Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Easton Drive / Rudy Weber

Matt speaking here: You know, after visiting Cielo and the proximity of Weber's house - these morons weren't escaping at the time. They went for that hose in the opposite direction of the escape route I would have chosen. Of course my sense of self-preservation is strong. Dissent, anyone?

The motive discussed.
(ColScott, Patty, Matt)

Zombie Apocalypse up Easton Dr. to Sebring's house.

The Rudy Weber hose.

DebS speaking here:  Until I went to the actual different places that come into play I did not realize how close Jay Sebring's home was to the Rudolf Weber home.  The two homes are  on streets that are a block apart and run parallel to each other.

Both streets dead end and are very narrow, if two cars going in opposite directions were to meet on either road one car would need to pull over to let the other pass.  I do not understand why the killers would choose to go up a dead end road like that.  Additionally, they must have gone past the Weber home to the end of the street and turned around, stopping at the Weber home to wash off on their way back down the street because Mr. Weber said that he tried to remove the keys from the ignition but the killers drove off and got away.  If they were headed up the road Weber could have intercepted them on the way back down.

The proximity of the Sebring home to the Weber home made me wonder if it was the intention of Tex and the girls to go to Sebring's home after the killings, perhaps to rob it of money or drugs, but turned up the wrong street when looking for Sebring's. LA is huge, what are the odds that the killers happened to drive up the street next to the street of one of the victim's?

Here's google map I made showing the two residences locations.  Weber's is A and Sebring's is the blue arrow.  Google places the two homes .3 miles apart.


Max Frost said...

Hola troops!

Very interesting and overlooked subject.

They were actually heading in the direction of their "escape route" when they hosed off. Further up Benedict Canyon is where they dumped the bloody clothes. Even further up is Mulholland. Go left on Mulolland and you are almost immediately at Beverly Glen. Take a right on BevGlen and halfway down the hill is where Tex tossed the gun over the car - landing in the backyard of a house on the paralell-running Longview Valley Road.

From what I remember reading at some point (maybe in Bug's Helter Skelter), they first drove in the opposite direction down to Sunset Blvd and stopped at a gas station before turning around and driving back up Benedict Canyon. It may have been something like...they left the house, drove up benedict, hosed off, drove back down Benedict to Sunset (gas station), drove back up Benedict, dumped the clothes, and then followed through with the above mentioned route.

The pointbeing there was a lot of zigzagging going on...not the kind of behavior you'd expect from people in a hurry to get out of sight. It seems they were more concerned with cleaning up and covering their tracks rather than running fast.

Again, I'm going from memory here. I'd have to look it up for specifics. If anyone has solid info to share, please chime in.

Remember...SOMEONE went back to the house much later that night. It obviously wasn't their mantra that night to "Run far away fast, and stay far away."

Interesting theory about them possibly intending to go to Sebring's house. If you follow the drug motive...MAYBE Sebring had a large stash at home (maybe? Lol!) and Tex felt entitled to it.

As far as why they chose Weber's house to hose off: Maybe there was a sign posted on Benedict, with an arrow pointing up Portola, saying "Garden Hose 4 Sale."

Max Frost said...

And I wouldn't call them "morons" Matt - I'd refer to them as "meth heads."

cielodrivecom said...

Great pics!

I've been dedicating a lot of time to this subject for the past few years (even made my own map!) and I've come to some conclusions that I will share in the very near future. I've been just waiting on confirmation on a few items.

I originally was trying to make sense of a few question I had, and as is often with the case, you do a little research, talk to a few different folks and you stumble onto things you weren't even looking for.

It all seems to make sense now, at least in mind.

But I will say this. I'm done with listening to Susan Atkins.

starship said...

Yes, cool pictures of a trip I hope to make someday.

But, Matt, looks to me like the Col is listening to his playlist, not your ideas about motive....

Matt said...

A comment from a reader off-blog:

Also, Max Frost's comment "David Oman's house is actually the one nearest our hero property." Countering CoffeeAddict1969's comment is incorrect.

David Oman's house was re-built from one of the original three houses (including 10050) on the cul-de-sac and is the furthest from the Cielo gate.

Matt said...

starship said...

But, Matt, looks to me like the Col is listening to his playlist, not your ideas about motive....

His phone rings a lot. My guess is he has those plugs in in bed, too.

cielodrivecom said...

Matt, is your off-blog friend sure about that? I was just looking at your picture and it looks like the Kott house (closest to the gate) is the only original house that has been redone.

Matt said...

Cielo, the one closest to the gate was not there in 1969. It is relatively new as compared to the others.

Matt said...

From my off-blog friend:

Oops, what I meant to say was that Oman's house was built next to one of the original three houses on the cul-de-sac

Farflung said...

It is an interesting theory, so I’m ‘forced’ to put on a geek hat and try to figure the probabilities a little bit. A little bit I’m going to try and figure.

First is the pseudo-unique geography of living in an area like Benedict Canyon. Most streets, by Mother Nature’s dictate, will be dead end, and thanks to the exponential costs of road construction, will typically have narrow lanes. Excavating a building pad is also painfully expensive, and the narrow street makes adding things like a garage an equally painful endeavor.

Upon leaving Cielo Drive the first decision point would be at the intersection of Benedict Canyon, and contain a binary left or right turn, with left being weighted in the direction of Spahn’s; they appear to have gone left.

From the intersection of CIelo and Benedict Canyon, to Mulholland Drive are ten (10) total decision points, with nine (9) of them being Dead End streets. Obviously the odds of selecting a dead end road in that area is very high, which would have anyone backtracking the street in such a decision, ninety percent of the time, based upon chance alone, and assuming they headed north. See how geeky?

With ten total opportunities to select a street to wash down after a crime, and another point of interest house being on the next street, roughly lowers the odds of random selection to one in five (very roughly) since there are ten in the base with the adjacent road creating a total of five pairs for selection. Would Sebring’s home being two streets away instead of one be any less significant?

Back to some geography, being adjacent to a street in the average suburban setting may mean jumping a fence at one residence to arrive in the back yard of another. In a situation which separates Sebring’s home from Weber’s you might as well be a mile away. I would imagine there has been more people walk on the moon, than traversed the ridge between the Weber and Sebring estates.

According to the ‘bread crumbs’ (Weber’s house, the gun’s location, the clothing) left behind by the Family, there appears to be a trend in the direction of Spahn’s Ranch.

So what about everyone else? They didn’t head towards Steve Parent’s home since it can be argued that he was an unexpected visitor. But so was Jay Sebring, it was Abigail and Wojciech who may (may that is) have been known to be in the Cielo home at that time, and their home was east on Mulholland Drive. The path of relatively least resistance, to facilitate an escape to Spahn’s Ranch, was Benedict Canyon via Mulholland to Beverly Glen and beyond. The only person (besides Sharon Tate) to have lived along that escape route was Jay Sebring, with his street being one of ten to select along the Benedict Canyon segment of the escape route. Man I’m in total spaz mode now.

Eliminating Weber’s wash point and using the gun and clothing disposal sites, one could still make an oo-ee-oo connection to Sebring’s home, with nothing changing in the realm of statistical chance. None the less, as Mr. Spock would say “Fascinating”. There now, I’ve referenced Star Trek and completely crossed over.

cielodrivecom said...

"Cielo, the one closest to the gate was not there in 1969. It is relatively new as compared to the others."

Now I'm very confused. Are you positive about that? That house is modern, but I do believe that is where the Kotts lived in 1969. It's confusing, at least to me, because, as you mentioned, the gate at 10066 has been moved up quite a bit from it's original position. But if you look at your picture, the third house from the left is the Asin's house. Now, the Asin's and the Kott's properties were not right next to eachother. There was a plot of land inbetween them. So, the house closest to the gate may not be original, but it is where one of the two original houses were.

Patty is Dead said...

oh geez...the hose! lol

eviliz said...

Panamint Patty said...
oh geez...the hose! lol


leary7 said...

I love a conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but when a new twist is promoted (and I love Deb's theory and the prospect of Cielo's info) I am always left wondering what the motive or reasoning would be for Pat, Leslie and Linda not to be fully revealing.
I understand Cielo dismissing Susan, but what would be the upside for the other girls to omit they contemplated going to Jay's house?

Wasn't part of Linda's immunity deal that she 'tell all' or 'reveal all'. And if it could have been proven that she withheld pertinent info would she not have been legally vunerable? Why would she risk all to keep something as innocuous as the contemplation of a trip to Jay's secret?
Yeah, all the girls were deep-fried wackadoodles '69-'75 or so and told many tales in those days. But I just find it hard to believe that all of em could maintain a veil of silence and secrecy for the past forty years.
Basically, all TLB alternative theories rely on the premise that all the girls were, are and will always be pathological and dedicated liars.
I am most likely in the minority here, but I don't see it.

Trilby said...

So I'm getting over my funk about missing this trip b/c of the date change long enough to comment... *sigh*... The whole thing with Weber just has always stunk to high heaven with me. Something is off. I read N. Schrek's book, & could definitely buy into the theory that they were heading to Easton to look for the drugs (cleaned out of the house the next day), after an aborted hostage-taking attempt. Then, on CieloDrive's (great) site, I read with much interest the police interview of Weber, by Sgt. Robert Calkins, done on 12/29/69. Weber talks of the decline of his street due to transients turning rentals into flophouses, & at the end of the interview is the most interesting statement. Weber asks: "So, what about the girl who lives two houses down?" or something to that effect, & Calkins quickly ends the interview and says that they'll talk about that later, "not on here.". My thinking is someone affiliated with the drug-dealing network/murder-burn crew was living on that street. It has never made any sense to me whatsoever that they'd go up that street all bloody, looking for a hose, go to a dead-end, turn around, spot a hose in the pitch-dark (barely a moon that night), etc. Then Weber sees the screaming headlines and doesn't see a connection and call the police? The whole Weber thing never seemed right to me - like the real story was being covered up and woven into a fairytale (like the rest of the official story). And that poor hose has seen better days, it was looking pretty new when I was there! Loving the pics of y'all!

leary7 said...

seriously, why wouldn't it make sense to go up a dead end...less traffic, less chance of being spotted by passerbys. what does it say, if anything, in Tex's book about the Weber incident just out of curiousity.

Jenn said...

Tex's book: "Linda turned off Benedict Canyon onto Portola Drive, one of the winding side streets, looking for a place where we could wash. Finally we saw an exposed hose. As we poured the water over ourselves, drenching our hair and clothes, a man and woman suddenly appeared at their door in bathrobes, asking us what we were doing.

I put on my Texas accent, saying we had just been walking and needed a drink. As we ran back to the car, the man followed us, his wife shrieking, "Get the license number; get the number!" from the doorway. In my rush I flooded the engine, and as I struggled to get the car started again the old man came up to my window and stuck his hand in, grabbing for the keys. I managed to crank up the glass and drive off, leaving him shouting after us in the middle of the road. For some reason it never occurred to any of us to try to kill him-he didn't live on Cielo Drive."

Jenn Martin

Trilby said...

I never thought it made any sense to leave the dead-end of the switchback on Cielo and drive in bloody clothes, supposedly changing while driving. Why not change into "clean" clothes before leaving? One way or another, carrying or changing, the clean clothes were going to get blood transferred. After reading Shreck and the Weber interview Cielo has posted, I think they either turned onto that street by mistake or because they knew or had known someone on it. I've always believed alot of missing pieces (perhaps deliberately omitted in the weaving of the fairytale/cover-up) could possibly be found in the police interview sheets and FIRs.

leary7 said...

thanks Jenn.
So my question would be, if there were nefarious reasons for them being on Weber's street, why would Tex not admit to them given no crime was committed and knowing all these years that Pat or Linda could come forward with said info and put a serious black mark on Tex's parole chances. It seems from what I have read and heard that Tex has believed all the years that one day he might indeed have a shot at parole (nonsense of course). So why remain both secretive and deceitful knowing full well that others - who have no loyalty to you and have the same info - can pull the rug out from under you.
It just makes no sense - you've just ADMITTEDLY butchered five people and you are going to be deceitful about why you are driving on a certain street? Makes no sense.

Trilby said...

Apparently I am incapable of any sort of consistent, correct spelling of Mr. Schreck's name...
Incidentally, my overall point in my previous posts is that something is totally off about the Weber incident/sequence of events.

Trilby said...

Leary, if the overall story is woven of fairydust and entirely deceitful, why would he pull at threads and unravel the whole thing? I think there was a massive cover-up in terms of motive, probably done to protect powerful interests. The more I read about Sidney Korshak, the more I believe he might have allegedly been the one powerful enough to pull it off. Tex et al were total losers and fu*k-ups. I think he went nuts and lost control of his bloodlust. I also think there were things going on that powerful people within the entertainment industry and Mob would have rather not seen the light of day. So they scrambled to orchestrate a cover story, which utilized certain truths. So the story is an amalgam of truth and lies, which makes it even more confusing to figure out and then decide what's germane and what isn't. I also think the answer lies in figuring out which players, no matter how seemingly insignificant, were backed by which factions of suppliers - Mob, Canadian Mob, & BEL. Who supplied whom, who got burned or crossed.

Patty is Dead said...

amen, trilby.

Matt said...

Trilby rocks, no?

Farflung said...

What was reported in 1969…. 2009?

Here’s a report about the blood drenched clothing found, which was so soaked in gore that the reporter and police instantly knew it must be associated with bloody, Satanic murder which involved blood:

News Retrospective

(1:11 – 1:18) Driveway that led to a ???

(4:15 – 4:28) Bloody clothes… did they look bloody? Would they look bloody to Weber?

(4:40 – 4:47) Covered in blood? Where does this come from?

(5:10 – 5:33) Was it bloody clothes or a pile of clothing?

The test and clothing change was a great idea, but it obviously discounts a visit to Weber’s house since the clock would still be running. The salient point was the spot afforded the offenders, which could reasonably be FIRST used, as a point to discard the clothing, AND he nailed it. The clothes weren’t mentioned as bloody and the timing was equally irrelevant, but does not detract from the analysis. It was the first opportunity on Benedict Canyon to pull over and toss a pile of clothing from a group of people. The handgun was disposed in a different area, presumably to disconnect it from the clothing and the sheer physics of tossing a small metal item versus a pile of garments.

(6:19) Look at that ruthless, cold killer wearing an epic beard and paisley shirt; true human scum.

Sometimes the news gets a few things out of whack, even forty years later.

leary7 said...

yes, Trilby does rock. And maybe I am just burnt out from spending a couple of decades waist deep in the JFK muck.
I honestly do remain open to all possibilities with regards to TLB and motive...but at the end of the day I just always come back to Charlie lashing out, Tex going berserk and the girls being zombies.
I wish there were more. But 43 years later and all we got is supposition and speculation. Nothing to hang one's hat on.

leary7 said...

But to answer your question Trilby, as to why Tex would pull at threads...
because he is not a moron, and if he really believes he has a chance at parole he HAS TO KNOW that getting ahead of all and any info/evidence is essential to his chances. He's gone to how many parole hearings claiming to have told all he knows? What happens to his credibility of rehab if suddenly Linda or Pat or the skies part and Charlie himself offers up testimony that they were after drugs and headed to Sebrings etc etc.
If you have admitted to butchering seven people why would you lie and deceive about non-criminal matters such as looking for more drugs etc.?
I just don't see Tex or Pat or Linda or any of the others being capable of omerta for half a century.

Patty is Dead said...

trilby rocks, yes. you too, leary.

Trilby said...

Awww, thanks, guys. :). Leary, I enjoy your posts. I've never been sure which house was the original 10170, rented by the Kotts - the first or second. Tanya Roberts ("Charlie's Angels", "That 70s Show") once owned it. Still sulking like a 5-year old (my normal mental age anyway) that I'm not on Tour! BTW, when you get to Topanga, stop at Bouboulina's - in front of Pine Tree Circle, across from the old Topanga Shopping Center and the turnoff for Old Topanga Cyn Rd. Bouboulina's is a funky-cool boutique that was an original Topanga cabin. I first went there in the year they opened, '80, when they were on the other side overlooking the creek. Multi-generational Topangans - started by Kathy and now run by her daughter Jess. The greatest original tye-dyes! Maybe they can share some Topanga lore, also. Across is the Topanga Shopping Center - where Neil Young's wife owned The Topanga Kitchen. The Market where Sadie walked to buy the soup, floss, etc. hasn't been remodeled since then, either. Abuelita's is tasty (better than El Coyote!!).

leary7 said...

I apologize - I really am going to turn the computer off and go to the movies after this one last vent.

Trilby writes "if the overall story is woven of fairydust and entirely deceitful"....

What am I missing here?

Do we not know with 100% certainty who went to Cielo Drive that night and who killed (putting aside Sadie's claims for the moment)?

Do we not know for certain who butchered the LaBiancas?

Was there not blood evidence, fingerprint evidence, and weapons, clothing etc etc.?

Was there not corroborating testimony from a dozen folk from Watkins to Kitty to Al Springer etc etc?

Have not the participants in TLB - save Manson of course - fully admitted to their roles and openly discussed what they believe was the motive for their actions?

So tell me please, with all due respect, where the fuck is the fairy dust?
Oh yes, motive.
I think there may be three people on these boards who believe Helter Skelter was the sole or even primary motive. Most of us accept that is was a "perfect storm" of Charlie's anger and paranoia and such.
Were there mob figures behind it all? Canadians? Drug hit squads? the CIA? The Chamber of Commerce?
Show me one, just one piece of solid evidence.
Fairy dust and entirely deceitful??
Man, that is one helluva leap.

Trilby said...

And that's the million-dollar question, Leary, WHY?... Hopefully we'll all split a million when we answer it. Or go crazy trying. Tex reminds me (I loathe the guy, & I can't believe I'm going to use this analogy, b/c I'm nuts about animals, active in rescue and all my furbabies are rescue adoptions) - but, Tex reminds me of a sheepdog whose job is specifically to guard or herd sheep. But one day the dog nips the sheep by mistake, gets a taste of blood, & starts killing sheep. In the dog's case, I'd advocate rehoming him to a Sanctuary with no sheep to live out his natural life. In Tex's case, not so much...). Atkins said in her Grand Jury testimony that they had disposed of the weapons before getting to Weber's. I agree with Matt's assessment of their escape route. They go all the way up BCynDr then turn around and go back to Weber's... Huh?! The killers can never agree on even the slightest details in their re-tellings over the years. Like a liar - or liars- who can't remember their lies. And I think of the protection Tex has had in prison over the years - it's been documented he and Bruce were not subject to the same searches, rules, etc. AND they were in that easy-time prison for years. Doris Tate alleged he was protected by a man named Voit, I forget the first name. A wealthy, powerful guy out of Orange County. What if they stick to the story because they figure their slim-to-none parole chances are better if they stick to the "I was brainwashed" story. Or if they fear what would happen to them if they told the truth. Life in prison is better than being killed in prison. And what is the significance of Kasabian's second husband (whether they were actually married, I've not yet ascertained)? - the guy she was with before Bob Kasabian. This guy was said to be a big-time L.A. drug dealer. I've never understood why Kasabian was along that night. See, one question begats a hundred others until your temples begin throbbing. The only thing I'm certain of is that I'm certain of nothing. But I'd really like to flesh some of the tangential details out. Oh, & here's something I find significant by its absence in all the killers' stories - why does noone EVER mention searching the area above the Cielo garage? You come in the gate, kill Parent, garage is there with bug light on and stairs leading to a second-floor and a door, & you just skip over it and proceed to the main house? Huh?!

Trilby said...

And it's all just my opinion, Leary. I'm interested in everyone's opinion. Just because I go in one direction with my beliefs doesn't mean I discount anyone else's. There's actually alot of conflicting evidence in this case. I'd love to see a forensic expert analyze the blood evidence. I take with a grain of salt ANYTHING DeCarlo says - where did the alliances lie between the Straights, the Slaves, & the HAs; & who was trafficking for whom? There is a huge amount of conflicting evidence and testimony in this case. I think it's all worth questioning. And I try not to put value judgements on any of the questions. I'm not attached to my opinions because I can't prove them. They're just thoughts. The only time I get annoyed is when anyone insists someone HAS to be wrong - because if anything was certain about this case, we wouldn't still be here asking all these questions, right? Anyhow, Peace :).

leary7 said...

you're right of course, Trilby, why is the only question. And IT IS a good one. I just have never had any problem whatsoever accepting Charlie's complete assholeness and evilness. And Tex's mindlessness. and the girl's zombieness.

I am old. I spent several years arguing with my ex-father-in-law who was 1,000% convinced it was OJ's son from his first marriage, the chubby chef, who actually did the Nicole and Goldman killings.

Movie night.

Jenn said...

I sure am enjoying this discussion; thanks, everyone!

Like everyone, I have huge questions about the motive. I tend toward the perfect storm sceanario. I also question why Linda was on the "mission". Because she had a CDL? Yeah..."We're going out to commit murder, we're dressed in black in the middle of the night, the car is filled with knives and at least one gun, and later we'll be covered with blood, but we sure need someone with a valid driver's license in case we're pulled over." lol

I work about 2 miles from the San Luis Obispo Men's Colony, where Bruce Davis "lives" and where Watson used to be. I drive by there every day. I didn't live in the area when Watson was there, but I've talked with several people who worked there at the time. When I ask about Davis and Watson, to a person they say, "Davis is no problem and he's nice enough, but there's something about Watson. No one turns their back on him."

I'm in L.A. Quite often and this Saturday is one of those days. A few times a year I go around to the Manson sites, and will do so this weekend. I've never been to Waverly. Perhaps I'll get there this weekend. I'll go to Spahn and Cielo for sure, like always.

Best wishes to everyone,

Trilby said...

Wow, Jenn, that is interesting info. Watson makes my blood run cold. There is something incredibly scary (to me, anyway) in his eyes. There's a pic of him in one of Bill Nelson's books, from high school, running down the football field - & the look in his eyes scares the hell out of me... For some other pics of him from high school . He's got scary eyes in two of them, too.

St. Circumstance said...

I think there should be tours every 6 months lol the site, the conversation and the peeps who show up to say hello are always at a peak in my opinion when you guys do this...

I cant tell you all enough how totally cool this is for all of us and...

I cant imagine how cool it must have been for you ;)

Max Frost said...

That's probably true. I haven't been up there since 2007, the last time I showed someone the place. We happened to be slowly driving by Oman's house just as he was coming out of his front door. He had a bright happy look on his face until the second he saw us and knew why we were up there. The look on his face IMMEDIATELY changed. It was bizarre. It was as though he was suddenly enveloped by a huge dark cloud and lived in a state of perpetual bitterness. He didn't come out. He backed up right away and closed the door.

This was surprising to me. I'd seen him on Ghost Hunters and other shows. For a guy who is as eager as he is to be on TV telling his ghost stories, you'd think he'd be a lot more receptive to people visiting the hill. Like, c'mon man, at least invite us in for a Foster's on tap. The dude is a trip.

Max Frost said...

CoffeeAddict1969 said...

Thank you Matt and your off-blog reader for clarifying my previous comment about the new construction next to David Oman's house. Correct me if I'm wrong but in the older pictures, the only two houses were the Kotts (closest to the gate) and the Asins. New construction was built between the two and next to the Asin's.

Matt said...

Coffee, that's my understanding but I'm no expert on the Cielo Dr. construction. The off-blog reader you refer to is - so I'm going with that.

CoffeeAddict1969 said...

Just an update on David Oman's movie "The House at the End of the Drive". There will be a one night sneak peek in Westwood on August 7th, 2013. He is also hosting a private tour and ghost hunt at this home. For mor info:

Dan S said...

Who are the only 2 who knew about the drug motive? LK and stabby....just a possibility as for why no one else blabbed about going to Jay's.

HellNoKitty said...

I believe that the girls all are pathological liars and Linda’s dishonesty surpasses even Susan Atkins’ lies. Linda is hardly as innocent as she was made out to be, and also had frequent dealings with Law enforcement in later years and always managed to get a golden ticket out. It is highly probable that the gang was headed over to Sebring’s to get his stash (later Steve McQueen and a few other people went over to get rid of it) , but got spooked and thwarted after encountering Weber.

Drugs played a much bigger role in the murderous rampage at Cielo (both Frykowski and Sebring dealt with and knew Tex through drug channels) . So—It would not have been prudent for Kasabian to discuss a trip to Sebring’s place to get drugs since she was even more involved with Tex and dealing drugs than she ever could feasibly admit as a witness for the prosecution.

Bugliosi seriously downplayed how drugs were integral in both the perpetrators and the victims lives as a key motive for the murders (Sharon wasn’t supposed to be there). Therefore, he was careful to paint Kasabian out to be an innocent little hippie chick who merely had fallen in with the wrong crowd and was pliable enough to not have been thoroughly brainwashed. She played her role very well, but that’s all it was. Don’t forget that she stole $5000 from her husband. That $5000 likely went to purchase a large quantity of illegal substances which inevitably Tex (and not Charlie) brokered the deals for. It’s also significant that at the time of the murders, Tex and Linda were romantically involved, and cohorts in crime.

So yes—she was a pathological liar then and still is, and it wouldn’t be conducive for her to ever tell the truth, nor did Bugliosi want to hear it if it conflicted with his “Helter Skelter” race war nonsense.

HellNoKitty said...

It would if it implicated him as a drug dealer who knew the victims rather than it having been a random slaying commanded by Manson to start a race war. Charles Manson didn’t “rule” Tex to kill anyone and he only told the girls to do what Tex told them to do.

Tex had his own agenda with Linda, but it’s not in their best interests to disclose that now as it conflicts with the official narrative.

HellNoKitty said...

It would if it implicated him as a drug dealer who knew the victims rather than it having been a random slaying commanded by Manson to start a race war. Charles Manson didn’t “rule” Tex to kill anyone and he only told the girls to do what Tex told them to do.

Tex had his own agenda with Linda, but it’s not in their best interests to disclose that now as it conflicts with the official narrative.