tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post6687157461065930792..comments2024-03-28T23:53:16.262-04:00Comments on The Manson Family Blog: Follow Up on Laurence Merrick's Killer, Dennis MignanoMatthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-13788830919009488922022-06-05T16:36:34.303-04:002022-06-05T16:36:34.303-04:00I dug up a photograph of Dennis Mignano:
https://...I dug up a photograph of Dennis Mignano:<br /><br />https://icareviews.wordpress.com/2022/06/05/more-on-merrick-the-minardos-and-mazatlan-connections/rainercvkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05683489586686393529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-31886911509417818172018-10-12T00:21:09.615-04:002018-10-12T00:21:09.615-04:00Veronica Compton
Acting Student/Attempted Copycat ...Veronica Compton<br />Acting Student/Attempted Copycat Strangler/Escapee/B-grade Pin-Up<br /><br />http://articles.latimes.com/1988-07-27/news/mn-6511_1_hillside-stranglerDoughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17388908256992077315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-57623324814171771592018-06-09T13:07:50.173-04:002018-06-09T13:07:50.173-04:00Has anyone looked into the unknown woman at Merric...Has anyone looked into the unknown woman at Merrick's funeral? All I remember is that her name was Veronica. A friend of Merrick's said that she was somehow connected to the Hillside Strangler....Leyladiannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04084079364448348757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-76865772722700925572017-08-26T07:41:21.593-04:002017-08-26T07:41:21.593-04:00I'm a teacher...perhaps we need those, too :-)...I'm a teacher...perhaps we need those, too :-) <br /><br />Seriously, though, I found this blog a few days ago after a longtime interest in Manson and psychology. This blog is, quite honestly, better than any of the books!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13955854427063032485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-10589571842629629642016-07-02T15:14:50.533-04:002016-07-02T15:14:50.533-04:00Robert Hendrickson said...
SHE can SHOW the world... Robert Hendrickson said...<br /><br /><b>SHE can SHOW the world the dangerous TRUTH - AND so can I</b><br /><br />Do tell !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-21462782434170222102016-07-02T15:13:19.231-04:002016-07-02T15:13:19.231-04:00orwhut said...
Lincoln must have been paraphrasin... orwhut said...<br /><br /><b>Lincoln must have been paraphrasing someone else with that lawyer statement</b><br /><br />Could well be, but either way, it would probably be quite a profound statement...........if he himself wasn't a lawyer ! It's a bit like a mechanic saying "whoever tries to fix their own car has a fool for a customer."grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-76965672582760315112016-07-02T10:58:16.867-04:002016-07-02T10:58:16.867-04:00Robert Hendrickson said:
SO WHY are YOU intereste...Robert Hendrickson said:<br /><br />SO WHY are YOU interested in this old MANSON Case?<br /><br />Because a couple years ago an old friend who was quite into this asked me to read some old trial testimony for him. I did. Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-48226550283068598082016-07-02T04:56:31.657-04:002016-07-02T04:56:31.657-04:00DREATH: Thanks mucho much. I'll get the Appea...DREATH: Thanks mucho much. I'll get the Appealate Review, it usually has an coroberating perspective. SO WHY are YOU interested in this old MANSON Case?<br /> <br />This is Criminal and you said you are a civil attorney.<br /> <br />BTW folks, the illustration here shows that a Prosecution attorney can be just as "clever" as a defense attorney. Just NOT enough money in "prosecuting" AS THERE IS IN "defending."<br /><br />Robert Hendricksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880909248364077567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-38541917994057118322016-07-01T22:41:56.607-04:002016-07-01T22:41:56.607-04:00Lincoln must have been paraphrasing someone else w...Lincoln must have been paraphrasing someone else with that lawyer statement. https://lawdiva.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/a-man-who-is-his-own-lawyer-has-a-fool-for-a-client/orwhuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17724866498802431665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-45947393365700484632016-07-01T18:26:15.972-04:002016-07-01T18:26:15.972-04:00Matt said...
"He who represents himself has ... Matt said...<br /><br /><b><i>"He who represents himself has a fool for a client."</i><br /> - Abraham Lincoln</b><br /><br />I find that statement of Lincoln's to have a mixture of arrogance, idealism and ignorance to it. Sometimes, those <i>"in the know"</i> really can't see beyond the tip of their noses. The quote makes a great soundbite but utterly fails to recognize that there are some people that might just have valid reasons for representing themselves.<br /><br /> St Circumstance said...<br /><br /><b>it wouldn't have mattered much who defended him</b><br /><br />In a roundabout way, this is what Manson asserted from the start. Rarely commented on yet undeniably so, he met with a number of lawyers before coming to the conclusion that he wanted to represent himself.<br />There's a connection there.<br />Also worth considering are the implications of his words to at least two of the Judges he faced in relation to himself and the law. More than once he would refer to any court appointed lawyer as the court's lawyer not his. Even Kanarek whom he chose, he didn't really choose because he was by then in a position whereby he had to take a lawyer even though he was adamant that he did not want one. Defence, jury, police, prosecution, Judge ¬> these were all one and the same to him or more accurately, on the same side. All of the defendants reflected this at one point or another. So feeling he was up against it regardless, it's not surprising that he wanted to defend himself. The Family were an alternative society that really turned its collective back on society where possible and there are good reasons for it in Charlie's case. I suspect his mind went back to the Mum that was meant to look out for him and rather, shipped him off into 'care,' the Dad who should've cared but didn't, the homes and reform schools that should have contained people that cared and yet were abusive and turned a blind eye to the most horrific treatment one could mete out to a boy almost all on his own in the world.....I think he looked at what he felt society had had to offer him for 30 years and concluded, you can keep it !<br />And that was a reality. No one could represent him because nobody bothered to empathize with him. He was just 'another client in the system.' As he himself said, in jail he had no name; he was a number. So while everything St said was true about him farting about in court, it's not as simple as it appears. There's a whole universe to traverse in coming to grips with why it was so important to him to represent himself. Having been there myself and having that feeling that this person supposedly advocating for me is not <i>representing</i> me, I can see why Manson was insistent on being his own lawyer.<br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-71209724127548294362016-07-01T12:41:00.902-04:002016-07-01T12:41:00.902-04:00Although I have not located the actual 1978 trial ...Although I have not located the actual 1978 trial it appears from this appeal of her parole denial in 2002 that the DA did not change the motive. He changed the charges by adding felony-murder. California Penal Code section 189. A very good move as you do not have to prove 'premeditation' to murder just 'intent' to commit a burglary/robbery. <br /><br />http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/e032032.pdf<br /><br />"Van Houten intended to inflame Whites against Blacks by leaving a White woman’s body mutilated under circumstances indicating the atrocity had been committed by Blacks. She may not have had the stomach to use her victims’ blood to mark on their walls, but she agreed with the group’s goals and that her crime partners should accomplish those goals, and actively assisted them with the mutilation and avoiding detection." pp. 39-40<br /><br />***<br /><br /> "Van Houten argues that she was mentally incapacitated by cult brainwashing such that her individual role, which she asserts was less than that of others, cannot be considered among the most aggravated for first degree murder. To some extent this argument is supported by the prosecution’s decision in the third trial to request a felony- murder instruction so that the jury did not have to unanimously decide beyond a reasonable doubt that Van Houten intended and premeditated the murders." pp. 40<br />Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-45297044238904528632016-07-01T11:43:05.508-04:002016-07-01T11:43:05.508-04:00So please show us... :)So please show us... :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-16312693132741120602016-07-01T11:29:34.624-04:002016-07-01T11:29:34.624-04:00Man, I just can't get the words "robbery...Man, I just can't get the words "robbery / Van Houton" OUT of my mind. How blind I've been when the TRUTHful "evidence" was provided for ALL to SEE by possibly the ONLY honorable and decent lawyer Steven KAY long ago in connection with the TL Murder Case.<br /> <br />AND as D. A. Jackie Lacey has recently written to Jerry Brown " She is still a danger to society."<br /> <br />Of course SHE is - SHE can SHOW the world the dangerous TRUTH - AND so can I.<br /><br />Robert Hendricksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880909248364077567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-37606491314211998512016-07-01T10:23:12.631-04:002016-07-01T10:23:12.631-04:00Well Mr. PISTOLS: IF what YOU say is TRUE, the St...Well Mr. PISTOLS: IF what YOU say is TRUE, the State of California "District Attorney" CHANGED the motive from Helter Skelter to "robbery" - at least as it concerns the LaBianca massacre.AND Charles Manson. Apparently, contrary to Bugliosi's CLAIM that nobody KNOWS why the LaBianca's, the REAL judicial experts did KNOW.<br /> <br />That's kind'a like "changing" the ISIS "motive" from EVIL terrorist CULT to "concerned Muslim citizens for a new and improved State of Islam."<br /> <br />I THINK this newly raised "issue," at least, deserves some further investigation / documentation before WE all continue spinning OUR "little bobble heads" in multiple directions.<br /><br />Robert Hendricksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880909248364077567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-52526365719752140542016-07-01T06:45:56.976-04:002016-07-01T06:45:56.976-04:00All good fair points ShortyAll good fair points ShortyAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-36108468667595714172016-06-30T23:23:35.854-04:002016-06-30T23:23:35.854-04:00Actually St, LVH got 3 bites at the apple. 1st tr...Actually St, LVH got 3 bites at the apple. 1st trial is guilty on all counts. That verdict for LuLu was Death. That finding was reversed on appeal, mainly due to the disappearance of the Late Ronald Hughes. Her second trial was a hung jury...7 voted for 1st degree murder 5 for manslaughter. This brings up the specter of a 3rd trial. Leslie was coming from under the free love, LSD therapy, and psycho philosophy haze she was under in the savage days of Charlie and the troops. She was on the streets, got a square gig and looked all civilian again.<br /><br />Most normal cases would find the DA offering guilty to manslaughter and LVH pleads out and gets 12 to 20 for Mans. But this was TLB. Kay was worried that Manslaughter was a real possibility & he didn't want to risk taking on Leslie's prosecution with a reduced capacity defense. Leslie's psych evals showed she had some valid head problems and LVH may have skated for reduced capacity. He filed this case in the 3rd trial as murder and Robbery. LVH had taken some cheap dresses and under $9. That makes the nut for murder with the Robbery stipulation. When the charge is murder and robbery, reduced capacity isn't a consideration.<br /><br />The 3rd trial found her catching a guilty verdict of 1st degree murder WITH the possibility of parole. I've always thought the robbery stipulation was very weak. A cheap dress & 9 bucks is hardly the Brinks job. Leslie's counsel should have gotten the robbery stip tossed out. Then went full bore on the reduced capacity. Nobody knows if the jury would have went for it, but it was a better shot than they had.Shorty's pistolshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09606672298731718462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-31640342191914752362016-06-30T11:59:11.499-04:002016-06-30T11:59:11.499-04:00Of course the one other thing to point out as well...Of course the one other thing to point out as well - fairly- is this...<br /><br /><br />quite a few years later- Leslie got to try again. That second time, she did behave. She did listen to her lawyers. She did say all the correct things and play ball. She dressed nicely and had been living among us in society quite nicely. And even with strategy, cooperation, and better attorneys who had a prepared, willing client...<br /><br />She was found guilty.<br /><br />So not all of it was even her own fault. She asked to go out and participate in what she has admitted she knew was going to be a heinous act. She participated in one, and then she made jokes about it and laughed in the faces of her victims families. she showed less than no remorse in her statements to authorities when caught.<br /><br />Hard for any lawyer to help a client like this under any circumstances I would think.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-27686226389909358322016-06-30T11:42:02.612-04:002016-06-30T11:42:02.612-04:00Mr. Humphrat: thank you
St. Circumstance: I agree...Mr. Humphrat: thank you<br /><br />St. Circumstance: I agree 100%. <br /><br />Something else didn't help them much....the evidence. As soon as Kasabian identified Watson shooting Steven and everyone else there doing nothing to stop it, they all go to jail. The only question is 'for what'. As soon as she placed Manson and Van Hauten in the car the next night and entering the LaBianca home- they both go to jail, again the only question is for what. <br /><br />The only possible way they avoid that outcome was to attack Kasabian's testimony and the attorneys either couldn't (due to Manson's control) or didn't (due to their own 'capacity'). She took acid X times doesn't get you anywhere and sounds desperate. <br /><br />They left a lot of cards on the table following her cross examination, true enough, and those cards could have helped the defense but...... Even if they had done a stellar job they still needed an alternative theory to explain five dead bodies. Now that could have been where putting on a defense and throwing Watson under the bus might have come in. <br /><br />Mr. H: those who get A's in law school teach. Those who get B's become judges. The rest of us actually practice law. <br />Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-77217667780058636252016-06-30T10:11:06.455-04:002016-06-30T10:11:06.455-04:00Pretty much sums it up in one sentence lol
I jus...Pretty much sums it up in one sentence lol <br /><br />I just think it is really unfair to blame the system or courts for Charlie and the Girls own foolish choices and behavior. And to say Charlie wasn't afforded the right to represent himself- which many people have argued over the years...<br /><br />is just not factually true.<br /><br />He was given the chance. He blew it. A coupe of us seem to also agree, that this was probably in his best interests. <br /><br />But again- it wouldn't have mattered much who defended him. He had his own agenda, moment in the spotlight, and stage. Charlie was going to put on a show and call the shots period. He fired anyone who got in his way. He had the others fire anyone who got in his way lol...<br /><br />There was only one person who had any say on the defense for any of them- Charlie. <br /><br />And keeping the girls out of jail as never given one small thought by Charles Manson.<br /><br />And no parents, lawyers, fear of jail, or anything else was going to stop the girls from listening to him.<br /><br />And that cost them their lives for all intents and purposes. But that was nobodys fault or choice but their own...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-69026703148565078772016-06-30T09:52:07.410-04:002016-06-30T09:52:07.410-04:00"He who represents himself has a fool for a c...<i>"He who represents himself has a fool for a client."</i><br /> - Abraham Lincoln<br /><br /><br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-19842848295060994372016-06-30T09:48:34.276-04:002016-06-30T09:48:34.276-04:00Or THINK of it this way - ONLY a competent person ...Or THINK of it this way - ONLY a competent person can be allowed to "represent" an alleged CRIMINAL, but an incompetent, dimwitted, corrupt, alleged criminal is allowed to "represent" EVERY decent, law-abiding citizen PURSUANT to the U.S. Constitution.<br /> <br />EXCEPT I suspect, NO past or present member of the MANSON Family will ever be allowed to "represent" any American citizen. Like NO representing for YOU !<br /><br />Robert Hendricksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880909248364077567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-36561758254429695602016-06-30T09:46:30.397-04:002016-06-30T09:46:30.397-04:00Great explanation DreathGreat explanation DreathMr. Humphrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02574243483977353223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-32940205323159320592016-06-30T09:22:34.387-04:002016-06-30T09:22:34.387-04:00The judicial "magic" of the U.S. Constit...The judicial "magic" of the U.S. Constitution can truly be found in words like "and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense."<br /> <br />No mention of representing oneself or being competent ENOUGH to represent oneself, BUT somehow a Judge, (who is usually a lawyer who was NOT competent ENOUGH to compete with actual judicial genius types) is selected to Lord over the MOST important written document EVER created in the history of mankind.<br /> <br />Sorry folks, but apparently Cousin Vinnie is the REAL "man" who actually has the power to MAKE of the "words" what HE wishes. And IF YOU don't like it, you can always PRAY, if you have NO money, or APPEAL if you do.<br /><br />Robert Hendricksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02880909248364077567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-47935976285772883922016-06-29T22:01:16.285-04:002016-06-29T22:01:16.285-04:00In his mind/ from his perspective, he was.In his mind/ from his perspective, he was.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-8483886317372305002016-06-29T20:49:38.742-04:002016-06-29T20:49:38.742-04:00I love this person :)
He was trying to help Manso...I love this person :)<br /><br />He was trying to help Manson. Imagine that. <br /><br />Thank you very much for the opinion lolAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.com