Monday, June 26, 2017

The Voodoo King (of Detroit) and the Origin of Helter Skelter


 I am not the first person to discuss this topic. Starviego already did so here: http://www.mansonblog.com/search/label/Zebra%20murders

So to some extent this is a bit of a rehash.

I started down this road because “Mr. H” used to mention the ‘Black Muslims’ in many of his posts. I wanted to try to figure out what his posts meant and in the process discovered ‘The Voodoo King (of Detroit)’, which took me back to my youth.

I was born in Detroit and spent my grammar school days in Cleveland, Ohio. Every summer my parents would drop my brother and I off at our grandparents in Detroit for a week, and every summer we’d have a ‘sleep over’ with all of my cousins. As we settled down for bed and my grandmother said goodnight, my grandfather would come in and tell us about the ‘Voodoo King of Detroit’ and how his followers would come for us in the middle of the night and stab us in the heart. His story always ended with the warning that, ‘they’ will be 'coming for you while you sleep tonight'. This was usually followed by my grandmother's insistence that he, ‘Stop it!’

Years later I WAS lurking AROUND this BLOG reading Mr. Hendrickson's COMMENTS about BLACK Muslims AND Manson. I decided to research that and like Starviego, I found the Voodoo King (of Detroit). 

Wallace D. Fard (He's not the Voodoo King)


Contemporary, Detroit, newspapers call him Wallace D. 'Farad' but every other historical record says 'Fard'. Wallace D. Fard is the original source for what later came to be called ‘Helter Skelter’ by Charles Manson. That is him below.

According to the FBI, Fard was born Wallace Ford in Portland, Oregon February 25, 1891. His parents were Zared Ford and Beatrice Ford, both born in Hawaii.

The FBI file claims Fard was arrested in Los Angeles for assault in 1918 and on narcotics charges in 1926. On the second charge, he spent three years in San Quentin. (FBI Records: The Vault, Wallace Fard Muhammed, Parts 1-7.)

Wallace D. Fard appears on the historical stage July 4, 1930 in Detroit, Michigan, where he is working as a door to door silk peddler selling to the African-American community. Fard had an East Indian appearance, and was a dapper dresser with perfect white teeth and according to the FBI, maroon eyes. He is described as being extremely likable and charismatic. 

While presenting his sales pitch to his potential buyer Fard would suddenly announce that they were ‘truly beautiful’ and ‘special’. Fard’s comments would alternate between flattery and strange, esoteric, references to the ‘lost-found people of Shabazz’. Fard would close the conversation by advising his listener that she (typically) was descended from scholars and kings and that ‘her people’ the ‘black’ race had invented the alphabet, calculus, astronomy and philosophy. The blacks, he would proclaim, were the elite race, God's chosen people and destined to 'rise!' and rule the world. 

He explained that this was a divine certainty because Allah had 'willed it to be so' hinting that he, Fard, was God’s divine messenger. All this was not going to happen sometime in the distant future but the listener was living in the time when Armageddon was going to occur. Fard would proclaim that the ‘white devils’ would soon be destroyed. (Zoe Colley, 'All America is a Prison', The Nation of Islam and the Politicization of African American Prisoners, 1955-1965, Journal of American Studies, 2014). Mystery Man Kelli B. Kavanaugh, Detroit Metro Times, March 5, 2003. Detroit Free Press, November 21-27, 1932.)


“Given the importance of Christianity to African American identity and culture, Fards teachings inevitably engaged with this aspect of black life. He made extensive use of the Bible, as the religious text with which African Americans were most familiar, to portray Christianity as the white mans religion and a tool of racial control. In doing so, he sought to break the bond between African American identity and Christian values. However, at the same time as castigating Christianity as the product of white malevolence, Fard also appropriated elements of biblical discourse to produce a doctrine that, as Zafar Ansari has shown, bore a greater degree of resemblance with Judaism and . . . especially Christianity than Islam.” (Colley)




Fard’s 'truth' included the story of Jacob (Yacub) and particularly the Book of Revelations, both stories Fard ‘translated’ from the ‘trickology’ of the ‘white devil’s words’ to their true meaning as revealed by Allah. And it went like this:

6500 years ago, the only race on earth was the black race. Then a mad scientist named Yacub created the other races, one at a time, by a technique known as ‘grafting’. As he did the ‘black’ race slowly became whiter and whiter until finally he created the ‘blue eyed, white devils’. These beings were totally evil, a murderous lot who could never be trusted because they spoke in riddles, confused and manipulated.  Fard had been sent to lead the chosen race to mastery of the world through the coming Armageddon. ( Kavanaugh)

Soon the ‘black people’ would ‘rise’. Some blacks, however, were ‘lost’. Some, unfortunately, would remain ignorant of the truth and many of the ‘lost’ would perish in the conflict. Blacks would fight blacks as well as whites. In the end the ‘black man’ would slay the white, each killing four by stabbing them in the heart and the world would belong to the blacks.

Between 1930 and 1932 Fard recruited a following estimated by authorities at between 8,000-9,000 from the African-American community in Detroit. He started a school known as 'The University of Islam' and a 'church' he named ''The Order of Islam' that he later called 'The Allah Temple of Islam'. Finally it came to be known as the Nation of Islam (NOI). 

All of this was designed to segregate the ‘chosen people’ from the influences of the white devil and allow them to cast off the teachings of the devil by living apart from the white devils until the Armageddon came.

Converts to this new religion were required as a first act to change their name. They must cast off their ‘slave name’ and abandon their past. Allah would reveal their true name through Fard. They must go simply by “X” to separate them from their slave master’s name until that day. The adherent could ask for such a name by using a pre-printed card, which Fard provided, by most accounts, for $2. In return Fard presented them with an ornate card, bearing their Muslim name, and, of course, collected his commission from the printing company. (Erdmann D. Benyon, The Voodoo Cult Among Negro Migrants in Detroit, American Journal of Sociology, 1938 and Kavanaugh.)
_____

"The true believer who becomes a Muslim was expected to cast off his old self and take on a new identity.  He was no longer a Negro, so long despised by the white man that he has come almost to despise himself.  Now he was a black man - divine ruler of the universe, different only in degree from Allah Himself.  This rebirth was commemorated by a change in name." (Lincoln, Dr. C. Eric. 1961, 1973.  The Black Muslim in America. Westport: Greenwood Press, Publishers)
_____

Fard's protégé was one, Elijah Robert Poole (whom he renamed, Elijah Mohamed). Until his death in 1975 he would head the NOI after Fard's sudden disappearance, officially, in 1934.

Everything seemed to be going smoothly for Fard. His following was growing in the African-American community. Donations and requests for non-slave names were pouring in. 

Then the wheels came off.

The Murder of JJ Smith


On Sunday, November 20, 1932 a follower of Fard, Robert Harris (soon to become known as the 'Voodoo King') murdered another African-American named James J. Smith. 

Harris explained to the court at his initial hearing that Smith agreed to die. Death, Harris explained, was not the end. ‘It will set Smith free and he will reach a higher state of being’. Smith, allegedly, consented to being stabbed in the heart (the preferred method for killing ‘white devils’ -although Smith was black) and beaten over the head with a car axle. Harris went on to explain to detectives about the coming race war and how Smith would now be a warrior in that war ‘inflicting fear on the white devil’. He also identified his inspiration: Fard.

Fard was arrested. Initially, Fard stuck to his story about the coming race war and his own divinity but denied telling Harris to kill Smith or telling Smith to volunteer to be sacrificed. 

In a typical response during less complicated times, Fard, Harris and another high-ranking member of the group, also arrested at the time, were sent to a psychiatric ward to determine their sanity. (Detroit Free Press, Monday, November 21-27, 1932)

According to the FBI Fard subsequently admitted the whole thing was a racket. Fard was released as long as he agreed to disband his 'cult' and leave Detroit forever. He agreed.

Fard relocated to Chicago but things didn’t go well there, either. On March 6, 1935, one of his followers was summoned to ‘Women’s Court’ for an altercation with another woman on the train. Some reports say the assailant pulled a knife on her victim.

About 100 ‘brothers and sisters’ showed up in court to support the accused, who asked for a 'warrant' for the other combatant's daughter who allegedly kicked her in the shin. About 100 police showed up to make sure things stayed calm. This filled the small courtroom and the crowd spilled over into the antechamber. The bailiff ordered the antechamber of the courtroom to be cleared. There was some confusion over which door to exit and a riot ensued. Shots were fired, knives and clubs were wielded and a police Captain died of a heart attack while diving into the fray. (Chicago Tribune, Wednesday March 6, 1935)

Fard wasn’t present and while the police were looking for him he and was never found. In fact, he disappeared forever. The NOI claims Fard disappeared a year earlier. In fact, Elijah Mohamed claimed he saw him climb onto an 'airplane' and ascend to heaven. That said, the papers in Chicago are pretty clear who the police wanted to interview: Wallace D. Fard. 

That’s why black prisoners become Muslims so fast when Elijah Muhammad’s teachings filter into their cages by way of other Muslim convicts. “The white man is the devil” is a perfect echo of that black convict’s lifelong experience.   

The Autobiography of Malcolm X.


By the early 1960's the NOI’s 'bastardization' of Islam was booming in the prison systems of the country.

(Aside: In 1961 C. Eric Lincoln in The Black Muslim in America coined the term "Black Muslim," thus distinguishing them from orthodox Muslims who he called "moslems" because the NOI is not Muslim.)

Sociologists observed at the time that this phenomenon was the product of two factors: the growing numerical dominance of African-Americans within the general prison population and the impact of the civil rights movement.

The process was bolstered, they said, by prison desegregation. The removal of racial barriers intensified racial conflict as white prisoners battled to retain territorial and formal control of the prison yard. (Colley)
_____

“Black Muslim’ prisoners distinguished themselves from other African American prisoners by shaving their heads and marking the seal of Islam” on their foreheads with either cigarettes or caustic soap. (Colley)
_____

During the late fifties and early 1960’s prison and government officials offered increasingly shrill warnings about the growing strength of the ‘Black Muslims’ inside their correctional institutions.

By 1961 Time magazine was issuing a warning about "Black Muslims" in our prisons, referring to them as: "Negro supremacists dedicated to the extinction of the white race". (Recruits Behind Bars, Time, March, 1961) 

The establishment began to fret about the influence of the NOI on the 'negro' population as a whole, warning that blacks were being trained in prison by the NOI for a race war. They, it was claimed, would form the vanguard of the Fruit of Islam the 'security force' of the NOI, in the upcoming racial conflict. Prison officials were encouraged to ‘crack down’ on the ‘Black Muslims’ and solitary confinement soon became the home for many. (Colley)

Enter SCOTUS 


In 1965 the Supreme Court decided Cooper vs. Pate. In that case an inmate in an Illinois state prison argued that he was denied access to NOI publications (Muhammad Speaks) in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 solely because he was a 'Back Muslim'. A district court dismissed his claim saying, in essence, that he had no claim under the law because he was a prisoner. By a unanimous vote SCOTUS ruled that the inmate could bring suit under the Civil Rights Act of 1871. Prisoners did not lose their all their rights, the court reasoned, only those necessarily arising from their incarceration or to prevent future crimes. And the flood gates opened. 

Hundreds of lawsuits followed advocating for prisoner religious rights amongst other causes and seeking NOI literature, prayer rugs, special dietary accommodations and copies of the Quran.

These events conspired to create the appearance that there had been sudden upsurge in incarcerated ‘Black Muslims’. Statistically, that was not the case. By 1966 the NOI’s influence was actually waning, but ‘Black Muslims’ were now free to openly express themselves in prison and could sue if they were deprived of this right. They 'came out of the closet', so to speak, and did so suddenly and with little forewarning. 

And Charles Manson was in the thick of it. 

Manson and The Black Muslims


Robert Hendrickson: 

The Muslim connection did not become significantly relevant to me until after 9/11, when in 2007, I
was putting “Inside the MANSON Gang” together and came across a copy of Clark Howard’s “Zebra”. Then, in 2008-10, the “transcribing” process became a series of “ah-ha” moments. I remembered Phil Phillips talking about his and Charlie’s relationship with Muslims in prison, but it was certain dialogue in “Zebra”, combined with specific “transcriptions” that really blew the Manson case wide open for me.


There are specific keywords, phrases and beliefs that Charles Manson could only have picked-up from the Black Muslims in prison, which are also expressed by the Black Muslims in “Zebra”. Thus, if Manson talked to Family members about a Black and White race war, he got the idea from the Black Muslims in prison. With regards to the Vietnam War, the Family and I discussed the issue at length. As for law enforcement threats and harassment, back then the friction was always apparent to me, but the issue of an actual violent conflict did not come to a full realization until I understood the transcriptions, more clearly.”

****

At the time in the 1960’s, nobody even knew what a Black Muslim was, let alone an ordinary Muslim. First and foremost, Vincent Bugliosi was an attorney/prosecutor, who’s job was to get a jury to convict Charles Manson. That’s it! All this BS we hear today about right/wrong, Constitutionally correct, etc. is just that – BS. That Bugliosi sold a Black and White race war motive to a bunch of “moon rocks”, as the failed OJ prosecutor Marsha Clark calls jurists, may not have required a “judicial genius”, but it sure didn’t hurt to have one on-board. That said, if Bugliosi played-up the issue of “Black” Muslims, he would have had to explain the existence of Black Muslims organizing and preaching against “Whitey” and “Christians” in California prisons.

Then, if the Black Muslims taught Charlie about the coming Black/White Battle of Armageddon, why were “they” not also on trial as co-conspirators? Then you have to explain why Muslims have it in for Christians and pretty soon you need a jury made up of all college graduates with history degrees, just to comprehend an otherwise simple Black/White race war. I doubt that Bugliosi was unaware of the delicate Muslim/Christian conflict connected to his so-called Helter Skelter race war motive, but simplicity SELLS. Complicated things do not. And when a prosecutor “builds” his case, that means precisely that. He carefully builds (puts together) for the jury, ONLY the “necessary” information (evidence) needed to accomplish HIS goal, which is to get a conviction.

Otherwise, Bugliosi never even had a meaningful conversation with Sandra Good – and Phil Phillips (Manson’s best friend in prison) isn’t even mentioned in the prosecutor’s best-selling book. Paul Watkins introduced the “Black Muslims” into his Helter Skelter analogy, but nobody even pressed such an important issue further.”

Interview with Robert Hendrickson, Ear Candy Magazine, June 2012.
_______________

While I was unable to find evidence directly corroborating that Manson learned all the above from Black Muslims in prison, the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests it happened. In fact, it is hard to conceive how he could have avoided it, especially at the rather ‘progressive’ institution, McNeil Island, where he was doing time in the early and mid 1960's.

It is highly probable that during his years at McNeil Island Manson experienced what must have been, to his eyes and ears, a rather shocking, and sudden upsurge of Black Muslim activism, freed from the 'closet' by the Cooper decision and desegregation. 

What would he have heard? 

The story of Wallace D. Fard and the imminent Armageddon: a black/white race war that was going to happen before 1970.

1970? 

Yes. More than one writer in the late fifties and early sixties mentions ‘the end of the next decade’ or ‘by the end of the decade’ as a sort of pivotal moment for the ‘Black Muslims’. For example, Time Magazine:
_____

The Moslems themselves talk of 1970 as their D Day, expansively predict that before that time the big white nations will have eliminated each other with atomic warfare and Black Africa will stand unchallenged.” (Races: The Black Supremacists, Time, August 10, 1959)
 _____

The very nature of McNeil Island penitentiary supports the conclusion Manson was exposed to this. Cooper and Post-Cooper court decisions were likely embraced by the authorities there. 

McNeil was a progressive institution with a long history of adopting modern and even 'experimental' rehabilitative programs like, for example, ‘bibliotherapy’- the notion reading books would cause prisoners to embrace the American way. Bibliotherapy educated a host of 60's prison radicals. 
_____

“[G]enerally speaking, throughout McNeil Island’s 135-year history-including the years since 1981, when it’s been run by Washington state – the prison has maintained a kinder, gentler approach, one based on the belief that hard work and nurturing the inner man can reduce recidivism.
When the prison closes, that will be its legacy: that criminal justice is about rehabilitation, not retribution.

In the 1960s, the philosophy of prisoner rehabilitation [at McNeil] began to veer away from work therapy and toward a “medical model,” characterized by substance-abuse programs and inmate discussion groups. Prison guards became “correctional officers.”

At McNeil, music was considered therapy: the prison had a piano and several practice rooms for individuals and groups: jazz combos, western bands and Dixieland ensembles.”

(http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/article22203306.html#storylink=cpy)
_____

(Aside: It has been said that Alvin Karpas taught Manson to play guitar. Probably through one of these programs.)

If Manson was exposed to Black Muslim proselytizing, that rhetoric spoke of an apocalypse that was coming and soon. The apocalypse would be a black verse white race war and 'the foot soldiers of the holy war' would be the Black Muslim convicts. 

While he was there, the hierarchy of the prison suddenly flipped. While it is likely he seldom ever spoke to a black inmate during his previous incarcerations, by 1961-2 'they' were everywhere. And the previously invisible Black Muslims suddenly were on top of the heap of black prisoners that were suddenly the majority, due to desegregation. 

Combine this with events outside the walls and it must have appeared that the prophecy of Wallace D. Fard was, indeed, ‘coming down fast’

Watts Riots: August 11-16, 1965
(Aside: note the dates. I have always thought there was more to the dates of these murders then simple coincidence if you were trying to start a race war.)

Detroit Riots: July 23-27, 1967

The Black Panther Party (BPP): founded on October 15, 1966.

May 2, 1967: Thirty armed members of the BPP go to the California state capital and rally on the steps.

On April 4, 1968 Martin Luther King was assassinated and the cities of America erupted into violence. Two hundred major 'racial incidents' occurred in 172 American cities. 

In August 1968, what has been called a 'police riot' erupted at the Democratic Convention in Chicago. Black Panther, Bobbly Seal, allegedly said the words below to the gathered 'Yippies' speaking on behalf of the Black Panther Party:

"The time for singing 'We Shall Overcome' is past. Everyone should get himself a shotgun or a 357 magnum or a carbine and kill pigs." (Testimony of undercover police officer Robert Pierson at the trial of the Chicago 8)

(Aside: The 'Yippies' nominated a pig named "Pigasus" for President at the convention and demanded secret service protection for their candidate. Testimony at the trial on this event focused on the fact that the pig was arrested by the 'pigs' before he could actually accept the nomination.) 
_____

“The BPP, armed with guns, law books and a menacing bravado projected a militant swagger that made their threats of starting a revolution for black liberation plausible despite the considerable evidence to the contrary.” (Joseph Peniel, The Black Power Movement: A State of the Field)
_____

Even if you assume Manson didn't give two thoughts to the idea of an imminent race war, the government (our government) did. On June 15, 1969 J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI said of the BPP "without question [the Black Panther Party] represents the greatest threat to the internal; security of the country". Through COINTELPRO (already actively seeking to undermine the BPP and the NOI by 1969) the FBI set out to destroy the BPP in 1969.  

Assume, if you will, that Manson sees the sudden upsurge of Black Muslim 'awareness' while he sits in prison at McNeil Island. It would have seemed to him to be a shocking event in the hierarchical and controlled environment of the prison he was used to. Here,  blacks were traditionally segregated and 'on the bottom' of the pile. 'Black Muslims' are suddenly preaching an apocalypse where the white man would be slaughtered. Black inmates were suddenly empowered in a way that upset the balance of power in the prisons and terrified the prison establishment. 

The ‘Black Muslim’ race war was also expressed in terms Manson was familiar with from his youth: the origin is the Biblical, The Armageddon. Armageddon: a term Manson will supposedly use repeatedly when speaking of Helter Skelter.

Seemingly out of nowhere in this prison culture, that until that time was not only segregated based upon color but also based upon power (white power), there arises a race of black warriors who believe God is about to level the karma of the white man and restore the black man to his rightful position- ruler of the world.  

Manson is paroled into a world he cannot possibly understand the world of 1967- Haight Ashbury. 

Here live the 'Leslie Van Houten's' of the world who have never heard of the Black Muslims and do not 'see' Armageddon 'coming down fast'. In the world of Ozzie and Harriet (even on dope) such things simply don't happen. Suddenly, with a little LSD and the events of the day, Manson is a prophet. 

Wallace D. Fard’s vision of Armageddon as a black/white race war happening 'now' is where Helter Skelter was conceived, not in the mind of Vincent Bugliosi.

Pax Vobiscum


Dreath

118 comments:

brownrice said...

A fascinating & well-researched post.

David said...

Thank you brownrice.

St Circumstance said...

Very interesting read!!

starviego said...

Hendrickson was already hinting at the influence of the black convicts on Charlie's philosophy in his movie released in '72. See the 11:20 mark from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMo5jEnL5Ng


His movie also had snippets of an interview with Charlie's prison bud Phil Phillips, who I think had a great deal to say about Charlie. You won't hear about him in Bugliosi's book, though. The DA avoided the whole subject like the plague.

Manson Mythos said...

Charlie did in fact do time with at least one of those later convicted in the Zebra Murders.

As for Hendrickson's question as to why the mention of Black Muslims was downplayed, I believe it had to do with the fact that by 1969, the Black Panthers were so heavily infiltrated by US intelligence, they posed no real threat. While the Black Muslims were on the radar of US intelligence, they were a little harder to infiltrate.

Another part of it, is answered by George Lincoln Rockwell (American Nazi Party) in one of his books. The media, largely controlled by jews, gave a ton of coverage to The Black Panthers, who were a Marxist group largely influenced by white radicals and jewish communist thinkers who had no problem with white allies and even taking funding from limousine liberals. The Black Muslims on the other hand, were openly anti-Semitic and not willing to play ball with white jews or liberals. If Charlie held the belief that "blackie only knows what whitey showed him", the media and establishment feel the same way. To give any publicity to the Black Muslims or Nation of Islam would be to promote them and turn portions of the black community onto them. So much of media is designed to creates tastes, make you think a certain way and work as a silent dog whistle. The last thing they would want to do is give a spot light to Elijah Muhammad.

This would also explain why there has never been a single episode about the Zebra Killings on any TV show dedicated to crime. Every day on TV there are boring stories about mundane murders, but that? It's as if they want to bury it. We'll be still hearing about Dylan Roof 30 years from now, but the Zebra Killings are oddly insignificant to the media, despite the level of brutality, bizarre nation and number of victims.

starviego said...


Fard (pronounced 'Farad') was a cook and owned a restaurant in Los Angeles back in the '20s. He disappeared in 1934.

Charlie was born in late 1934. His father was allegedly a 'colored' cook by the name of Colonel Scott.

Could it be? Just sayin' ...

Manson Mythos said...

Yeah, Charlie isn't black. Another myth created by Bugliosi. Perhaps Bugliosi perpatuated that to humiliate Charlie, because deep inside life long democrat Bugliosi, being mixed with black DNA is humilating.

starviego said...

Manson Mythos said...
"Charlie did in fact do time with at least one of those later convicted in the Zebra Murders."

I've heard that happened at TI, but never came across any names. Any idea?

Manson Mythos said...

Paul Watkins specifically said that Manson learned things from talking to black inmates and Manson himself in the early 70s talked of it, so the idea he was trying to make himself sound like a prophet who single handedly predicted this stuff is bunk.

starviego said...

" ...who single handedly predicted this stuff..."

That idea was being pushed by Bugliosi and the media. They didn't want to pursue the obvious leads--of which the Black Muslim link was only one.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

Yeah, Charlie isn't black. Another myth created by Bugliosi

That statement is in itself a myth. A bit like the one even balanced researchers and scholars like to push where it is mooted that Bugliosi says Charlie stopped his watch when he clearly and demonstrably says no such thing.
Bugliosi said he found in one of Charlie's old records from 1951 a part where it says it was alleged his Dad was a "coloured cook by the name of Scott." He then goes on to speculate whether Manson's Dad was Black and offers some explanations as to how it was in Charlie's records and suggests Charlie may have believed it and later asks him if it was true to which he notes Charlie emphatically denies it. He states that Charlie seemed to be telling the truth yet he wonders. Then when later comparing him with Hitler, says he may have believed his Dad was Black.
Where in all of that is the myth of Manson being Black created, maintained and sustained ?
The notion of a possibility of Black blood didn't even originate with Bugliosi.
Ironically, it shows that actually, Bugliosi was curious about the genesis of Charlie's philosophy and obviously wasn't as au fait and depth charged with the Black Muslim contribution to HS as Robert would have liked us to believe.


starviego said...


Fard (pronounced 'Farad') was a cook and owned a restaurant in Los Angeles back in the '20s. He disappeared in 1934.
Charlie was born in late 1934. His father was allegedly a 'colored' cook by the name of Colonel Scott.
Could it be? Just sayin' ...


That however, was a classic and I haven't laughed as hard at anything today as I did at this. Priceless, brilliant.
Starviego, take a bow !

brownrice said...

"“Black Muslim’ prisoners distinguished themselves from other African American prisoners by shaving their heads and marking the “seal of Islam” on their foreheads with either cigarettes or caustic soap. (Colley)"

Sounds familiar :-)

starviego said...


"Soon the ‘black people’ would ‘rise’. .... Blacks would fight blacks as well as whites."

“The Moslems themselves talk of 1970 as their D Day, expansively predict that before that time the big white nations will have eliminated each other with atomic warfare and Black Africa will stand unchallenged.” (Races: The Black Supremacists, Time, August 10, 1959)


One of the things that always confused me about Charlie's HS theory was the idea that, after the whites had gone down to the ghetto and killed off all the 'Uncle Tom' blacks, the liberal/hippy whites and the uptight/conservative whites would turn on each other and kill each other off, leaving the field clear for the Black Muslims to emerge and take over. But, based upon the above quotes, it looks like he got that idea from the Black Muslims too.

starviego said...

"According to the FBI, Fard was born Wallace Ford in Portland, Oregon"

It should be pointed out that there are any number of theories as to where Fard came from. The NOI says he came from what is now Saudi Arabia. The FBI also claimed at one time that he was born in New Zealand from a British father and native mother. Other sources say he was born in Spain, or Egypt. The one I give credence too is the theory that he was born in Afghanistan or North Pakistan. See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV7JMGhx12E&list=PLGDyKia7kUw4o4C6RXuv852oXXinsShcH&index=16

starviego said...

brownrice said...
" “Black Muslim’ prisoners distinguished themselves from other African American prisoners by shaving their heads and marking the “seal of Islam” on their foreheads with either cigarettes or caustic soap. (Colley)"

"Sounds familiar :-)"

Wow. I just realized you are taking about Charlie. I do believe you are onto something.

Manson Mythos said...

"“Black Muslim’ prisoners distinguished themselves from other African American prisoners by shaving their heads and marking the “seal of Islam” on their foreheads with either cigarettes or caustic soap. (Colley)"

Sounds like sensational bunk. I never saw an image of one with marks on their head.

It's hard to determine exactly how much of Charlie's HS was his and not conjecture and other people's imagination.

But the concept of blacks turning to those white people who survived HS for guidence sounds kind of legit and something he would say, because he has said the same in a much deeper way in the interview with Bill Murphy. Though with a somewhat leftist slant to it. Basically saying the African didn't even know english or had a concept of what a "man" was, before the white man. Thus all the problems of whites have with them, is their own fault.

I doubt Charlie seriously though an entire nation of blacks would turn to The Family for support. But then again, who knows. There is a ring of truth there. if one looks at the current state of South Africa, many blacks are wishing it WOULD go back to the days when a white mimority ruled over it. Because it's a complete mess right now by those in power, who absolutely hate whites, on top of being useless as leaders. Chicago isn't under the rule of "racist" white Republicans and it has the level of violence that a third world hellhole has. Many liberals will blame a "racist", white system for not "doing enough" for them. But that sentiment is and of it's self is saying they need white people to keep them in check and "show" them what to do.

simon davis said...

What's hard about determining how much of Charlie's HS was his and not conjecture and other people's imagination ?

william marshall said...

Anyone else wondering if Robert Hendrickson passed along the information he was supposed to reveal after Charlie dies to someone or did he take it to his grave
Also thanks to the awesome help of a friend of the blog I finally have a copy of The Manson file myth and reality of an outlaw shaman

starviego said...

Is that the 900 page tome?

grimtraveller said...

william marshall said...


Also thanks to the awesome help of a friend of the blog I finally have a copy of The Manson file myth and reality of an outlaw shaman


I had Deb S to thank for alerting me to my copy. And I'm glad she did. It's a very important book, even though I think much of its content is on a par with The Brothers Grimm {no relation !} and Hans Christian Andersen. It took me a few months to read it and it'll take much longer to digest.

simon davis said...

What's hard about determining how much of Charlie's HS was his and not conjecture and other people's imagination ?

I guess it's the putting together of all the pieces of the puzzle and working out which bit was influenced by which bit and then working out the strength of each aspect. For example, I think a powerful influence on Charlie was the churchy upbringing he had, both positively and negatively. Whether it was as powerful as what he may have absorbed from the Black Muslims in jail is anyone's guess and everyone's opinion.
I think there were a number of important events, happenings and associations in Charles Manson's life and his eventual encounter with LSD as well as when that encounter took place coalesced with all of that to ultimately bloom into HS. The Black Muslim element was one among a few.

simon davis said...

OK, fair enough, I think my question was actually at cross-purposes with whoever was making the statement.

I suppose the fact that he finds it in the Beatles' song and links it to the Revelations was somewhat original (?), not to mention quite clever actually. It has always struck me, that whilst it is completely fanciful nonsense, it is rather clever - the guitars, the long hair, the power of the music etc etc.

Why does he have the white retaliation in there ? Why isn't it just black overwhelms white in a huge battle/conflagration and takes over world, then black doesn't know what to do, then Charlie take over. Why does he throw in at the early stage, "Black kills white, which prompts retaliation by White, which prompts a war which black wins, and then there's a huge conflagration which black wins". Don't know if I'm making sense, but .....

grimtraveller said...

simon davis said...


Why does he have the white retaliation in there ? Why isn't it just black overwhelms white in a huge battle/conflagration and takes over world, then black doesn't know what to do, then Charlie take over. Why does he throw in at the early stage, "Black kills white, which prompts retaliation by White, which prompts a war which black wins, and then there's a huge conflagration which black wins"


One of the things that was going on in the 1960s, in fact, one of the defining aspects of America {and to a lesser extent the UK} was the split that opened up between the conservative and liberal {then mutating into radical} Whites. In the same way that the Black Muslim context was one element of HS, so was this rancour between the White factions in the USA. In the southern states there had long been enclaves of people that never really accepted "the united states" as an entity. There still are. I think Charlie had this kind of thinking deep within him and that comes out in HS.
I've felt for a while that HS represents something of a settling of scores for Charles Manson. Pretty much all of the groupings that he had some sort of axe to grind with have their hash settled in HS. Robert Hendrickson points out in his book "Death to pigs" about LSD that ”LSD was developed for psychiatrists to administer to their most disturbed patients so that their deepest and darkest secrets could be brought to the surface and dealt with. But it’s use has always been considered a very dangerous method of dealing with otherwise ‘unreachable’ patients." It seems to have brought some deep seated stuff out in Charlie...
In order for a minority of Black people to eventually overpower White America, it makes sense that White America first weaken itself. And with so many White liberals in favour of civil rights and standing alongside Black America in this matter, you instantly had 2 sides of Whites up in each others faces. It was seen for example in the anti war protests and the attempts of certain security agencies to infiltrate and then decimate those wings that were viewed as subversives and undesirables, not to mention that WW2 had essentially been a White Man's war and the cold war sort of followed suit.
Charlie said that the White man was not together but the Black man was.
But the White retaliation makes even more sense than the White on White fight because it represents business as usual. If the Blacks were thought to have committed the Tate~LaBianca killings, then a certain strand of White society would need/want to put these uppity Negroes in their time honoured place at the bottom of the shoe and what did it matter if their lives were snuffed out in the process ? Those old photos of Black men hanging from trees after a lynching simply told one that their lives were expendable. The notion of White retaliation on Black people was ever so real to Charlie. Black men could lose their lives for being suspected of being around White women, so imagine the outcry if they were thought to have killed White people....

ziggyosterberg said...



Ayyy! Sit on it!







Mr. Humphrat said...

I certainly enjoyed this post David. I was reading up on the Zebra killings and was surprised to know that then future SF mayor Art Agnos was one of the shooting victims.

Manson Mythos said...

First of all, I do not think there was any coherent definition of Helter Skelter until Bugliosi pieced his interpretation of it together. One described it as every war ever fought being reignited. Which makes sense. Let's face, Charlie is correct: WWII never ended. Why are we still talking about Hitler in 2017 and why do the Jews constantly need to call everyone who doesn't act as their lapdogs, Hitler? Why do they teach college courses like "Abolish Whiteness", promote race mixing (yet never really date non-jews) and openly present the idea of a non-white majority Europe/United States as a progressive thing? Why has with each administration, Israel pushes for leaders in the MD to be knocked out of power, regardless if something worse fills the void? Every since WWII they kept Hitler alive in various forms, to justify their own pursuit of supremacy, not to mention profit and that time of agitation and constantly leading some damn "resistance" on white people is going to result in Hitler really coming back.

Why are all of the sudden monuments being taken down in the US and there is hysteria over the confederate flag? It's as if society made the villains vs heroes narrative so appealing in media, everyone wants to play act comic books and WWII movies.

All of this is going to eventually erupt and look at how BLM are now counter protesting gay parades. Look at how the jews who are indoctrinating blacks with Marxism and turn anti-white subversion into academia. They are not being chased off their own campuses by them. Look at how blacks suddenly turn on their white liberal ass kissers by threatening them with violence for "cultural appropriation" for having dreadlocks.

I think James Mason defined Helter Skelter the best: uncontrollable war with a mind of it's own and the way the system has tried to prevent it from happening, is only escalating the possibility.

BTW: It's funny how Keith Ellison, who is promoted by commie Bernie Sanders has ties to the Nation of Islam, but white liberals dismiss it as no big deal as he tried to take advantage of this idea that the RNC is now a white supremacist dictatorship by leading the DNC. But try to dig up hearsay from the 70s that prove NYC libertarian Donald Trump is really a Hitler worshipping fascist.

I personally would love that. white emocrats getting hard-on's over the decline of white birth rates and percentages of "old white men" dying every year, as they push for mass immigration to create a non-white majority in which there will not even be a need for a Republican party....and then full on black supremacists who played the game and posed as progressives took over their party.

simon davis said...

Thanks Grim and Manson Mythos. Very helpful. I'm a bit intrigued, I must admit, by teh reference to Bugliosi's "interpretation" of it. I haven't seen that. Is that in something he said ? or wrote ? Where do I find it ?

Cheers beers !

simon davis said...

Now, Manson Mythos, do you mind if I call you MM? Let me know if that's inconvenient, otherwise I'll assume it is OK.

Now you're saying, are you, that Helter Skelter actually still is possible ? Have I got that right ? If so, do you mean the version put forward by Charles Manson? Or some variation of it?

Thanks mate.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

I do not think there was any coherent definition of Helter Skelter until Bugliosi pieced his interpretation of it together

Have you read Leslie Van Houten's session at the end of '69 with Marvin Part ? Have you understood some of the things Susan Atkins said in her interview with Caballero and on the stand before the Grand Jury ? Have you digested that June 25 1970 edition of Rolling Stone in which members of the Family, including Charlie, speak out ? Have you read any of the testimony of Paul Watkins, Brooks Poston and Gregg Jacobson ? Have you considered a guy like Al Springer concluding a week before Bugliosi was even brought in on the case that Charlie had "built up a thing where he can be leader of the world" ? This is a guy who hasn't even gotten to know the Family concluding this on November 12th 1969 and telling it to the Police. Bugliosi didn't get this information straight in his mind until Feb 1970 and it was from Paul Watkins that he understood it, even though he'd heard the Springer interview.
My stance on HS remains that it is a multi part happening and each piece should be looked at individually while simultaneously never losing sight of its place in the whole picture. The Family understood its components. Some {eg, Bruce, Barbara Hoyt, Bobby} have subsequently admitted they didn't believe all of it and way back in '69, Leslie aired doubts that Susan did too. Some like Tex said they lost faith in it because they couldn't see it unfolding after the murders. Charlie stated that he may actually have put a clog in HS which was in response to what ? A question after the trial from Bugliosi asking when the Black man was going to take over.
Highly significant is Van Houten's recollection to Part of how she came to be part of the murder troupe in the first place;
MISS VAN HOUTEN: Well, we were all sitting in the kitchen, and Charlie pulled me out to the side, and he said, “Are you crazy?”

And I said, “Well, yeah.”

MR. PART: He said, “Are you crazy?” and you said, “Yeah.

Now, what does “crazy” mean to you?

MISS VAN HOUTEN: In other words, it meant, “Are you almost, to the regular person’s thinking mind, are you crazy enough to believe the way I believe, to see the way I see, that we are, you know ~ that we had been sent down to start this in motion?”

And I said, “Yes.” Because I — I do. I’m crazy enough to believe it.

And he said, “Are you crazy enough to be able to go out and kill someone for this?”

And I said, “Yeah,” that I was.

So he said, “Okay. Go get two changes of clothes and get in the car.”

So I did.


The only reason Bugliosi could put it together is because it already was together.

starviego said...

grimtraveller said...
"... imagine the outcry if they were thought to have killed White people..."

Given the hostility of the FBI and LAPD to the Panthers, is it not strange that the cops never even implied that TLB was the work of the black militants?

I am going through back issues of the Black Panther newspaper right now. Not even peep about TLB or how Charlie tried to blame militant blacks. Would they not logically have screamed long and hard about how this was another devilish attempt by the whites to blame blacks for their own sins? But instead there was just silence.

David said...

Starviego said: "Given the hostility of the FBI and LAPD to the Panthers, is it not strange that the cops never even implied that TLB was the work of the black militants?"

Why? There wasn't a shred of evidence that it was black militants. In fact, there is not a shred of evidence I have ever seen that the Panthers ever even knew Manson was alive in the spring-summer '69. Just because we put "Healter Skelter", "Rise" and "Pig" together with what we know about HS how does that remotely connect black militants to the murders? I'd say the initial police reports pretty much tell you what the LAPD thought and what little there is in the FBI Vault all points to drugs as the motive. Wouldn't we expect there to be a bit more interest from the FBI? Instead there is a repeated notation on those records 'Don't let [redacted] and LA get drawn into this. Absolutely nothing I have seen except Manson's imagination connects the Panthers to TLB.

"I am going through back issues of the Black Panther newspaper right now. Not even peep about TLB or how Charlie tried to blame militant blacks. Would they not logically have screamed long and hard about how this was another devilish attempt by the whites to blame blacks for their own sins? But instead there was just silence."

Again, why would they? In none of the books I have read written about or by the Panthers in the last few decades does Manson even get a footnote. Maybe it was because he didn't even merit a blip on their radar. They were in a war with the US Organization and getting in shoot outs with the cops. They were trying to infiltrate student organizations and 'mobilize' the masses. Why scream about Manson he's not killing blacks? Because some nut job drugged out white guy tried to trigger a race war? He wasn't 'blaming' black militants. He was trying to trigger a white reaction and/or cause an uprising among the black community if you believe HS. Put simply he was trying to trigger another Watts Riot.

Maybe they had the same view generally shared around here, even by those who support the HS motive: it's nuts.

Panamint Patty said...

Happy birthday William Marshall

Manson Mythos said...

One has to ask themselves this:

Despite the crime scene having a number of clues that would lead one to come to the conclusion that black radicals were responsible (the use of the word "Pig", a towel that upon first glace resembles a KKK hood, the rope which was reminiscent of lynching).....why was the possibility never even considered by law enforcement? It was, considered by the public and at least one suspect. But not by law enforcement. As if they knew it had nothing to do with that.

The answer is simple: the police in '69 knew what the Black Panthers were going to do before they were going to do it. As I said, it has turned out that many prominent members were informants and shills for the FBI.

Do I believe Helter Skelter could happen? HS as in a race war, yes. The more the left pushes for "diversity", "Multiculturalism", mass immigration and continue with racial agitation and indoctrination with Marxist philosophy in colleges, I do believe it's going to happen. They've attempted this by destabilizing white people into being self hating, guilt ridden and scared pansies and blacks more aggressive and arrogant. This type of social engineering it going to lead to a collapse. Throw Islam into the mix too.

We've already seen glimpses of it. There are of course people who want this to happen within the system. It's amazing to me that isn't "not a big deal" to most people that Bill Ayers is working within the system today and cannot connect the dots to that and the fact kids are going into colleges and coming out calling for violent revolution, the destruction of cultural and waiving soviet flags with Che on their shirts.

starviego said...

David said...
"There wasn't a shred of evidence that it was black militants."

When it came to the BPs, the LAPD's attitude was "We don't need no stinkin' evidence!"


Anyway there were hints that police had looked into the possibility:

The Sharon Tate Murders by Peter Maas
From The Ladies’ Home Journal, April 1970 Edition
One of the first police theories was that black-power militants, out to terrorize the white community, were responsible for the killings.

What we do know is that Bugliosi, for all his search for motive, wouldn't touch the obvious links to the Black Muslims and their own racial philosophy. Even if he didn't want to confuse the jury during the trial, he could have brought up the link in his book, but he didn't.

Do you smell a cover-up?

Manson Mythos said...

Well, Bugliosi was a democrat in California and if you noticed, his favorite quote to attribute to Charlie was "blackie only knows what whitey shows him". Notice CA has been consistently under democratic rule and Joy Reid of CNN pointed out it's because of one thing: demographics. The BPP were a Marxist organization, meaning they too only knew what a white turned them onto.

Perhaps that quite rang true in Bugliosi, because deep inside he knew it was true and wanted such a concept to appear as something only a crazed racist white on LSD could dream up. Bugliosi knew it was true and not just of blacks. This is the same man who said juries are little babies you have to spoon fed. The job of a prosecutor is making a jury think a certain way based on only on what YOU show them. I'm almost positive he blamed the victory of OJ on a predominately black jury.

Blacks only knowing what whites show them is the mentality of both sides of the political spectrum. Just look at how the right wing are always trying to convince blacks that democrats are the "real racists" and how democrats try to motive blacks into voting with pandering, cheap displays of being on their side or painting their rival as a "racist". I know, and will admit Charlie most certainly said such things. He used the analogy of the Mau Mau in the Murphy interview. They didn't even know what a gun was before the white man showed him them and then whites had to deal with them using them.

simon davis said...

Hi MM,

Just about my earlier question, yes I've read all of that material. I wouldn't quite say I agree with your take on all of it, but I agree with a lot of what you say.

No offence, but I didn't really want your opinions or interpretations about HS, as interesting and edifying as they are. What I'm really interested in for my purposes is what you say was Bugliosi's interpretation of it. If it's too long to set out in writing, could you at least refer me to where I can find it ?

Cheers

simon davis said...

Sorry sorry MM, I now see your comment at 4.19 PM which I gather is your answer to my original question. I should read it all before I jump in. Please be kind enough to let me digest that would you ? Then I'll come back to you.

simon davis said...

Oh shit now I realise I've mixed up Grim's comments with MM's. Sorry guys, senility is the only explanation, pretty early here, need another coffee and pull myself together !

Manson Mythos said...

If you gather up the comments of those prior to the trial about HS, there was no clear coherent explanation of it. None of those within the Family appeared to have a well thought out idea of it. It was very abstract. It was when the trial started, that Bugliosi had something that appeared to make sense. With perhaps the exception of Brooks Poston. Leslie's tape with Marvin Part was somewhat in line with it, but that tape was clearly a guy following the party line of the prosecution trying to get off via Diminished Capacity. That tape was made with the sole intention of trying to prove she was nuts, brainwashed and thus not guilty.

simon davis said...

OK, so there seem to be 2 threads running here.

1. MM your thesis, if I can call it that, is that the "left" is, in a nutshell, leading us towards societal collapse and one way it is doing this is by promoting multiculturalism etc which could well lead us into some sort of race conflagration along the lines of HS. Have I got that right ?

2. Starviego, you say there was a cover up by Bugliosi, cops, government, establishment forces to deliberately avoid investigating and implicating blacks (despite obvious signs of the murders being committed by blacks). Have I got you right ?

Sorry to be so tedious but this is my normal approach and whilst others on the blog may be familiar with your thoughts on various subjects, I am not.

Cheers !

David said...

Manson Mythos said: " Leslie's tape with Marvin Part was somewhat in line with it, but that tape was clearly a guy following the party line of the prosecution trying to get off via Diminished Capacity.

Let me make sure I understand this: you are saying on December 29, 1969 Bugliosi already had HS teed up and had conveyed it to Marvin Part?
_____

And: "That tape was made with the sole intention of trying to prove she was nuts, brainwashed and thus not guilty."

Help me with this one too. Ok, let's say that was the purpose of the tape, why does that impact the tape's 'credibility'? That's his job.
_____

I'd also note she doesn't 'bite' on the brainwashing:

"And like I’m not trying to, you know, do like Sadie’s doing and put it on Charlie, ’cause I don’t think Charlie has any control."

Maybe I'm being too much of a lawyer and missing something.

Manson Mythos said...

I'm not sure what Bugliosi had up his sleeve then, but if you are a lawyer, I am sure you know all about Discovery. Wouldn't take a rocket scientist even with what we know was disclosed to see the direction the DA was going in. Bugliosi met with Atkins' attorney with her in private and we have no idea what was really discussed then. But I am fairly certain they discussed the real objective (bust Manson) and the route they wanted to go down.

My biggest question in this case is if that tape with Poston reached the hands of Atkins' and Leslie's attorney before the date Bugliosi said he got it in Helter Skelter. I have a gut feeling, it did. The tape with Kitty that implicated her did, so I am sure Inyo County provided the Poston tape too.

As a lawyer, I'm guessing you are playing a game of court room with me when you ask about the impact of the tape's credibility and you are right, that was his job.

We don't have to assume that was the purpose of the tape, we KNOW it was. The tape was made with the sole intention of being presented to the judge for it's evaluation by a shrink.

The tape she made previously with law enforcement was night and day. She was manipulative, sarcastic and anything but forth coming. In her tape with Part, she even had the almost childlike tone to her voice as she was extremely candid and her willingness to go along with her attorney shows their self preservation was much greater than any slavish devotion to Charles Manson.

David said...

Manson Mythos said: "As a lawyer, I'm guessing you are playing a game of court room with me when you ask about the impact of the tape's credibility and you are right, that was his job."

No, I'm not. I am legitimately curious why you think the purpose behind the tape damages its credibility and I think you answered. If I read you correctly: because it was a scam, made up, faked.

I admit I didn't go reread all the pretrial stuff but a quick scan tells me the first discovery order is first discussed and not even signed on January 6th- although I might have missed something.

simon davis said...

Aw I'm lost. I think I follow what's David's saying and I agree with it.

MM, I don't suppose we could slow down a bit and approach this a bit more methodically for a dumb ol' country boy like me ?

First, I think you're aware I'm a lawyer about the same vintage as David. I'm now sort of retired.

Now, first para of last comment. VB interviewed Atkins on 4 Dec with Caballero present. You say you have no idea what they discussed. I think I can tell you. In all likelihood what they discussed was what was revealed the next day to the Grand Jury. Maybe not, but probably was.

Still on first para, yes I think it was at least on the horizon that Manson was in VB's sights. It would have to have been from the moment VB first realised Manson was the leader. Can't recall precisely when that was, but it was around this time. So from about this time, VB wanted to bust Manson.

Still on first para, the route they (VB ?) wanted to go down? I don't follow this. I can't recall seeing anything which really implies VB knew at this stage what "route" he wanted to go down. I'm sure at that stage, like any lawyer, he would be willing to look at any route that suggested itself. It looks like 4 Dec is first real inkling that VB ever gets about HS. Judging by the way he approaches that subject the next day in court - fairly low key - it doesn't look like he's thinking "HS is the answer to his case, I've gotta go there". Additionally, he plainly doesn't think Atkins is great shakes as a witness. He later describes her as "crazy" and as at 1 Jan he is telling Police Chief Davis to the effect he wouldn't be basing a case on her.

Can we just come to resolution of these things before we go to next para?

simon davis said...

Sorry, "answer to THIS case" was what I meant to say.

brownrice said...

"blackie only knows what whitey shows him"

Yes... "we" certainly showed "them" how to invent jazz & rock 'n' roll, eh? I heard that Hendrix learnt everything he knew from... ummm... Dick Dale... and as for that Louis Armstrong guy... pffft... he was just copying Paul Whiteman (irony alert). :-)

starviego said...

simon davis said...
"Starviego, you say there was a cover up by Bugliosi, cops, government, establishment forces to deliberately avoid investigating and implicating blacks (despite obvious signs of the murders being committed by blacks). Have I got you right?"

Well I wouldn't say the signs were obvious, but certainly the cops could have used the murders to smear the Panthers, if they had wanted to. And certainly Bugliosi could have connected Charlie's HS philosophy to the Black Muslims, if he had wanted to. And Charlie could have ordered up more HS, if he had wanted to. And the Family could have tried to deflect attention to the blacks when the investigators started asking questions, if they had wanted to.

It was like everybody got dressed up for the party, but then suddenly no one wanted to go. I don't know exactly what happened.

Manson Mythos said...

@brownrice

invented them on instruments created by whites. Even still, if you consider blues a greater innovation than let's say classic like Wagner, well.

simon davis said...

Brownrice, I don't understand your comments - not being sarcastic or nasty or anything, and I know I must sound terrifically uncool and even stupid LOL !. But I would be interested because I like music history stuff. I play guitar, formerly semi-professionally believe it or not, and am a pretty keen fan of Hendrix but its OK if you want say something adverse about him I won't bite. I know well enough about Armstrong. Dick Dale - yeah surf guitar guy ? I doubt Hendrix learned from him as such, may have liked him, even been influenced by him, but learned ? I might take a bit of persuading on that. Whiteman rings a bell but really I dunno who he is or was.

Starviego, thanks, just one bit at a time for country bumpkin here !

1. The cops could have used murders to smear blackie if they wanted to, but they didn't ? Agree. Although how far they would have got with it is questionable, but no doubt they could have tried. Also not quite sure why they would want to (unless they were all rabid racists, in fact somewhat stupid rabid racists to think they would get anywhere without actual evidence).

2. VB could have connected Charlie's philosophy to the B. Muslims if he had wanted to. Agreed he could have. But again how far he would have got with it is arguable. And well, to put it mildly, I'm not sure why he would want to. Now on this one, applying my inside knowledge/experience as a lawyer, I'd have to say its sort of inconceivable that he would want to, ever at any stage in light of the evidence of which I am aware. And that probably explains why he didn't, I suppose.

3. Charlie could have order up more HS if he wanted to. Yes, I suppose. But isn't it on this site we recently went around on this. I think we worked out some apparently feasible reasons why he would not want to i.e. Tex's mum's phone call on Sunday 10 August. Was there something else too? But yes he didn't want to, apparently. On the other hand, he may have wanted to but couldn't find anyone to do it for him. I mean, let's face it, Tex must have been absolutely buggered after his Herculean efforts of the previous two nights. We know he got some sleep on the Saturday, but . . .

4. Family could have tried to deflect attention to the Blacks when investigators started asking questions if they wanted to. Yes they could have, if they wanted to. And some arguably did, or at least started talking about the blacks being involved in the reasoning behind the murders. Maybe you need to identify a bit more precisely which interviews with investigators you're talking about, otherwise its difficult to know what to make of this point.

At any rate, you say, as I understand it, that the above (at least) adds up to valid suspicion that VB and the cops etc covered up the black connection. Do you say it adds up to a powerful case for that type of cover up, or just it is at the level of valid suspicion. I'd have to say, at this stage, I can't see it adding up to either. I suspect that there are more plausible explanations of each of the anomalies you have identified. But I'm still listening !!

starviego said...

simon davis said...
"1. The cops.. not quite sure why they would want to ..."

Because they hated the BPs:

www.truth-out.org/news/item/21382-1969-the-year-the-black-panther-party-was-to-be-annihilated
Elaine Brown, a member of the Southern California chapter of the party at the time:
"So 1969 was the year we were supposed to be wiped out, and we almost were."


simon davis said...
"2. VB: I'm not sure why he would want to."

Bugs, in his book, wanted to tell us the whole truth, did he not? And he left out this obvious link to Charlie's thinking? No way, there was more to it.


simon davis said...
"3. ... we worked out some apparently feasible reasons why he would not want to i.e. Tex's mum's phone call on Sunday 10 August."

So Charlie was freaked about the alleged visit by the FBI to Tex's mom's house, but then he orders Tex to set up a shotgun ambush of the Park Service Rangers. Well that's kind of contradictory.


simon davis said...
"4. Maybe you need to identify a bit more precisely which interviews with investigators you're talking about... ."

The ONLY one who tried to implicate the Black radicals was Beausoleil, in his interview with cops after his arrest on Aug 6. I have across NO other interviews with any Family members who tried that gambit.

brownrice said...

simon davis said...
Brownrice, I don't understand your comments - not being sarcastic or nasty or anything, and I know I must sound terrifically uncool and even stupid LOL !. But I would be interested because I like music history stuff. I play guitar, formerly semi-professionally believe it or not, and am a pretty keen fan of Hendrix but its OK if you want say something adverse about him I won't bite. I know well enough about Armstrong. Dick Dale - yeah surf guitar guy ? I doubt Hendrix learned from him as such, may have liked him, even been influenced by him, but learned ? I might take a bit of persuading on that. Whiteman rings a bell but really I dunno who he is or was.


Sorry Simon. I was being completely sarcastic, hence the "irony alert" & sideways smiley face at the end of the comment. I was trying to point out that most of the popular music we've listened to was influenced by or is based upon or IS black American music. Hendrix pretty much invented modern rock guitar in my book. I just pulled Dick Dale's name out of the hat because he had a certain raunchy charm but his influence is minor compared to Hendrix. Paul Whiteman was an orchestra leader in the 20s & 30s who was billed as "The King Of Jazz". He specialised in watered down versions of what guys like Louis Armstrong did and was hugely popular at the time with mainstream white audiences.

brownrice said...

Manson Mythos said...
invented them on instruments created by whites.


True but what they did with those instruments was highly original and "white folk" have been mimicking (and formalising) it ever since. The ability to invent new instruments has more to do with "access to tools & resources" and spare time than any genetic predisposition I suspect. People at the bottom of any social order are obliged to make do with whatever they can lay their hands on.

Even still, if you consider blues a greater innovation than let's say classic like Wagner, well.

Not sure if I regard Wagner as all THAT innovative... though I think that's down to personal taste and where we draw our inspiration from. He's certainly one of the Western classical greats. It strikes me though as fairly difficult to gauge the innovation quotient of a classical tradition versus a folk one. You'd be better (IMO) comparing the blues with (say) the Celtic folk music tradition... they're both brilliant genres to me... but different.

If you're gonna compare European classical music with anything, then Indian classical music is an interesting one. Both systems are incredibly complex and there's a whole formal training with each. But Indian classical music is based largely around improvisation... something your average western classical player has real problems with. Once again, I love both types of music (country AND eastern). Neither (IMO) is better or greater... they're both awsome! Just different (which I like).

My point being that ALL people seem to be capable of invention & innovation and that the differences are cultural rather racial.

simon davis said...

Bear with me while I digest all of it.

1. the cops hated the BP's, but they didn't make the connection in this case;

2. VB wanted to tell us the whole truth, but he didn't make the connection;

3. Charlie could have kept going with HS, but he didn't;

4. No Family members tried the gambit of connecting the murders with the BP's;

Well, can't really gainsay any of that. I can't deny you're right about it. I think the only way I can put it is that if I was on a jury listening to you argue that I'd probably think it adds up to there being "no connection" rather than adds up to "there's a connection which is being covered up".

BTW, where do I find 6 August police interview with BB ? That has eluded me. Is it Cielodrive?

brownrice said...

That should read- "cultural rather THAN racial". Sorry...

starviego said...


simon davis said...
"BTW, where do I find 6 August police interview with BB?"


I got my info from this thread by AustinAnn74:

http://www.mansonblog.com/search/label/Mary%20Brunner
Monday, October 14, 2013
Observations on the Hinman Case


Hinman file at Cieloddrive:
http://www.cielodrive.com/updates/?p=1757

simon davis said...

Starviego, thanks for that, for some reason I've never been able to get to that AustinAnne post. The Cielodrive is the Hinman LASO file ? Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, both of those are (police) reports about the interview, rather than being the actual record of the interview (i.e. question and answer). Sorry to be so tedious but could you tell me if I'm right ? (I'd hate to think I've missed the actual record of the interview in all of my searching).

Brownrice, yes I get that. I guess there's been a whole it of exchanging between black and white, probably still goes on, and I have always had the impression the music (I like) is all the better for it. Had to laugh the other day when I saw Jimi's bass player Noel Redding saying he didn't really like Jimi's All Along the Watchtower.

Cheers

starviego said...

simon davis said...
Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, both of those are (police) reports about the interview, rather than being the actual record of the interview (i.e. question and answer).

You are right. The transcript of the actual interview is absent.

------------


Re: Jimi at the The Newport '69 Pop Festival at the Devonshire Downs racetrack, 4-5 miles from Spahn, on June 20-22, 1969

youtube.com/watch?v=YwQiIXv0Vk8
A friend and I were there, Friday thru Sunday, front and center. Jimi was the headline act Friday night. We waited FOREVER between acts for him to come on stage, then it was not a good performance. A couple of years ago I read what seemed to be an authoritative account of what happened that night: according to this story, Jimi was cornered in his dressing room before the show by several Black Panthers who seriously hassled him about playing to predominately white college crowds; in other words, he wasn't "black" enough for them. They were aggressive and threatening, suggesting he should ally himself more with the Black Power crowd. This went on until one of the other band members (Mitch Mitchell?) realized what was happening and got security and they broke it up. But Jimi was understandably upset when he finally got onstage, so his heart wasn't in it. To make up for it (or to earn his pay?) he performed again on Sunday, but not with Mitch and Noel.

Jenn said...

Brownrice wrote:

"Not sure if I regard Wagner as all THAT innovative... though I think that's down to personal taste and where we draw our inspiration from. He's certainly one of the Western classical greats. It strikes me though as fairly difficult to gauge the innovation quotient of a classical tradition versus a folk one. You'd be better (IMO) comparing the blues with (say) the Celtic folk music tradition... they're both brilliant genres to me... but different."

Wagner certainly was innovative, particularly in his harmonic practice, in particular in his use of chromaticism. This led to the 20th century "crisis" in classical music, I.e. The loss of tonal center and the rise of dodecaphonicpolytonalism. He was, of course, also a person that held certain anti- Semitic beliefs. It's not a coincidence that Manson Mythos picked Wagner for his comparison.

As to the black roots of Rock, and in particular who invented what instruments, that's a whole thing for a longer discussion.


brownrice said...

Jenn said:
Wagner certainly was innovative, particularly in his harmonic practice, in particular in his use of chromaticism. This led to the 20th century "crisis" in classical music, I.e. The loss of tonal center and the rise of dodecaphonicpolytonalism.


Jenn, I dont really have a very deep knowledge of classical music history whereas I suspect that you do. You're absolutely right.

He was, of course, also a person that held certain anti- Semitic beliefs. It's not a coincidence that Manson Mythos picked Wagner for his comparison.

Yeah, I got that.

ziggyosterberg said...


Kriss Kross innovated wearing your pants backwards.

ziggyosterberg said...


A white man invented the HEXAPHONIC GUITAR AMPLIFIER (Shoutout to Joseph Esposito).

Matt said...

The guitar was invented by Muslims. The Moors in particular. From eh... Africa...


ziggyosterberg said...


Zamfir (a white man) mastered the pan flute.

Matt said...

Rock Hudson (a white man) mastered the skin flute.



ziggyosterberg said...


Paul Watkins and Bobby Beausoleil (both white men) also had some skin flute skills.



(I wonder if this thread is what Dreath envisioned when he was composing his post?)

David said...

Ziggy said: "I wonder if this thread is what Dreath envisioned when he was composing his post?"

Ah....no....but it is entertaining.

PS: A Jew invented Christianity.

ziggyosterberg said...


A Monkees mother invented Liquid Paper.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

If you gather up the comments of those prior to the trial about HS, there was no clear coherent explanation of it

As a whole. But there were coherent explanations of its constituent parts.
I've noticed that in the recent past {since 2015} and present it's actually very rare for most commentators to approach it as an entirety; people tend to comment on a particular part or parts and still call it HS. That's what the Family were doing back in '69/'70.

None of those within the Family appeared to have a well thought out idea of it

Living under a philosophy that included "never ask why," "the child is the leader," "do what your love says do" and "no sense makes sense," it is pretty clear to me that it was as well thought out as it needed to be. People may not have described it to your satisfaction but they knew what they derived from it. When I read the words of the Family members in Robert's book, it is obvious to me that they understood it. The funny thing is that they try to absolve Charlie but end up showing all the more how in thrall to HS they were. Why ? Because it's what they had been consuming throughout '69 and nothing new replaced it through '70.

It was very abstract

Many parts of the various Eastern philosophies that absorbed Westerners in the 60s and beyond are very abstract. The concept of sin in Christianity is abstract. The necessity for atonement in Christianity and Judaism is abstract.
Virginia Graham didn't understand HS but she gleaned enough of it from Susan to have an inkling as to its importance to the Family. And what she understood of the part she spoke of shows that it was not difficult to pick up. It's worth remembering that she wasn't interested in that side of Sadie's talk; yet she recalled it. She actually thought it was the name of the Family.

It was when the trial started, that Bugliosi had something that appeared to make sense

Bugliosi's take made as much sense as all the fragments he'd been given. He simply put the fragments together to make a vieweable picture and being a literate lawyer, it was bound to seem like it made sense. He needed to have it make sense. He did exactly the same thing when explaining the law of conspiracy for the jury.

With perhaps the exception of Brooks Poston

Poston and Crockett's 3/10/69 interviews with the Police, while jumping from subject to subject are coherent enough to give a picture of HS.

Leslie's tape with Marvin Part....was made with the sole intention of trying to prove she was nuts, brainwashed and thus not guilty

Obviously, but that's kind of missing the point. He did think she was nuts and possibly brainwashed but for the purposes of our discussion, did Leslie demonstrate that she understood HS in ways that someone else could look at and make a decision about ? Yes she did. That's why Part thought she was nuts and wanted the Judge to hear the tape. His view was "how could anyone sane think this ?" And she sounded pretty coherent about it all and said more than once that she believed it.
Any one of the Family could explain HS as they understood it.

grimtraveller said...

ziggyosterberg said...


A Monkees mother invented Liquid Paper

She really did !

starviego said...

Given the hostility of the FBI and LAPD to the Panthers, is it not strange that the cops never even implied that TLB was the work of the black militants?

No, it isn't. Just because you hate a particular group doesn't mean you're going to try and pin every murder that crops up on them !


I am going through back issues of the Black Panther newspaper right now. Not even peep about TLB or how Charlie tried to blame militant blacks

Well once caught, Charlie always denied it so why should they ? And let's bee clear here, the Panthers would have been unlikely to be shedding tears about the murder of some affluent Whites in much the same way that many Whites wouldn't have given a toss about Blacks killing Blacks in some inner cities.

Would they not logically have screamed long and hard about how this was another devilish attempt by the whites to blame blacks for their own sins? But instead there was just silence

Although not technically funny, it never ceases to amuse me how little the Family knew of Black people. Just because Charlie had been in jail with Black people and listened to them and talked with them didn't give him real insight into the various Black communities. Interestingly, it still doesn't. His view of Black people that is espoused in George's book brings something of a facepalm from me and the Family were little different back in the day.


Manson Mythos said...

One has to ask themselves this:

Despite the crime scene having a number of clues that would lead one to come to the conclusion that black radicals were responsible (the use of the word "Pig", a towel that upon first glace resembles a KKK hood, the rope which was reminiscent of lynching).....why was the possibility never even considered by law enforcement?


The Police did look at certain Black guys and the radical connection, such as it was, as was documented in the 2nd Tate Police report.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

The answer is simple: the police in '69 knew what the Black Panthers were going to do before they were going to do it. As I said, it has turned out that many prominent members were informants and shills for the FBI

Many ?
You're going to have to substantiate the claim that many prominent Panthers were informants.

Do I believe Helter Skelter could happen? HS as in a race war, yes

Then you're not really far from where Charles Manson was in the late 60s. And not only him. Even Bugliosi noted in his book that it was not fantastic that Manson saw a conflict coming between Blacks & Whites. He went on to add that many also believed this.
It's not exactly rocket science after seeing some of the riots that happened in the 60s, the 90s, in the last couple of years....to suppose that similar could happen. Simply because of America's history I suspect there will long be people agitating for this ~ on more than one side.

starviego said...

Anyway there were hints that police had looked into the possibility

The Police looked into a few possibilities. They even noted {in one of the LaBianca reports} that the bloody words on the walls at Waverley had turned up in some of the lyrics of what was then the current Beatles album.
But they didn't look into that !

Bugliosi, for all his search for motive, wouldn't touch the obvious links to the Black Muslims and their own racial philosophy

The links were not at all obvious. They seem that way now because yourself and David have done quite a bit of research. And as interesting and discussable as all the Black Muslim stuff is, it has absolutely no bearing on the murder of the victims. You can't say that 7 people died those nights because in the 20s some weird guy was pissed at Whites and developed a philosophy to reflect this.

Even if he didn't want to confuse the jury during the trial, he could have brought up the link in his book, but he didn't

But why would he ? The book was about how he investigated motive and prosecuted Charles Manson and 4 members of his Family. It wasn't about the myriad of events and philosophies that were ingredients in the brewing of Charlie's meisterwork. When he talks about some of those that he identifies, he merely touches on them, even the stupid Hitler comparisons.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said...

Do you smell a cover-up?

No.
In order to cover something up you need to know what it is you're covering. The Black Muslims had no connection to the TLB murders. I know that you believe that Charlie was under some kind of orders from the Black Muslims to set off a killing spree but even if that were so, how in the world could anyone in LE know this unless one of the murderers or their associates were talking ? You only came up with the theory half a century later !

Manson Mythos said...

Well, Bugliosi was a democrat in California and if you noticed, his favorite quote to attribute to Charlie was "blackie only knows what whitey shows him"

And yet, if you read Charlie's quotes in George's book, not only does he convey that sentiment, he amplifies it in ways that make the entry of it in "Helter Skelter" look like an invite to a 5 year old's birthday party.
Charlie also added that if Black people were on top, there would be no White people left. Ironically, LVH stated that the first lift they got in hiking back to Spahn after the LaBianca murder was from a Black man. They even bought him breakfast !

The tape she made previously with law enforcement was night and day. She was manipulative, sarcastic and anything but forth coming

Actually, that's debatable. She dropped some of the women in it.
She was obviously keeping herself out of it because at that point {Nov 26/28} it was not known that she stabbed Rosemary LaBianca 14~16 times. It wasn't even known that she'd been along on the nights in question. She was offered immunity even if it transpired she was one of the killers but she had no reason to take it. She knew that it wasn't known she had been in on Tate and it was a Tate cop that talked to her. She was shocked at Susan spilling the beans but even with that, she knew she hadn't squealed on her. So she played the game she did.


In her tape with Part, she even had the almost childlike tone to her voice as she was extremely candid and her willingness to go along with her attorney shows their self preservation was much greater than any slavish devotion to Charles Manson

By the end of December, the game was up, she'd been indicted and for you to say she wasn't showing slavish devotion to Charlie means one of two things ~ the interview you've read is the Japanese language version or you choose to ignore what is staring at you in a fashion so blatant that your chutzpah must at the very least be admired by one and all. There are a good 10 statements she makes that are so pro~Charlie and furthermore, within a short while of making this tape she fired Part. After she came to her senses in the 70s she may have claimed brainwashing, drugs and mental instability or whatever but she certainly was not doing so in '69/'70. The very opposite in fact. She did not want to be seen as mentally incapable and sacked the man that you say she was using to give her the diminished capacity defence. Your thesis makes no sense.

simon davis said...

Oh shit now I realise I've mixed up Grim's comments with MM's

Not something that happens a lot !

simon davis said...

I'm always a little intrigued or troubled by the interest some people have in whether HS made sense or didn't make sense. It seems to be something that some suggest was important in the overall assessment of the events. But unless I'm missing something, HS obviously did not "make sense", it was far-fetched and fanciful. Amongst other things, it was fanciful to think given the numerical supremacy of whites and the military capability of white government/s that the Black people could take over USA or the world. Not to mention all the fluff about bottomless pits, miniaturised people etc. It was self-evidently a fantasy. But that strikes me as immaterial, either in law or in common sense.

The law is plain and adamant that the extent of the fantasy of a suggested motive does not affect the central question of whether the accused held it as a motive.

And good sense suggests that that must be so. It is trite that many many murders are motivated by reasons that are "fanciful", "nonsense", "make no sense" etc etc. The fantasies of many killers were as "far out" than Charlie's.

What makes no sense is the suggestion that if a suggested motive can be regarded as a fantasy, that therefore it can be dismissed as a suggested motive for murder



grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

the real objective (bust Manson)

The real objective was to bust those responsible. Manson was one of them.
It's been pointed out so often that Bugliosi wanted to bust Charlie as though there was something suspect about this.
If a young gang gang raped your Mum or wife or partner or sister then slit her throat and tossed her in the river and she died and they caught the perps and it transpired that they all admitted they'd done it but had also said, independently, that they'd been put up to it by the gang leader who wasn't even in the city at the time of the crime, as the means by which they got their wings of gang membership, would you be happy for the leader of the gang to not even be charged ? When it is clear that your loved one would still be alive had that leader not said to the prospective gang members "this is how you gonna make your bones, chaps...." and told them what to do ? Would you not want that person to face justice or would you seriously be of the opinion that they hadn't done anything that warranted it ?
Before Bugliosi was ever on the case, a month before, Charlie was on the suspect list of the LaBianca cops. In unrelated circumstances to that report, Al Springer and Danny DeCarlo then come in {again, before Bugliosi is on the case} and connect Charlie with the crimes. Unrelated to that, Susan Atkins tells Virginia Graham & Ronnie Howard that Charlie is the one that basically directed the killers to kill.
Now, I don't know about you but if from 5 or 6 {because there's the stuff from Kitty Lutesinger, Brooks Poston and Paul Crockett} disparate sources someone is named as being involved in a murder or even suspected as thus, before I was handed a case, then on that first day, I'd be going through the case file and when I see that pattern emerge, am I supposed to ignore it ? Especially as more and more evidence pours in as I dig.
One of the more overlooked facets of the case is the lack of "I don't think Charlie did this or was involved" type noises. You get a little of that from the girls interviewed during the "keepaway" but after Leslie's 26/28 McGann interviews, they stop pretty much until the penalty phase of the trial almost a year later, by which point it's a moot sale because they'd been convicted.
It's interesting how it's never pointed out that Bugliosi told his superiors that convicting Charlie wasn't good enough ~ they all had to go down. It just initially appeared that he was going to be the really difficult one to nail and other measures had to be brought in to snag him.

David said...

Grim said: "You can't say that 7 people died those nights because in the 20s some weird guy was pissed at Whites and developed a philosophy to reflect this."

'30's' but what's a decade here or there.

You are absolutely right, Grim, and I hope no one here took my post to suggest that. This facet of the whole kit and kaboodle is similar to the Scientology, Dale Carnegie or Manson's exposure to the Bible: something Manson stole from to create his own delusion.

simon davis said...

I'll insert one little caveat into what I just said, not that it makes much difference.

Somebody above (Grim ?) spoke of there actually being some basis in fact for the belief in an imminent race war - Watts Riots, etc etc. I agree with that. In this sense, HS was less of a fantasy than has been suggested by some. But it was still a fantasy.

Grim, I'm not sure the Hitler stuff was all that stupid. I've been struck time and time again by the Hitlerism in the Manson Family. There was a lot of Hitlerian militarism and theory happening at the Ranch, even if the gormless disciples didn't realise it. Frankly, I think it is more profitable in terms of understanding the Manson Family to look at the German experience than continuing to look at it through the prism of black/white relations. My book will touch on this, but not explore it in detail. I don't feel this blog is the appropriate vehicle to discuss it, or at least I am frankly not yet in a position to gather my thoughts and talk more expansively about it at this point. I might be right, I might be wrong, but it is worth looking at.

grimtraveller said...

simon davis said...

What makes no sense is the suggestion that if a suggested motive can be regarded as a fantasy, that therefore it can be dismissed as a suggested motive for murder

This is something that I guess I will bang on about to my dying day. Helter skelter's robustness is about as important as Christianity's robustness ~ but I believe in Christ. That other people might think it's dumb or sadly lacking is kind of neither here nor there to me because for me it's reality.
HS was believed in to varying degrees by a number of people, even someone like Linda that hadn't been around long with the Family. And that's what is important ~ it was believed.
The things that IS believe are arguably mad but it isn't stopping them from causing havoc in Iraq, Syria, Belgium, France, the US and the UK.
People kill for all kinds of reasons. I don't dismiss the reasons people give just because I happen to think the reasons aren't sensible.

David said...

Simon said: "What makes no sense is the suggestion that if a suggested motive can be regarded as a fantasy, that therefore it can be dismissed as a suggested motive for murder"

I agree with you 100% and in fact you don't have to look any further then the Voodoo King's murder in the post: he stabs the victim in the heart on an alter because killing him will release him to a higher state and he will come back as an angel to aid in the Armageddon against the whites.

Grim said: "It just initially appeared that he was going to be the really difficult one to nail and other measures had to be brought in to snag him."

Yes, those other measures were named Linda Kasabian.

grimtraveller said...

David said...

I hope no one here took my post to suggest that

Not at all. I often deal in what I call "logical conclusions" {probably partly why 1971 had a go at me for constantly reading things into what people in the case said} and that was the logical conclusion of what Starviego was getting at. Star may not have thought of it that way....but that's the logical conclusion from where I stood.

simon davis said...

I'm not sure the Hitler stuff was all that stupid. I've been struck time and time again by the Hitlerism in the Manson Family

What I thought was stupid was VB's comparisons of Charlie with Hitler as though the things he mentioned couldn't be found in plenty of other people and therefore trying to guarantee Charlie a special kind of evil. I've long felt that was unnecessary. Charlie did have warm feelings about Hitler but what do VB's parallels prove or what were they trying to prove ? There are parallels between Hitler and Idi Amin.

Manson Mythos said...

@brownrice

invented them on instruments created by whites


MM, look into where instrumentss such as guitars and drums originated.
But even if your point is right, that's like saying that if I invent a dish made of certain vegetables not grown in England but only in Chile, that negates my creativity and somehow means that actually the Chileans really should get the credit or at least some of it.

Even still, if you consider blues a greater innovation than let's say classic like Wagner, well

If you play Wagner's music to someone who simply likes classical music but isn't interested in historical detail, all they'll hear is....classical music, you know, the strings, brass, woodwind, percussion, grandiose tunes all played on instruments that pre~exist Wagner's birth that he didn't invent. That someone White may have invented these instruments has nothing to do with Wagner. Some of them may have been Jewish.
Your point simply demonstrates that inventive innovators create with whatever they have to hand. Brownrice's point classically illustrates that when one looks at the development of popular music through the 20th century, the notion that "Black only knows what White has taught him" is manure so potent, I want it in my cotton field, massa !

if one looks at the current state of South Africa, many blacks are wishing it WOULD go back to the days when a white minority ruled over it

Do you actually know any ?
I think you'll find that many that are dissatisfied aren't of the mind to go back to apartheid, but rather, that their own who are seemingly bloody useless {to them} need to get their finger out and put measures in that improve peoples lives before there comes the kind of trouble that will leave the rest of the world gasping....

grimtraveller said...

David said...

an angel to aid in the Armageddon against the whites......Yes, those other measures were named Linda Kasabian

Sorry mate, I just couldn't resist. I tried...

David said...

Huh? Lost me, Grim.

starviego said...

grimtraveller said...
"The Black Muslims had no connection to the TLB murders."

Maybe not, but the connection is where you find it. Found amongst the Folger possessions in the Tate house were what was described as " civil rights placards ."

At the Hinman crime scene Beausoleil says they took a pile of his " radical literature " and set fire to it the middle of the room.

Was there perhaps a hidden political motive that they didn't want to get into? Why did BB go back to the crime scene and attempt to erase the blood writing on the wall. I think it was because of the work "political" in 'political piggy.' That got a little too close to the truth.

The FBI targeted actress Jean Seberg because she gave money to the BP cause, driving her to eventual suicide. They targeted activist and producer Dan Freed and activist Shirley Sutherland(wife of Donald) with false arrest and jail because of their support for the BPs. Could someone have targeted Folger or Tate in the same fashion and for the same reasons? Certainly Folger was very active politically, but you don't hear a lot about that, now do you? Let's talk about the MDA in her blood instead!

simon davis said...

Hmmmm good points Starviego, but I still think the BM connection is tenuous.

Folger was a social worker/philanthropist, so civil rights placards were her tools of trade in 1969. They don't necessarily speak of active connections with BP's do they ?

That said, you might be able to help me here on the BB/return to scene of crime thing. Everyone seems to take it as read that BB did return to the scene to erase the writing. BB is generally a very dishonest unreliable witness. I'm puzzled that everyone seems to unquestioningly accept that he went back. Do we necessarily believe he went back? You've reminded me I've got to do some re-reading if this. If I recall, this part first came out from DeCarlo's testimony or police interview ??

starviego said...

simon davis said...
Folger was a social worker/philanthropist, so civil rights placards were her tools of trade in 1969. They don't necessarily speak of active connections with BP's do they ?


What did the 'civil rights' placards say? "Tom Bradley for Mayor" or was it "Free the Panther 21?"


BB: I'm puzzled that everyone seems to unquestioningly accept that he went back. ... If I recall, this part first came out from DeCarlo's testimony or police interview ??

I think everybody agrees that BB went back.


Danny DeCarlo interview by Sgt Paul Whitely, Nov 19, 1969
http://www.cielodrive.com/updates/coming-january-13th-14th-audio-archives-danny-decarlo-interviewed-by-the-los-angeles-county-sheriffs-department/
After he had told me what he had done, they went back to the house. To wipe all that stuff off of the wall.

DeCarlo testimony at first BB trial, Nov 24, 1969
http://www.cielodrive.com/bobby-beausoleil-trial-11-24-69.php#dc2
Q: Did Bobby say anything to you about going back to the house after the stabbing?
A: Yes, sir. They went back there to wipe off the writing they put on the wall.
Q: Did they wipe anything else other than just the writing?
A: They wanted to clean the house up extra good, but it was mostly to take the writing off the wall.

From the 2005 parole hearing:
http://cielodrive.com/bobby-beausoleil-parole-hearing-2005.php
Defendant later told Brunner he went back to the house to remove the paw print he had drawn in blood on the wall and the house smelled and Hinman's body was decomposing



simon davis said...

Ah well see there we might have the answer to this rather puzzling bit of evidence.

You see, all of those things are BB telling people he went back, and why. In fact the third one is, unless I'm mistaken, a third party's account of what Brunner said Beausoleil said. That's like third hand hearsay, actually probably fourth hand. Moreover, they are hardly consistent. So none of it is exactly what you would call reliable or incontrovertible.

However, I can discern a plausible thread that might run through them and represent the truth. A plausible balancing of all of those snippets, and another one I have read to the effect "they went back to wipe for prints", is that that is exactly what they did - wipe for prints, which means they wanted to wipe the paw print, which indeed was later found to be BB's print/s. HOWEVER, they did not go back to wipe the writing (smeared on with a towel I believe - check). You see, I can't work out why he would write those words and then return to erase them. I can see why he would want to return to erase the paw print. I'm beginning to think that was the reason they went back. Now he might have thought in a spur-of-the-moment way "well I might as well try to erase the writing too". But the initial and main purpose of the return was to erase prints, including paw print.

Associated with this, although I'm not sure how far I can take this, if you look at the police photos of the writing, there doesn't seem to be any sign of an attempt to wipe the writing - might have another look at that actually).

Thoughts ?

simon davis said...

Starviego, you've forgotten I'm non-American and stupid LOL !

The thing about Tom Bradley is lost on me. He was a black politician/mayor? Can you elucidate your point ?

Cheers

orwhut said...

Concerning Robert's comment about needing a jury of college graduates with history degrees. I'm afraid I qualify for that jury and I'd consider committing a felony to keep from being sequestered for seven months.

David said...

Starviego said: "What did the 'civil rights' placards say?"

I am unfamiliar with the source of the 'civil rights' placards but assume it is in one of the police reports. But doesn't the very nature of the description of the placards and your argument suggest they had nothing to do with Black Radicals/Muslims?

"Civil Rights': as the quote from Bobby Seal points out and as MM has pointed out the BPP did not consider themselves to be 'civil rights' activists. They viewed themselves as 'revolutionaries' at least Elaine Brown did. Isn't it more likely the placards may have referenced the Voting Rights Act of 1965- register to vote. Or wouldn't the LAPD have used words like 'radical' 'extremist' 'revolutionary' or more directly 'Black Panther'? And if they were 'Panther' oriented then, as you say, wouldn't the US Organization (a hit on BPP supporters) have been on the suspect list given the January 17, 1969 assassinations of Bunchy Carter and John Huggins? Would they care which 'Black Revolutionary/Muslim' group they pinned it on, especially when they had US dead to rights on the Carter hit? Why would they 'protect/cover up' both sides of a BM civil war?

starviego said...

simon davis said...
The thing about Tom Bradley is lost on me. He was a black politician/mayor?

In 1969 he was a city councilman who ran against the incumbent for mayor. He was the first black person to do so. He lost that election, but came back in '72 and won.

starviego said...

David said...
Isn't it more likely the placards may have referenced the Voting Rights Act of 1965- register to vote. Or wouldn't the LAPD have used words like 'radical' 'extremist' 'revolutionary' or more directly 'Black Panther'?

Well if it really was a drug burn, wouldn't the LAPD have used words like 'drug burn?'

Come on, David, sometimes people lie and cover-up.

starviego said...

simon davis said...
"they went back to wipe for prints", is that that is exactly what they did - wipe for prints

For all we know, the incriminating partial palm print(not a fingerprint) found on the kitchen door frame, the print used to convict him, was left at this second visit to the Hinman house.

Manson Mythos said...

I suspect some loose lips revealed too much info about the Hinman episode and details of the scene, which caused a need to go back and undo some parts. If for example, Susan and/or Mary were running their mouths about the writing on the wall and it quickly spread around the ranch, that would be reason to go back and wipe it away.

If somebody was a rat and told police that so and so said they wrote something in blood with a paw print and there was indeed that at the scene, they would know they got their people. If that was later removed from the scene, the person would be discredited.

simon davis said...

And I suppose the lips didn't come much looser than Susan Atkins. Although Bobby himself was pretty garrulous. Great point MM. I'm beginning to understand the Hinman murder, better late than never.

Starviego I agree too, the prints could have been left on the second visit for all we know.

simon davis said...

That's quite exciting actually. Perhaps you all have already covered this, but what MM says pulls together some of the known, but hitherto unconnected, parts of the story.

I guess you need to assume for these purposes that Charlie masterminded it all, and the disciples were all amateur first time crims - which they were - but it looks to me like a plausible sequence of events was:


- BB comes back from Hinman and brags about it to DeCarlo, Atkins is probably blabbing away to everyone about it;

- Charlie gets wind of the loose lips, tells them "you idiots, don't talk about it, only thing you can do now is go back and wipe off the paw prints/writing. And get rid of the Fiat too." (known that Charlie said this);

- BB returns to Hinman, tries to wipe off writing, neglects to dispense with Fiat, instead goes driving around in it and is caught. Charlie tears his hair out - "I told him to get rid of the Fiat" (known).

- as a result of what happens after Hinman, when the disciples return from Tate, the immediate de-brief includes an instruction to not say anything about it (known);

- when Atkins and Van Houten have their first discussions with police, they are trying hard not to talk (Atkins I think refuses to go on tape at first, and Van Houten plays cat and mouse with officers Burdick and McGann), but before long both start saying things - their natural impetuosity, attention-seeking, whatever, takes over (all known).

ziggyosterberg said...


Come back, Mario!

grimtraveller said...

David said...

Huh? Lost me, Grim.

Just me being obscure ¬> MM sometimes quizzically enquires how convenient it was for Bugliosi to have Linda as the angel among a group of devils and Charlie's trial was an armageddon of sorts and he's long been vocal about being White.
It's lost me too ! ☺ ☺

starviego said...

Was there perhaps a hidden political motive that they didn't want to get into?

There was a political motive that the cops missed ~ it was called Helter skelter !

Why did BB go back to the crime scene and attempt to erase the blood writing on the wall. I think it was because of the word "political" in 'political piggy.'

And those on the other bank of the river could say it was the 'piggy' in 'political piggy.'
I think it was nothing more simple as second thoughts once the immediate aftermath had passed and BB had taken stock of what was being said and what was going on.
For me, going to wipe away prints doesn't make a great deal of sense given that all three were friends of Gary, yet they did so. It points to an impending panic/paranoia on Bobby's part, almost paralleling Charlie at this point in the aftermath of the Lotsapoppa shoot. Interesting that both of them should run off for days {in Bobby's case, intending to} to clear their heads as the pressure mounted. Bobby was also in the position of having gotten three different women pregnant at this point so he may well have been in something of a tizz.

simon davis said...

I still think the BM connection is tenuous

I still think that is being extremely generous !

I'm puzzled that everyone seems to unquestioningly accept that he went back. Do we necessarily believe he went back?

I'll tell you why I believe it.
Mary Brunner in her police interview said Bobby told her he'd gone back. Danny DeCarlo and Mary both mentioned how Bobby said he could hear the maggots eating Gary. That's consistent with the physical evidence {I have been paying attention, David !} that the Police found and the ME reported on. How could Danny and Mary know about the maggots eating Gary if Bobby hadn't said something ? Well, maybe it was a lucky guess, but their statements seem to be corroborated by the findings of the cops and ME.
Interestingly, Mary says it was the paw print that Bobby went to get rid of because her and Susan had already wiped the house over before they'd left when Gary died.

starviego said...

Well if it really was a drug burn, wouldn't the LAPD have used words like 'drug burn?'

No, but they did use their own equivalent words.

Come on, David, sometimes people lie and cover-up

Sure, no dispute about that. Except that it didn't happen in this case.

starviego said...

For all we know, the incriminating partial palm print(not a fingerprint) found on the kitchen door frame, the print used to convict him...

I don't think that was used to convict him. The Police found a letter dated Nov'67 in the house that was addressed to Bobby so it was known he'd been there. If he'd lived there it wouldn't be unusual that he'd have prints there as a visitor. Driving the man's car and having a knife in the tyre well and lying to the Police all the way along the line on August 6/7th however.....

David said...

Grim said: "It's lost me too !"

But you did do a commendable job on the explanation.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said...

I suspect some loose lips revealed too much info about the Hinman episode and details of the scene, which caused a need to go back and undo some parts. If for example, Susan and/or Mary were running their mouths about the writing on the wall and it quickly spread around the ranch, that would be reason to go back and wipe it away

That's a great shout and backed up by Leslie to Marvin Part:

MISS VAN HOUTEN: I knew that three of us ~ Do you want me to give the names? ~ Bobby and Mary and Sadie went to Gary Hinman’s to get some money. And anything else he had. And him.
And if he wouldn’t ~ and if he wouldn’t come, they were going to kill him.
And he didn’t come.
But they were there for a lot of days. And they would call up, and they were real scared and everything.
And Charles went over there one night to tell them to, you know, relax, because he could ~ he could keep his cool.
But I would never call him villainous, even though all this has happened.
And then he came back, and about the next day I think the rest came back, and they said that they had killed him.

MR. PART: Who said that?

MISS VAN HOUTEN: Sadie. Sadie came in grinning saying, “We killed him.”
And then I asked her what it was like, you know; and she just said that it was real weird and he made funny noises.

MR. PART: All right. There’s been some talk that at one time Charlie Manson had gone over there and cut off Hinman’s ear.
Would you comment on that if you know anything about it; and also would you comment on anything that Sadie or Bobby Beausoleil said about the actual killing.

MISS VAN HOUTEN: Yeah. Charlie went over there ~
I heard from someone ~ I don’t remember who ~ that Charlie had gone over there and cut off Gary’s ear, and that he had come back.
That’s when I said, in just a little bit before, when Charlie went over there that’s what happened.
And I guess that all I ever really heard about it was they had a hard time killing him; that he wouldn’t die, and that ~ I don’t even remember who actually did the killing or not. I never got that straight.


I'm also reminded of a part in "Helter Skelter" where the author reports that Kitty told Sergeants Whitley and Guenther that she'd "heard" that Charlie had sent Bobby & Susan to Gary's to get some money from him. She says she couldn't remember who told her, "just that it was the talk of the ranch."
The coming months would demonstrate just how loose the lips were around Spahn and how the talk of the ranch was to be instrumental in undoing the world the Family had cultivated.

David said...

Grim said: "The coming months would demonstrate just how loose the lips were around Spahn and how the talk of the ranch was to be instrumental in undoing the world the Family had cultivated."

It has always struck me that the killers don't seem to think they did anything wrong. The most obvious example is the LVH-Part interview. But Atkins/Cabellero or Atkins' story to Graham or even reports about Kasabian post murders and her initial comments.

Now I don't mean the 'cold' statements like 'you're going to die, bitch'- as in 'no remorse'. There is an absence of 'it was horrible' until Kasabian testifies and Goldman and Fleischmann had told her she'd never see her kids grow up and explained to her how the gas chamber works. There is no recognition of 'wrong'- even from the 'non-killer' witnesses. Even years later on a TV show. 'They had to die.' It is that simple (and death is meaningless).

The impression I get is they truly did not think they had done anything wrong.

This may partially explain why Manson 'took them back' or was willing to 'take them back'. How could you fault someone for telling about something they thought was right. It may also explain why they talked- despite what they later said (once sober).

If someone really believes in your murderous delusion how could you turn on them- 'What did I do wrong Charlie?'

Which he answered- 'nothing'.

grimtraveller said...

David said...

the BPP did not consider themselves to be 'civil rights' activists. They viewed themselves as 'revolutionaries' at least Elaine Brown did

That made me look twice. My wife's sister is called Elaine Brown !

simon davis said...

And I suppose the lips didn't come much looser than Susan Atkins

While true, I'm fascinated that Leslie gets away with not being seen as loose lipped. Even before her indictment and the Incendiary Marvin Part tape {which, let's face it was confidential} she was dropping little bombs all over the place for LE that acted as significant encouragements that they were on the right track.

starviego said...

Hendrickson was already hinting at the influence of the black convicts on Charlie's philosophy in his movie released in '72

It was an enduring theme with Robert and I used to enjoy our sparring matches {such as they were} on the subject. From time to time he'd conflate Islam, Black Muslims and Family/Mansonian insight. But I found that there was almost always a road leading to LBJ and Vietnam and that this was where his main foundation lay in terms of this case.

His movie also had snippets of an interview with Charlie's prison bud Phil Phillips, who I think had a great deal to say about Charlie. You won't hear about him in Bugliosi's book, though

There is a long interview/transcript in "Death to pigs" with Phil Phillips and it's a great and very revealing piece. But it essentially mirrors what was included in "HS" anyway. Charlie's insightful skills in listening to and reading other people, his mind games, his use of LSD and the way he utilized it in breaking peoples comfort with their world and replacing it with the milieu of Charlie, his desire to get a musical career off the ground, the more positive aspect of his relationships with Black people; it's all there in the book if you wanna get close enough for rock'n'roll.

The DA avoided the whole subject like the plague

Because it wasn't relevant. It would be like you discussing your exam success and someone from the publishers of one of the text books you used coming forth and saying "hey, what about our credit ?? We wrote 'X' book you know ! It played a major part in you getting your good results.."

David said...

And that might explain why the wheels came off.

If so, there is a certain irony to that: Manson's influence created people who truly thought they did nothing wrong which would then lead to his undoing.

And perhaps created a motive he, personally, didn't embrace (I think he did), which led directly to his conviction by creating a 'conspiracy' dozens actually embraced and he preached. A 'sales pitch' heard by dozens that imbedded in the acid soaked brains of more then a few.

Yet another way Manson convicted himself.

Just my current thoughts.

grimtraveller said...

David said...

It has always struck me that the killers don't seem to think they did anything wrong

I must admit, I rather see that as a divided group. I think Pat and Tex {interestingly, the older duo} did see it that way, if Pat's words to Leslie are anything to go by {"She said that they had murdered five people; that they didn’t know there were going to be that many at the house; and they didn’t know who the people were; and there were a whole lot of them.
And it happened so quick, and it was a horrible thing. You know, she was shaken up by it"} and Tex's actions out in one of the desert towns when he hid from a policeman.
But Leslie and Susan were something else. MM said that Leslie was trying to alter her voice in the Marvin Part interview but she sounds lucid to me. Her words come across all the more powerfully because she simply can't see she's done something wrong and admits that she'd do the whole thing again in the same breath as saying that Montezuma's people were waiting for them under Death Valley.
MR. PART: Leslie, if you could turn the clock back and go back that night that you asked Charlie to go along with him to kill the LaBiancas, although you didn’t know who was going to be killed, dear, would you do it again?

MISS VAN HOUTEN: Yes, I would. I can’t ~ I can’t feel sorry for what I’ve done.

MR. PART: You’d do it again even if you thought you were going to get caught and be in the same position you are now?

MISS VAN HOUTEN: Yeah. Like, you know, I hope I can ~ I hope I can walk, you know, out, or that I can ~ in other words, I want to be free. But I’m not afraid to die.


To be fair, she does also say "Sometimes I doubt it, and then I get nervous and shakey and everything" but by and large she truly believed that what she did not so much wasn't wrong, but was right. And as such actually harboured a hope that she wouldn't go down for it.
Whoa.

Bobby, Bruce, Mary and Clem didn't seem to have thought what they did was wrong. But I ask myself this sometimes, how many murderers actually do ? So many killers attempt to justify what they've done which indicates that although they might think society at large regards what they've done as wrong, they don't necessarily.

grimtraveller said...

David said...

And that might explain why the wheels came off.

If so, there is a certain irony to that: Manson's influence created people who truly thought they did nothing wrong which would then lead to his undoing


I love some of the ironies of the case and that's one of them. By preaching to them that there was no wrong, there is no death, yet telling them to say nothing after their murderous actions, the power of his mystical preaching overrode the practical good sense in shutting up and because the significant members believed in the word of Charlie, it was virtually impossible for them to shut up and not tell anyone. Just like Christ's followers recorded in the book of Acts saying "we're compelled to speak of the things God is doing. We can't not !"
Bugliosi says that he found himself focusing on the last verse of Revelation 9 about those people that continued to do wrong not repenting of their wrongful actions. And with good reason, because what that biblical passage has in mind is that the people being spoken of did not believe that what they were engaging in was wrong. Ditto those Family members that continued to breathe the ethos. Robert's book drips with that thinking. Into the 80s and 90s and beyond that thought still abounded.
I wonder if Charlie ever sat in his cell and thought "I've created a friggin' monster !"

simon davis said...

Atkins, Van Houten and Krenwinkel were seriously and deeply devoted to Helter Skelter. It took until the end of 1972 before LVH and PK started considering the POSSIBILITY that it might not happen (i.e. the HS revolution). Atkins a little later (probably). For a few years of incarceration, they continued to believe they had been right for at least having tried. And all the while they were having pretty intensive counselling about the folly of it all.

Jenn said...

Manson Mythos wrote:

"Despite the crime scene having a number of clues that would lead one to come to the conclusion that black radicals were responsible (the use of the word "Pig"...."
The use of the word "pig" to describe both law enforcement and people of privilege was not at all associated with "black radicals" exclusively in 1969. Not even close.

David said...

Jenn, I'm glad someone pointed that out. He probably got the from Bobby Seals quote and missed Rubin et al nominating a pig for president.

starviego said...

grimtraveller said...
MISS VAN HOUTEN: I knew that three of us ... went to Gary Hinman’s to get some money. And anything else he had. And him.
And if he wouldn’t ~ and if he wouldn’t come, they were going to kill him.
And he didn’t come.


I don't recall any of the three there ever describing any attempt to get Gary to join the Family. From what I gather, they spent about 10 minutes with small talk, and then BB pulled the gun and demanded money. From that point on the die was cast.

But that's just one of many anomalies about the Hinman killing:

1 - If they thought Gary had an inheritance of $20k, did they expect to find it in cash? There was talk of stocks and bonds, and of Gary signing over the house. But to turn all that into cash would have taken time with Gary having to leave the house and go to the bank, etc.

2 - What was the point of having Gary sign over the vehicles, and then the Family attempting to sell the VW bus? They would have been(and were) traced right back to the Ranch!

3 - Why did they wait a day and a half to kill Hinman? Somehow I get the feeling there were waiting on something, but what?

3 - BB got caught with the dead man's stolen vehicle, with the murder weapon, and with blood on his clothes. A full week after the murder. BB said he was in a mental fog--but could he have been that confused? And where was he in that week?


The murder of Hinman was either the most poorly planned-out crime ever, or there is something they are not telling us.


/


grimtraveller said...

Jenn said...

The use of the word "pig" to describe both law enforcement and people of privilege was not at all associated with "black radicals" exclusively in 1969. Not even close

And for some back up on that, just check out the song "Meridian Leeward" by Nazz which was part of the sessions recorded in late'68/early'69 for the LP "Nazz Nazz" and starts with the words "I'm a human being now, but I used to be a pig..."

starviego said...

I don't recall any of the three there ever describing any attempt to get Gary to join the Family

It doesn't really matter. In 1969 Leslie was of that impression and she was part of them. My quoting her was simply to demonstrate that at Spahn, people "heard" things and people "heard" things because people talked.
That said, on December 4th, almost 4 weeks before Leslie's words to Marvin Part, Mary Brunner, who had been part of the shindig at Gary's, told detectives this:
SERGEANT WHITELEY: What did you do all day while you were waiting around?

MS. BRUNNER: Well, we were kind of thinking, you know, Gary would heal up and, see, it was, we didn't even know what to do because we were afraid to go leave him the way he was, you know, because we knew he was going to charge us with assault and we talked to him about him coming with us to the desert and, just stayed around.


so make of that what you will.

Why did they wait a day and a half to kill Hinman? Somehow I get the feeling there were waiting on something, but what?

Money. If you think about it, in a short space of time, they'd seen Tex net $2700 from Lotsapoppa, Linda $5000 from Charles Melton, Juanita Wildebush had handed over $10,000, Sandy supposedly $6000 and money had at various times come from cards that Pat & Brooks had from their parents. It's documented that people gave Charlie things {piano, sword, motorbike} and so the Family weren't exactly opposed to material wealth at various points, even if it were just for practical purposes. And they were mildly persistent....a little waiting hurt nobody. Kind of. There was also a dose of healthy competition. It often came up how one would see such and such being done and would want to get in on the act, Leslie and Ouisch being immediate examples.
They had the whiff of money.

starviego said...



grimtraveller said...
Money. If you think about it, in a short space of time, they'd seen Tex net $2700 from Lotsapoppa, Linda $5000 from Charles Melton, Juanita Wildebush had handed over $10,000, Sandy supposedly $6000..

So how much did they get from the Hinman murder? $20? Someone didn't think this one through all the way...

simon davis said...

Starviego, you gave us the option of most poorly thought out crime ever, or there's something they're not telling us. I go for the former. (At least one of the worst I've ever heard of).

Not much different to Crowe or TLB or Shea. They were all Keystone cops types of affairs, but without the humour.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said...


So how much did they get from the Hinman murder? $20? Someone didn't think this one through all the way...

Well what do you expect when the leader of the outfit was of the opinion;
"You know, I don’t have any philosophy. My philosophy is 'don’t think.' You know, you just don’t think. If you think, you are divided in your mind. You know, one and one is one in two parts. Like I don’t have any thought in my mind, hardly any at all, it is all love.
If you love everything, you don’t have to think about things ~ you just love it. Whatever circumstances had to you, whatever dealer deals you, whatever hand you get handed, you just love the hand you got, you know, and make it the best you can."
?
Fact of the matter is that the Family's main crimes, the ones they ended up becoming famous for were all poorly thought out. And again I'll say it, their leader and grand poohbah was a petty criminal who spent most of his career as a criminal getting caught. There's something chillingly logical about the outcome of the Family's criminal pursuits.

simon davis said...

They were clowns. Crime at its best is laced with stupidity. But this lot were complete idiots, even Charlie. Beausoleil ? Fancy driving Hinman's Fiat around - with the knife on board ! Incredible ! Going back to the scene. Breathtaking really.

ziggyosterberg said...


Any significance to Bobby and Charlie both heading up towards the Bay area after the Hinman murder?

Maybe Bobby was supposed to meet up with Manson at Esalen, before heading off to ditch Hinman's car at the Black Panther Party Headquarters in Oakland?

starviego said...

ziggyosterberg said...
Any significance to Bobby and Charlie both heading up towards the Bay area after the Hinman murder?
Maybe Bobby was supposed to meet up with Manson at Esalen, before heading off to ditch Hinman's car at the Black Panther Party Headquarters in Oakland?

I like the way you think!

Maybe BB had already met up with Charlie, and was on his way back when he got arrested?

And those two 'hitchhikers' that Manson was with when he picked up Stephanie Schram? Could they have been Beausoleil and/or Bruce Davis?

It is almost impossible to find out where these guys were in the fist week of Aug, '69.


/

starviego said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
starviego said...


starviego said...
The ONLY one who tried to implicate the Black radicals was Beausoleil, in his interview with cops after his arrest on Aug 6. I have across NO other interviews with any Family members who tried that gambit.

I qualify that by adding this comment from Kitty Lutesinger:

"On August 10, Sunday, Sergeant William Gleason of the Los Angeles sheriff's office visited Kitty Lutesinger at her parent's ranch... Sergeant Gleason was compiling a file of disturbing information about the Spahn Ranch preparing for a huge police raid to come the following week. ... During the conversation she asked him if it had been the "Panthers" who had committed the so-called Tate murders. He replied that it didn't appear that any blacks were involved. "I had been programmed to believe it was the Panthers who did it," Kitty recalled."
(Sanders, The Family, pg339, original edition)

So here was a witness who tied Charlie, the Panthers, and the Tate murders all together just a day after the murders. Just another lead not followed up.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said...

The ONLY one who tried to implicate the Black radicals was Beausoleil, in his interview with cops after his arrest on Aug 6. I have across NO other interviews with any Family members who tried that gambit

Yet isn't it strange that the very tactic that was supposed to be the defining clue and kick off of HS {ie, blame it on the Blacks} is the one that Bobby tried. It is either a great coincidence, a startling example of morphic resonance or he had absorbed more of Charlie's ideas than he cared to admit by the time of his parole hearings.

So here was a witness who tied Charlie, the Panthers, and the Tate murders all together just a day after the murders. Just another lead not followed up

Where in that statement does she tie Charlie to Tate ?
Secondly, that wasn't the only "lead" {if it could even be described thus} not followed as we know from the incident involving Jess Buckles the magnificent. And the day after that, the lead about the words from Beatle lyrics appearing on the LaBianca walls weren't followed up. A few leads weren't followed up straight away because they didn't look remotely like leads. Why would Gleason imagine it was a lead to be checked out because some runaway hippie chick asked if the Panthers had done the Tate killings ? Members of the public and reporters were asking all sorts of questions and at that time the Police didn't have a clue what was going on ~ but whether LASO or LAPD, they did know a good suspect was in custody.
In any case, the Police did later check out Black connections.
They got nothing.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said...


I like the way you think!


Only because you previously suggested the possible meeting of Bobby and Charlie on the Frisco headed highway in a previous post ! ☺ ☺ ☺

starviego said...


grimtraveller said...
Where in that statement does she tie Charlie to Tate?

MAYBE if the copper had just asked a few more questions the whole "Helter Skelter" theory would have come pouring out.

In any case, the Police did later check out Black connections.

Now that simply is not the case, Grim.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said...

MAYBE if the copper had just asked a few more questions the whole "Helter Skelter" theory would have come pouring out

Why ? Why would the cop have any inkling that Kitty would have been in any way connected with the people that actually did commit the murders the day after it happened ? Even when Kitty was approached about Bobby, Hinman, Charlie and co, HS didn't come out. Even when she knew that there had been involvement in murder ~ which wasn't the case on August 10th as she'd left {for the first time} over a week previously.

Grimtraveller said In any case, the Police did later check out Black connections

Now that simply is not the case, Grim


Oh, but Star, it is.
The 2nd Tate progress report makes that clear.
What is also the case is that it doesn't chime with your theories.