family.

Panamint Patty said...

Mr. P, Patty Hearst suffered from the so-called "Stockholm Syndrome." She was not with the SLA of her own free will, at least not at first.

Also from Wikipedia:
"Psychiatrist Frank Ochberg, widely credited with the psychiatric definition of Stockholm syndrome, describes it as "a primitive gratitude for the gift of life," not unlike that felt by an infant.[7]

According to the psychoanalytic view of the syndrome, this tendency might be the result of employing the strategy evolved by newborn babies to form an emotional attachment to the nearest powerful adult in order to maximize the probability that this adult will enable—at the very least—the survival of the child, if not also prove to be a good parental figure. This syndrome is considered a prime example for the defense mechanism of identification.[8]"

Panamint Patty said...

An aside: Patty has always been interested in cults, among other reasons, because her Dad's cousin Susie was a Moonie. The family does not believe she was brainwashed, nor did she need to be "deprogrammed." She simply grew out of it.

MrPoirot said...

I can't buy the Stockholm Syndrome in the Manson case. Not one psychiatrist uses that term for this case. Remember Leslie thought angel wings might protrude through her sweater? Sandy remained mentally controlled by Manson for 35 years. None of the Family defense attorneys used the term Stockholm.

Stacey L. said...

You're right, no one claims that the Manson case is a case of Stockholm Syndrome, both Patty and I used it to refer to Patty Hearst...but I don't know much about that case.

Stacey L. said...

Ok,I just re-read my last post and it sounds kinda mean to you, MrP. That was not my intention, I was just trying to be clear about which case I was talking about. Sorry if I was rude...I'm so not a rude person...that's why I'm not evilstacey. :-)

MrPoirot said...

I would call Political Correctness a form of Groupthink. I would buy Stockholm Syndrome in the Hearst case but F Lee Bailey lost his case with Hearst using the Stockholm defense. In the Manson case there were nightly lectures. Drugs and sex were used to gain control. The Manson case seems to be a classic case of brainwashing. Charlie even studied different mind control techniques in prison intending on using these skills to be a more effective pimp when he got out of prison.

Stacey L. said...

Maybe groupthink isn't the term I'm looking for, it's been 7 years since my last Philosophy or Psychology class....

Panamint Patty said...

Patty loves sharing ideas, sparring a little. She hopes this is not too mooshy, but she appreciates you guys (Poirot, Stacey et al) immensely. Thank you for being your bad selves.

Stacey L. said...

You're welcome!

leary7 said...

groupthink isn't a bad term. I know this is a ridiculous analogy but I think back to my sports playing days. In high school we had a real nazi of football coach who would scream and berate you if you didn't show the "killer instinct" and want to maim your opponent. It was both funny and disturbing to see kids join the team, nice kids, and try to transform themselves into Viking warriors under the guidance of this would be Knute Rockne.
I remember thinking all the time, it's just a game, lighten the F up.
But it was a mindset, groupthink.
Looking back, I wish I had quit and joined the band.

Panamint Patty said...

This evening bloggers are discussing inaccuracies in the various reports surrounding the death of Karl Stubbs. While Patty was reading comments at The Official Site, she was chagrined to find an inaccuracy she introduced when transcribing from studio legal internazionale to eviliz. Specifically she is speaking of the date of the attack: It is elsewhere reported as 11/12/1968. Di Stefano has 9/15/68 at his place, and Patty further f***ed the chicken by making the date a hybrid of the two: 11/15/68. The post above has been changed to reflect the verbatim statement at Studio Legale Internazionale for those of you paying very close attention. Patticulpa.