Thursday, August 9, 2012

Susan Atkins (1976) Charles Manson Family Helter Skelter Crimes and LSD

Acid week continues...


Video from The Backporch Tapes






16 comments:

orwhut said...

I've never thought Sadie was the prettiest Manson girl but, she's as attractive there as I've ever seen her.

Matt said...

What's with the accent though? Did girls from San Jose sound like that back then?

orwhut said...

I'm on the right hand side of the country and haven't a clue.

Stacey L. said...

Her little girl voice is so annoying. The only other person I've heard use that voice is that Duggar woman with the 19 kids.

eviliz said...

Stacey L. said...
Her little girl voice is so annoying. The only other person I've heard use that voice is that Duggar woman with the 19 kids.

Yes that voice is annoying. I used to think it was fake back when there was not a lot of footage around. But it seems it was not fake. As I recall her praying during her compassionate release plea.
What a dumb bitch she was.

AustinAnn74 said...

Goes to show you what a little soap, water, brush, makeup & clean clothes will do for a woman. This was one of many versions she always talked about. I want to know why she never told anyone else about the "other" murders that she had talked about to Ronnie & Virginia. Remember in Helter Skelter she told Ronnie about "three in the desert?" Oh, and SCARY AS SHIT black, darting, crazed eyes!!

Farflung said...

So in 1976, Sadie claimed that she was a different person and has come to appreciate the magnitude of her actions, once clear of the drug induced confusion. Hmmm….. she sure seems sincere and rehabilitated from her past of self absorbed mayhem. If only there was a way to test a person’s sincerity, to see if they have progressed beyond pure self interest.

In a very similar situation later that year, another Manson minion would do just that.

December had the California Supreme Court ordering a new trial for one, Leslie Van Houten since her lawyer disappeared during the first proceeding, which had a jury of peers voting - Guilty. So that’s kinda like being able to see into the future and bee all witchy. With that massive advantage in her favor, Leslie somberly entered the court and told the judge, she was a changed person and takes full responsibility for her acts seven years prior, and would plead guilty saving the expense and grief of another trial…… oh gawd…. I can’t go on…. that’s not what she did at all.

Leslie ‘I’m not that same little girl, who is a different person’ Van Houten entered a plea of….. wait for it…. NOT guilty. I’m sure she was willing to accept a time served plea deal, but she went straight to the center sanctum of self serving denial where her only concern was having her bail reduced. Nice. I wonder what Susan would have done if she were given a new trial. OK, that was a lie; I don’t wonder that at all.

Matt said...

AustinAnn74 said...
Goes to show you what a little soap, water, brush, makeup & clean clothes will do for a woman. This was one of many versions she always talked about. I want to know why she never told anyone else about the "other" murders that she had talked about to Ronnie & Virginia. Remember in Helter Skelter she told Ronnie about "three in the desert?"


See our Dostie posts

I know you know, Ann! :)

eviliz said...

After watching it I have determined-
She's a buzz kill. I think if I was at a party and she was there she would ruin my buzz.
Imagine being in lock up with her. She starts telling you about the murders.
I mean did she really think the people she told would not snitch?
Seriously. What was the point of that anyway? How stupid could you be? I wonder if she ever thought in prison "If only I kept my mouth shut."

Stacey L. said...

I've often thought that if she just kept quiet they probably would have gotten away with it. Good thing she didn't, who knows if there would have been more murders...besides the three in the desert.

andy said...

this is off topic, but hey its the 43rd anniversary so anything goes. is this really manson talking?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt9wt0D_i8E&feature=g-hist also again, i know this is kind of off topic, but when pat split back to alabama, was she leaving the family? trying to eascape what she had done? did manson maybe order her to split for a while? anyone have any ideas about this? also has anything been written or has she ever talked about what she did while back east?

AustinAnn74 said...

I know not what you speak of....

Rod Foglio said...

According to Susan's book, Pat left of her own volition.

beauders said...

pat claimed one reason she left was because she was afraid manson would kill her.

candy and nuts said...

the real snitch was Kitty she was the first to tell any info...not sure why they let her back in ,,,weird I just read Kitty married Vernon Goucher, one of the brothers of the 3 dudes Brenda Tuffy and Crystal hooked up with,,,anyways,,,ya Sadie blabbed but,,, kitty kinda started it

David said...

Is there anything about the T/L murders that anyone has found (that is factual) that points this case to something other than what we have heard? I've come across things in the police reports that are suspicious. For example, I tend to believe police statements saying that one of the bodies appears to have been moved. Another example is the blood trail with Sharon and Jay's blood on the front step. Another issue is Parent's coroner toxicology report that shows at least 5 illegal drugs in his system. I'm sure there are other things that one just can't say "oh,well, that's not right, but It can't really mean anything." " It can't possibly mean something else is going on here." Could it be that the more we spin this story, the more we lose sight of what's behind this crime of the century? Is it possible that the real answer lies in the strange statements and evidence and not in the killer's statements per-say? If Parent actually said 'Don't hurt me, I won't say anything." I'm sorry, but that kid saw the murders going down to say that. That is a clue from him to us. If he saw the murders going down, would that change how we view the story that has been told? If so, perhaps it will lead us to to something not yet discovered. It seems we try to find the smoking gun from statements made by people who have been lying at every turn of this case,only to find that we are right back where we started. The crime scene evidence seems to tell no lies, if the police didn't destroy the evidence by not being careful, However, I have read that sloppy work did occur. But is there enough evidence that is factual to come to the realization that this case points to a different story? I'm sorry, but when the police say things like bodies look moved, or this looks like a ritualistic crime scene, you have to conclude that something bigger is going on here.