Monday, February 10, 2020

Charles Manson; Vincent the bug... Rivals







17 comments:

Cooltide said...

Just Helter Skelter novel revisited.
Nearly all photographs taken from the book.
One or two I hadn't seen before.
When was this first broadcast?

Cooltide said...

Oh, Steven Parent was not shot 4 times in the head as stated dramatically here.

steve said...

no audio?

cielodrivecom said...

1998

grimtraveller said...

I've long found it interesting that very little has been said or debated {or even doubted or denied} down the years across the various sites about the conversations Manson and Bugliosi had that are recorded in "Helter Skelter" ~ or their content. Some of that content is dynamite.

Peter said...

The theme music for that show is so offputting.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

It seems, when you think about it that it was the prosecution, the bench, meaning the judges and the media that were brother Charlie's rivals. And the three girls rivals too.
Now, we have a long trial with mistakes being made by both sides.
The antics of the three precious girls and of brother Charlie did not help the daring quartet on the courts stage.
When we saw that there was physical evidence and then empirical evidence, such as Susan blabbing away at Sybil prison, then of course, the testimony of Paul Watkins and that of Linda.
The trial was out of control.
The prosecution was goading brother Charlie to anger.
The prosecution was leaking, as the weasels they were, information to the press.
They made comment after comment to the press and others that were repeated, like:
that these were "the most bizarre, savage nightmarish murders in the recorded annals of crime." Are you freakin' kidding me? That's an outright lie and statements like this were gossiped and talked about throughout LA and California.
How ya gonna get a fair trial?
They, the prosecution had a Halloween party that had decorations that were of the Cielo murder scene: guns, nooses and knives. How caring and sensitive. That right there, should have caused a mistrial, maybe complete dismissal. Yes.
Vince (not my cousin Vinnie) tells people that, well, before these murders people didn't lock their doors. What? Is Bugliosi that unaware of so many crimes across the nation and that people DID lock their doors, though now, in LA, people were somewhat more vigilant at the windows and doors being secured.
And he was prosecuting crimes and knew about the many innocent people that were victims.
When Pres Nixon said "guilty" about the defendants', and it was in the headlines,
there should have been a change of venue and a new judge and different prosecutors.
In this video we heard some rather questionable statements...well, actually outright ignorant ones, such as- millions of young people "tuned in, turned on and dropped out."
Ahh...no.
I was there:
1967-1970. There were many 'hip' types, but not really hippies, as living that life style
I lived with true hippies for a week. I dropped acid, smoked pot, there in the hills of America.There were 'commune' type living places, houses, like the ones in Haight-Ashbury, in Denver, Boulder and Taos that I went to.The ones I was with for that week were real: they made craft products, raised natural food and sold them and they did not willy nilly exchange girlfriend/boyfriend and would not just sit around and they told me:
they can call us hippies or whatever, it doesn't matter, we just wanna live a more natural life.
At Venice Beach, on two trips to there, one in July, '69, after a coupla days in Chatsworth, where I talked and more with three girls from Spahn Ranch, I saw kids, long hair, 'cool, colorful hip clothes' and most seemed unsure what to do, some just wandering around looking for a 'scene.' Sorta like the 'scene' at the Haight.
Most college kids that were in demonstrations didn't drop acid.
Most of the college kids in America actually...did not join protests!
Most of the kids that traveled and looked for the new 'free way' went back home or into a college and a job-millions DIDN'T drop out like you hear in film and read in articles and books. From the 70's to now, few really describe the '60's.'
So, the talk by the prosecution and of the ignorance and spins in the press about linking the four on trial with drugs, orgies and crime was obviously to have everyone in LA be prejudiced. It went on and still does.
By the way, I haven't seen a movie yet that shows how sister Susan looked and acted:
it's artificial and robotic what they portray her as. And as a crazed always serious girl, something like that. That she is always creepy looking acting. They're wrong.
Here, in this fine piece, I have really only scratched the surface, but that's the way it goes.

Peter said...

Vince kept that circus train from riding off the rails for almoat a year and secured guilty verdicts and death sentences with almost no real physical evidence. Two fingerprints and some leather thongs and the testimony of coconspirators, outlaw bikers, ex family members, and a used up hooker. Love him or hate him, you got to give the man credit foe that.

grimtraveller said...

Fayez Abedaziz said...

It seems, when you think about it that it was the prosecution, the judges and the media that were brother Charlie's rivals

i The prosecution were trying to get him convicted and sentenced to death. Rivalry is not implied, it's mandatory !
ii Manson issued a legal challenge and got one judge taken off the case. The other judge repeatedly {if you read the trial transcripts} tried to protect Manson and the women. Short of wiping their bottoms, he couldn't have done much more in their favour.
iii The media, Charlie courted from the start, giving interviews, playing up to the camera etc. Are you aware that one of the reasons he lost the status of his own lawyer was because he continually violated the gag order not to talk with the press on matters pertaining to the case ?

The antics of the three precious girls and of brother Charlie did not help the daring quartet on the courts stage

Simple fact: The prosecution's case rested on one overarching assumption ¬> Manson dominated Tex & the women. Tex was only in court for a few minutes. For 9 months Charlie showed his dominance, the girls showed his dominance and that stupidity did far more to get them convicted than any motive or judge or press or prosecution trickery. Those 4 had no one to blame but themselves. Their actions in effect said: the prosecution is right !

The trial was out of control

Au contraire. The trial was pretty tightly controlled. What was out of control was Charlie Manson and by extension, the women. The defence lawyers had no control. The transcript shows that, even if you have no idea of the story.

The prosecution was goading brother Charlie to anger

Well of course they were. Much of his shit was sadly exposed. That made him angry. He was angry to discover he wasn't as smart and savvy as he thought he was.

The prosecution was leaking, as the weasels they were, information to the press

Vincent Bugliosi was not liked by many people in the press. Yet, in the years to follow, none come out saying that he was feeding them info. But Paul Fitzgerald is highlighted by press people as having done that. Read George Bishop's "Witness to evil" or Ivor Davies' "5 to die." On top of that, look at how Charlie was leaking stuff to the press {Read "The Garbage People"} about Susan and predicting her moves ~ in other words, using the press to tell her to recant. And hear the joke ~ Aaron Stovitz had a hunch that the TLB killings were committed to act as a copycat of the Hinman murder and he told Rolling Stone that. And what happens a year later in the penalty phase ? The Family introduce it to try and get the women sentenced to death and Charlie off.
Ho hum....

They made comment after comment to the press and others that were repeated, like:
that these were "the most bizarre, savage nightmarish murders in the recorded annals of crime." Are you freakin' kidding me? That's an outright lie and statements like this were gossiped and talked about throughout LA and California. How ya gonna get a fair trial?


That statement came from the trial itself. The press had been saying things like that about the killings even before there was anyone charged with the 7 murders and before there was any prosecution.

grimtraveller said...

Fayez Abedaziz said...

When Pres Nixon said "guilty" about the defendants', and it was in the headlines, there should have been a change of venue and a new judge and different prosecutors

You do talk some cloudy lemonade at times ! There were only 12 people in the known universe that could convict the foursome ~ the jury. They were blissfully unaware of what Nixon said. And who made some of them aware ? Charlie. He held up the newspaper headline for them to see. Defendants are not allowed to profit from their own wrongdoing in a trial so your point is null, void and moot.
As an aside, a number of the jurors didn't like Nixon anyway and some thought he was stupid to say what he did.

I was there

What, in every part of the USA ? Did you count everyone and assess each person's reasons and what they did each day ? Saying you were there doesn't actually mean much. I was in the centre of London during 7/7 and witnessed the chaos. Doesn't mean a great deal, only one person's perspective.

Most college kids that were in demonstrations didn't drop acid

I'm not disagreeing with you, just curious as to how you could possibly know that.


the talk by the prosecution and of the ignorance and spins in the press about linking the four on trial with drugs, orgies and crime was obviously to have everyone in LA be prejudiced

Oh, so it wasn't true ? Even though brother Charlie and the death angels have told us for over 50 years ad nauseum that this is what was going on with them ?

it's artificial and robotic what they portray her as...crazed.....creepy looking acting. They're wrong

Forget the media. There are two major sources of how Susan Atkins was. Her own "Family" and herself. One doesn't have to have met her to be able to draw justifiable conclusions. As early as '69, Susan's cell mates and Leslie Van Houten were giving their impressions of her {all privately, at the time} and even then, none of them were pretty. And Susan was the one that said she knew how to "play crazy." She's the one laughing at Sharon Tate's horrors in that December 1st recording of Richard Caballero. She's the one that referred to Steve Parent as a 'thing' at the Grand jury. And this is when she's supposed to be helping the prosecution !

AstroCreep said...

Fayez- you cant have it both ways. Charlie, the girls, and the knuckleheads on the corner are what solidified Charlie’s legacy in the public eye. You want the prosecutor and the judge to play ‘fair’ with a group of people that turned the trial into a circus when it’s not the prosecutor or the judge that was acting the fool.

Peter said...

Grim.I am not aware of this and I have looked at the pretrial record and motion practice pretty closely. I even prepared a detailed timeline of the hearings and motuons from arraignment to jury selectuon i can share if anyone wants.

Are you aware that one of the reasons he lost the status of his own lawyer was because he continually violated the gag order not to talk with the press on matters pertaining to the case ?

Unknown said...

Could someone point me to the ‘Dec 1st/Caballero/Atkins recording’? Not offering any opinion on any of this right now, but I’ve never heard that.

Peter said...

If anybody wants it.

This is timeline of the pretrial motions from Dec. 10, 1969 through July 17, 1970.

https://app.box.com/s/rk3t9hl054s8xdnsgtd15xrj2jivywwd

This is a key to all the trial transcripts on Cielo.com. Dates, Witnesses, Transcript Volumes, Exhibits, etc. (Yellow Highlighting indicates missing transcript)

https://app.box.com/s/gxp5f75e1ugap1v6cdl7v2bge6xjeat4

grimtraveller said...

Unknown said...

Could someone point me to the ‘Dec 1st/Caballero/Atkins recording’? Not offering any opinion on any of this right now, but I’ve never heard that

I don't know about the actual tape recording, but the transcript of the recording can be found right here. It's a classic of the genre and vital reading for anyone that wants to have a balanced view of the contradictions and foibles of Susan Atkins.

Peter said...

I am not aware of this and I have looked at the pretrial record and motion practice pretty closely

From "Helter Skelter":
On March 6, Manson appeared in court and argued a number of novel motions.......Judge Keene declared himself "appalled" at Manson's "outlandish" requests. Keene then said he had reviewed the entire file on the case, from his "nonsensical" motions to his numerous violations of the gag order. He had also discussed Manson's conduct with Judges Lucas and Dell, before whom Manson had also appeared, concluding that it had become "abundantly clear to me that you are incapable of acting as your own attorney."

To be fair, even Aaron Stovitz fell foul of that gag order eventually.

Peter said...

I don's see any reference to the violating a gag order in the March 6 transcript.

AustinAnn74 said...

Um, people lost their lives at the hands of these human trash heaps. Precious girls? Brother Charlie? These individuals were dangerous and needed to be taken off the street at all costs. People act like Bugliosi committed a more heinous act than the actual murderers when in reality, he most likely saved more people from Manson & Family's greed, entitlement & madness.