Friday, April 4, 2014

Then and forever - by Susan French/Tony James Features

On my soapbox:

This article on Polanski's love for Sharon makes me wanna puke. He's as bad a liar as DT. Every year he becomes more of the grieving husband than he was in 1969.

Now he claims that he's made sure that there are flowers on Sharon's grave every year on the anniversary of the murders with a note "Love R."

A: He's never made sure there are flowers on the grave.

B: The "Love R" notes are from bat-shit-crazy Rosie.

He also now claims that he used hi-tech listening devices planted in his friend's homes, hired high priced private detectives, and once Manson was found, was not sure justice would be done so he hired a hit man to kill Manson. 

What a load of horseshit. If he was so worried about justice, how about showing up for even a single day of the trial? How about writing one single letter to the parole board to keep Sharon's killers in prison?

Why didn't Polanski make these revelations in his biography??

Thank you for indulging me. I feel better now.

The article...


Then and forever

by Susan French/Tony James Features

It is 45 years this year since 26-year-old Sharon Tate, the pregnant wife of maverick movie-maker Roman Polanski was murdered by Charles Manson and three women, but Polanski, now a frail 80, has never allowed himself to forget.

It is 45 years this year since 26-year-old Sharon Tate, the pregnant wife of maverick movie-maker Roman Polanski was murdered by Charles Manson and three women, but Polanski, now a frail 80, has never allowed himself to forget.

On August 9 every year a Los Angeles florist arrives at the Holy Cross Cemetery in Culver City and piles a simple white grave under a cedar tree with bunch after bunch after bunch of red roses.

The flowers are always the same and so is the card that goes with them: "I love you. R" It is 45 years this year since 26-year-old Sharon Tate, the pregnant wife of maverick movie-maker Roman Polanski was murdered by Charles Manson and three women, but Polanski, now a frail 80, has never allowed himself to forget.

Now married to French actress Emmanuelle Seigner with whom he has two children, Polanski makes no secret of the fact that Sharon Tate was the love of his life.

Barred from the US after a series of sex scandals, he has to entrust others to put flowers on the grave in which Sharon Tate lies, their unborn son Paul, who also died in the attack, in her womb.

The fact that he was away from their house in the Bel Air hills on the night Sharon was murdered remains the greatest regret of his life, Polanski said recently. "The times spent with Sharon were the best years of my life."

In none of the movies which had made him the new master of Hollywood spine-chillers had he invented such stark horror.  But when 35-year-old Polanski flew in from London in August 1969 and hurried home, what he found would haunt him for ever.

The bodies of his wife and of four friends, staying in the farmhouse-style mansion while Polanski was away, lay around the house. The scene appalled hardened detectives who described it as looking like a battlefield.

After Sharon's murder, Polanski was obsessed by vengeance. He bought high-tech listening devices to leave in the homes of people he suspected to be implicated in the killings, and employed expensive private detectives.

When Charles Manson and three young women were found guilty of Sharon's murder two years later, Polanski, apparently not certain that justice would be done, was claimed to have tried to hire a hit-man to kill Manson in jail.

"Marrying Sharon was the supreme moment of my life," he said. I just hoped it would last. I should have known better."

Sharon and Polanski had come from very different backgrounds. A former Dallas beauty queen she had grown up on a ranch indulged by wealthy parents. Polanski's mother had died in Auschwitz and his father managed to have the boy smuggled out of the camp. With the help of relations, the boy escaped the Germans for the rest of the war. He slept in woods and ditches, always expecting the next day to be his last. Miraculously he survived and after the war decided to be an actor. He moved to America and in 1963 won an Oscar for his first film, Knife in the Water.

Hollywood welcomed him as a dynamic hero of the New Wave and over the next six years he became one of the world's wealthiest and most successful directors.  He made such classic spine-chillers as Rosemary's Baby, The Vampire Killer and Repulsion.

In 1967 he made The Fearless Vampire Hunters with Sharon Tate. They fell in love and married. In the house on the hill she introduced him to a tranquil home life he had never known. They were blissfully happy and when Sharon became pregnant, friends said that Polanski announced the news "as if they had just invented having babies." He had flown back to London in time for the birth.

Instead, he flew back to horror. In the living room he found Sharon's body covered with numerous brutal wounds. He rang the police, went into the garden and sat under a tree and wept. Later he would say: "Before the murders I was the toast of Hollywood. Then people started saying that the victims must have been evil.

"In fact ours was just an ordinary married life with ordinary friends. Just because you make horror films for a living doesn't mean that you are some sort of a monster."

Eight years later that was just what the press named him. He was arrested on sex and drug charges, given bail and immediately fled to Europe. He never returned to America and today spends most of his time in France where he has made several hit movies. He lives quietly with Emmanuelle and their children.

Just 40 years since the nightmare experiences in Bel Air, Roman Polanski admits that he still thinks constantly about Sharon's murder.  My life is with my wife and family and I am grateful for their love and the happiness they bring," he said recently. "But Sharon is still someone who will always be very special."


Anonymous said...

"Sharon is someone who will always be very special" - Roman Polanski. Well, Roman, it is a great pity that if she was so 'very special', that you were not faithful to her. She was too good for you, and was also carrying your unborn child.

As for Debra Tate, instead of turning up to Parole Hearings, why don't you fight to get Mr Polanski returned to the USA to face trial?

Suze said...

You beat me to it Equinox. Well said!

Robert Hendrickson said...

To EQ...234

Thank you for the compliment. My murdered X-associate used to say; "TRUTH is more compelling than FICTION" and HE was a pathological liar. Of course, life is just a grand ILLUSION, and he was reffering to MOVIES specifically.

I think the real problem is: Polanski OWNS all the rights to the deceased SHARON TATE - as HE will always be HER husband when she died. AND the real conflict in the Tate / Polanski marriage was that Polanski's ego saw HIS wife RISING to a level of an actual "movie star."

Where HE would always ONLY be just another "director."

So for HIM to even help promote the everlasting celebrity of HIS first wife, would seem totally counter-productive to promoting HIS career. And HIS career was EVERYTHING !.

Doc Sierra said...

Well said Robert.....

AndyHunt said...

Sorry, for jumping in here as a complete unknown. I have been reading this blog for a while, since I became interested in this whole subject about a year ago.
I've often been tempted to comment, but so far considered my knowledge and opinions far below that of most of you guys and girls.
The article, in particular one line of it, has forced my hand. The authors state that Polanski was "barred from America after a series of sex scandals". Later they turn this into "arrested on sex and drug charges" What a very eloquent way of avoiding the truth. Mr P, as I'm sure youre aware anally raped an underage girl who he had fed drugs too.
The article is full of such deception, outright lies, and narcissistic self pity. In that respect the only truth in it is as an accurate character analysis of Mr P.
Sorry if i'm going off on one here, what with this being my first post, but reading that pile of unmitigated shite has got my blood boiling.

On a better note...excellent blog, especially the comment sections. Always lively, always thought provoking.

Venus said...

I love the "soapbox" comments, well said!

So Sharon was the love of his life? Really?? He should've treated her better.

Baby Paul isn't in her womb. He was removed during the autopsy.

I was amazed to learn that Sharon grew up on a ranch and was spoiled by her rich folks. Well, you learn something new every day, huh? Sheesh.

Excellent posts, everyone!

Matt said...

Andy, thanks for the kind words. Your points are well taken. Polanski is not barred from the US. To the contrary, the State of CA would very very much like him to return and maybe even become a guest of the Governor.

Welcome to the blog.

Matt said...

Right, Venus. She was such the LOHL that he poked two flight attendants before he even took his polygraph in the TLB case. Maybe it helped alleviate the intense grief, I mean we all deal with it in different ways, right?

AustinAnn74 said...

Who wrote this ridiculous article? Was it Rosie Tate Polanski? Whoever wrote it obviously didn't do that much research. As y'all know, everyone who is born in Texas has to grow up on a RANCH by WEALTHY parents! Ridiculous!

beauders said...

So Polanski discovered the bodies, learn something new every day.

Max Frost said...


You should never refrain from commenting out of fear that your knowledge and opinions are inferior to others.

There's really no such thing. Just jump in and if you leave any blanks someone else will most likely kindly fill them in. I've never seen anyone here ridicule anyone for a lack of knowledge. On the contrary, people can get quickly educated by commenting back and forth.

There's probably a lot of you out there which is why some posts only receive a few comments. Just jump on in everyone - get the ball rolling. That's what it's all about.

Matt said...

Exactly, Andy. Max speaks the truth. We are here to help fill in the blanks. Conversely I have gained valuable insight from newbies. Many times they see things we don't.

Vera Dreiser said...

Wow, for such media savvy people you guys are incredibly clueless. This is a "write-around" article -- not an interview. These people did not interview Polanski, they took quotes from other interviews and books and "wrote around" them for an article that is, yes, mostly factually incorrect. But all of the so-called claims by Polanski that upset Matt -- the flowers every year, the listening devices, the private detectives and the hit men -- they are just MORE factually incorrect assumptions or mangling of past reports and innuendo by the "reporters" not based on info they rec'd from Polanski (notice none of those claims are sourced or put between quotation marks). They weren't based on new statements by Polanski. Please, don't be so naïve guys.
And Debra Tate's "lies", Matt? Not even worth a response, such tired bullshit from a guy who's bitter she won't have anything to do with his blog.
You and Hendrickson are made for each other the way you conflate this shit.
Robert, really? Polanski didn't want to be eclipsed by Sharon's sky-rocketing fame?
She was not a "star" or even a "rising" star as others have pointed out many times before, just a respected b-level actress who told everyone who would listen she was quitting acting with the birth of the new baby.
And I hardly think Polanski was considered just "another" director by anyone in 1969, except, perhaps, by you, Hendrickson, because of your personal beef with him. Just look at the Wikipedia entry on his previous film, Rosemary's Baby: "The film was an enormous commercial success, earning over $33 million in the United States on a modest budget of $3.2 million. It was met with near universal acclaim from film critics and earned numerous nominations and awards. The American Film Institute ranked the film 9th in their 100 Years...100 Thrills list..."
And of course, he would make what many consider one of the best films ever, Chinatown, a few years later.
Anyone can make a film about Sharon, if they want, she's a public figure and a dead one at that. The reason he never made a movie about her, undoubtedly, is that there is no reason to do one. There's no grand story "arc," as you should well know, and it would be unseemly at best. A husband making a film about his dead wife's brutal murder? Yeah, nice.
And, oh, another FYI, she wasn't his first wife, she was his second.
And for all your tsk-tskers, Roman wasn't the only one who was unfaithful in that marriage, and, no, Chris Jones was not Sharon's only infidelity during her years as Mrs. Polanski.

ElComadreja777 said...

He's still a criminal and loathsome pervert.

Doc Sierra said...

Vera Dreiser said...

Wow, for such media savvy people you guys are incredibly clueless.
What are you trying to say? Don't beat around the bush.....

Doc Sierra said...

I like your style Vera (heavy sacrcasm). You being so omniscient and shit and taking personal shots at Matt and other people because you don't agree with them.
When you do this you discourage people that want to contribute but are afraid they're going to be attacked. Tact is a good attribute. Check it out.....

Vera Dreiser said...

I only go "personal" in response to their personal ie unfair comments about Debra and Polanski by Matt and Polanski by Hendrickson. And believe me, I'm used to getting attacked on this site by the majority of the users here. If Matt can use his "soapbox" why can't the commenters? And I wouldn't attack a poster who hadn't attacked me first, except for Hendrickson -- and those attacks are not personal, just fact checking and calling out because he is a public figure with a major stake in this case...and he, of all people, should know better.

Matt said...

Robin...I mean Vera,

To quote one of the genius comedians of our time when addressing his fellow idiot on screen anchor:

Vera, you ignorant slut. This article may appear to be a (oh, let's use publishing terms) "write-around" article, but it is written in a manner to mislead the average reader who has picked up this article for the average toilet-time reading experience employed by over 56% of American magazine readers, who, with their limited squeeze time, do not take the time to analyze it's validity, thereby producing more fodder, flotsam, and lies about this case that if left unchecked will surely become fact.

The article is purposely meant to mislead and even closes with a quote from Polanski.

With that in mind, I decided to make sure that there was at least one commentary countering this bullshit article on a board that is meant for just such a use.

Your follow-up remarks that take a confirmed, habitual liar (Debra Tate) and a pedophile (Polanski) to a glorified status while belittling Sharon's life accomplishments to "just a b-level actress" are nauseating. And while I'm positive that you have no more confirmation than anyone else on the subject of Sharon's infidelities, if true, it bares no consequence on the subject because no one is questioning the good or bad of Polanski for said infidelities! He's being condemned for his posthumous commentary of how wonderful his marriage was to Sharon, how important she was in his life, and how much he loved her, which is in complete contradiction to his actions at the time. Sadly, Sharon is not here to make such commentary or to defend herself.

In defense to Robert, in the big scheme of things in Hollywood, Polanski is just another director who has done fewer good films than he has done absolute flops in which the studios lost millions. Big whoop. At this point in his career he is far more well known for his alleged rape of a 13-year-old girl, fleeing the country to avoid trial, and being Sharon Tate's husband than he is for his films.

In closing, as you continue to defend Debra Tate on this site, your only and next commentary should be to Cindy Lee's question in which she literally begged you to answer the following questions about Debra's claim of work in victims' rights: What victims organizations is she a member of, what victims (outside of the Manson case) has she counseled and through what means, and what legislation has she lobbied to get passed? Because these are the things a victim advocate does. They do not fight to get an alleged pedophile off the hook for his crimes by saying about Rape and Rape, "I'm a victims' advocate and I know the difference."

AndyHunt said...

Thank you Matt and Max. I'll do my best to contribute in a worthwhile way.

Vera, I hope you do no think that I was commenting in the belief that the article was an interview with Polanski. I did say in my post "as the authors state". I do believe however that Mr P is lying when he makes such statements as (and these are real quotes)"Marrying Sharon was the supreme moment of my life" "In fact ours was just an ordinary married life with ordinary friends. Just because you make horror films for a living doesn't mean that you are some sort of a monster". Mr P has made dozens of similar, and more outrageous statements over the last forty odd years. It's very easy to check.
Examine the reality. Both Polanski and Tate had affairs during their brief time together. Polanski was by all accounts a sexual predator. Tate was no innocent however, a look at her previous relationships reveals an uncanny preference for men who could further her career. Whilst everyone close to them confirmed that they were in love, this does not rule out the very strong possibility their relationship was any more important to either, than Tates for former boyfriends, and Polanskis for his pecker shaped ego.
I still believe, after a great deal of research in to Mr P, that he is a most despicable, dangerous, and toxic personality.
I do agree that he is also a genius filmmaker (or at least, he was), and his films have made millions upon millions of dollars, and received all sorts of critical praise.
Perhaps I should explain my view in a short summary.
I compare him to an asshole. It does an incredible job, and is capable of producing some outstanding output. It's still an asshole tho'

Vera Dreiser said...

Well, Matt, your cluelessness continues. Do you think Debra would be pleased if her friend discussed Sharon's infidelities and called her a B-level actress? There are other posts I've made that are decidedly not the kinds that would come out of Robin, who of course I've heard about, but don't know, have never spoken to and whose site I've never visited, nor have any desire to. The fact that you can't get past the fact that I am not "Robin" despite today's and past postings that clearly show I'm not -- and that you only think I am her because I defend Debra and other victims' family members when attacked anywhere shows how, uh, limited your skills of deduction and observation are.
I won't even go into your embarrassing, nonsensical defense of how the discussed article was "purposely meant to mislead" so you gallantly corrected the record by scouring Polanski, despite the fact that -- again! --the very things you were horrified by POLANSKI NEVER EVEN SAID.
You're sumpthin, friend.
And if you think Polanski is better known for the rape conviction and as Sharon's husband, well, of course that may be true in the general public but talk to anyone who knows anything about cinema -- and why don't you start with your friend the "Col." -- and see where they rank him in the canon of film directors. You'll be in for quite the surprise.

Vera Dreiser said...

And Andy Hunt, I agree with pretty much everything you've said about RP, genius filmmaker, but unsavory, even sexually criminal predator.
But like many other historical artists, figures, etc., when it comes to their "product," I separate the person from the art. Starting with Picasso and Matisse, to RP, Woody Allen and so so many others.

Vera Dreiser said...

But I WILL not stand for untruths about the historical record and Matt's attack on Polanski, BASED ON QUOTES HE NEVER MADE, had to be corrected.
Matt just can't stand to be shown as wrong. See how he couldn't even admit it in that ridiculous defense?

AndyHunt said...

Mr Hendrickson, Hi, I've very much enjoyed reading your previous posts, even when I've had disagreed with them!

I think you've hit a very relevant point when you say
"I think the real problem is: Polanski OWNS all the rights to the deceased SHARON TATE - as HE will always be HER husband when she died. AND the real conflict in the Tate / Polanski marriage was that Polanski's ego saw HIS wife RISING to a level of an actual "movie star."
Whilst there is a great of deal debate over the actual amount of acting talent that Sharon Tate had, her public profile was certainly on the rise.
With the tensions in their marriage, and the pressure Polanski must have been under to repeat his success with Rosemarys Baby, the last thing he needed was a very public divorce or separation shattering his pretence of a Hollywood fairy tale. In showbiz, it's not just the movies that are scripted and directed to fit with the audiences expectations.
I doubt that Polanski would ever co-operate with, and almost certainly attempt to hinder, any attempt at a biopic of Sharon Tate. Not because the past is to painful for him, or even out of respect for the living and dead. Rather I believe that Polanski would fear the shattering of the fantasy that he has helped to construct. The fantasy that his marriage was anything but the perfect fairy tale romance. The fantasy that the horrific events of that one night took from him his one true great love, and left him so shattered and ruined that for at least the next two decades he descended into a dark hell of drugs, abusive sexual relationships, and sorrowful morning.
Such a biopic is very likely to reveal, or push overs into revealing, the truth to a wide audience. The truth that Polanski was a self obsessed, deceitful, manipulative player. It would pull the camera back from the fantasy so carefully constructed for the audience, and reveal the reality behind the scenes.

Vera Dreiser said...

Ah, Andy Hunt, and there you had to go lose your cred.
You think a divorce in Hollywood would've hurt Polanski's career as a director? Are you kidding?!
And again, Polanski couldn't hinder anything made about his late wife -- she's A PUBLIC FIGURE AND, FURTHERMORE, DEAD.
Is everyone crazy???

AndyHunt said...

you misunderstood what I wrote. I never said that a divorce would have hurt Polanski's career (although I doubt it would have helped)
I said that a divorce or separation would have hurt HIS pretence of a fairy tale Hollywood marriage. It would have hurt Polanski's ego. Opened up his public persona to scrutiny and shed some light on the goings on behind the scenes.
You said that you can separate artistic output from the artist. Unfortunately for Polanski, he cannot. His life must fit the script he wishes the audience to see. He must control all the scenes. Life however doesn't work like that, and so he lies and deceives and manipulates to hide the dirty truths.
Polanski is also quite capable of hindering a biopic of Sharon Tate. Apart from the obvious legal rights he has, Mr P still has a lot of powerful friends and admirers in tinsel town and beyond. Just look at the support he received in his recent legal troubles regarding his 'sexual scandal' of some 30 odd years ago.

Panamint Patty said...

Andy, you are being trolled.

Max Frost said...

Good stuff Andy - honest and insightful.

There's definitely a lot to be said for the fairy tale image in Hollywood (not so much anymore) and Washington DC. Call it a prerequisite.

Max Frost said...

Oh, and VERA...

I don't know you or have a history with you hence I don't have a dog in this fight which is why I've never addressed you (not that you care and why should you). But I'm finally compelled to do so and for a good reason.

You say a lot of things that are also honest, insightful, and often very intriguing. I can see your intelligence and get the impression you have a lot of knowledge regarding this subject. I honestly hope to hear a lot more from you...I'm listening.

What I don't understand is your need include the underhanded compliments, insults, etc. There was a thread recently where you all seemed to be getting along. Then on a thread that followed you started in with the digs. Why can't you all just get along?

It seems to me that you really WANT to get along with these people because you keep talking to them. There's nothing wrong with that. The finer points of the discussion or debate are of depth and broader (more honest) perspective. That's a good thing. Why does it have to be so combative?

I guarantee you if you would just shed the urge to bite you would find yourself engaged in a lot of great conversation and you WILL get through to people.

Stick to the subject. Who cares what others think of Debra? Personally I don't feel one way or the other about her. I don't see the point of criticizing her. If she's invalid then I'd simply ignore her. I don't even know the stories or details about her or why she is either hated or loved. Not everyone here is in line with the same favorites or same disdain for whoever or whatever theory. That's why there's discussion - to sort it all out and get to the core.

So please try Vera. I know you can do it. And I know I'm not the only one interested in what you have to say.

Panamint Patty said...

Max, that was lovely. :)

Vera Dreiser said...

I appreciate your comments, Max, nicely put. Here's the thing: I respect good, intelligent conversation on this topic and yes, if I do say so myself, I know quite a bit about it. So I go to all the sites, read them, and sometimes engage. Obviously, the moderators and commenters on this blog, for the most part, know what they're talking (writing) about, yet, I'm always reluctant to participate here because, well, I feel a little dirty after I do. Why is that? Because I'm completely opposed to the site's constant Debra Tate bashing. I don't need to explain why, I've done that before and I shouldn't have to anyway -- any decent, compassionate person should be able to see that that poor woman, as a very young girl, was traumatized in a way that hopefully known of us will ever even remotely know. She harms no one and yes, while she often mixes facts up, maybe occasionally embellishes or exaggerates, so what? It's done w/out malice and, I believe, by my own observations, is a result of the trauma she and all the other family members of the victims of this horrific event live through on a daily basis. That said, yes, I do go on here from time to time to defend her and also to engage in whatever subject is being discussed, especially when I see misinformation being disseminated. Something Matt claims (in this same post!) to be a champion of.
I also am repulsed by this blog's outing of former Manson Family members -- in most cases, people who committed no crimes, or at least no murders, who were very young and troubled when they got swept up in something beyond their ability to control; got away from it, and who now, in their dotage, have to have their secret shameful pasts spread all over the Internet simply because some clever Evil Liz sleuths have stalked them on Facebook or someplace and then published their names and pictures to entertain themselves and others. Absolutely horrifies me. That's why when I come on here, often against my own better impulses, I come with an edge, yes, even, an ax to grind.
I apologize to those who I've offended who are not the moderators of this blog but NOT to the moderators of this blog.
Another thing that you don't know Max, evidently, is that what you've seen posted by me is more often than not incomplete. Some of my most incisive commentary and, yes, even attacks on the actions of this site never saw the light of day. The site censors and removes posts which you'd never know, because, well how could you? And, though I'm sure the moderators will dispute this -- if this post even remains up -- just as many of my removed comments were not attacks, not personal and simply critical of what was posted. Frankly, I'm surprised that I haven't been censored on this very thread, or, in fact, in the last month or two. Maybe a new policy? Who knows. But before, yes, they would leave stuff up by others attacking me and remove my defenses and explanations. The same way the Col does at his site.
Censorship, which again, Patty, Matt and the others will undoubtedly spin to defend in response to this, is as abhorrent to me as Debra bashing, Family member outing and factual inaccuracies.
And, finally, I rarely have called people names and it is almost always only in response to being called a name first, and when I do, it is inevitably innocuous, generic adjectives like "dumb," "stupid," etc. not personal, like the things I've been called by Patty, Matt, and some other chick whose name I don't even remember. The weird thing is this blog is a champion and friend to the Col, who sets the bar when it comes to curmudgeonliness, yet when it's turned against them, they all become like Pat Krenwinklel with a knife.
But thanks, Max, for your well considered comments,

Panamint Patty said...

The censorship thing makes Patty's eyes roll back in her head, Vera. Get your own blog?

Robert Hendrickson said...

Dear Vera:

I think Max has said it best, many folks appreciate your comments (makes US think) BUT you kinda twist a "point" to re-frame an issue to your liking. This is a primary trait of one practicing as an attorney. They will even argue when they agree.

Case in point: I thought I made it clear Polanski would always ONLY be another director, BUT Sharon Tate would likely have risen (had she lived) to the level of a MOVIE STAR. It's a rather simple( round peg in round hole) observation with some personal insight thrown in.

TODAY Polanski is just another DIRECTOR and the difference between a director and a movie STAR is like the difference between a PRIEST and GOD. AND in the TATE case, Polanski was smart enough to realize that one day the world would still PAY to SEE his GODDESS even after the world discovered HE was just like any other Priest who molests children.

WE the public grow to LOVE our movie STARS, but only learn to respect good directors.

Of course, the real litmus test for this issue would be: IF Sharon was NOT a rising STAR, why did Polanski cast HER in the Vampire Killers ? Did HE only want to get-off taking nude pictures of a young girl for Play BOY ?

AND I was really ONLY talking about a biopic about SHARON, cause nobody, but another pedofile is interested in a actual character like Polanski.

Panamint Patty said...

Here's another thought for the day: If you speak anonymously, are you honestly practising free speech?

Vera Dreiser said...

Patty: is that a nondenial denial? Are you saying it DIDN'T happen? Don't speak in riddles.
Robert: Well, as someone who has also worked in film and is close to many film "people" and cineastes, I'd -- and they'd -- hardly call Polanski just "another" director.
Despite his personal life, he is considered by most as one of the greatest of the medium.
And of course Sharon was a "rising star" at the time he cast her in Vampires, as she was in her subsequent three or four pictures (and she wasn't a "young girl" when he shot her for Playboy, she was twenty-five). But she never landed on the A-list, may have, may not have, if she CHOSE to continue. But she told intimates and her manager (who is on the record about this) that she was quitting the business to raise her kid. She always was ambivalent about it. I don't know what Andy was talking about when he said she only went with men who could advance her career (like who, besides Roman, who she was clearly in love with, at least in the beginning: Jay? Philippe Forquet, Chris Jones? Say what?).
Robert the rest of your argument re: Polanski & Tate's level of stardom is so circuitous and incomprehensible it made me dizzy, like most of your cryptic I-know-a-secret posts on this site. God Bless you, you made a great documentary a hundred years ago, but your constant conspiracy-fueled blathering about this case on this site is just, well...never mind, Vera will be nice...and repeat, she loved the film Hendrickson made with your assistance.

Matt said...

Firstly, Vera you entered this blog from day 1 with a big chip on your shoulder. What you get are merely return volleys. You’ve only been deleted when your tone has been over the top aggressive. You’ve been better lately so we haven’t been deleting you. You’ve even made me laugh once or twice (with you).

Matt said...

That being said, I’ll address your points:

Debra Bashing - It’s not bashing, it’s questioning. And when I hear lies, I call them out. Why isn’t PJ buried with Sharon and Doris, as were his wishes? Why does she claim legal right to her father’s estate, even though she was disinherited? Why does she represent the family at parole hearings against PJ’s wishes? I could go on and on but ColScott summed it all up pretty well here: Her defense of Roman Polanski’s behavior is indefensible. It puts everything else she says in a shadow of head shaking doubt. You are incorrect in suggesting that I have asked DT to come on this blog and defend her position. I have never contacted her.

Robert Hendrickson - Don’t insult Mr. Hendrickson. We love him here and I won’t be the only one to set you straight about it. HE is the only one here who was embedded with the family and knew them personally. He’s a kind, generous man who tries to inspire others to THINK. Lay off of him.

Roman Polanski’s professional genius is not in question, just his despicable personal behavior. He should be kidnapped like Adolph Eichmann and brought to CA to stand trial for what he did.

Manson Family Members - “people who committed no crimes”???? Let’s see…

Mary Brunner - Participated in the Hinman Murder. Shot at policemen in the Hawthorne shootout

Larry Bailey - Shot at policemen in the Hawthorne shootout
Catherine Share - Shot at policemen in the Hawthorne shootout (I won’t even get into the CC fraud)

Nancy Pitman - Covered up the Willett murders and likely participated.
Sandy Good - Spent 15 years for threatening murder

Vern Plumlee - armed robbery

Linda Kasabian - Partiicipated in both Tate and LaBianca

Grogan - Present at LaBianca. Convicted in Shea.


No one has been OUTTED. Their locations and situations are not published only their likenesses. If you put your picture on the internet, it’s gonna get around. If you don’t want it out there, keep it on your own computer. Furthermore, more than one member has been removed at their request. You’ll have to guess which ones.

Vera, if you keep it civil you will receive it in return. I don’t like you, but I respect your knowledge of the case.

Matt said...

Sorry, meant to publish the link to Col's blog entry on the subject:

Panamint Patty said...

Patty dislikes Vera soooo much that she's probably going to end up loving her at some point.

AustinAnn74 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Vera Dreiser said...

No, just looked her up, it was that nasty one with the -- never mind.
It was "Suze."

Vera Dreiser said...

And Matt I'm not responding to yours cause I gotta douche.

Asphalt said...

jesus christ, vera

AndyHunt said...

Whilst the subject of Polanski's character, and all our individual opinions on it are under discussion, can I ask if anyone knows of Mansons opinion of him?
IIRC I've read that he claims he had no idea who Polanski really was, and no idea that Polanski and Tate were the tenants of Cielo drive at the time. Considering the connections between all parties concerned (a venn diagram of which would probably make one mid bending fractal) The idea that Manson was unaware that Hollywoods biggest brightest new boy was renting the place along with his Starlet wife is something I have always found hard to believe.
So, does anyone know of any Opinions Mr Manson may have/had?

Cindy Lee said...

Hold on one second Vera...Okay, much better, I just farted you outta my system...

Are you ever going to respond to my question or just keep coming here to side-step it by spewing your your love songs to Debra Tate, bullying others, and regurgitating your "knowledge" of the case?

Matt said...

Vera, make it strawberry. I prefer strawberry.

Suze said...

Oh, hi there Vera (or whoever the hell you are). So I'M nasty? Weren't you the one who made an unnecessary outting of someone on Col's blog for making racist comments on an entirely different subject forum? While it may have been true, it was uncalled for and mean. You seemed to enjoy hurting someone who had never bothered you.

You are a hipocrite.

I agree with Matt. Use strawberry... if that thing of yours still opens.

Panamint Patty said...

Pepsi douching made popular by Lana Del Rey is the trendy thing to do dontcha know. God Patty hates that word. so gross.

AndyHunt said...

Good God Miss Patty

The new "come alive with a Pepsi" add is going to be a real treat then.

Panamint Patty said...


Doc Sierra said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trilby said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Doc Sierra said...

Matt said...

Vera, make it strawberry. I prefer strawberry.
Strawberry's good as long as she doesn't eat asparagus.....

Vera, I'm just going to make a mental note that you don't get along or play well with others and scroll past your future posts.

CarolMR said...

I can think of two reasons why Debra continues to defend Roman: It would hurt her too much to realize that her murdered sister was cheated on and emotionally abused by RP; maybe Debra is or was financially supported in some way by RP.
Does anyone know what Doris thought of Roman? I know while watching video of Sharon's funeral that Doris and Roman seemed to take turns supporting each other.

Uncle Gilly said...

Just when I was about to vacate this site realizing with the clique of plebs such as peppermint patty and sleazy i mean suze, if you cracked their noggins together you wouldn't get anything but dust and the occasional snake from suze's hair . then Vera appears speaks truth and gets set upon. Typical rats none capable of standing on their own. and who was the max planck that stated Polanski was afraid of Sharon Tates rising star ? lol lol lol

Uncle Gilly said...

Polanski if not deserving of the term Genius, is inarguably Brilliant! Poor Sharon, Beautiful and tragic are her claims to fame. She was at best o. k .in the wrecking crew. Her last film was not good, even by quirky European standards, she probably would have ended up on DALLAS or some such. And ANDY ,remember those called " trolls" usually by the unenlightened ,are usually those who make sense saying what those of dull wits do not want to hear . amen

Uncle Gilly said...

And what the eff , does Debra Tate have to do with Polanski's criminal charges ? what a specious, spurious , ridiculous statement ! If we follow your logic, why don't you go to Europe and bring Polanski back? see what you have to deal with Andy ?

Uncle Gilly said...

I was wondering who Robert Hendrickson was, I was given the book " Death to pigs" along with 2 dvds "Manson" and " Inside the Manson gang" for my birthday last year. I enjoyed them all. thanks for signing the discs.

Panamint Patty said...

Trolls out in full force this evening. Yes Patty said TROLLS

Anonymous said...

Does anybody ever comment on the irony of the Polanski and Farrow connection - that the sisters were *there* in India when the White Album was written? And that the sisters were personal song writing inspirations for Lennon?

I've always wondered if there was any regret about that part.

Matt said...

Good to know the enlightened trolls still read up on us dull wits each day. The stats bear it out.

Welcome back uber-humans.

Anonymous said...

I've only seen one Polanski movie, Rosemary's Baby of course. I thought it was lame. The big climax for one half second with the flash of baby with Satan horns made me laugh.

Anonymous said...

Must have hurt to squeeze THAT baby out.

Matt said...

Uncle Gilly said...

And what the eff , does Debra Tate have to do with Polanski's criminal charges ? what a specious, spurious , ridiculous statement ! If we follow your logic, why don't you go to Europe and bring Polanski back? see what you have to deal with Andy ?

Uncle Lilly Liver, Debra Tate defends RP's conduct. She says there's "rape", and then there's "RAPE". Here is just one of the tapes where she spews this nonsense. If your attention span is what I presume it to be just skip to about 3:10. Wouldn't want to tax you too hard:

Robert Hendrickson said...

I think we ALL agree: Polanski was the GREATEST movie "Director" of a certain time in US history.
AND Sharon was, at least, a possible "could have been."

I want to thank ALL for providing ME with a new insight to the Manson case: It is now rather obvious that IF Polanski had nothing to do with Sharon's death, HE was / is just another NOBODY with regards to the "Crime of the Century." AND thus NOT even worthy of mention in ANY media materials exploited therewith.

It also appears though, that in 69 HE rushed back to the US primarily to piggy-back on the publicity of Sharon's death. I mean, PRESS conference and pics of HIM all forlorn at the bloody front door. Come on Miss V. that's the stuff Publicity AGENTS dream up. AND a whole movie (Wanted and Desired) all about how a wicked US JUDGE was screwing HIM for rapping a 13 year old.

Since YOU Vera seem to know much about Mr. P., can YOU tell me why Paramount let NBC re-make "Rosemary's Baby" for TV. AND re-make it in Paris, France while Mr. P. can only watch from the sidelines. I've always hoped for a sequal to "Chinatown", by Polanski: where do YOUR insider friends think that's going next?

CarolMR said...

I agree with Uncle Gilly that Sharon probably would have ended up on "Dynasty" or "Dallas." Not a bad thing. Look what it did for Joan Collins. OTOH, Sharon could have done a Farrah Fawcett and turned into a respected actress who was nominated/won an Emmy and a Tony. Unfortunately, we'll never know.

AndyHunt said...

Matt, in my opinion your right regarding Debra Tates defence of Polanski. She sure as hell put both feet in her mouth with those statements. So far in I bet they still cut her nails via her rectum.

Matt said...

My point exactly, Andy. It's not bashing, it's questioning. Her statements are indefensible.

I just Googled her name. Funny that at the bottom of the page it says (among other things):

Searches related to debra tate

debra tate disinherited
debra tate liar
debra tate oui

Right at the top of the search is this site:

This site also addresses the same questions regarding Debra's ignoring the Col's polygraph challenge (which Alisa Statman has agreed to participate in).

AndyHunt said...

I read the blog Matt, and all I can say is, I'm not surprised.
I started having an interest in all things Manson related just over a year ago. My interest actually stemmed from my life long love of the music and culture of mid 60' to 70's. A few documentaries have been shown here in the UK recently regarding this period. I got caught in the Manson mysteries and cannot get out! Every time I've come across DT in my searches I've been struck by the apparent idiocy of her behaviour. I actually feel a little sorry for her. Its as tho she is living her life (a quest for attention) vicariously thru her dead sister...and shes even to dumb to do that right.

beauders said...

As far as I know Doris Tate adored Polanski until her last days. Bill Nelson travelled with her to Europe, in the late 80's early 90's (there is a video so I know it's true)and she was all excited about meeting with Polanski for dinner.

CarolMR said...

"As far as I know Doris Tate adored Polanski until her last days. Bill Nelson travelled with her to Europe, in the late 80's early 90's (there is a video so I know it's true)and she was all excited about meeting with Polanski for dinner."

So Debra was no different from her mother in regard to Roman?

Uncle Gilly said...

Know how old that referring to yourself in the third person is peppermint patty? not to mention unoriginal. but then, originality isn't your strong point , banality is . At least from what your posts imply.

Uncle Gilly said...

Matt i can tell you are not too swift, but answer my question. what does Debra Tates stance on Polanski have to do with keeping her sisters killers in prison? I mean, come on you are no rhodes scholar but surely a simple answer wont use up all your vital energies.

Uncle Gilly said...

I can see matt (good name ,probably have peoples feet wiped on you constantly) trying to imitate Col Scott. STOP ! it's insulting to him to have a 4 th grade intellect tackle the big issues.

Panamint Patty said...

Please feel free to bite Patty.

Matt said...

Uncle Gilly said...

...answer my question. what does Debra Tates stance on Polanski have to do with keeping her sisters killers in prison?

Gilly, in a live conversation I can see someone mixing up points. In writing it is indefensible. You can read back over and over again until you understand the written words.


You didn't ask what D. Tate's stance on Polanski has to do with keeping her sisters killers in prison. You asked, "what the eff , does Debra Tate have to do with Polanski's criminal charges ?"

Being already familiar with your limited understanding of the English language I clarified my explanation with a video. It had no effect. I can't dummy it down any lower that I already have. Sorry.

Suze said...

Go ahead Uncle Gilly, tell us everything you know. It'll only take 10 seconds. I'd like to see things from your point of view but I can’t seem to get my head that far up my ass.

Folks, give up trying to reason with this monosyllabic, self-rightious, Robin Olson-ass kissing boor. There is no vaccine against stupidity.

Doc Sierra said...

The turd in the punch bowl has a name. That name is Uncle Gilly.....

Uncle Gilly said...

Really sleazy from the look of that hair ,you've had it up somebody's ass .what is your rate for that type of service? hey i'm not judging you, whatever it takes to supplement those welfare cheques, and keep up payments on the trailer.

Uncle Gilly said...

Door matt ,you still haven't answered my question, But you seem the undereducated overwhelmed type who runs to moral high ground probably low self esteem, it also helps you run with the herd wheere you can blend in.

Panamint Patty said...

Go away

Uncle Gilly said...

Oh my, the herd is banding together must smell fear. There definitely is some ungodly stench here, Sleazy close your legs! or are you trying to keep flies off your watermelon ?

Uncle Gilly said...

Shouldn't that be patty says go away? maybe boring will be your trademark , from now on you're potty .

Uncle Gilly said...

Do I get the impression i should leave ? is this blog only for obsessed unemployed, sheep? why not say that?

Uncle Gilly said...

Oh sleazy, you misspelled self righteous, and hypocrite, Damn, getting that G.E.D. will be next to impossible for you.

Uncle Gilly said...

O K I'll be back, as sleazy says to the folks at the food bank.

Doc Sierra said...

Uncle Troll, the internet would be a lot better if your father had pulled out.....

Donna Nelson said...

The article was full of misrepresentations so I am not sure Polanski said or did any of these things.

Doc Sierra said...

Uncle Gilly. Does not get along or with or play well with others. Why would any intelligent person waste their time and energy corresponding with people that have no respect for them? You need to get a life. Have you even ever kissed a girl before? A life is a terrible thing to waste.....

fiona1933 said...

What a load of garbled nonsense! who writes this stuff!
he didnt find the bodies...what are they going on about. Cant even get the movie names right.

We can see what Polanski was like from his detector transcript. First he starts joking around, messing it up. next, he openly says he 'fucked' a bunch of air stewardesses and finally goes off lighting a fag after apparently having fooled the detector. It reads like a comedy script.

Samskara Impressions said...

I really wrestled with whether I would leave a comment here or not, but reading through the comments I felt I had to.

You people talk about Polanski as if all the so-called "facts" you spew here are the God's honest truth. They aren't. Whether "Vera" is Robin Olson is not the point, the facts she presented are. The point here is that according to the Vanity Fair suit he filed in 2008, those allegations presented in that original article were lies. He did not "stop off in New York to poke" those two women, one of whom did testify on Polanski's behalf during the trial in London. He won that case, if you care to mention it...which you don't.

As for the 1977 case. Again, specious allegations against him claiming he anally raped Samantha Geimer. Despite what she says in her "tell all" the EVIDENCE does not support her, never will. According to the forensics there were no fluids of Polanski's found anywhere on or around her body. Not even semen if we are to believe intercourse occurred. According to her Grand Jury testimony, she was asked by DA Gunson if she bathed, showered, douched or took an enema. To all those questions she answered: "No." Which flies in the face of the evidence where Dr. Larson who examined her at Parkwood Hospital that night at approximately 11:34 PM, he found no bruises or contusions as would have been there with unlubricated anal sex, as Geimer stated happened. He took slides and swabs that were examined and tested by two technicians who testified in the Grand Jury hearing. Both found NO fluids. None. They found no semen or saliva nor did they find any traces of blood either his or hers. According to the examination of the underwear she was allegedly wearing, there was only one stain on the panties and when examined it was found it came from a man who was sterile. As we know from Sharon's child and the two children he had with Emmanuelle Seigner, he is not a sterile man. So if there were no fluids where Samantha Geimer said there should be, and she pained quite the picture for the Grand Jury.

Samskara Impressions said...

continued ....

Next is the issue of the other men over the age of 18 who had been with Samantha prior to and after Polanski. Yet there is no revulsion for them as there is for Polanski. You seem to think he's some sort of animal or something, however, you forget that Sharon chose him, not Jay Sebring. And you also have no similar feelings for Philippe Forquet who if I recall, beat Sharon quite badly to the point she was admitted to the hospital. But back to Polanski. According to the court transcripts, both the psychiatrist and the probation officer who prepared their reports for the court all said Polanski's "transient bad judgement" as well as his continued depression over Sharon's murder 8 years prior were the reasons behind what happened. And also there is the fact that neither Samantha Geimer nor her mother wanted Polanski to serve any prison time. In fact since she got the pretty sum of a six figure settlement, Samantha Geimer has been pretty insistent that the case be closed and the charges not only be dropped against Polanski, but he be exonerated. What rape victim would want her rapist to effectively "get away with it"? None. I certainly didn't want mine to. Then next there is the issue of what was known about Susan Gailey's proclivities at the time. Most or all who knew her knew what she was up to, including her ex-husband who was a lawyer....which is why he divorced her.

There is an excellent blog out there on this case, if you care to read through it as I have taken the time to read through yours. The URL is: . The author is a Russian who has investigated this case thoroughly and his conclusions are some of the best writing I've read. Then there is the case of the court reporter who was one of those who charged Judge Rittenband with misconduct for an exparte communication. His name is Richard Brenneman and he has some interesting background on Rittenband. His column is here: . Please take the time to get yourself acquainted with these facts.

As for Polanski's "first wife" I read either here or in another post. His first wife was not Sharon Tate, it was Basia Kwiatkowska. Sharon was his second wife. These facts matter.

Thank you.

Dan S said...

F***, I forgot to copy that playboy link from three days in the future!

I bet Sadie from 5 days in the future beats her ( Church of Satan , Black House, San Francisco ).

Dan S said...

I meant 3 posts in the future not "days"

Dan S said...

Wow you gotta really earn it to get to this final good comment by Samskara.