Thursday, January 21, 2016

Manson Family Lookalikes!

You may think "The Manson Family" had a unique look and were one of kind in behavior AND appearance, but, as it turns out, that simply isn't true. They say everyone has a twin somewhere, right? From Sadie Mae Glutz's slender skull to Danny DeCarlo's push broom bristles, you will be amazed at the common characteristics this felonious family shares with...well, a lot of different things. Let's take a look:
First up, we have the patriarch of the "First Family Of Terror" Charles Milles Manson, aka Jesus Christ, God, The Dirt Devil, Pecker Smalls:


Next we have the oh-not-so-sexy-one of the group. Rumor had it that she was constantly "fishing" for complements:




Third in line, we have the former bible student who went on to "teach" oral communications at the Longhorn Saloon, located, some have said, miles from civilization in a land that seemed lost:


A horse is a horse, of course, of course, and no one can talk to a horse, of course, that is, of course, unless the horse is the infamous Lulu Van Toothahavin:


I'm too sexy for my shirt, too sexy for my shirt, so sexy it hurts.......other people:


The parole board always has this man sitting around in a sickening stab of suspense, where all he can do is present Halloween favorites in the TV room at the prison house:


This steaming pile of horsehockey fancies himself a holy man where he spends countless days farting in the prison chapel, appropriately named, "The Church of Fecal Wonder." The resemblance to his lookalike is simply uncanny:

Up next, we have the very first female member of the motley crew of smells, Mary "The Chin Gigantica" Brunner:


This blockhead of clay loved ground squirrels & chuckers so much, he was willing to forewarn them about beasties a comin' down the road. Too bad he didn't feel the same way about ranch hands:


This malevolent mouse was a jack off jack of all trades. From preparing a dumpster dinner to crooning out creepy songs, she was the "man," literally:

Up next, this whiskered, small mammal with a robust body, short limbs and a long.....Oops. I'm sorry. I was describing some sort of rodent....or was I?:

Now, turn your attention to this bohemian bad girl who loved to belch on command, smoke herbal delights, pick an occasional nose, dance and blow various pipes. You know, the musical kind:


Who was responsible for all the dirt, grime & grease at Spahn Ranch? Give up? I'll give you a hint:


"Yana the Witch" made her way to Spahn's ditch to eat a sausage sandwich, only to get ill from not taking the pill and now has a litter of three:





Blinded by her hate for hamburgers, this dirty damsel destroyed a sandwich on the way to catch a flight one sunny afternoon. What did a hamburger ever do to her?:

Frankly my dear, this young lad didn't give a damn if you looked like a trout with hair, or a tumbleweed with eyes, you were gonna get laid:


My, what a shy, long-suffering muppet who sat on a tuffet for days on in, wearing his kickers with a load in his knickers. If he only had a brain....


This young girl only wanted a broiled, beef Whopper, fresh with everything on topper, anyway she thought was proper, minus the mind-altering secret sauce:

Rumor has it that this "Curlicue of cuteness" was said to be highly skilled at the art of copulation. Not so good was her skill at getting rumors correct, however:

This young snake with the last name Lake loved to shake, rake, bake, eat cake and when awake, partake in slithering through the grass on a hot, summer day.

As a pubescent with plenty of pubes, this young creature made her first feature, on the floor of the saloon with a midget named Bridget, plus a donkey and a honky:


Not much is known about this fuzzy little scuzzy from the coast. Let's hope she found a good home and a bathtub:


Not much is known about this "eyes without a face" except she "popped out" of nowhere and made herself at home amongst the flies at Spahn ranch:

This ends our lookalike list for now. We hope you enjoyed. We will be back real soon with "Manson Family Lookalikes # 2: The Associates" in the near future. Remember, kids, this is only a blog. My postings are not meant to cause offense, so chill.....it's not everyday that you get to read the ramblings of a lunatic, right?





57 comments:

DebS said...

This is hilarious Austin Ann! It's not at all what I expected when I read the title of the post. Manson, a tumbleweed, who would have thought?!?

Logan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
candy and nuts said...

Someone has too much time on their hands,,,Susan Boyle, really?

Panamint Patty said...

Meh

Manson Family Archives said...

I placed a bet with myself the second I saw this post as to who made it.

I won.

Matt said...

Marty Feldman. Hysterical!


black_love_in_space said...

I didn't want to like this post but you got me pretty good with Gypsy/Booger.

Manson Family Archives said...

How about a post about that new Straight Satans documentary? That should be a smoking hot topic right now.

Didn't Ann assure us once that biker gangs didn't use people like Bobby as middle men for their dope dealing? I tried to tell they usually didn't turn informant either, but they did.

2016 will be a very illuminating year for the Tate-LaBianca case. While Ed Slanders new book on Sharon Tate is mostly an epic failure, it has confirmed what so many of us have always known. That the cinematic March visit to Cielo by Charles Manson was a fabrication and hopefully by the end of the year, the Straight Satans documentary will be released and finally make a whole lot of people eat their words.

But let's instead make silly posts about what people who are either dead or in their 70s looked like when they were kids. In the meantime, I'll go flogg that dead horse I have in the backyard.



candy and nuts said...

lmao easy bet sure winner

AustinAnn74 said...

There seems to be some serious tight-asses visiting this blog as of lately. Geez, get a sense of humor....

candy and nuts said...

chaka land of the lost for pat hmmm that kinda stuff jokes about pats hair probably made her hate more and love to be accepted by anyone,,,))funny pats long thick hair,,,,women pay hundreds now for human hair extensions to have hair like that

candy and nuts said...

if it perhaps was humorous,,,,not copy pasting pictures of talented people like Susan Boyle,,,,as i said some people have too much time on their hands

Matt said...

Candy and Archives, try to laugh now and then. It's good for you.

candy and nuts said...

matt i have a great sense of humor i just remember ann making many jokes about sandy good how her hair was frizzy and needed conditioner,,,when i said hmm ann comments on hair? ann, whos never seen me told me i must be ugly and need a makeover but tx matt i am laughing at anns posts, they are consistently humourous, as usual

St Circumstance said...

If we did this for ourselves....

I think Alfred E Neuman would look perfect next to me...

"What me worry"

:)


Clever Ann- It would have made a great article for my favorite old magazine.

St Circumstance said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
candy and nuts said...

I rarely ever post here when Liz began this blog I remember her telling me she was doing this i hope ive not offended Ann et al Ill go back to observing

Sunshine69 said...

Gee, one could build a Hippie Commune or land Air Force One on Charlie's forehead. Looks like something out of Alien vs. Predator.

Fiddy 8 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fiddy 8 said...

He vould have an enormous schwanzstucker.

christopher butche said...

To be fair to the untalented... Share had previously released a single, acted in a film and could competently play violin.

Beausoleil had appeared in at least three films, was apparently jamming in a forerunner of Love and has since composed a soundtrack for a film after Mick Jagger and Jimmy Paige hadn't got around to, as well as a handful of albums, including a retrospective album for his early work.

Poston and Watkins of course can be seen accompanying themselves performing their own compositions on Mr Hendrickson's motion picture.

Van Houten and Krenwinkle are published authors, the first for her short story and the latter for her poetry.

Atkins, Watkins and Watson are all published authors.

Grogan continues to do well for himself as a singer-guitarist, also taking on vocal duties for most of the Family Jams album.

Manson himself was employed by Universal studios, was professionally recorded performing his own compositions, had his compositions recorded by The Beach Boys, was highly regarded by his peer group, the obvious ones being Terry Melcher, Gregg Jakobson, Dennis Wilson (The Golden Penetrators) and Neil Young to name four. And there was talk of having a TV company filming him and his commune for a documentary.

So, creatively we have the gang being professionally involved with performing recording and releasing music and film before any of that killing people stuff happened.

(ps. Mr Stimson's recent book has extracts from Squeaky's memoirs and she writes well)

Farflung said...

Poston as Beaker... Sublime surrealism, and eloquently exquisite. And stuff.

Fiddy 8 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matt said...

christopher butche said...

So, creatively we have the gang being professionally involved with performing recording and releasing music and film before any of that killing people stuff happened.


Exactly! One of the myriad of reasons I'm such a junkie to the entire story.


St Circumstance said...

I think a few of them had some real talent. Bobby, Charlie,Brooks, Paul and Clem could all play music in a manner I like listening to.(Young Girl- from the Hendrickson Documentary and Look At your Game Girl are two songs which come to mind)

Some of the girls became legitamate artists over time- I have seen really good drawings and paintings.

I think Pat would have become a modest sucsess at whatever she did in soceity had she got the chance. She became articulate, bright,and responsible in her incerceration.

What Bobby has acomplished in jail, artistically, with what he had to work with is nothing short of amazing.

So there is some praise and amdission of talent to be given to some of them.

But I think Tex is still a worthless bastard who has only learned how to talk more and more shit. If I imagine all of them today in the real world as if the crimes had never hapopened- I can see both Bobby and Pat having really good professional lifes. Susan and LULU would have gotten married and did the kids thing I bet, and both of them could have landed guys who enabled them to live alright.I actually think all of their lives would have been better than Lindas actually turned out lol

I think Charlie would be Charlie and not sure his life would be any different anywhere he is :)

But I see Tex working somewhere outside of Dallas. Selling used cars. sneaking into the bathroom every hour to do lines. At then end of his day he stops by his slutty girlfriends house to cheat on his fat, nagging wife, and then goes home to ignore her and accidental kids. Tex is a botoom dweller. Deceipt, lies, and trouble would have followed him any where he went. Tex is much more dangerous in free soceity than Charlie ever could be. Charlie you see coming a mile away. Tex looks jsut normal enough and sounds just intelligent enough to be trusted. The ones you never see coming are always the ones that wond up getting you...

St Circumstance said...

Manson Archives-

you should ask to do the post on the SS video- it was your find lol It takes time and effort to do a post and even more to do a good one. But remember- not always fun to put yourself out there for people to critique, what can sometimes be, hours of your work...

you should try it :) It was certainly a very interesting discovery- it is relevant, and would be the most important new Info I ( personally) have heard about this case in a very long time. Actual Witness testimony that validates the SS/Bobby mesc deal as the motive for Gary.

I thought about it myself- BUT- first I need to see the coming video. All we have so far is the promise of new information, and witness statements- "Coming Soon" The current video doesn't even talk about the SS. What we have to date is a really cool home movie of bikers in the late 60's with cool background music.

Again, all BS and sarcasm aside, you seem well informed and passionate about this case. I would love to hear your views in a formal form on this subject, and listen to any arguments about it you care to make. You should consider asking to go for it!!

As for me personally- to answer your earlier question without speaking for anyone else- I cant do a post about the witness testimony until I hear the witness testimony

:)

christopher butche said...

I see on that SS instagram account the author mentions mentions 1969 as being their most popular year as far as membership with around 35 members.

I'd always imagined there was way more than that as Beausoleil was on for a massive beating. Not that it takes more than 35 people to hold Bobby back, but even in 1969 surely it would be possible in LA to avoid 35 people?

Also on the SS instagram is a picture of Bobby at the Russian House(?) which thanks Bobby for the photo. So do we think he is currently in contact with the account holder (ie. with regards to the documentary)?

Robert Hendrickson said...

This reminds ME - did you ever THINK how funny the LaBianca Massacre MIGHT have been?

I mean, it's #3 for KILLING and leaving messages in blood, and STILL nobody remembers to bring a "paint brush."

AND Ann, are you one of those anti-catities ? Cause in MY day, when Ms. Grabtree would put a Dunce hat on a student and make them stand in the corner - I could SEE another serial killers being born.


Suze said...

AustinAnn, I lost it on the Bobby Beausoleil/Pinocchio pic! I could hear that falsetto voice from the commercials.

You have potential...

To funny!

Manson Family Archives said...

Bobby is going to be interview for the Straight Satans documentary, as if Catherine Share, who was one of their "old ladies" for a period.

88 George was the president and best friend of Danny DeCarlo. He supplied the sword used to cut Hinman and he is interview and "opens up" about the whole ordeal.

So Bobby isn't Pinocchio. He's been the only one telling the truth. That includes the whole thing with the 10th Anniversary party.

grimtraveller said...

St Circumstance said...

Manson Archives

you should ask to do the post on the SS video- it was your find. It takes time and effort to do a post and even more to do a good one. But remember- not always fun to put yourself out there for people to critique, what can sometimes be, hours of your work...


I think MFA already has done some posts, one on the Hinman killing and one back in December that asks if TLB is actually uglier than we think. Both were interesting posts that generated a lot of discussion and heat and I think they'll be valuable for years to come for anyone that should chance upon the archives in need of a good read.

it is relevant, and would be the most important new Info I ( personally) have heard about this case in a very long time. Actual Witness testimony that validates the SS/Bobby mesc deal as the motive for Gary

Except that it wouldn't. People that keep asserting that Gary Hinman was killed because of bunk mescaline sold to the Straight Satans have not understood why Bobby Beausoleil is in jail and has been for 47 years.
If Bob had gone up to Gary and said "You %$£@@=+*, you sold me some shit crap and now I've got these crazy bikers on my tail, you're getting yours and how !" and stuck him with the knife, then you could confidently say Gary was killed over drugs. If Bob had said to Gary "that stuff you sold me was bad, it's made the bikers sick and they want their money back" and Gary had said "away with you man !" and Bobby had pierced his heart with the knife in a fit of anger or even panic, then you could say he was killed over drugs.
But according to Bobby who MFA tells us is the only one that has been telling the truth {last week, it was Bobby & Charlie that were the only ones} that is not what happened. Bobby says that he had already sorted out the situation with Gary. He says that Gary had already turned over the two vehicles to him to make good the debt. So before Charlie came bounding in and sliced his face and ear, much to Bobby's shock, the scenario with the Satans ceased to exist. Bob had the vehicles, he claims the Satans could use the VW to ferry their bikes and until that moment when Charlie appeared, all was well.
According to Bobby.
Charlie tells a different story.
Susan told a different story.
Mary told a different story.
If Bobby is to be believed, Gary was not killed over drugs, for being a small time provider of psychedelics or because of bunk mescaline.
The point at which Gary was killed had nothing to do with the mescaline and everything to do with him wanting proper medical attention, without which, unbeknownst to him, he could die. It had everything to do with the police being involved if a man turned up at hospital with a "possibly fatal" wound. I don't think any of them were worried about mescaline which, because the SS had ingested it and got ill, no longer existed and therefore couldn't be proven to have been sold. Thus had zilch to do with why Gary Hinman never made it to 40.
86 George can confirm all the anniversaries he likes.
It changes nothing. Disputing whether such a thing as the mescaline deal took place or whether Gary used to manufacture it is yet another red herring. Assume Bobby is telling the truth for a moment. Everyone still ends up in exactly the same position, the Satans are still innocent of any crime and Danny DeCarlo can't be touched as there is nothing to corroborate his involvement.

St Circumstance said...

Grim- to the first one- I only read here anymore so if he posted here - I really do need to quite smoking and drinking so much. If he posted somewhere else- I missed it. I have only seen him criticize others here, so thought it would be fair to offer him a chance to give it a shot. I think he could be interesting.

second point yes and no. It is not fair to say it would- but it is also not fair to say it would not. It gets boring to say over and over that they deserve to be in jail forever no matter what the motive. I have written more posts than anyone about that than almost everyone else in this community combined. But it could be, at least, something new as far as actual witness testimony to a long debated question which many people have argued over here for many years.It is something new - at least to me it is, and I try to admit when I am wrong or when a question I raise gets answered. even when it goes against what I have predicted.

Grim you as well are an excellent blogger with a very good understaning of the facts.

I know that they all changed there stories a million times. I know that it doesnt matter why they killed Gary as far as thge bigger picture of punishment and justice. But we invesitgate the smaller pictures here. after 40 years and not much new info- thats all we can do. So if new information comes out to support any mong held rumors- thats more interesting than continuoulsy arguing over the same old things right?

If the Drug burn motive for Gary is true- in some ways it changes nothing and in other ways it changes quite a lot...

but maybe that is just me

St Circumstance said...

You know what? Who cares- you are right. None of it matters...

Charlie will be dead soon and the rest of it will be speculation forever. Someone will always think one thing is important and another person will always say the same thing is irrelevant.

as long as the right people paid for the crimes- who cares what the motivation behind them was?

I guess I have wasted an awful amount of time on all of this lol...

Have a great weekend folks :)

Panamint Patty said...

Awwwwww St come back!

hippie doll said...

Hey St.,
You posted "What we have to date is a really cool home movie of bikers in the late 60's with cool background music".

Could you please post a link to this video you've mentioned? I would like to check it out too but I didn't find anything like that in the pictures I seen.

Thank you St.
:o)

Manson Family Archives said...

The video posted on that page has nothing to do with the SS documentary. Make an Instagram account and you'll see all the posts. There are no trailers yet, but some clips.

Suddenly now the truth "doesn't change anything". That's the new answer for people who don't like to admit they were wrong after all. If the truth doesn't change anything, then why the endless mental masturbation over it?

If the truth revealed Beausoleil and Manson were big fat liars after all, then I'm sure it would be viewed as a great victory for the likes of Ann who could use it to further validate her groundless claims like Beausoleil is a liar, bikers don't use people like him to work as middle men, anyone in prison is incapible of telling the truth, etc. But when proven wrong, suddenly great revelations that change the history narrative of the case are easily brushed aside, since...they "don't change" anything.


Manson Family Archives said...

It might not bring Bobby back from the grave or get Beauosoleil out of prison, but it does in fact change the fact that what they call the "court's findings of facts" are complete and utter bullshit and Bugliosi no doubt white washed the his golden boy DeCarlo, who he never mentioned was a suspect in the case and gave us such vague details about the entire investigation.

Jean Harlow said...

MFA, I have never read anything that paints Danny DeCarlo as an angel and that includes trial testimony and interviews that he has given.

If he really was Bugliosi's stooge why didn't he stick around and get part of the Polanski reward money he was entitled to? Oh yeah because there were warrants put out on him.

St Circumstance said...

Here ya go Hippy Doll- this is the video I was referring to and I got turned on to this link by Manson Family Archives.. there is a coming soon on this page for the new video- but the video on there is cool as well..

https://www.instagram.com/straightsatans/

St Circumstance said...

not to worry Patty- I am not going anywhere :)

But if the actual motives for the crimes isn't important in this conversation- I will wait for one where it is.

I agree with Grim in the big picture that why Bobby did it doesn't matter in regards to his sentence/parole chances, asnd that he changes his story several times.

I also agree with Manson Archives that finding the true motive is what we do all this for...

and I dont want to spend the weekend arguing with either :)

Kevin Marx said...

Hey Grim,

As you said let’s assume for the sake of argument Bobby is telling the truth and his story will be corroborated by the Straight Satan’s soon.

If that is the case, I don’t see how you can so easily dismiss it as unimportant. It may not change who’s in jail but is that the only reason why we discuss these murders?

The mescaline story (if, true) is very important because quite simply it is the reason why they went there in the first place.

Its also the reason why there was an argument which led to the first call to Manson which led to him coming in wielding his blade. Therefore no bad mescaline = no murder.

You can’t reset the clock to a specific time in the chain of events and disregard what has happened up to that point (and even doing that the mescaline is still the root cause).

If a bank robber gets a staff member to open a safe after an argument and then later shoots him because he becomes concerned he may be able to identify him, do you disregard the robbery as being unimportant? Not quite a perfect analogy but I’m sure you get what I mean.

And the Satan’s were not innocent of any crime – there was just no evidence left to convict, that’s totally different.

As an aside, if this is true, then the families first two (that we know of) violent crimes both had drugs as a central component – with money and self preservation also being driving factors. It’s a big leap from there to Helter Skelter and Armageddon less than two weeks later.

I’m shocked that the Straight Satan’s are going to talk about this tbh – and can’t wait to see the documentary. No doubt it will provoke more lively debate :)

Manson Family Archives said...

If the Straight Satans roughed Beausoleil up, put the gun in his hand, supplied the sword and had a hand in the transaction of Hinman's van...that would have made at least one or two or them accessories and that is why they ran to the police to spin a tale that absolved them of any involvement. Manson cut Hinman, yes. But that should have been "Accessory Before the Fact". Instead, he got first degree murder, as did Bruce Davis and the rest of them under the falsehood that Manson was the ringleader and the entire thing was for his benefit. The entire weight of the situation fell upon Manson.

As I said earlier, it also changes the historical narrative. All the books, movies, documentaries dramatize the Hinman murder by tying it into the silly Helter Skelter scenario.

More importantly, when Beausoleil, Manson and Davis go before the parole board, they are forced to except the "court's findings of fact". Which state that Hinman was killed because some silly story of needing money to fund a race war. This has been used to keep Beausoleil and Davis in prison longer than people who've done worse. "we CAN'T let these people out! They are sooo dangerous, they killed a man for money under the orders of a cult leader to star a race war!"

The real story provides a tad bit of understanding for Beausoleil's situation. The Straight Satans were a nasty bunch. Bugliosi downplays that fact in Helter Skelter, when he acts as if the LaBianca and Hinman detectives never really heard of them and portrays them as just a tough bunch of beer drinkers. Danny to Bugliosi wasn't a scumbag, he was just a guy who liked drinking booze and loose women.

Patrick Sequeira has scolded Beausoleil with his cringe worthy, moronic tirades when Beausoleil tried to, at their mercy, explain what really took place. Steven Kay has done the same thing. If that is not what happened, then I feel they should be told, "no, fuck you. This is what happened". But the legal establishment of California doesn't want to admit they were and still are wrong. They are using fictitious scenarios while demanding that it's fact.

christopher butche said...

Nothing in this saga is without merit. It's all of interest.

After decades (on and off) of following the case and the convicted, I only discovered today that the first suspect Roman Polanski investigated was Bruce Lee!

You couldn't make this stuff up.

grimtraveller said...

St Circumstance said...

I have only seen him criticize others here, so thought it would be fair to offer him a chance to give it a shot

He's done at least two captivating posts here and here. One of which ran almost simultaneously is here.

as long as the right people paid for the crimes- who cares what the motivation behind them was?

I'm more than interested in the back stories, whether true or not, and how various perps interject them into the overall story. In one of his parole hearings, Bobby admitted he'd lied three times. Even if you follow his parole hearings of 2003, 2005, 2008 and 2010, there are some points of consistency in his story but also some changes to the story.
I think there are question marks against Bobby's story but I also think that some of it is plausible. Let's face it, not one of the TLB events {and I include Crowe & Shea} is without ??s and contradiction {except the murder of Steven Parent} and even the explanations that Bobby has given towards Hinman since he adopted the mescaline gig as the true story are not without suspicious moments.
As we know, the law is less interested in why something was done than if the people that did it are caught, convicted and put away. Because the 'why' does not essentially change anything a lot of the time. If someone shot dead my Mum because they hate Black people or if someone shot dead my Mum because they wanted to see what would happen if a bullet went into someone's head or if someone shot dead my Mum because I was married to and ill treated their sister, my Mum is still dead, murder has still been committed.
I think MFA confuses motive with mitigating circumstances.

St Circumstance said...

Thanks. I will check out those posts. It's Sat nite here in the states, but I will read them soon!!

beauders said...

St. I don't think Tex would have made it out of his 20's to be a car dealer. He was a very dodgy drug dealer and someone would have killed him over it. Oddly, the murders saved Watson's life.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Family Archives said...

Suddenly now the truth "doesn't change anything". That's the new answer for people who don't like to admit they were wrong after all

As I'm the one that since the summer of last year has said that so I'll assume that that is in part directed at me.
Firstly, it wasn't some new answer. Unlike you, I don't dismiss the ideas of someone I generally disagree with. I think about them, not, as Kevin says, to find fault, but because I'm in the same boat as everyone else on these pages ~ I wasn't there. So any answers I arrive at won't be arrived at easily. And it was through thinking about your summer piece that it occurred to me that Bobby's story doesn't change the overall result. That's because if you look at the people convicted or given immunity {who should arguably have been convicted}, they all acted independently as conspirators. For my money, Susan Atkins and Bruce Davis shouldn't have merited the same sentence as Charlie and Bobby. Unfortunately, that's how the law in California works. Susan, Mary and Charlie's part in the killing is not connected with the Satans. And Bobby had sorted out his stuff with Gary before Charlie's entry. So, the truth as you see it really does not change or even motivate what happened to Gary Hinman. Because it was sorted if you believe Bobby and even prior to that, though some believe the Satans played Bobby like a banjo, fact is, if the story is true that 1000 hits of mescaline were bad and 1000 people got ill {in itself a questionable story} the Satans wanted their money back, not the dealer of the bad stuff dead.


If the truth doesn't change anything, then why the endless mental masturbation over it?

That depends on which aspect of the story you are focusing on. It seems to me that your motivation in the piece you wrote in the summer is not to include mitigating circumstances into the killing of Gary Hinman so as to round out the picture, but to draw negative conclusions pertaining to Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecution, LE or anyone that testified against Beausoleil or Manson. We are supposed to believe that everyone was shit scared of these awful murderous bikers. In every account of 15th August I have ever read, the night the Satans came to get Danny, the one impression I get is that the Family were anything but cowering with fear over the Satans' threats.
You ask why the mental masturbation. The same could be asked of you, why the emphasis on the Satans when it is increasingly clear that the events that got Charlie, Bobby, Susan and Bruce convicted were not at the Satans' behest ? The bikers are incidental to the murder of Gary Hinman. Though you don't actually state it, you heavily imply that they are central to it and by extension, partly responsible for it.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Family Archives said...

If the truth revealed Beausoleil and Manson were big fat liars after all, then I'm sure it would be viewed as a great victory for the likes of Ann who could use it to further validate her groundless claims like Beausoleil is a liar

In his 2008 parole hearing Bobby stated "I have lied about this crime." He said he didn't want to be seen as a snitch, yet he said Charlie was the murderer so was already that.
You can't blame people for picking up on Bobby's inconsistencies when from the moment he was caught in '69 right through till 2003 when he told the parole board about the mescaline deal, he lied and lied and and lied some more.
As for Charlie, in his own court testimony you have a bold, clear as day example of him lying, not coercing anyone else to do it, but doing it himself.

.....anyone in prison is incapable of telling the truth

A number of times I have made the point quoting Pat, Susan, Leslie, Bruce or Tex and demonstrating something they have said in captivity and you dismiss what they say. You say as well as imply that they are lying for the benefit of the parole board. If there's one person that has consistently stood up for the killers words that they've said in jail, 'tis moi. I am very much of the opinion that just because something comes from a criminal and is self serving, that does not make it a lie. You criticize Ann for supposedly saying that jailbirds are incapable of speaking the truth but you do it yourself when it suits your argument.


But when proven wrong, suddenly great revelations that change the history narrative of the case are easily brushed aside

On the contrary, they are not brushed aside, let alone easily.
They are put in their correct place within the overall picture.


beauders said...

Tex ....was a very dodgy drug dealer and someone would have killed him over it. Oddly, the murders saved Watson's life

That's a gutsy and rather left field observation. And not without merit. If you consider that the Family members had all more or less dropped out of straight society, then prison is what has been instrumental in giving them some reason to be useful and some reason for living. One never knows where they would have headed had the murders not happened. But they did and that was, in retrospect, their wake up call, even if it took a number of years.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Family Archives said...

It might not bring Gary back from the grave or get Beauosoleil out of prison, but it does in fact change the fact that what they call the "court's findings of facts" are complete and utter bullshit

But there's nothing new there. This isn't some earth shattering revelation. Pat and Susan when alive, knew this as far back as '78 when the parole hearings started happening. Pat disputes carving WAR on Leno LaBianca ~ but it's part of the record. Susan Atkins disputed stabbing Sharon Tate and copped to suffocating Gary Hinman just so she didn't have to go through another trial ~ both were part of her official record. There are a few things that are part of the record that the defendants have never accepted such as Pat and Susan murdering to start a race war when Bugliosi in his closing argument stated that HS was not the motive for the women killing.
Had Bobby told the "truth" he's putting forth now back in '69, would it have been seen as relevant to what happened to him and would Danny DeCarlo have been indicted ? There was no independent evidence to corroborate his supposed involvement. So that wouldn't be on the record.

Bugliosi no doubt white washed his golden boy DeCarlo, who he never mentioned was a suspect in the case

As I pointed out to you a while back, there are different kinds of suspects. There are the " I think this one is really likely" types, the "this one is a good one, let's focus on them" type suspects and the "well, they knew or knew of the deceased so we better check them out" ones that are never really serious suspects. DeCarlo was the latter. Once he stated he didn't know Hinman he was never really a contender and it's stretching it somewhat to suggest he was seriously looked at. He is to the Hinman case what Richard Lee Hoffman and Roger Pierce are to the LaBianca case and Bruce Litow and Jean Sharp are to the Tate case.

DANNY DeCARLO: And uh, he was gonna get the 20 grand off Gary – force him out of it. Not only the 20 grand, but he was gonna get him to sign over his house, sign over his car, and that Volkswagen bus. Now all of a sudden my name got next to that Volkswagen bus, it was at the ranch when I was up there. But believe me, I had nothing to —

SGT. PAUL WHITELEY: The guy we, we arrested in the car said you were one of the guys who sold it.

DANNY DeCARLO: He’s a lying motherfucker and go up against a lie detector test.

SGT. PAUL WHITELEY: Ok, we’re not making any accusations —

DANNY DeCARLO: Well, I’m not —

SGT. PAUL WHITELEY: — I’m just told you how you’re name got into the deal.

Patrick Sequeira has scolded Beausoleil with his cringe worthy, moronic tirades when Beausoleil tried to, at their mercy, explain what really took place. Steven Kay has done the same thing

Both Sequeira and Kay's role/contribution in the parole hearings, in my opinion, can be described in one word: embarrassing.
The only interesting thing I've ever heard Steven Kay say is that he once went on a date with Sandy Good in his younger days ~ and that's even stretching the interest factor.

grimtraveller said...


Manson Family Archives said...

If the Straight Satans roughed Beausoleil up, put the gun in his hand, supplied the sword and had a hand in the transaction of Hinman's van...that would have made at least one or two or them accessories

2 & 4 possibly. But these are big "ifs."

i If I felt you owed me money and I collared you and gave you some mighty slaps and said "make good on this, matey boy !" and you went out and robbed a shop and killed someone in the process, how does that make me an accessory ? I asked for my money back, not for you to rob and murder someone !
ii In 3 consecutive parole hearings 2003, 2005, 2008} Bobby whom you assert is telling the truth, states clearly and categorically that Bruce Davis put the gun in his hand. Not the Satans.
iii 86 George supposedly gave Charlie the sword after Charlie took care of a traffic ticket. According to "Helter Skelter" this was a few weeks after DeCarlo moved up to Spahn and it was Charlie that liked the sword and was proactive in getting it. This predates the Hinman crime so how in the world could any of the Satans be culpable as accessories to a crime committed in which a sword one of them had given away was used ? That's like saying that if I gave you my car and you deliberately knocked someone over, I'm an accessory. Or if I gave you my hammer and you smashed someone's head in a month later, I'm an accessory.
I'd emigrate from any country that had such a law !
iv The transaction involvement of the Satans is questionable and completely contradicted by Marcus Arneson who claims that Charlie gave him the bus and the pink slip and told him to say he bought it from a Black guy called Gary Hinman if he was ever stopped by the police.

As I said earlier, it also changes the historical narrative. All the books, movies, documentaries dramatize the Hinman murder by tying it into the silly Helter Skelter scenario

Forget the books, movies and documentaries. Forget their sensationalist dramatizations. They've often been bunk.
Was Bobby convicted on Helter Skelter ? Did it come up at either of his trials ?
Bobby was virtually bang to rights before any of the killers had even left Spahn to drive to Cielo Drive. He was caught in a murdered man's missing car. He lied about how he acquired it then he lied saying Hinman had given him the keys and signed the ownership papers. It had a fake date on the ownership slip {13th July} which was stupid, given that Hinman was seen driving it 2 weeks later and that Bob said Gary gave it to him on 26th July. On top of that, he said the cop lied about him saying he'd bought the car from Black men ! He lied about leaving Gary alive. He lied about him having his face sliced by three Black dudes in Santa Monica even though there was no trace of blood in the car. He gave a false name. He gave a false date of birth. As ID he produced a credit card that wasn't even his and when challenged said it belonged to a friend. He was found with a knife that had consistent dimensions with the murder wounds. He said he knew Gary had died because he heard it on the police radio but the CHP officer that arrested Bobby said no mention of it came on the radio.
A couple of weeks later traces of blood were found on the trousers and shirt he'd been wearing though not enough to test.
It unraveled very quickly for Bobby. And apart from the blood spots, all before the night of August 8th.
The relevance of all that ? Dramatizers can tie it in to HS all they like. HS is, a bit like the mescaline story, incidental to the overall Bobby saga, not central to it. Of interest in and of itself but not the reason that it happened.

grimtraveller said...

christopher butche said...

Nothing in this saga is without merit. It's all of interest

I agree. The fact that the mescaline story does not change the convictions and is irrelevant to them does not mean it's without merit or that it is of no interest. In the whole of TLB there are plenty of side issues that have no major bearing that are nonetheless interesting and in some cases of more fascination than that which does have a major bearing.

Manson Family Archives said...

when Beausoleil, Manson and Davis go before the parole board, they are forced to except the "court's findings of fact"

And yet, as I pointed out to you before and on a number of occasions actually, they do not. The highly antagonistic Anderson in Bobby's last parole hearing said:

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANDERSON: So, I don't want to go back just on historical information. I can do that with any package. And you may not like the outcome if I just go back on historical information, because it's not pretty, my friend.

INMATE BEAUSOLEIL: No, it's not. It's not. It isn't.

He was in effect saying that he did not just want to accept the historical narrative. That he was open to what Bobby had to say. This is curious in the light of his bias and short temperedness with Bobby in this hearing, but he is clear on it. If there is something that the official narrative doesn't touch, he wanted to hear it so that he could determine Bobby's suitability.

But the legal establishment of California doesn't want to admit they were and still are wrong. They are using fictitious scenarios while demanding that it's fact

No disrespect mate, but you often do that.

Manson Family Archives said...

under the falsehood that Manson was the ringleader and the entire thing was for his benefit. The entire weight of the situation fell upon Manson

He got a life sentence. Bobby got death.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Family Archives said...

If the truth revealed Beausoleil and Manson were big fat liars after all, then I'm sure it would be viewed as a great victory for the likes of Ann

You seem to have it in for Ann. Of late you've been taking swipes at her.
On the topic of Charlie and Bobby as liars, their stories on this Hinman thing don't even dovetail. Charlie, in "Goodbye Helter Skelter" is adamant Bobby called him to say Gary had a gun on him. Bobby in his last 4 consecutive parole hearings says one of the women called Charlie. In 1992 he said he wasn't even aware until Charlie turned up that one of the women called Charlie and that it was conjecture on his part.
Both contradict each others' stories. Charlie says Bobby was owed $64, Bobby says $1000. Yet you and others have long made merry over the discrepancy of the "official" narrative's $20,000 verses Mary's $2~3000 verses Ella Jo's suggestion that Gary had money.
Hmmm.
Charlie says he cut Gary and took the gun from him. Bobby says Gary did not have the gun, that he'd got it back from him.
Charlie says Gary was on his way to kill him so Bobby, after offering his own life by handing Gary the knife and Gary refusing {bear in mind Bobby had smacked Gary about the head a number times and if he was off to kill Charlie, why not shoot Bobby; he had nothing to lose if he was going to plug Charlie} then stabbed him. Bobby says nothing about any threat to kill Charlie, says nothing about offering his own life for Gary to take. He actually said the opposite, that he was manipulated by Charlie and said while not legally, in his mind Charlie was as guilty as hell.
Bobby told the parole board that other than this episode, he'd never been involved in crime. But during 1970 he told John Gilmour who wrote "The Garbage People" extensively of his past criminal pursuits and it's in the book. In 2008 he said Bruce drove him to Gary's. By 2010 he said Bruce and DeCarlo drove him.
All of it is possible, just as the moon landings being fake are possible.
But it's just not cricket to have a go at people for not believing Bobby when there are so many sticking points and areas of doubt.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Family Archives said...

The real story provides a tad bit of understanding for Beausoleil's situation

If true, I agree. In the same way Charlie, Susan, Bruce and Pat's backgrounds provide understanding towards the paths they ended up selecting in their lives.

The Straight Satans were a nasty bunch. Bugliosi downplays that fact in Helter Skelter, when he acts as if the LaBianca and Hinman detectives never really heard of them

It's true that they are not presented as a nasty bunch. But why would they be ? We are looking at them through the lens of 47 years hindsight in which a number of stories weren't necessarily commonly known back in '69. But the LaBianca detectives knew them. Springer and DeCarlo were called in on various charges. DeCarlo had charges over his head and even when he had testified, skipped bail and ran off. He was ready to skip even during trial and had to be accompanied everywhere by detectives and complained in court that he couldn't even drink booze. On occasion, Bugliosi had to tell the court that he would be located when and because he would disappear.
The Satans are kind of presented as lovable rogues.
But you know, that is exactly how they are presented all these years later in the photo montage you linked us to last week. Apart from the murder of the guy stabbed 79 times, they are portrayed as good time guys who liked their women rough, willing and smelly, their bikes shiny, modded and impressive, their accommodation sparse, ragged and rent free and were almost victimized by the Venice police for being what they were. Like Robin Hood and his merry men on iron horses.

grimtraveller said...

Kevin Marx said...

If that is the case, I don’t see how you can so easily dismiss it as unimportant. It may not change who’s in jail but is that the only reason why we discuss these murders?

Absolutely not.
We discuss these murders for a myriad of reasons. One of the reasons I currently enjoy TLB is precisely because of all the different angles and strands and how they support the overall narrative, some of which are crucial to it, some of which are not.

The mescaline story (if, true) is very important because quite simply it is the reason why they went there in the first place.

Yes.
However, it is not the reason for the eventual outcome.
There are a number of important side issues to this case that have no major bearing on a particular aspect of the main story, as it were. For example, Debbie Tate. So much time, energy and argument has been spent on her. Mostly fascinating, arguably important. But not to the main thrust of TLB.

Its also the reason why there was an argument which led to the first call to Manson which led to him coming in wielding his blade. Therefore no bad mescaline = no murder.

Technically, I can see that.
It's interesting that Bobby uses the mescaline deal gone wrong as a mitigating circumstance and not as a reason or motive for the murder.
But no bad mescaline = no murder is also far too simplistic. As I keep on stressing, Gary wasn't killed because of bad mescaline. According to Bobby, he'd already agreed to sign over 2 of his cars in lieu of payment before Charlie came, even though Charlie says it was after his sword slice and as a result of his action in showing Bobby "how to be a man." Bobby is clear on this. He states he was getting ready to leave. So at this point there really is nothing the Straight Satans can say that makes them in any way remotely culpable or changes anything. Unless they say they killed Gary. Then that would be a different matter altogether. Or unless Bobby was convicted with Helter Skelter as part of the motive.

You can’t reset the clock to a specific time in the chain of events and disregard what has happened up to that point

I don't disregard what happened up to the point at which Bobby claims he was just getting ready to leave. To disregard it would be daft and muleheaded. I'm simply saying that it is not the reason the murder happened, not according to either Bobby or Charlie, in the recent version. Bob says it was to stop Gary going to hospital and therefore involving the police. Charlie says it was to stop Gary coming to Spahn to kill him.
The irony here is that yourself and MFA seem to be alternately amazed at and robustly {which I appreciate, incidentally} shaking my stance, when my stance is based purely on the words of Bobby Beausoleil and Charles Manson. I'm going by what they say.

grimtraveller said...

Kevin Marx said...

and even doing that the mescaline is still the root cause

Not if Bobby is telling the truth. The root cause is fear of police involvement. Or if you take Charlie's word, to stop him being killed. The mescaline deal is the soil the root cause grew in.

If a bank robber gets a staff member to open a safe after an argument and then later shoots him because he becomes concerned he may be able to identify him, do you disregard the robbery as being unimportant?

Of course not. Because being identified in the course of the robbery is central to why the bank staff member gets shot.

And the Satan’s were not innocent of any crime – there was just no evidence left to convict, that’s totally different

Well what crime were they guilty of ? Bobby said at his last hearing "so, let me just say that it was not for money that he was killed. At that point, it was because Manson had slashed his face, and he - and Manson and Davis and I assumed, although I didn't hear it directly from them, members of the Straight Satan's were concerned that he was going to inform on them, and so he was killed because he was perceived as a threat at that point." The slash happened the first night they went there and how would they have been concerned so quickly ? And inform on them for what ?
Did you know that mescaline wasn't even illegal in the USA until 1970 and is currently not illegal to the Native American church ?

then the families first two (that we know of) violent crimes both had drugs as a central component

Paradoxically, yes & no. Drugs were the conduit but Tex never intended to pick up drugs, just money. Drugs were the carrot, the bait.
And the Family never benefitted from the supposed mescaline deal. It wasn't even a Family thing as such. Neither were. Both were conducted individually, a bit like how "Within you, without you" only involved George Harrison and "Yesterday" only involved Paul McCartney yet both are 'Beatles' tracks on Beatles albums.
Taking a long range retrospective view, George Martin viewed "Yesterday" and "Within you.." as the seeds that ultimately undid the Beatles. And Crowe & Hinman are the seeds that ultimately undid the Family.

It’s a big leap from there to Helter Skelter and Armageddon less than two weeks later

Not really. Helter Skelter gave rise to the need for money for desert supplies. Don't forget, in just 4 days via Lotsapoppa and Linda, Tex netted the family $7500. And he was an avid believer.

I’m shocked that the Straight Satan’s are going to talk about this tbh

I'm not. Outlaws are really little different to anyone that is accorded a certain celebrity status, even if it's little league or tinged with notoriety. People love to talk about their exploits. There is a line in the bible that says "whoever can control their tongue is perfect" !

Kevin Marx said...

Hi Grim,

"Disputing whether such a thing as the mescaline deal took place or whether Gary used to manufacture it is yet another red herring. Assume Bobby is telling the truth for a moment. Everyone still ends up in exactly the same position"

I agree that the straw which broke the camels back wasn't the bad mescaline but they wouldn't have been in that position at all had the bikers not wanted their money back - they wouldn't have went round there. That doesn't mean I'm saying he was killed over bad drugs (I agree with you on that) - I'm saying the reason he was killed wouldn't have happened if the drugs weren't bad (again all assuming this is true). Therefore it can't regarded as a side issue - its central to the overall story of Hitman's death.

I actually did know about mescaline and the native americans but tbh I didn't know, and was surprised, to find it wasn't made illegal for the general population till 1970, thanks. Perhaps Bobby's vague statement about the SS being concerned about Gary informing on them means they simply just didn't want the police investigating them in any shape or form (or, they didn't know mescaline was legal - thats very unlikely but this is a time before google).

"Helter Skelter gave rise to the need for money for desert supplies" - but its one thing committing crimes to prepare yourself for a change in the world order, and another to commit crimes to help bring about that change.





grimtraveller said...

Kevin Marx said...

but its one thing committing crimes to prepare yourself for a change in the world order, and another to commit crimes to help bring about that change

I agree. For those that see HS as one of the viable motives in this case, it seems that leading into that summer, there was a very gradual, almost imperceptible move from "this helter skelter shit that I've forseen that is going to end like this and we need to be ready with our survival techniques" to "we're going to have to kick start it." I'd say at this point that it will be forever impossible to determine what exactly or what combination of events brought about this change.
I see HS as an umbrella that took under its aegis a series of things which is why so many seemingly disparate events could happen within a short space of time.