Monday, August 14, 2017

Deconstructing Pete Porteous

As everybody gears up over the next couple of years for the Big Fifty it will quickly become evident how much attention this case still attracts after almost half a century. Right now there are probably at least a half dozen projects in the works designed to capitalize on the Golden Anniversary of the Tate-LaBianca murders. Whether it’s books, television, movies, or independent documentaries it is obvious that a market still exists for the TLB Brand and that people are still happy to spend their attention and money on it. But unfortunately there are also people who want to cash in on all of that attention and money. And so in a situation like this you not only have people who want to pay attention but you also have people who want to get it. Therefore, keep an eye out in the coming months for never-before-heard-of childhood friends, old school chums, long-forgotten roommates, distant family members, former neighbors, brief, one-time acquaintances, and any and all manner of other such alleged ancillary characters to the case who want to get a slice of the Death to Piggies Pie. The big problem, though, is that many of these purported peripherals to the case will be imposters. And a prime example of such a mistaken individual is Pete Porteous, the Hollywood stuntman who claims that as a ten-year-old boy he was mentored into the stuntman profession by Donald Jerome “Shorty” Shea at Spahn’s Movie Ranch during the summer of 1969. Porteous’s recollections are particularly remarkable because among them are his memories of being present at the ranch when Charles Manson was beaten up on several occasions by stuntman associates of Shea.

Pete Porteous

Below is a slightly abbreviated version of Porteous’ story as it appeared here on the MF Blog in January of 2015 (You can read the entire article here.):

I Learned to be a Stuntman from Shorty Shea

[Introduction Clipped]

“I would ride to Spahn Ranch on my mini-bike between the ages of 9 or 10 without my mother's knowledge. I was a bit of a black sheep to begin with, but after my dad bought me that mini-bike I was outta control. We lived on the corner of Elizondo Ave. and Currant Ave in Simi Valley.  A flood control wash was right across the street that runs right through the center of Simi. I rode that about 10 miles or so on the hard-packed parts. Then I rode a small service road along the railroad tracks for a few miles to Santa Susana Pass Rd.

“I was fascinated with stuntmen and I wanted to be one even at that early age. I knew Charlie (Manson) by sight and name, but I thought he was a stuntman. I figured everyone at the ranches were stuntmen. I already knew a couple of them from a neighboring ranch called Corriganville Movie Ranch - specifically Jimmy Babcock, Monte Laird and Joe Soto. Those guys would also frequently be at Spahn to do stunts for the various B movies that were filmed there.

[Cut]

“It was actually Charlie who introduced me to Shorty. I asked Charlie how to become a stuntman and he said, "First you have to be one" (He always talked in riddles). He also said, "You'll want to talk to Shorty". So that's when my career as a stuntman first began. My time with him lasted four or five months.

“Shorty was a great guy. He taught me everything like how to take a saddle fall, how to throw a punch and how to take a punch. Most of my friends played sports, but I hung around Shorty. He took the time to show me things. He took a liking to me and an interest in teaching me. He also didn't treat me like a kid. He treated me like an equal. In exchange, I worked for him. I did things like clean horse stalls and other things. For instance, sometimes a ranch customer would be out for a ride and get off the horse to urinate and the horse would run away. So, part of the job was to go find that horse. I really liked it, even cleaning the stalls. If I got there early enough I got to help feed the horses. I loved things like that. My dad was a city boy and didn't like horses but I loved it. I liked cleaning and being a cowboy.

“Charlie was always nice to me. He sometimes would ask to ride my mini-bike. I'd let him and he'd tear around on it and seemed to have fun like a little kid. But, Shorty didn't like Charlie and didn't want me near him. He said, "If you play with a bucket of shit long enough, you're gonna get some on ya". I know that people have the idea that Charlie was in charge of the ranch, but he wasn't. The wranglers thought he was a clown. They laughed at him - never took him seriously. Monte Laird slapped the shit out of Manson twice that I know about. I got there shortly after the first one. I witnessed the second, and Laird sure bloodied him up. I also saw Joe Soto throttle Manson good one day. You gotta remember, these guys were a different breed. If you pissed them off they didn't wonder "hey will this guy call the cops?" No, they'd rough you up and just laugh. Those guys were tougher than any bikers. I know that there are folks out there who see Manson as some mysterious guru, but he was a joke to those guys. I wound up having a long relationship with Joe Soto. From the time I met him as a kid at Corriganville Ranch until he passed away in 2009 at age 80.

“The only other Manson Family person that I had any real exposure to was Tex. The thing I remember best was that he'd take us for ice cream. He had a pickup truck and we'd all (mostly kids and teenage girls) pile in the bed (since it wasn't illegal back then). Tex would spin the truck out leaving the ranch and we'd all slide around and bang into the sides and laugh. He was almost like a kid when we'd go on those ice cream rides. He was always nice to me.



“I remember some of the girls, but I don't remember any of their names because I mostly hung around with the wranglers. I do though remember that sometimes they made brownies and would give me some. I also remember that they liked to take gum wrappers and fold them up to connect to each other and make chains. They had some really long ones going!

“One day I got up early and went to Spahn Ranch because I wanted to help feed the horses. When I got there Shorty wasn't around and the horses had not been fed, so I did it. When I finished I saw Charlie talking to Tex and another guy. I asked about Shorty and Charlie said, "He went away on a trip." When I asked when he'd be back he said he probably wouldn't be back. I was very hurt. Shorty was my teacher and more importantly, my friend. He was also the first adult friend I ever had. It was the first time in my life that my heart was broken.

“I first heard about Shorty's demise at home. My mom watched the news every evening because the Vietnam war was on and we had relatives over there. This one night the ranch was on the news. Miss Pearl (Ruby Pearl) was being interviewed. She said she was worried about Shorty and feared something very very bad had happened…”

Pete Porteous (right) with Eric Estrada (left) at a reunion for the CHiPs television program in Las Vegas, Nevada

Porteous’s story might sound reasonable enough on its face, but once you start to think about it for more than a few minutes it starts to fall apart quickly and completely. The important thing to consider here are the various demonstrable timelines for the persons who were involved with the alleged events that Porteous describes. To begin with, Porteous says that his time as Shorty Shea’s shadow lasted “four or five months.”  Since Shea’s own time ended at the end of August, 1969, four or five months earlier than that (five, to use the outside time estimate) would take us back to the beginning of April, 1969. April through August 1969 — that is the timeline into which Porteous has locked the duration of his alleged association with Donald Shea at Spahn’s Ranch.

Because Donald Shea disappeared on a fairly certain date and was presumed murdered, law enforcement officials put considerable effort into determining his actions in the weeks and months leading up to the date of that disappearance. The results of that effort were testified to by friends of Shea’s at the various trials of the persons eventually convicted of his murder, Charles Manson, Bruce Davis, and Steve Grogan. That testimony reveals an interesting fact, namely that for the vast majority of the time frame given by Pete Porteous as the period he associated with Donald Shea, Donald Shea was no nowhere near Spahn’s Ranch.

Perhaps a little background on Spahn’s Ranch and the situation there in the summer of 1969 would be helpful here. By August of 1969 the nominal “Movie Ranch” already had its best days behind it. Western movies and television shows were losing favor with the public and the demand for western sets for entertainment purposes was no longer great. (Nearby Corriganville, a much larger and more successful movie ranch than Spahn’s, closed its doors in 1965.) In 1969 Spahn’s Ranch mainly supported itself by renting out animals to outside events needing them (circuses and parades, for example) and by renting horses to riders who wanted to explore the rocky hills around the ranch in the Santa Susana Pass area. Spahn’s Ranch was not a bustling money-maker, but was rather a business that was barely getting by. This reality was evidenced by the fact that the wranglers who worked there were not paid any wages for their labors. Instead they got a place to sleep, meals to eat, and occasional cash allowances to buy such necessities as work clothes, gloves, and cigarettes. Spahn’s Ranch was not a place where anybody was likely to make a lot of money in show business, and thus there were no actual “stuntmen” hanging out there unless they had a real, paying job to perform, which, in the summer of 1969, none of them did. Most of the people who did work at the ranch could be classed as “down and outers,” people with nowhere else to go who were happy to exchange a day’s labor for a day’s place to stay. In August of 1969 Donald Shea was just such a person. He had no job, his wife had left him, and he was living in his car.

But what was Donald Shea doing before that? By examining the testimony of witnesses at the several murder trials held in connection with Shea’s disappearance we can construct a fairly complete timeline of where Donald Shea was before his arrival at Spahn’s Ranch in the middle of August, 1969.

We know from trial testimony from various prosecution witnesses that in the summer of 1968 Shea spent some time working at a salt manufacturing facility in the Vallejo, California area before returning to Los Angeles in the latter part of the year and taking up residence at Jerry Binder’s house at 8010 Hollywood Boulevard. Jerry Binder was a longtime friend and frequent employer of Donald Shea. He often let Shea live in his residences and loaned him money on many occasions when Shea had the need.

While staying at Binder’s Hollywood house Shea helped Binder with his mail order business selling adult literature and novelties from out of the house. Business was good, so Binder set up several shops where such merchandise could be purchased in person. Shea helped Binder with the setup of one such store in Las Vegas and then began working at Binder’s L.A. enterprise, the Hollywood Shopper book store.

Jerry Binder’s house on Hollywood Boulevard where Donald Shea lived in the spring of 1969

At some point in “the beginning of ’69,” according to Jerry Binder, Donald Shea was back in Las Vegas assisting with the physical work (setting up shelves, hanging signs, doing fixit work, etc.) involved with launching several of Binder's adult-oriented retail enterprises (the Swingers Boutique, the House of Paperbacks, and Book City) in the city. Shea worked at several of Binder’s retail outlets, waiting on customer and doing other odd jobs around the premises. At one of Binder’s establishments Shea was entrusted with keys to the business and acted as a sort of assistant manager. By April he was back in L.A. and hired by another friend of Binder’s, a Mr. Bromberg, to work at one of Bromberg’s drinking establishments. This time sequence is established in the testimony at the Grogan trial for Donald Shea’s murder when defense attorney Charles Weedman asked Binder when Shea started working in Bromberg’s beer bar:

“Do you recall when Mr. Shea was hired by Mr. Bromberg for the first time to work at one of his beer bars?”

“I can’t recall the exact date, no,” Binder replied.

“If I told you that it was around May of 1969 would that be…. substantially correct in your judgment?“

“No, I don’t think it was that late. It was earlier than that.”

So, starting earlier than May 1969 Shea was working in one of Mr. Bromberg’s beer joints in Los Angeles and was not at Spahn’s Movie Ranch working as a cowboy or stuntman.

Jerry Binder testified that Shea started working at Binder’s Swingers Boutique adult entertainment store in Las Vegas from the end of May and for “a little over a month.” If Binder’s testimony is to be believed (and he was a prosecution witness) that means that Shea was not in Los Angeles (much less at Spahn’s Ranch) for almost all of June of 1969.

Shea must have been in Los Angeles at some point in June of 1969, though, because Spahn’s Ranch forewoman Ruby Pearl recalled seeing him not at the ranch but at her house on DeSoto Street in Chatsworth where he picked up some photographic negatives featuring him at various jobs that he wanted to have printed up as part of his job-seeking resume. Regardless of that brief encounter, however, Pearl must not have seen Shea at Spahn’s Ranch in June because if she had she would have so testified later.

Ruby Pearl

On July 1, 1969, while still in Las Vegas, Shea married Magdalene Velma “Nikki” Fuery, a black topless dancer he had met earlier in Carson, California. The couple immediately encountered problems in Vegas, mostly to do with the fact that not too many people were willing to rent housing to a biracial couple. Thus Shea’s wife then left for L.A., according to Jerry Binder, “after a couple or two [sic] weeks.” Shea followed her, Binder continued, on “approximately the 25th [of July] — no wait. It had to be around the 30th.” Again, if Binder’s testimony is believed, that means that Shea was not in Los Angeles (much less at Spahn’s Ranch) for all of July of 1969.

Shea’s precise whereabouts in the first weeks of August are not known, but we can determine from Ruby Pearl testimonies that although Shea had been an on again/off again habitué of Spahn’s Ranch for about fifteen years in the summer of 1969 she did not see him there until after the raid of August 16. From that time on Shea began living at the ranch in his car and she said she saw him on a daily basis. So, Shea apparently was not at Spahn’s Ranch during the first half of August.

All of this testimony presents a pretty convincing argument that Donald Shea was only sporadically in Los Angeles from late 1968 until mid-August of 1969 and that when Shea was in L.A. he was not at Spahn’s Ranch.

But still another indication that Shea was not in Los Angeles for the greater part of 1969 came in the testimony of Arch Hall, another Los Angeles-area friend of Shea’s who had loaned Shea money to buy a pair of matched western revolvers. Hall loaned Shea the money in August of 1968. Then, he didn’t hear from Shea again for a long time, which was unusual because when Shea was in Los Angeles he usually checked in with him at least every few weeks about employment opportunities.  At the Shea murder trial of Bruce Davis, L.A. Deputy District Attorney Stephen Kay asked Hall, “Now between the time that he purchased the guns from you in August of ’68 until the time he called in late July or early August ’69, had you heard from him?”

“No, I had not…. He said the he was very sorry that he hadn’t gotten back to take care of the payment [for the loan for the two guns]; and that he had been out of the [state] — I think he said he had been married in the meantime, and that he would come by in a few days and settle up and pick up the cameras and pay me the balance on the guns…. I gave [the time of the call] considerable thought before, and I think it was around the middle of August.”

Hall never heard from Shea again.

Now we have a fairly complete and convincing timeline showing that Donald Shea was not at Spahn’s Movie Ranch at the time Pete Porteous claims to have been with him there, from April to August of 1969. Shea’s whereabouts elsewhere are partially documented for the latter part of 1968 up until May of ’69, and are well documented for June, July, and August of '69. (And it could be added here that if Porteous was at Spahn’s Ranch for any amount of time in April or May of 1969 he must have been skipping a considerable amount of his school classes. That’s not an impossibility, of course, but the reader might want to consider the likelihood that a ten-year-old boy would be truant from school for two months in 1969.)

Not only was Donald Shea not at Spahn’s Ranch when Porteous says he knew him there, but the other people described by Porteous as being present were also very likely not there. Monty Laird worked at nearby Corriganville, but there is no record of him working at Spahn’s Ranch in the summer of 1969. Joe Soto is another stuntman claimed by Porteous to have been at Spahn’s. But in 1969 Joe Soto was forty years old and had, according to his obituary, begun a 25-year stint working as a heavy equipment operator four years earlier, in 1965. (Perhaps not coincidentally, Corriganville closed in 1965.) Is it believable that Soto would take a several-months-long break from his burgeoning career operating heavy machinery in the spring and summer of 1969 so he could hang around Spahn’s Ranch hoping to pick up work as a stuntman? (In her trial testimony during the Shea multi-murder trials Spahn’s Ranch forewoman Ruby Pearl said that the only people working as ranch hands in the summer of 1969 were Randy Starr, Larry Craven, Bennie Dietrich, and, later, John Schwarz and Juan Flynn -- not Monte Laird, Joe Soto, or even Donald Shea.)

Another factor which casts doubt on Porteous’ recollections of his life at Spahn’s Ranch are those very recollections, especially the memories of the bad blood and numerous violent encounters between Shea and his stuntman friends and Charles Manson, two of which encounters Porteous claims to have actually witnessed.

Ruby Pearl worked for George Spahn for almost twenty years. In the summer of 1969 she worked at the ranch every day, seven days a week, from mid-morning to late in the evening. She oversaw the operation of just about every aspect of the ranch. If there had been enough disharmony to result in multiple violent encounters she certainly would have known about it. But she never had any such recollection. In fact, aside from a few incidents when “Family” vehicles got too close to horseback riders on one of the riding trails, she recalled no trouble at all  between Manson and his friends and the other people at the ranch.

“We liked ‘em all,” Pearl later testified about Manson and the people with him. “George liked them, and I liked them.”

“You liked Mr. Manson?” asked Manson defense attorney Irving Kanarek.

“We never had an argument. Never had an argument.”

“You never had any argument with Mr. Manson at all?”

“No.”

“Right?”

Right.”

“And you never saw Mr. Manson have any argument with anyone else?”

“No.”

“Right?”

“Right.”

It is pretty clear from that testimony that Spahn’s Ranch was a relatively harmonious place in the spring and early summer of 1969 and not a place where ranch denizens were regularly getting into violent confrontations with visiting stuntmen. (If it had been, the ever-present and all-seeing Ruby Pearl would have been well aware of such incidents. Not to mention all of the other persons who were unquestionably present at the ranch who also don’t recall such violent episodes. And also not to mention that such a violent undercurrent between Manson and Shea would surely have been known to the prosecution during the Shea murder trials and they just as surely would have introduced evidence of such an undercurrent to support their theory that “The Family” had something to do with Shea’s disappearance.)

There are still other thoughts that I’ve had about Pete Porteous’ claims that I have expressed here. I would encourage interested parties to read those thoughts and add them to the information that has been presented here. Because when you read those thoughts and consider what I’ve shown here I’m sure you’ll agree that it’s very reasonable to conclude that neither Donald Shea nor any of his supposed cowboy compadres were at Spahn’s Ranch when Pete Porteous claims they were there. And thus we also can state with near certainty that Porteous’ claims of ongoing hostility and violence between Manson and Porteous’ stuntman pals are also without foundation.

So, in the final analysis you can take Pete Porteous’ reminiscences about his life at Spahn’s Ranch and file them along with the fake mug shots, phony personalities, and outlandish new lies (e.g., Jeff Guinn’s recent uncontested Dateline assertion that Charles Manson went to the Polanski residence after the murders there and draped an American flag over the back of the couch) as an insult to anyone who considers themselves to be a serious student of this case. Because I don’t think it’s likely that Pete Porteous ever met or knew Donald Shea. He probably met or knew Monty Laird and Joe Soto. He might even have been to Spahn’s Ranch at some time in his childhood. But otherwise, Pete Porteous is a fantasist, a fabulist, and a fraud. He is like countless other individuals who have dishonestly latched onto the Tata-LaBianca murder case in order to attract attention to themselves.

I’ve been asked, “If he’s making it up, why?” I’m not inside Pete Porteous’ mind, so I can’t definitively answer that question. But perhaps getting attention is enough of a motive. Perhaps, like his supposed mentor, he is a dreamer seeking stardom. And perhaps the only way he can get some sort of stardom is to claim that he was buddies with tough guys who beat up Charles Manson. But whatever the motivation, it doesn’t justify what he is doing. For by fabricating a relationship with Donald Shea Porteous actually dishonors the hapless, would-be stuntman he so ardently claims to admire. And in doing so he cheapens Shea’s life by using Shea and his unfortunate demise as props in the furtherance of his own publicity-seeking agenda.

Pete Porteous and Matt at Spahn’s Movie Ranch on the MF Blog 2015 Tour. (And yes, that’s Stoner and St. Circumstance hitting a pipe in the background.)


Pete Porteous’ bio on IMBd

Pete Porteous accidentally gets shot while performing in a mock gunfight

Pete Porteous fantasizing  about his time with Donald Shea at Spahn’s Ranch on You Tube

The Indiegogo fundraising page for one of Pete Porteous’ recent film projects


162 comments:

robin torro said...

Another fraudulent claim by another loser, claiming to know shorty Shea. And how Manson was so hated, kicked around etc. Idiots want to make a name for themselves. Thanks for clearing that up, George.

St Circumstance said...

Well. I told you someone with me didn't buy it. Lol. I guess we know who that is now lol

Very convincing argument George. Hard to argue with factual timelines. He seemed sincere to me. Also, two years ago we weren't as close to 50 and I don't know why someone would go through so much trouble to develop such a detailed thorough story just to say the knew Shorty. He was also a kid and it's possible some of the dates or times blurred over the years.

Or what George says is true. He is a fraud. Certainly - this post makes me wonder??

The day I smoked weed at Spahn lol. A great moment indeed 🤞

Peter Moran said...

I think its funny that in the earlier post, Lynette addresses him as "young man."

stoner van houten said...

good stuff man, great read ....looks like i will have to do a follow up interview on his response to this..ill just ask him ''why did u lie'' .?? ..what is your goal.? ...what is the purpose of all this.? ...i will admit i made a name for myself to off this case ''SVH'' guardian of the ranch, but i just pick up trash,clean trails and remove graffiti from spahn ranch ...thats my angle,and i dont see a problem with it.? ..and he has gotten mt noticed ...BUT ''WHY'' pete would lie , i have no fucking clue..he doesnt have a youtube channel,no followers,he doesnt get work from this.?..he makes no money from it.? ..unless he was kicked in the head by a horse and thinks he was there in 69'' i dont see his ''angle'' ...?? ...GREAT ARTICLE

David said...

Maybe I'm stating the obvious but if Ruby Pearl's testimony as related by George is correct then Shorty wasn't at Spahn until after the raid. If she is correct that either casts doubt on the snitch motive or they thought he snitched or was going to snitch on something else.

George Stimson said...

Lunch!

David said...

I'm working on it. Should have said this: excellent post.

St Circumstance said...

Look out for my contribution to the Manson 50 year literary collection....

" I know somebody who knows somebody who knows Charles Manson"

I am going to ask Mario nitrini the third of OJ lore to write the forward...

I wonder if he ever came across a little kid racing around Chatsworth on a mini bike in his travels??

Panamint Patty said...

People just like to attach themselves to famous events and people. It's a weird phenomenon, no?

St Circumstance said...

I'm with Stoner. He's really got nothing to gain by lying ??

But George makes it hard to conclude he did anything otherwise.

Unless it's just faulty memory regarding timing.

Let's say they did beat Charlie up but not exactly when petes memory says they did. That would give another motive for Charlie to want to get him as we know the timeline may also eliminate the snitch motive...

St Circumstance said...

Or this guy just invented the entire thing. But I sure didn't get the impression he was that kind of liar.

Who knows?

Mr. Humphrat said...

Great job George. How could the snitch motive for killing Shorty be so prevalent through the years? Is it not possible he was hanging around the ranch earlier in the summer while being employed elsewhere? Also, I wonder what if any contact with the Manson group he had on Spahn perhaps earlier? I'd have to reread your piece to see if that is ruled out too.
On the subject of lying I kind of go along with Saint that someone could have fuzzy memories from childhood and later attach those memories to a different time or person than it was. I hesitate usually before declaring someone is a liar.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Mr. George Stimson:

Just because someone testifies to a situation in a Court of Law on the witness stand doesn't necessarily make that claim true.
Mr. Stimson, do you know that?
And for that matter Mr. Stimson, just because someone makes a claim and/or claims about certain situations, that doesn't make it necessarily true either.
Look at OJ Simpson's testimonies in cases he testified in.
Mr. Stimson, Do you think OJ Simpson told the truth in his testimonies?

And Mr. Stimson, you say:
"ancillary characters"

Mr. Stimson, let me just say if you are referencing me as one of those "ancillary characters," I'M NOT.
Maybe to verify this, you can ask
Charles Manson Family members
Sandra Good, Lynette "Sqeaky" Fromme, and/or other Manson Family Members about certain members of a "GROUP" that frequented Spahn Ranch and conducted "Business" and other "THINGS" there with Charles Manson and other people at Spahn Ranch.
Could you please get back to me on that?
Also, you can ask them about
Charles Manson's Construction Site Pad and what went on there, if they know.
On another thread, I asked
Ben Gurecki/Underworld Production Inc some questions, and of course:
NO RESPONSE from Mr. Gurecki.
Now, on my twitter account, I did get a response from Kim E Goldman's
PR firm, GarsonWrightPR,
in a situation related to
The OJ Simpson Case and Saga, and that's going to Legally lead to a
WHOLE-LOT-MORE situations related to The OJ Simpson Case and Saga.
Legally-Watch......
Maybe somone will respond to me on this Manson Family Blog regarding what I have stated in this paragraph about
The Charles Manson Case and Saga.

I have no idea whatsoever if
Pete Porteous'
claims are true or false.

To St. Circumstance.

I went to Chatsworth High School and I graduated from
Chatsworth High School in June of 1968.
I saw kids riding mini-bikes in Chatsworth, California, but I didn't know there names.


Mario George Nitrini 111
------
The OJ Simpson Case

DebS said...

Mr. Humphrat it is possible that Shorty was coming around more regularly at Spahn in 1968. The Family was there in early 1968 but lived at Dennis Wilsons from April until August 1968. I do believe that Manson and the Family first met Shorty in 1968.

David said...

Deb.

But if the 'snitch motive' is accurate then isn't linking it back to contact in '68 pretty remote from August '69? A lot of people came and went during that time why would Manson et al connect the raid to the guy that hung around the ranch back in early '68?

Unless as The Col said Shorty bragged about it. But I haven't found any reference to him doing so, so far.

David said...

MGN111 said: "Maybe somone will respond to me on this Manson Family Blog regarding what I have stated in this paragraph about The Charles Manson Case and Saga."

I think over the course of your comments I've been less 'snarky' then others. But it would help if I had a clue what this meant:

"[C]ertain members of a "GROUP" that frequented Spahn Ranch and conducted "Business" and other "THINGS" there with Charles Manson and other people at Spahn Ranch."

Otherwise I have no possible way to begin to look for whatever it is you are asking about.

On your other note there- whether you believe a witness and accept their testimony all depends on who they are. Nothing has ever suggested that Ruby Pearl was dishonest or had any motive to disregard the truth. Similarly, there is no motive for the gentlemen mentioned (Binder, etc.) to fabricate their stories. None of them actually directly connected the killers to Shorty's murder. They simply testified to Shorty's whereabouts in the months leading up to his disappearance.

Your comparison to OJ Simpson would be better compared to "Don't call me Tex" Watson and I am pretty sure there are very few here they give a good deal of weight to his testimony, at least I sure don't.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

David

You will find on The Internet
"The "GROUP"
but you will NOT find on The Internet
"Business" and other "THINGS"....
What really must happen is that a
Manson Family Member(s) has to come forward and legally expose it.
I'm not sure I would want to.
Extremely Serious Situation....

David, I'm don't know if Ruby Pearl or Binder ect... told the truth or not.
I am pointing out that someone on a witness stand in a legal court of law can lie.

Ah, Charles "Tex" Watson
Does Charles "Tex" Watson lie?
I don't know, but I will tell you this:
I was in State Prison (Chino) finishing my State time (1984) after doing my Federal time (concurrent sentences), and while at Chino, I worked in the
Intake Medical Unit. There were several inmates who had been incarcerated with Tex Watson, and they were in Chino on parole violations. These inmates had NOTHING good to say about
Charles "TEX" Watson. Absolutely Nothing at all....Watson is NOT the most likeable inmate in the
California Prison System.

Snarky???? No problem for me.

David, you have treated me with respect and I thank you.

As I commented on a blog-post of yours, you made me remember......
Thank you.

Mario George Nitrini 111
--------
The OJ Simpson Case

St Circumstance said...

There is a new documentary out about Robert Kardashian.

It shows the moment OJ got back
From airport after he found out Nicole was dead. It shows OJ and his female assistant grtbout of car with huge garment bag. Then they slow motion show the assistant whispering in Kardashiabs ear. Then they freeze frame Kardashian look off into space.

He is making his decision.

Then a few moments later as the press starts to arrive- they show Kardashian walk away with the garment bag. It was never seen again.

He helped OJ. I never knew that until this past weekend. This footage was just discovered after all these years. I honestly believe it was the guilt as much as anything that killed him.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

St. Circumstance:

I'm doing this from memory.

I believe the assistant was Cathy Randa
There was also a "story" about
Ms. Randa shredding a whole bunch of paperwork......

That Louis Vuitton garment bag. Who knows whay was in there??????

Mario George Nitrini 111
-------
The OJ Simpson Case

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Sorry St C...

Should read:

"what" was in there?????

Mario George Nitrini 111
-------
The OJ Simpson Case

St Circumstance said...

It was clear as day what went down. There must have been something in that bag. You can see the agony in his eyes. He has seconds to make a decision. They show him walk around the bag and then move when cops get close. Then he just picks it up and walks out of site when nobody is paying attention. It's unbelievable nobody ever caught this before. He was an accessory no two ways about it...

Anyway back to poor Pete and figuring out if he is full of oscsr Meyer bologna or not.

sorry George. This is an excellent - light shining post which will educate suckers like me about the truth. I was so awestruck seeing that place in person and meeting some of the people I probably was ripe for a good story.

But again lol. He seemed sincere ??

DebS said...

David said...
Deb.

But if the 'snitch motive' is accurate then isn't linking it back to contact in '68 pretty remote from August '69? A lot of people came and went during that time why would Manson et al connect the raid to the guy that hung around the ranch back in early '68?
------------------

David I wasn't trying to infer that Shorty knowing Manson et al in 1968 had anything to do with the snitching. I was addressing Mr. Humphrat's question asking if it were possible that Pete had contact with the Family earlier which by my way of thinking would have been the previous summer in 1968.

ziggyosterberg said...


Everything is snarky, up around Snarkyville.

ziggyosterberg said...


Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

"I was in State Prison (Chino) finishing my State time (1984) after doing my Federal time (concurrent sentences)"


It begins like this: Listen: Mario George Nitrini 111 has come unstuck in time. It ends like this: Poo-Tee-Weet?

And there's a lot more to the "Poo-Tee-Weet" situation.

ziggyosterberg said...


I remember that "what was in the bag" stuff from the OJ "situation" back in the 90s. That was one of those things that was often brought up as indication of some sort of cover-up. They did have footage back then of Kardashian taking the bag back then, and they showed it on TV ad nauseum. Is this new footage really new?

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
brownrice said...

Poo Tee-Weet? So it goes.

David said...

Deb, really wasn't suggesting you did. I was really asking the questions and used your quote to frame them.

There is an image of a rent receipt that purports to be related to Shorty. It is dated July 9th.

Mr. Humphrat said...

Thanks for your answer Deb.
I must say my mind has been flipped a bit by the last two Postings by Matt and George re: Shorty. I just pictured him being a constant around the ranch, and now I'm thinking what was this some guy who only was in contact with them for two weeks?? What about the story (and I don't know the source) that some of the slippies were unhappy with Shorty bringing his African-American wife to the ranch? If Shorty and wife were separated by August would it make sense her coming to the ranch? And if their separation was due to his lack of full-time employment why would he be pushing for a position at the ranch where he only would get room and board?
And forgive me for prying George, but is it out of bounds to ask if Sandra has any insight into when and how much Shorty was around??

DebS said...

David, Ah, I guess I misunderstood. :) What rent receipt? I have an address where Shorty and Nikki were living in Las Vegas when they married on July 1 1969. It's on their marriage license. According to trial testimony, Nikki gave the marriage a couple of weeks before bagging it and returning to California. That would cover July 9th. Where was the home on the rent receipt and who is the receipt made out to?

Mr. Humphrat, valid questions. Unfortunately I could only speculate as to the answers. There are enough people, including Nikki, who said Shorty showed her around the ranch so I feel confident that did happen.

St Circumstance said...

The documentary is new. If this footage is old- I had never seen it. A local reporter was in area doing something else when he got a call OJ was about to show up
At Rockingham. When the reporter got there it was just Kardashian and Three cops. When the car pulls up with OJ and assistant nodding else is there yet. They show all the other cops and press arrive. They show the assistant look like she is hugging Kardashian but they pan in and you can actually see her whispering in his ear. I had never seen this footage before. It shows him think about it for a minute. They actually. Lose up him staring into space. Then they show him walk all around the car and start to pick up the bag a couple times but police get closer. Then they eventually show him walk off camera down the street with it in his hand.

I had never seen this before?

David said...

Deb,

I'll send it to you. It reveals nothing to me other then he paid rent somewhere on July 9th.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
starviego said...

"Interrational relationships"

I don't know what that means, but it sounds KINKY! Count me in.

Panamint Patty said...

Lpao

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
David said...

Sag,

Curious, where do you live?

Tim A. said...

I googled lpao and didn't find anything that I thought would be the meaning. I thought about lmao again and it dawned on me what it was. Lol! Good acronym, Patty!

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

SAG,

Yes, I know what sundown towns are without a google search. White River, Bull Shoals or the Missouri side?

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Manson Mythos said...

Remember the weird gay guy who duped a bunch of people by claiming he was an offspring of the Spahn Ranch circle?

The worst offender of all is Matthew Roberts. I can't believe he is still duping people and they are falling for it.

DebS said...

I think that Rosie Blanchard (Tate Polanski) gives Matthew Roberts a run for his money in the duping/fraud department. She first said she was Sharon Tate then said she was Sharon's unborn baby and actually went to the Tate residence and sent Doris mother's day cards!

Matt said...

Roman Polanski’s New Sexual Abuse Accuser Speaks Out as His Attorney Dismisses ‘Ridiculous’ Announcement


St Circumstance said...

I wish Roman would be forced to sit right next to Charlie in the clink.

I really do. He is among the worst bastards associated with this case.

St Circumstance said...

Ya know I wonder looking at pic of Pete at top of post....

Why do all bikers dress the same? They all look like extras from the movie Mask. Jeans boots leather or denim jackets. Always the same.

Why can't anyone ride wearing khakis and a light colored Ralph Lauren shirt? Top sidrs or afffidas flops.

Why would a little color or casual
Style hurt??

St Circumstance said...

Addidas

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
David said...

George inspired me so I did a little research. As George stated Corriganville Movie Ranch closed in 1965 due to competition from the new Disneyland. In the fifties and early sixties it was an amusement park and employed many stuntmen to act out western scenes. One was Shorty in 1959- you can find him on the Honor Role. I did not find any other mention.

http://www.corriganville.net

Cherokee Jim Babcock, Monte Laird and Joe Soto were all employees there too. There is no reference on the internet to any of them having any contact with Manson that I could find, likely because all three appear to have left the area by 1966.

Bob Hope bought the ranch in 1965 for 3.5m so it was no Spahn.

I also found a stuntman named Wild Bill Babcock who also was at Corriganville. His website includes this:

“Charles Manson (Bill called him Charlie), used to live in the caves behind the movie ranch – Spawn Ranch in Chatsworth.  He and Bill used to ride rodeos together and he would bet Bill money as to who would win.  Then once they had to pay $250 to ride a bucking bronco and they (Tex and Charlie) would borrow from Bill to go ride (Bill says they were good). One time Charlie had spent the night with Bill in Chatsworth  and he stole Bill’s truck, guns, clothes and boots.  Bill says he was in a movie as a Sheriff with Pat Garrett at the time.  Tex Watson also with Charlie and Bill found Tex walking to Bill’s truck in Chatsworth.  So Bill drives over the mountain to the Spawn Ranch where Tex had hawked the guns for $25.  Bill had to buy them back.”  

Of course its crap, especially since Manson was in prison in 1965.

Gary Kent, another stuntman wrote a book about his career with this blurb available on the web:

“Gary Kent's career in the entertainment world took him to amazing places, introduced him to a host of truly remarkable people, and, after four decades, left him replete with memories and stories that make up the treasures inside Shadows & Light. His portfolio includes working side by side with some of the biggest names in the movie business, including Jack Nicholson, Brian DePalma, James Caan, Alan Arkin, Penny and Gary Marshall, Bruce Willis, Peter Bogdanovich, and many more. He even found himself munching doughnuts with crazed murderer Charles Manson and his kreepy krawleys.”

It seems the list of stuntmen who knew Manson is almost as long as the list of actors who were invited to Cielo that night.

PS: I also learned that until the 70’s it was very uncommon for stuntmen to be credited in films so Shorty may have done a bit more work than it appears. He at least seemed to have a good gig at Corriganville.

Panamint Patty said...

Gary Kent is a great guy. In his eighties, he is a regular on Facebook and in Stoner's group.

David said...

Didn't mean to suggest he wasn't.

George Stimson said...

A very small quibble, David, but Disneyland wasn't really new in 1965. I went there as a ten-year-old in 1964 and they were making a big deal out of the fact that it was ten years old.

Panamint Patty said...

Patty didn't take it that way. She's just suggesting that he's engaging and very approachable.

David said...

George,

Thanks for the quibble (truly)- I got it off the website, there. Might have misread it I was skimming along looking for Shorty references.

See, George, you inspire me with these posts of yours.

Cielodrive.com said...

Jimmy Babcock was a friend of Shorty's but he didn't have any run-ins with Manson

DebS said...

I have Gary Kent's book Shadows and Light. He does have a bit about Manson but doesn't say he beat him up or slapped him around. He wrote more about Tex and the girls than Charlie.

As an aside he says that Shorty was called that because he was short, about 5'6"!

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DebS said...

Porteous was 10 years old at the time, what do you think? I doubt that Porteous, even when he became an adult, knew enough about Shorty to know that he worked in an adult book and novelty store back then.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
David said...

Dave,

Why do you do this? Why do you say these things? What part of who you are thinks this is 'cool'?

You clearly believe this somehow makes Shorty's murder ok. As you stated: "Thats why we have such a liking for Charlie around here because hes a good ol mountain boy just like us....and hes White"

I understand how you feel threatened by other races. I also understand how you fight against change.

I am sure change is frustrating: gays serve in the military just like you and your kin. Blacks have jobs that pay the same as you. Women have management jobs and tell you what to do.

Manson is your hero because he hated blacks and every victim deserved what he got because- well because your boss is now a woman and that is because of the liberal elite- and God he got them.

Please stop.

PS: You don't live in the Ozarks because no one from the Ozarks would ever say 'the Missouri side'.

St Circumstance said...

Is it possible Pete did ride his mini bike around the ranch and that someone who worked there did take him under his wing...

But as he was young and there were several Shorty type characters going in and out of Sphan...

So he got a name confused or mistook one stunt man for another?

Is it possible there is some truth to his tale blurred in with confusion or innacuracy that comes with time and age???

Or did I get completely snowed ??

Cause I sort of believed him lol. So many people tell so many stories about this case how do you know who you can believe about anything ?? Even Bugs can't be completely trusted it is starting to seem...

I have to deduct after this post that although I sort of want to believe Pete in this instance... I can't

George Stimson said...

St., you need a snowplow.

Mr. Humphrat said...

I thought I had read in a previous post that Shorty was actually tall. Whaaahappen?? And George I will try one more time then leave you alone: at the risk of being pushy is there some input from Sandy on when and and how much Shorty was around the Ranch? Thanks.

St Circumstance said...

Lol

George Stimson said...

Mr. Humphrat, Sandy says that he was hardly there but when he was he was gross and lecherous and the girls avoided him.

DebS said...

Mr. Humphrat it just goes to show that stuntmen have faulty memories. Maybe they landed on their heads one too many times.:)

Shorty's autopsy report puts his height at 5'10".

St Circumstance said...

I heard an interview with Charlie from jail where he is rambling in general but at one point when talking about ( who I assume was Shorty) he says " you see he was not a small guy" or something very close. I always assumed Shorty was a sarcastic nickname

St Circumstance said...

By the way...

Roman was accused today by a third person of sexual shenanigans. This one apparently took place in 73. Gloria Allred is on it lol

When Gloria Allred becomes aware of you lol things get bad fast !!


Roman really is an animal.

St Circumstance said...

If I were to come out of retirement and write a thorough argument... ( I won't lol)

I bet I could do a decent job of convincing you that Roman is as dangerous- or more in my personal opinion- as Manson.

I think aside from Tex and Kreny I hate and fear Roman as much as anyone else in this case.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter said...

Uh oh. Helter Skelter man. It's coming down fast.

David said...

Well, Ryan,

You certainly have me confused with someone else. I've tried. I've asked you to stop. I've even said 'please'. It is obvious I am wasting my breath/fingers on you.

Peter said...

Here's a good one from Kasabian's testimony day a million.

MR. KANAREK: No. Her conclusion, her subjective statement as to what those words mean, your Honor, is not admissible. It just isn't. She can't explain it. Otherwise we could just go on and on forever. If somebody made a statement that they didn't like, then they could sit up there and try to weasel out of it.

MR. STOVITZ: Your Honor, there is only one weasel here, and there is only one person that goes on and on, and I would like to object to counsel's improper objections. If he can't frame an objection in one or two words, I think that he ought to go back to law school.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Matt said...

Did you read that on your Tindle.. I mean Kindle?


Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

Ryan,

The point is the comments have no place here. Take it to a political blog. Here your words simply say 'they deserved it'. All the rest is misplaced (wrong blog) and purposely inflammatory.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

Oh my bad,

Ryan/Dave/SAG,

The point is the comments have no place here. Take it to a political blog. Here your words simply say 'they deserved it'. All the rest is misplaced (wrong blog) and purposely inflammatory.

Mr. Humphrat said...

Thanks George!!

brownrice said...

David said...
Oh my bad,

Ryan/Dave/SAG,

The point is the comments have no place here. Take it to a political blog. Here your words simply say 'they deserved it'. All the rest is misplaced (wrong blog) and purposely inflammatory.


...and another trolling millenial with a Hitler Youth haircut bites the dust. :-)

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mr. Humphrat said...

and thanks Deb for the autopsy measurement on Shorty.
and if anyone wants to see a picture of Mario Nitrini you can do a search on Newspapers.com and see what he looked like playing basketball at Chatsworth HS!

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...

Brownrice, you got ahead of this a bit.

Ryan/Dave/Sag

This is the broken fence at Ceilo. There are two possibilities. I’m going with the evidence.

I am surprised you are so off about mixed raced people. You are part Native American and part white. That may explain why in your comments you don’t mention Native Americans.

And given your first marriage, your comments about Shorty and less then 18-year old young women is surprising.

And you are not from the Ozarks.

You know that game, Clue? I think I’m right.

Sorry George. This is a very good post. I'm still searching.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Matt said...

This is like having a booger on your finger that you just can't seem to flick off...


Jenn said...

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
"Why is it ok for every other race to love who they are except Whites?"

Well, you see, it's like this: the minority races in this country have historically been discriminated against due to their race (obviously.) So when they have had enough, they say, "Fuck it, I'm proud of who I am." Now, white folk haven't faced that systematic institutional discrimination, so there's no need to declare pride in a priveledged status.

I hope that this is helpful to you.

brownrice said...

Well said, David, Matt & Jenn.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
Looks like someone has been hitting the bottle tonight, when did i say anything about the fence at "Ceilo"?


I think they call it a metaphor, Ryan.

Panamint Patty said...

Why would anybody stay where he's not wanted?

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Hi David (The Lawyer)

I had been conversing with OJ Simpson's parole attorney Malcolm LaVergne on my Twitter account mostly regarding
The NY Post article about
Justin & Sydney Simpson's purchasing of Real Estate with cash, and how Fred and Kim Goldman's attorney David Cook is investigating any illegal doings, pertaining to $ money owed to
The Goldman's from the civil case
Judgement that was won by The Goldman's
along with the Nicole Brown Simpson estate.
Several of Malcolm LaVergne's tweets to me were directed at Kim Goldman, and were extremely harsh, and that's putting it mildly.
As soon as I brought up Rocky Bateman's name to Malcolm LaVergne, Mr. LaVergne completely stopped responding to me.

The question I have is:
If it can be legally proven that
Justin and/or Sydney Simpson knowingly diverted $ money of OJ Simpson's, that OJ Simpson owed to The Goldman's from the Civil Case judgement,
Could Justin and/or Sydney Simpson be Criminally Prosecuted?

Thanks David (The Lawyer)

Hello Mr. Humphrat

Yep, my basketball days.
Actually, my dream was to be a
Professional Baseball Player. I was a pitcher. My Godfather is Norm Sherry. Norm's brother Larry Sherry taught me how to throw a wicked curve ball. But alas, my fastball wasn't fast enough, so the real good hitters would lay off my curve ball and "Sit" on my fastball.
So I decided to try and become the next Mick Jaggar. I'm a musician.

Hello Mr. Stimson

Thought you'd be interested.
A few months ago I was talking with a person about the Charles Manson Case.
This person told they went horseback riding with some friends at Spahn Ranch when The Manson Family was there.
This person said that The Manson family Girls were kind, respectful, and couteous.......
Thought you might want to know.

Mario George Nitrini 111
------
The OJ Simpson Case

David said...

MGN111,

No, it would not be a criminal matter.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Panamint Patty said...

You're a disgusting pig

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Thanks David

Mario George Nitrini
-------
The OJ Simpson Case

Peter said...

The question I have is:
If it can be legally proven that
Justin and/or Sydney Simpson knowingly diverted $ money of OJ Simpson's, that OJ Simpson owed to The Goldman's from the Civil Case judgement,
Could Justin and/or Sydney Simpson be Criminally Prosecuted?

Couldn't you maybe squeeze this into a criminal RICO action.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Peter,

Very interesting question.
OJ Simpson has been "Hiding" $ money from the The Goldman's for many years.
We'll see what David says.

Mario George Nitrini 111
------
The OJ Simpson Case

Panamint Patty said...

He was being ironic duh

St Circumstance said...

But did Pete ever ride his mini-bike over to Rockinham??

Interesting trivia:

My ex and I drove over to Rockinhgam last May when I was out there for my 50 birthday. When you stand directly in front of Rockingham and then turn 180 degrees you are staring at the house directly across street ...

That is the house Miles picked up Jack from in the movie Sideways. They show the gate to OJ driveway for a split second when they pull out to take off for Wine country.

I akways wonder if they chose that house on purpose??

Funny some of the places OJ and Charlie show up...

My ex watches The Vanderpump Rules on Bravo about Sur one of Lisa Vanderpumps restaraunts. One of the regulars on the show started a band called " Charles Mcmanson". The same episode they revealed this they showed the other regulars all out to a dinner- at El Coyote... what's that all about?

David said...

Peter,

I don't know enough about the OJ case to know if there might be a bankruptcy somewhere that could be used. Hiding assets is not a crime but it is in a bankruptcy. They could bring a civil action to set aside what is known as a 'fraudulent transfer' and get the cash.

Even under RICO you need an underlying crime being committed by the 'organization'- racketeering activity- I believe these are listed in the statute but acknowledge it has been a number of years since I was anywhere near a RICO case.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter said...

I think the underlying activity can be fraud for the RICO statute.


Wasn't somebody talking about the American flag on the sofa the other day? This is from Winifred Chapman's direct.

Q: It is a long couch>
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know whether or not the American flag covered the major portion of the back of that couch, or was it just a part of the couch?
A: It covered the major portion.
...
Q: Do you remember when it arrived, if you have knowledge about when it arrived at the Polanski residence?
A: No, I don't remember what day.
Q: Was it there on the Friday when you left?
A: Oh, yes.
Q: Had it been there for a day or two before?
A: It had been there for several weeks.
...
Q: On Friday, August 8, when you left the home, where was that American flag?
A: On the back of the couch.

David said...

MGN111, Peter

Here is the list of crimes that constitute 'racketeering activity': https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961

'Fraud' is on there as bankruptcy, securities, mail or wire fraud.

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter said...

There are three elements to mail and wire fraud: Intent; A "scheme or artifice to defraud" or the obtaining of property by fraud; and, A mail or wire communication.


Bing bang boom.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Thank you Peter and David.

So, is the bottom line:
Justin and/or Sydney Simpson can be held Criminally Liable?

Mario George Nitrini 111
-------
The OJ Simpson Case

David said...

I would vote 'no'.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Ok, thanks David.

Please, let me ask you this:

Right now, Fred & Kim Goldman are in a real battle with OJ Simpson and
Malcolm LaVergne. Is there a possibility, if legally proven, that Justin and/or Sydney Simpson can held Criminally Liable for one of the crimes mentioned?

Mario George Nitrini 111
-----
The OJ Simpson Case

lostgirl said...

Tom Sandovals band is actually Charles McMansion. But, it was close enough for me to go "huh". Not sure what time of year they shot their video or visited el Coyote. Maybe around the anniversary?

lostgirl said...

My last comment was in response to an earlier post by my favorite Saint. Not sure why my reply ended up here and not under his post. Sorry if it looked random.

David said...

MGN111,

I haven't got a clue. And not to offend but I helped you out on the RICO stuff because I always tend to answer questions but this blog is not about that case so I'm going to go back to that.

Peter said...

I would also have to say it's doubtful that a prosecutor would bring such a case. I'm a plaintiffs lawyer, so I look at it as a question of what possible claim could you shoehorn those facts into. It's what we do.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Ok,
Thanks David.

Peter,
Thanks for your input.

Mario George Nitrini 111
-----'
The OJ Simpson Case

Lynn said...

It's actually Charles mcmansion. Referring to the giant cookie cutter houses that are built on tiny lots

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

lostgirl said...
My last comment was in response to an earlier post by my favorite Saint. Not sure why my reply ended up here and not under his post. Sorry if it looked random.


lostgirl, the full web version of the comments section on blogger isn't multithreaded. The comments just appear in chronological order. On the mobile version it IS multithreaded so you can see which comments were replied to directly. So, it's always better to put in the extra keystrokes and be clear about which comment you are addressing


St Circumstance said...

McMansion lol. I stand corrected Lost Girl :)

Did you happen to watch that video for " touch in public". Lol. Kinda cheesy.

I went to Sur on my last trip and met Scheana. She was very nice to me. Took a pic with myself and her mom. He hubby was there too but sparingly she dumped him.

The things I do for my ex huh lol ( I admit I watch sometimes too lol )

St Circumstance said...

Apparently she dumped him sorry for typos on my phone

St Circumstance said...

Do it was just coincidence? Weird they also went to That restaraunt in same episode ...

lostgirl said...

The video was so cheesy it was uncomfortable to watch! I'll be in LA at the end of the month. Tempted to try SUR, but I have a feeling that a drive up Cielo is more appealing. I've never been to LA, and the thought of hitting Cielo makes me a little nervous. I'll have to do it alone though. Don't want want to subject my adult son to any more of my weirdness ��

lostgirl said...

Thanks Matt. I interact with the blog on my phone, so that's great to know 👍

Lynn said...

I commented above but it may have gotten lost. McMansion is an LA term for a gigantic house built on a tiny lot.

St Circumstance said...

Thanks Lynn... Lost girl I did both in one trip lol- versatility ya know:)

Be prepared going up to the gate on Cielo- very narrow, and minimal room to turn around when you leave- plus people park along side of the road who are doing work- it gets tricky getting up and down that little street.

But it is a freaky feeling being there, even though I felt very awkward doing so. It was broad daylight, and I felt guilty, excited, and even a little nervous all at once...

but then you get to a gate and well, its just a gate lol. But not really

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
St Circumstance said...

Hey Lynn... there is still a very small chance that them using that particular name and showing El Coyote in same episode is a coincidence .... no?? Do you think it is an inside joke and it makes me wonder if someone like Lisa Vanderpump knows that is was made??

I don't think she would find it funny that her brand was making those types of obscure references and having her name associated with it... but who knows lol Maybe Lisa is into it???

Someone on that show is apparantly

Zelda Formaldehyde said...

I was skeptical of what I was reading early on when Pete says "I was fascinated with stuntmen ..... I figured everyone at the ranches were stuntmen".
Huh?

J Pinnacle said...

So if Shorty wasn't regularly around the ranch prior to after the raid, that sort of discredits the whole Windee Starr story as well, no?

lostgirl said...

We use that term in Wisconsin too. Generic giant houses on small lots.

lostgirl said...

Yeah Saint I figured it would feel weird. Not sure if I'll make the drive up the road. Might be content just hanging at the bottom of the hill. As far as LVP goes, not sure if she would be aware of the connection. I thought the band name was an obvious play on words, but that's just me.

DebS said...

Yes, J Pinnacle! As time went on Windy's story just didn't add up. She was at Spahn off and on and did testify at the trials for Shorty's murder but much of what she told me were just stories that she dreamed up. She was entertaining but that was about it.

St Circumstance said...

Lost Girl I hope you have an amazing and safe trip :)

J Pinnacle said...

Thanks for the confirmation, Deb. That story always seemed a bit fishy to me.

lostgirl said...

Thanks Saint!

joseph esposito said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
David said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
joseph esposito said...

Right you are David, the nationalist socialist party was ALWAYS democrat (left wing)

grimtraveller said...

Mr. Humphrat said...


I must say my mind has been flipped a bit by the last two Postings by Matt and George re: Shorty. I just pictured him being a constant around the ranch, and now I'm thinking what was this some guy who only was in contact with them for two weeks?


Well, to be fair, Danny DeCarlo and the Family {both past & present} themselves are the ones, followed by LE that have fostered the impression that Shorty was kind of a ranch constant. For example, if one reads George's book and focuses on the chapter on Shorty's killing, you'd be hard pushed to conclude that Charlie is speaking about a guy that was only around for a couple of weeks.

David said...

Of course its crap, especially since Manson was in prison in 1965

Another one of those "he auditioned for the Monkees and didn't get it hence the anger towards Hollywood pigs" stories.
Actual facts do make a few things fall into place so much easier but we live in the "I'm free to speculate even when the facts mash up my story and I'm entitled to my opinion so piss off and don't try to contradict me" era, I fear.

St Circumstance said...

If I were to come out of retirement and write a thorough argument... ( I won't lol)

Ne dis jamais, jamais !

Mario etc said...

I was talking with a person about the Charles Manson Case.
This person told they went horseback riding with some friends at Spahn Ranch when The Manson Family was there.
This person said that The Manson family Girls were kind, respectful, and courteous...


Why would they not be ?

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

grimtraveller,

I'm just relating what this person told me.

Mario George Nitrini 111
------
The OJ Simpson Case

Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susanatkinsgonorhhea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.