Grandson or con man?
Tonight at 1030 pm EST, Jason Freeman researcher W. Adam Smythe shares his findings after several years of researching Freeman, Jay White aka Charles Milles Manson Jr., and the other factors driving the battle for Charles Manson's estate. I've talked to researcher Smythe several times and he is a true raconteur. If you need a paid researcher or want to find someone no one else is able to find, get with Smythe online. You won't regret it.
Paul, Dani, and Mr. Beckham will interview Smythe and he'll be available to answer your questions afterward. I also linked Dani's true crime channel above. You'll never find me there because my all encompassing cowardice creates scary nightmares I don't like, but Dani has a great presentation style and an active crowd where you'll feel right at home talking about unforgettable dismemberings and hurtings with other twisted weirdos like yourself if you're a true crime fan.
Make sure you never tell me about any of it. Yes, I know the Manson study is gory but I get around all of that by writing love prose to black and white photos of cute girls who are the age of grandmas now. "Sweet surfer yeah I am aging with you that rotten old clock is after us girl yeah your eyes those sus ojos do you feel me making note-oh's on the Hermosa you ran from to become a punk rock hero?"
Okay, overshare.
Anyway. Freeman. What are your thoughts on all the estate business? If Manson was a public figure how does owning his estate help its owner?
Sometimes I think Jason Freeman looks like Kathleen Maddox and other times I am convinced no one would leave their dead grandfather in a refrigerator until his corpse begins to separate and fall away.
Or dump his grandfather's remains into a ditch instead of taking them to the place his grandfather wanted his ashes spread. Or allow some of his grandfather's ashes to find their way into creepy paintings. Or allow the four year circus that's taken place since his grandfather died. Right now, I feel like I could write fifteen sentences that start with "Or..."
Some of us here hate Charles Manson and I get where you're coming from but to me a dead body is a dead body and not a circus attraction. This ghoulish chapter needs to end. The next hearing on Manson's estate is around sixty days away. A nice round of DNA tests and a declared winner will hopefully follow. +ggw
-------------
38 comments:
GreenWhite said:
or want to find someone no one else is able to find, get with Smythe online. You won't regret it.
Do you think he can help me find myself?
Three questions regarding Estate.
1. Is there not a DNA profile of Manson that exists that can be used to verify lineage? If not are there not hair samples that could create this profile?
2. Has Michael (Mary’s son) ever been proved, using DNA, to be Manson’s son?
3. What is the state of the VF civil trial? If it has not expired would not the estate proceeds be first used to fulfill that ruling?
ToF - If I remember correctly, Michael Brunner has never been tested. Matthew Lenz was tested against Jason Freeman and there was no match. I'm going to listen to the show tonight because I'm totally out of my wheelhouse here but I believe Freeman controls Charlie's DNA. Now if there is any, I don't know. Maybe someone will hop in here and answer our questions.
I saw your question the other day about VF and Leslie and was hoping someone would answer.
They take all felons dna now i thought
Dan, I passed my lonely bike in the cold garage today and thought of you and yours lol. I seem to remember someone who knows telling me there is Charlie DNA but Freeman controls it though.
ToF - I smiled every time your comment circled back thru my mind today. Not sure on his guru skills but you can ask tonight.
So as much as i Iove Greenwhite and appreciate what they contribute go the blog ....are we EVER going to get normal research posts back without all the weird poetic "double speak" stuff..? Or do Matt and DebS no longer run or contribute to the blog at all?
No offense GreenWhite.... sometimes their posts are fun and all to try to figure out but sometimes I also miss Debs well researched posts that get straight to the point without me wondering wtf I'm even reading. Idk... maybe it's just me but I'd really like too see some of those kind of posts again.
I usually give up on them because it's too much work to figure out what is part of the topic at hand and what isn't. You should have more faith in your research and opinions and just write the posts as if you took it seriously.
If this moronic jabroni is a blood relation of Manson's, then I'm the rightful Queen of England & I shall be arriving at the Palace post haste with my luggage & cats, to claim my inheritance.
My (serious) question is, why did Manson always refuse to fill out that document that's a prison equivalent of a will, when offered the chance to do so???
I believe Michael's legal problem is that he was adopted by his grand parents and has therefore lost his right to be Manson's legal heir or some such.
I gotta agree. GreenWhite seems to have some great insight and obviously does his research but like I said above, all the whole "doublespeak", trying to be super witty on every post has honestly lost my interest because I spend 80% of my time trying to decipher what they're even trying to say and usually just skip too the comments.
Its unfortunate because I think you got some good stuff Greenwhite. But it just reminds me of when fayez used to comment or even when Mario comments.
I much prefer Debs and Matt's straight forward approach. The well researched posts and commentary is why I've followed this blog since 2013 but I'm becoming less interested... bc of the reasoning I've listed above. But can anyone answer... do matt/deb/george/col etc no longer contribute or something??? Its been nothing but these kinda posts for awhile so just wondering.
Hope I didnt offend GW
Yes, why didn't Manson act responsibly?
Why would he not fill in a document that changing the contents of which is a carrot he could lead people on with?
Sorry I've tried to stamp sarcasm out of my patterns but it's a speech impediment i have. "Im SO lonely"
JFeatherStone1 - couldn't agree more. This used to be an informative site but not so much any more. Too much babble and mental masturbation and too little useful information.
Deb / Matt / Panamint / anyone - help! (please)
The fountain of the world mythos is the same as charlie's rap. He spun the tale and he devalued life to his disciples with all his "kill you kill me" games. Then he's pissed because of his embarrassing performance at Esalan and getting tickets and his bread delivery truck and it's occupants disappearing. The new young love (Stephanie never gets a nickname) got slapped but stuck around :that's probably in the win column in Charlie s mind.
Anyway, what are the circumstances for the "now is the time for helter skelter" speech? I don't doubt something like this was said but i bet diarreha mouth said shit like this all the time. He had over eager Tex lapping up every word into Tex's own poo-brain.
Watson was finally in with the swingin pimps now that he had kasabian and was on top bitch sadies crew. Plus wasnt (what's her pseodonym?)van houten so now it was his chance to prove himself.
The second night Charlie definitely "show(ed) em how it's done" . i am still sceptical of the "death drive" It doesn't seem environmentally friendly(nor do auto parts stewn throughout the wilderness) I guess i can believe Charlie was trying to psyche himself up for it.
I don't think they really enjoyed it so the plan didn't really work out.
Gaunt with wiry muscles the first killing with a gun so easier. The gun stops the karate man! No more bullets! Beat the big one with the gun. Now what? Stabbing!.
I wanna know what's up with the rope and the ritualistic stuff that was abandoned the second night when that second night would be the one really under Charlies control. If Charlie had really cared about the first night's success then he would have given them proper instructions. He probably wanted those bitchy looking Hollywood people to suffer AND the 4 in the car to fuck off
I dig it, Y-O. Your "I'm so lonely" had me laughing all day.
I want to really emphasize tex's eagerness to impress his peer group leader, the frat president in the typewriter case and the Soul in TLB.
I want it to be something more sophisticated so bad. Spook city lookout mountain. Operation Fuck the hippies. My gut has always told me it's polanski. I really liked the story of the youngest tate sister really being sharon and the whole shebang was a setup.
But no. It's just dumbassery. A pimp cult leader using sophistry and getting more than he bargained for when the Texas hick practiced the nihilism he'd been preached.
Dan has some chops for real. I'm sick of all the crazy answers too.
JFeatherStone1 said...
"But can anyone answer... do matt/deb/george/col etc no longer contribute or something???"
And a lone night owl called out mournfully in the distance, only to be answered by the crickets chirping and the wind whispering through the trees...
Good question though :-)
And, how does it go?, the echo of ice in the cocktail glasses....
That opening line is up there with call me ishmael
Dan S,
That's my favorite line in the whole book. My question is, WHICH OF THE KILLERS SAID IT? I'm thinking it must have been Tex because I haven't read any of his books. Someone please correct me or verify that it was Tex.
"It was so quiet, one of the killers would later say, you could almost hear the sound of ice rattling in cocktail shakers in the homes way down the canyon."
It was Gentry. If he was here today people would be telling him he sucks lol. I've been ghost writing for a few decades and he's an inspiration to my constantly craving dinner tummy.
I vote for atkins. It sounds like her. Or do you think it's just gentry wanting to get the word "killer" in his opening sentence. Dark and stormy night....
Thanks. Good question too
Guys,
Thanks for responding. One day I'll learn to take what I read in a "true crime" book with a grain of salt. The statement sounds like the work of a professional or a one in a million shot by an amateur to me.
Agree, whut. It's too smooth.
Dan S.,
I'm told that the great mystery writer, Snoopy, always begins his novels with "It was a dark and stormy night". That's about as far as he gets.
Winner of the 2021 bulwer lytton prize:
"A lecherous sunrise flaunted itself over a flatulent sea, ripping the obsidian bodice of night asunder with its rapacious fingers of gold, thus exposing her dusky bosom to the dawn's ogling stare."
I was really hoping for a heaving bosoms in there. You got close enough.
The "It was so quiet..." line was lifted directly from one of the LATimes articles published proximate to the time of the murders.
Trilby said...
The "It was so quiet..." line was lifted directly from one of the LATimes articles published proximate to the time of the murders.
Thank you, Trilby. Did the LA Times attribute the statement to one of the killers?
On cielodrive.com check out the following by MARY NEISWENDER:
http://www.cielodrive.com/archive/tate-neighbor-heard-shots-screams-in-murder-house-about-2-in-morning/
Tate Neighbor Heard Shots, Screams in Murder House About 2 in Morning
Wednesday, August 27th, 1969
From his home, he said, “you can’t miss anything that is done” at the Polanski home.
“I overheard the conversation between the detective and the telephone man as they were trying to get some clues from the way the wires were cut. But that’s not the case,” he said, “as far as the guest house is concerned – where the caretaker lived. You can’t hear anything that’s happening in front when you’re in the guest house.”
This, he said he determined from previous visits with the caretaker and the house’s owner, Rudy Altabelli, who both lived in the guest house. At the time of the murder Altabelli was in Europe.
But from his home he said, if you listen closely you can hear the chatter of guests, the music and “even the tinkle of cocktail glasses.”
Lol I think the silence is my answer. :(
I went back and looked through the past three months and it's all GreenWhite and hardly any Matt,Deb and Patty commenting. Dare I say, they've moved on? Or maybe I can be in denial and fool myself into thinking they must be working on something BIG & MINDBLOWING. But I'm betting on the former over the latter.
Too bad... this was the most informative blog on this subject along with Cielo for over a decade. Whenever I discussed the case with anyone I'd tell them to come here and read from the beginning (including the comments) and then head over to Col's and read from the beginning and after all that, I'd start scratching the surface on all the misinformation on this case and finally get the real facts.
I mean...It's still good I guess,if you can get past GWS constant need for everyone to think of them as the wittiest guy in the room and an understand and read between the lines of his endless references to movies, songs and etc. And the Charlie "double speak" bullshit I've been mentioning. Just wish they had enough faith in their research without doing all the party tricks but alas, here we are. No sense makes sense? Or something like that I guess.
Watching/listening now, but based on this blog post and a half hour of listening to this flakey "investigator" speaking, my eyes are beginning to hurt from the rolling . . .
If we're going to take the trouble to do a formal post, is it not a good idea to at least TRY to get things correct? Jason Freeman did not "allow" the remains to decompose in a fridge - Jason Freeman had no say in what happened to those remains during the months-long battle over this matter. Also, the cremains were not dumped into a ditch somewhere, they were released into a stream for some stated reasons I cannot recall right now. And, of course, smeared on the faces of some who claimed to love the dead dude. Manson left no will, at least not one that was discovered, why are we suggesting here that he had plans established for the disposal of his own remains?
And what of Manson's apparent acceptance of Freeman as a grandson? Are we distrusting the old fuck to decide who was who in his family and world?
45 minutes into this thing, all I'm really hearing is a bunch of gossip about a yahoo bumpkin family history.
Yes, count me among those people who think the idea of Charlie Manson's corpse rotting in a fridge somewhere as being a pretty fitting end. As for this "investigator" - he obviously came at this with a pre-determined point-of-view, meaning that we have another conspiracy theorist posing as someone in search of a truth. Everything he presents is suggestion and theory.
I have no dog in this fight, I don't give a shit what happened with Mason's "estate" such as it was. But if not Freeman, then who? Michael Channels, that annoying freak of a pen pal? The other dude with no father on his birth certificate? Michael Brunner, who I feel certain is the son but who, of course, had no birth certificate or documentation to prove it? In the end, the court made what ruling they could, given the evidence, and that's that.
As for the documentary? That was wildly entertaining and fun and entirely in line with Charlie's 50+ year long schtick. Manson wanted, more than anything, to be famous. His is one of those "careful what you wish for" cautionary tales. Yes, he lived in solitary for half his years in prison, but he got to play "crazy Charlie" for years in the numerous TV interviews he granted over the years and he got the very public send-off that was quite in line with the "crazy Charlie" persona he put out there. People like this flakey "investigator" act as if Manson were some noble, historical figure of import and that we should treat his passing with hushed reverence. Knowing what we do of old Charlie, he'd likely have had a very hearty laugh over his very public funeral.
TabOrFresca,
Thank you. That certainly sounds like the source to me.
Sorry, Orwhut, for not seeing your question until now (btw, hope you are doing well!), & thank you to TabOrFresca (Fresca, btw, but Tab when I was actually living thru the Tab/Fresca era... later Fresca had a black cherry flavor that was awesome, but it disappeared. :( ) for finding the correct source - sorry for my error, I had misremembered a direct plagiarization, because, let's face it, age + ADHD = I should always check a source first instead of going by memory.
No problem Trilby. I'd been meaning to ask for help in finding the name of the killer Gentry said made the 'ice' statement for some time. Thanks to you and other great minds on this blog I've concluded that Gentry made a "mistake".
Post a Comment