Sunday, June 5, 2022

Opinion — The Pen Pal Will is a Pathetic Fake

 Like all major events which attract great public attention, the phenomenon generally known as “TLB” has produced its share of phonies and frauds. From fake Ruth Moorehouses and Gypsy sons, to altered photographs (Manson playing guitar in prison before 1967, Dennis Wilson with Manson, the Spiral Staircase House), to publicity generating personal anecdotes (Danny Trejo, Bryan Cranston), to false memories (Pete Porteous) and forged memoirs (Robert Earl Murray), to the proliferation of phony Manson artwork, crafts and other personal effects and memorabilia (including ashes), fraud has occurred in the past, in the present, and likely will occur into perpetuity.

A couple of the most recent and still relevant instances of Manson-related fraud were two alleged Manson wills that were filed shortly after his death on November 19, 2017. Although one claimant quickly withdrew his effort, the other will has lingered on and is still a point of contention in the current tedious legal fight over Manson’s estate.

But why it is, is a mystery to me. Because that will is such an obvious fake that I don’t see how anyone could take it seriously enough that it would still be in play. 

There are so many things wrong with this alleged will that it’s hard to know where to begin to start critiquing it. But perhaps the best place to start would be with the fact that Charles Manson would never have had anything to do with such a document in the first place — not in a million years. 

First of all, the assertion that this fairly concise and literate will was actually written by Charles Manson is an absurdity on its face. But beyond that, even if he allegedly just signed it, the Charles Manson I knew for the decade before this will was supposedly crafted on his behalf had such a disdain for signing anything legal that it is unthinkable that he would consider and assent to such a detailed and precise legalistic document turning over the rights to every aspect of his entire existence — to the exclusion of anyone else, including specifically all living biological relatives — to a casual acquaintance murderabilia dealer.

And I’m not alone in this opinion. If you talk to anyone who knew Manson — and by “knew” I mean people who had intimate, ongoing, relationships with him for years and/or decades, not just people who spoke with him on the phone (Newsflash! Manson called anybody!) or visited him a few times —they will all tell you the same thing. I’ve spoken with people who knew Manson for almost fifty years, other people besides myself who assisted him daily for years and years during his incarceration, and inmates who did time with him, and all of them are instantly and unanimously clear that Manson would never have signed over the rights to his life to anyone — much less to an individual so casually involved with Manson that he would later refer to himself as a pen pal and not as a friend.

And indeed, Manson did not sign such a will. And the best evidence of this is the will itself. One look at the document shows what a crude and ludicrous effort at forgery it is. All of the particulars of the will are on the first page, and Manson’s allegedly assenting signature is on the second. But since it is obvious that the printed portion of the second page has been formatted to fit around the handwriting and signature, the only conclusion one can come to is that the printing was formatted to fit around handwriting that was already on the paper. In other words, someone got a piece of paper with a Manson signature on it and fit the printing of the bogus will to go around it. 

There can be no other reasonable explanation for page two’s odd formatting.

Why this is not glaringly apparent to anyone who sees it is beyond me.

But finally, aside from the fact that Manson signing such a document would be totally out of character for him, and aside from the fact that it sure looks like the printed text was superimposed over Manson’s written text, there is another glaring clue pointing to the will being a fake that has a particular and personal resonance for me, and that is the signature of one of the purported witnesses, Roger Dale Smith, also known as RD.

Roger Dale “RD” Smith and Charlie with Taming The Beast author Ed George in the visiting room at the California State Prison at Corcoran. The look in Charlie's eyes says, to me, “Snap his neck RD!”

Ed, Charlie, and me in the visiting room on that same day.

When I saw RD’s signature on the will, that was the clincher for me that the will was dirty, because there can be nothing good or honest about anything that was ever connected with that guy.

I don’t like to use expletives in my writing, but when it comes to RD Smith it’s impossible not to, because he was a truly vile piece of shit.

I knew RD way too well, having met him in the visiting room on several occasions and spoken with him on the phone many times — until I got to the point where I finally got tired of his lying bullshit and hung up on him and his scams.

RD was about the most disgusting human being I’ve ever had the occasion to meet. No, he was the most disgusting. A murderer, he was loathed within the prison system and had been shivved by other inmates so often that his nickname was “Pincushion.”

He was a monster. He was fat and disgusting, and he had sloppy swastika tattoos on his forearms. His dishonesty and deceit knew no bounds. He was a snitch beyond belief, and I know of more than one instance where his snitching cost Charlie months of his life spent in solitary confinement in the Security Housing Unit (SHU) while prison officials investigated some supposed  Manson scam based on “information” provided by Smith. He bullied Charlie incessantly, demanding money and other favors, and Charlie asked me on more than one occasion why I couldn’t do anything to “get this motherfucker off my back.”

He was a corpse fucker and proud of it. Charlie told the story in the visiting room about how RD’s cellmate died and RD had sex with the corpse until the guards realized the guy was dead and took him out of the cell. Asked why he was fucking a corpse, Smith replied, “because the hole was still good.” As Charlie recounted the story, RD was standing there, beaming, like, “Yep, that was me!”

He was an opportunist who would do anything if he thought it would bring him some advantage, monetary or otherwise. He lied about everything and his word was absolutely worthless. And my refusal to go along with his bullshit was one of the main reasons why there was a wedge between Charlie and me for about half a dozen years. (That wedge was only removed when RD finally died of cancer, a day on which the world surely became a brighter place.)

I hated RD and I’m sure he hated me. And I have little doubt that if he could have, he would have fucked me, killed me, and then fucked my corpse

In short, Roger Dale Smith was a thoroughly dishonest, despicable, and disgusting human being of the type that would convince anyone to avoid prison at all costs so you wouldn’t have to be around someone like him for five minutes. Really, unless you have actually met and dealt with such a person you can’t have any idea of how horrible he was. Imagine the worst piece of shit asshole you ever knew in your life and multiply them by one hundred. That was RD.

That should give you some idea of the importance of RD’s signature on the will as a witness, because his signature screams out, “This thing is totally dishonest, conniving bullshit!”

And anyone who would get involved with anything RD was doing would have to be either a dupe or a co-conspirator with regard to whatever dishonest scam he was trying to pull. There was no middle ground with RD; if you were involved with any of his insidious enterprises you would have to either be too stupid or naive to realize it, or you would have to be in on it. (It’s possible that the claimant with this will believes it is genuine, but I doubt it.) 

Here are what, to me, are relevant questions about this alleged will that might help to clear things up:

If the will is genuine, why is the text on the second page formatted around the handwriting? What other explanation for such strange formatting could there be other than that the handwriting was on the page before the printed text?

Why is the date of the second witness signature (said witness also being the exclusive beneficiary of the will) four days earlier than the date that Manson supposedly signed it?

Why didn’t Manson date his signature?

Why would Manson, who was notoriously uncooperative with anyone who knew him, and who regarded legal paperwork as bullshit nonsense not worthy of acknowledging with any kind of consent, agree to sign a legal document turning over every aspect of his reality — from the rights to his music and works, to the disposition of his property, to the disposition of his body — to a murderabilia dealer who he barely had any personal interaction with?

How did the pen pal gain the trust of the famously paranoid Manson to such an extent that Manson entrusted him with his entire legacy?

Does the murderabilia dealer have any recorded telephone conversations with Manson or written correspondence wherein Manson discusses the creation of this all important, once-in-a-lifetime document? (That would be particularly interesting to know, because from what I’ve heard there does exist a recorded telephone conversation where Manson states that he never signed any will.)

Would the pen pal detail his relationship with RD Smith and recount how he hooked up with him in the first place?

These should be easy enough questions to answer by anyone involved in a legitimate enterprise. But while we wait for those answers I’ll give my theory about the will and its origins.

What I think happened is that RD cooked up a scheme, very possibly with the will’s beneficiary, to create a fake will that would benefit the beneficiary (and thus RD) after Manson’s death. Enlisting the help of fellow Protective Housing Unit (PHU) inmate M****** C**** (C**** was good at producing passable legal documents — and snitching on Manson — when I knew him) they drew up a phony will that turned all of the assets of Manson’s post-mortem existence — to the very specific and complete exclusion of anyone else who could possibly make a claim for Manson’s estate — over to the beneficiary and then formatted that will around a piece of paper already signed by Manson. (The will’s page two contention that the contents of the will were actually written by Manson himself is ludicrous beyond belief.)

Since I first laid eyes on it it has been beyond my comprehension that anyone could believe that this will is genuine. And yet it has convinced enough people of its veracity that it has tied up court proceedings for over four and a half years. And that’s the real issue for me, because when this will was filed after Manson’s death the disposition of Manson’s body was in limbo for four months while it lay in the refrigeration unit of the morgue in Bakersfield — rotting. People have called the embalming of Manson’s body a desecration, but this was a much greater one.

When I saw Manson on the slab in the funeral home in Porterville the night before his funeral (Believe it or not, they needed someone to identify the body!), his body was literally falling apart. Juices were leaking out and the skin on his hands and feet was sliding off like loose gloves and socks. The famous forearm tattoos were just purple blobs of flesh. He had no eyes. The funeral director was genuinely shocked that the body was in such a bad condition.

Sure, it was just Charlie’s body and not his spirit, but it wasn’t good to see a friend of almost thirty years in that condition. And it was especially not good to realize that he was in that condition because people who didn’t care about him were fucking around with a phony money-making scam while his body was decomposing.

In a sense, the vultures who fed on Charlie figuratively for money when he was alive became almost literal vultures after his death, as his corpse decayed due to the delay in its disposition resulting from their fraudulent claims on his body and estate.

When I saw Roger Dale Smith’s signature on this alleged will my blood boiled. It was like being slapped in the face as I saw RD reaching out from his grave to fuck Charlie over one last time. 

But that’s not going to happen if I have anything to do with it. And that is why I have written this article.


D. said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Peter said...

That's exactly why we want to produce this play. To show the world the true Hitler, the Hitler you loved, the Hitler you knew, the Hitler with a song in his heart.

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Ah, Bialystock and Bloom, I presume! Heh heh, forgive the pun!

G. Greene-Whyte said...

I thought about RD all day. What a scary fucker.

Meez said...

I'm sorry George but no one really gives a shit.

Rock N. Roll said...

Team Channels.

V.A. Services said...

I know next to nothing about the will thing. Maybe glanced once or twice at posts here. No clue who has what rights in this poopshow. But there's something I've been wanting to say for a while:

George, I'm sorry for your and Sandy's loss. Regardless of anything else, losing a friend is never easy, and from what I read of your description just now, it sounds like it was even harder than I could imagine.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

What's the matter with you people?
You'll see what I mean when you read and see what I mean.

Good day George, I hope you're well and doing alright.
This is an interesting and enlighteneing article about the creepiness of some truly
dis-honest creepy people.

As I remember, I've talked to all kinds of people and most stare and don't know what I mean when I said:
we had a living friend and there was a girl and don't you know they should return to the earth to the living soil
so then I said run away from me don't bother me
they took brother Charlie and dear Susan I love her and they were alive and talking and singing and smiling and having a walk in the Golden Gate park life was fun and wasn't that what you do and maybe some other people on this world
do so what do think of what I'm saying by the time I'm through
that it's kinda cool or could be you know oh
Look at brother Charlie walking smiling and guitarring and Sadie Susan the way she walked with cute short steps and they took them-what's the matter with these people- and they burned their bodies-
I'm really angry-you had no damn right to do that- we want to go see them with flowers laying on the shiny clean natural grass around them
I wanted to go and
sit and say things to her

The real brother Charlie was heard and was saying it true with the interview with beautiful face Diane Sawyer in '93
look at it and you will see
Susan was saying you know this happened and now this is past all those years
you want to punish some of us for things we didn't do
that's right cute brown eyes and silly girl
but when people who had no right or principle take you and grinning Charlie and then it's as if you never existed cause now when don't know where your thoughts are
some I think are up there in the pure of nature's blue skies
we don't only see with our eyes
poems songs and prayers

Dan S said...

That will is clearly bs. Charles Manson's notoriety/infamy is up there with hitler, but can someone show me the cake in his estate? "Cake" was supposed to be "value" but that s a great Autotext bon mot

AustinAnn74 said...

Gary Hinman & Shorty Shea were left rotting away and then years later, the same thing ends up happening to Manson and ya know what? Two wrongs don't make a right. No matter how horrible of a human I think Manson was, nobody deserves to be left in that state, especially when it's due to murder or greedy assholes fighting over an estate of an infamous convict. The decent thing to do would've been to allow his remains to be taken care of first. I'm also of the opinion that Manson's son, Michael Brunner should've received the estate without question. I don't like how the "grandson" exploited and continues to exploit this saga. It seems very disingenuous on his part.

Dan S said...

But why??? His image had been co-opted by every one. The music is worthless. Where's the value? Seems like it'd be a PItA to be manson's heir with no upside

tobiasragg said...

RD had swastikas inked on his arm, CM had one carved between his eyes. RD allegedly fucked corpses, CM fucked underaged girls.

We're not really climbing very far up the scumbaggery staircase in either case - are we, now?

That said, George writes as well as he blogs. This was interesting and informative and very well put together.

Still, all-in-all I think Meez wins commenting on this one.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said:

If Charlie is a scumbag, so is Jay Sebring. He had a 15yo girlfriend at one point in his thirties. Dennis Wilson, scumbag. Terry Melcher, scumbag. All your favorite rock stars, scumbags. Kiss, Bowie, Led Zeppelin, Hendrix, Rolling many others were doing that?

Er, yes.
You've made this point before, some time in the dim and distant past. And the answer is yes. Those rock stars and their roadies and hangers on and entourage that went around various countries as adults, having sex with girls {and boys} that were under the particular countries legal age of consent, in that particular matter are every bit as bad as Charlie.
You try to pressure people by mentioning the Jay Sebrings and the Terry Melchers and "favourite rock stars" but that cuts no ice. Digging someone's music or films or books or productions or haircuts doesn't take away the reality that many of that ilk acted like shitbags. And before you say anything about being a prude, just ask yourself how you'd react if your 13 year old sister or brother or daughter or son was being screwed by the adult stars that come to town.
And in the strangest way, it is worse than necrophilia, though not as immediately and initially disgusting and sickening. The corpse in a case of necrophilia is dead. The violated younger teen carries on living and soon {or one day} gets to see actions they engaged in for what they were and becomes affected by that, one way or the other.

grimtraveller said...

Manson Mythos said:

necrophilia on your murder victim?

RD may well have murdered the cellmate, I don't know about that. But George's article doesn't make that clear or even imply it.

George's article said:

He bullied Charlie incessantly, demanding money and other favors
I would imagine that there are a few people over the last 55 years that wouldn't shed too many tears at that.

Ajerseydevil said...

My signed copy of the updated Manson file arrived today

Doug said...

He's going to take a big hit on the current cost of postage...silly man

Jay said...

Ajerseydevil- glad to hear the books are finally arriving stateside. I have been waiting on mine, hopefully it arrives soon.

Fayez- always a pleasure to see you post. I enjoy your writing style.

Ajerseydevil said...

Nicolas has been very kind to me through my recent sickness & made my book a priority

Doug said...

Sending healing MOJO to you!

Dan S said...

That's like a triple negative :"few wouldnt shed too many"...must be a brit thing. Grim, of Your million very incisive posts that's the first time you weren't clear as an azure sky in deepest summer

Fayez Abedaziz said...

Thanks Jay, now there are at least two of us that like my style. Heh
Well, mabe several more, I gave a dozen or so girls that worked/work at a bakery/cafe (Corner Bakery and Cafe) and a Wendy's some gifts (I used to wholesale watches and Indian Jewlry, have a bunch left over) and as some days went by, most said, "wow..." or "like, what you write is cool." Ah, sure thanks y'all. Can I have a free sweet roll with the coffee now. Hey hey.
If your ever in Denver, drop me a line, buy ya lunch or coffee or a Martini.
Actually that would be fine for any of you.
Here, I want to clarify a thing or two.
First, I never write an article or post/comment where I have had even one drink or was high in any way.
Something comes into my head on a topic, the article or comment forms in a swirl and withing seconds I start typing. Like Now.
Second, to clarify what I wrote about the disposing of Brother Charlie (may the Lord have mercy on you and on sweet Sister Susan) by way of, you know, the burning ritual, I'm saying that the people that decided that were really taking full control of that person, full ownership, so to speak. That includes their (Charlie and Susan's) whole existence. Why should they be allowed that?
I am against burning bodies. They should be to where they're resting back where they came from, as we all did. From the life giving land where all things grow.
If a person give instructions to end up in ashes, that's one thing, though I'd try to talk 'em out of it.
Speaking and thinking of writing and commneting,
There's a word I thought of where:
time is where forever is such a long way walking away from us is time the only thing that never ends we coulda asked dashing brother Charlie
and 1969 went waltzing away look softly and we're peering down the hallway peering at Susan and lonfg legs Leslie and don't forget Pattie that last stepping away down that lonely hallway
I saw that clip Susan turned her head and looked back and it was a sad 'ah'
Leslie and Pattie saw the door to the van
goodbye freedom later bugaloo
who were the real dupes were you fooled
in some parts of the world they use the words 'five star criminal' here in this
crazy old nation we say you were a bad girl
and here we are a California prison kicking dust making love (sex) on a hill or by a stream and ranches with you know whatever that all means is all that's missing
where did we go wrong what happened to you and you too you had The Beatles and new ways of hairing and clothing and thrift stores for sharing and whatever food was
where oh where did we go wrong is it like this song-'how could we know that promises end?' (Promises-sung by Eric "I was like, kinda a Beatle, kinda you know, for a day or so) Clapton.
What can we get right I mean aren't theories to do with science so why all the this and that about riding around to Cielo or Waverly they went there and I asked but everyone told me no brother goofy Fayez no one invited them for anything no come over raggedy old run arounds we'll have coffee or a cup of tea is there a mystery to
it it's all somewhat strange like some people from Susan Leslie and the corrupt bums running the show in the faliling state of what was once America's sunny side but now
we find ourselves here looking at transcripts and pictures of the old gang from Spahn Barker and don't forget Topanga Laurel and there was some I don't know see you later

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Keep going, Fayez. I dig it too.

grimtraveller said...

Fayez Abedaziz said:

I am against burning bodies

I'm not.
As long as they're dead.

They should be to where they're resting back where they came from, as we all did

Be a bit difficult to get them back in their Mum's wombs !
Burn them. You can fit them in a box that is smaller than their size at birth. Or better still, use the body as fertilizer.
I've often said that if I had my way, I'd get my body carted down to London zoo and chucked in the lions or tigers cage, to let them feast on my niggardly remains.
People always think I'm joking when I say that.
I'm not.
However, I don't want my family to have spend money on my funeral and what I regard as "all that bollocks" so I've told them, just get it burned. Do whatever is cheapest and elicits the least fuss {and preferably, none at all}. I've never been to a funeral that I would wish for myself {the first one I went to was in Nigeria in 1978, a few weeks before I first read "Helter Skelter", now that I think of it}. Not that it matters. I won't be there !

If a person give instructions to end up in ashes, that's one thing, though I'd try to talk 'em out of it

Why ?
I most assuredly believe in eternity and life beyond the grave, but for the purposes of this life, the body is just the body. What you do to it once it no longer functions as a living entity, is of no consequence, as far as I'm concerned. The essence of me will be elsewhere. And if atheism was actually true, it would make absolutely no difference whatsoever. I wouldn't even be worth crying over. 😢 😭

Dan S said:

That's like a triple negative :"few wouldnt shed too many"...must be a brit thing made perfect sense. You missed out the most important word. You missed out the "a". The quote is "I would imagine that there are a few people over the last 55 years that wouldn't shed too many tears at that."
In other words, there are a few people that would not cry at hearing Charlie got bullied in jail. Dianne Lake, Gypsy, Susan, Leslie, Pat, Tex, Vince Bugliosi, Kay Martley, Anthony DiMaria, Debbie Tate, Barbara Hoyt, Stephanie Schram, Bruce Davis......

Jay said...

Another great comment Fayez. One of the more interesting aspects of your posts is your affinity for Susan. I have taken a much, much softer view of Susan over the years, as I have read more and learned more. Not a popular opinion to have of course. I don’t think she is the monster that she was thought to be. I think her initial public statements and actions really set the tone for everything that came after. I know I am in the very small minority that feels she is not that monster, but there you go. We can all have different opinions, it doesn’t hurt anything. I enjoy reading everyone’s thoughts and opinions here. It goes without saying that I of course sympathize with the victims.
The fighting over someone’s remains is pathetic and kind of seedy. Especially when it comes to Charlie, let’s face it, it likely over the desire for notoriety as being the ‘heir to Manson’s estate’
I guess some people just want to be able to say they have his ashes on the mantle.

On another note, GGW: any thoughts on continuing with the movie reviews/discussions?

saoirse said...

Great post as usual George. I concur with your assessment of 'the will' and it's forgers.
Brunner should be the sole heir to his father's estate, but since most everything in this saga comes with side orders of sleaze and corruption, I won't be betting money on him getting any of it.
On a lighter note: I almost spit out my food at the remembrance of that jackass Cranston and his "Charlie's on the hill" bullshit. I didn't even bother with Trejo's absurdity. Five-plus decades on and the parasites are still flourishing!

saoirse said...

Then why are you here mate?

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Hi, Jay. Yes. Life has been in the way the past six weeks but I should have one early next week. I can't stop landscaping and gardening during my spare time.

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Jay, thanks for asking. I appreciate it.

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Saoirse. Rhetorical, I assume.

Fayez Abedaziz said...


Jay, how ya doin'?
Well,you express some fine, general feelings and outlook about Susan (pass the pink lipstick this way) Atkins.
I was literally a half minute or so from the post office door, which itself was a few feet away from the mail slots, when I felt faint and dumb and I threw thr letter away.
It was to Susan at her prison. That was to have me as a visitor. I was going to fly to California the following week to see her. It would have led to more. I'll explain later, I don't feel too good now to explain.

George Simpson how's it going. That's some research and work you put in about the basics, realy almost the total study and angles of the stories of Brother Charlie and the events and the year of the '69 and how there was some pretty did-honest reporting and some sleazy 'writers' who were slandering and out right laying.
And you weren't kidding, there is merit in what you have been pointing at and saying.
As I inderstand it, to do aquite general paraphrasing of what you were writing and saying that, 'you see, it wasn't all what some of the book and article writers say...that Charlie sent and told them to actually go to kill'
So, then, where do we go from here? Didn't Tex go crazy, as if he wasn't 'normally crazy.' Ah, is there a double something there? I'm trying to write clearly, anyway, thanks for your indulgence and I'm not being sarcastic
I'm just saying, to paraphrase Brother Charlie- 'I wasn't on the damn road directing traffic...they did what they did...they did it, I didn't kill anyone!

Was Spahn Ranch a magical place?
Welcome to part of the 60's human race
Calling America
why do you keep changing
my eyes are wondering and now people aren't even questioning or thinking
the 50's and 60's were really better as people read, talked and questioned
now it's a bunch of cell phone bulltalking, imaging and people pretending
and to so many nothing means anything

Fayez Abedaziz said...

I apologize for some misspelled words.
And, I hope that I spelled 'misspelled' right here.
The ironies. How can you look up a word, as to how it's spelled when you're asking that question in the first place?
Ha I can't help laughing, at myself.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

With three manila envelopes, I walked into the post office.
"how's it how much, what stamps do I need to send these?"
THe fella grabbed the envelopes and suddenly looked up at me with a very amused grin.
So much he said and went on to tape the postage strips on them.
This was shortly before Governor Brown denied Leslie Van Houten her right to freedom.
One letter was to the Governors office.
One was to the Warden at Leslie's prison.
One was to the head of the Stanford Law school.
I asked the Governor to consider Leslie's prison record/behavior and so on.
Kindly let the Parole stand, she met all that was required and so on.
the time.
I said:
'your law school and the Justice Research there, has done a study on the subject of an inmates age and Recidivism; that there is, as you found, a very low percentage of aging inmates that committed any crime, once released, as they reach those later years. What I'm wondering and asking is: why then don't you there, present such findings and have 'some say,' as it were, in regards to someone, such as Leslie Van Houten's position and situation, to the prison she's in and to the governors office, like now?"
One letter was to the Warden at Leslie's prison, as I stated above.
I said, "as the person that oversees this institution there, with Leslie now having
a chance at freedom and you know how well she has done, shouldn't you have an important view, something to say, to the governor, to any authority, that these are the facts. You're the Warden, you should be able to. (my wording, friends, was rspectable, yet quite direct, as in, 'you should have the right and should say something, you're the head of the place, you and the staff know about the inmates and their records there.'
I didn't receive an answer from any one.
The California site says all emails, and mail is answered in due time.
Aside from the letter to Brown the Guv, I sent an email too. No answer.
Then I thought, 'all the government money, all the money from companies and that's it? This University did/and/or does research from all of those grants and well, to what avail? It's just business isn't it?
Now Leslie doesn't qualify for any attention because?
I have to say again, as I have here, before and elswhere across the internet:
Both Governors, Brown and Newsom were GIVEN the report and conclusion and TOLD this and that, and ya know, Leslie doesn't qualify-crimes...bad...dangerous.
Same was done to Susan Atkins. He listen for some seonds and signs the paper.
And, stop with the D.A.'s office in L.A. interfering, having any say, when there is a Parole hearing/sessions going on with Leslie or Susan or others because, it's none of their business, okay? They don't have a right to come over and actually try the cases again! What the hell! The case is basically tried again at most Parole hearings anyway! Think about it. How many times, ah, do we have to live in echoes again and again? Also, the California Supreme Court ruled years before that an inmate's denial of freedom should be based on if they are a 'reasonable danger to society.' That's the main and most important criteria. So what does the Governors staff do? No matter how short or long is the written denial, all they have to, and they do it, is to end the writing with 'danger to society,' and therefore...they get away with it! The California Supreme Court needs some attorneys to ask/demand that they make Parole boards and Governors go by the law, without the weasel ending of a denial, as I said just above with 'danger to society.'
By the way, I did send Susan and Leslie both postcards, you know, the shiny ones that people you to send when on trips, mostly. I didn't ask either girl to write back, I just said hello, I hope you're doing well...chin up and some other positive couple of lines. Of course Susan knew it was me.

Dan S said...

Lol how did she know it was you? Girl was promiscuous

Dan S said...

The town's bicycle's leather saddle's not gonna keep the impression from the dude who rode it once 50 years ago

Jay said...

More great posts Fayez
GGW, I hear ya on the garden/landscaping. If you are ever looking for someone to write a book or movie review, I’d love to try one out.

G. Greene-Whyte said...

Jay, please do! I'd love to read your takes on the films etc.

Please contact Matt to get going. His email is found along the right column of the blog's main page.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

Jay and Green,
sounds good, movie and book reviews, there are a lot of 'em, aren't there.
My comment above was shortened and ended up somewhat different than I intended, specifically because, for at least five times, ir wouldn't post as I tried.
The red letters kept saying that there were too many words.
So, I went and deleted some words, then some sentences. Still, it wouldn't post.
I then deleted the last two paragraphs which actually directly addressed the post by George Stimson.
I also want to clarify a few things. Sometimes we gotta remember how our knowledge and experiences don't resonate well with people that don't understand the broad picture.
That wouldn't be a put down of some of them, they simply 'weren't there' or don't 'get it.' You know, I gotta laugh whenever I remember what one of my heroes said about the 60's. John Lennon said: "if you remember the 60's you weren't there."
Of course, he didn't mean that he or me or others were constantly high or stoned.
I wasn't but there were times when some of us did so many things in diffrent places that we get reminded of them in a sort of 'not really a sudden flash.' Those things or people. You know, I've told people that the '60's didn't end on December 31, 1969. Same attitudes, hair, clothes, music and the 'communal living' and 'thinking,' anti-war movements, etc. For example, it was after the Kent State killing by the National Guard, in the Spring of 1970 when three guys and myself went to the College Presidents office, President Phillips-a good guy, as it turned out- (Metro State, in Denver) asked and got, classes voluntarilly.
canceled and we led an ant-Vietnam war demonstration.
Before I explain, in more detail about my asking and getting ready to go see Susan Atkins, let me say that, the prison answered me and said, that yes, I was allowed to visit. They and Susan had said okay. That dates have to be set and approved. What kept me from, though I wanted to, have a serious relationship with her, is what I will write about here. It's kinda sad really. It just made another 'downer' for my head, aside from when I was shocked to find that she was actually one of the people at Cielo.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

Usually, I sit back, stretch my legs forward, my arms hanging on my sides and I sit and stare and always feel tired, at these moments, if not downright exhausted.
That's what happens when we decide something, then after awhile, maybe longer, we chnage our minds. Then, another change of mind and you say, "I'll go ahead and do it."
Then you stop and say, to yourself, "what am I thinking, I don't know."
I'm being dumb.
Indecision can be a mind bender. Or something like that.
That's when I wasn't sure about going to see Susan Atkins.
I said, after how are you, hope your doing well, there, I said, 'I'd really like to see you again, but I just don't know how, I'd like to, I'm sorry I can't.'
On the postcard I sent to her. The postcard I sent to Leslie was years later after she was turned down for Parole.
One day, I was talking with a couple of people, who were regulars at a restaurant that I often went to for a lunch break, when one of them said, "why not?"
They were talking about tickets and car towing. One of them had his tow truck parked outside. He was answering my question about people visiting inmates at the local county jail. Apparently, one of the cars the fellow had hooked up and then started to drive away with turned out to be a close call, for him. The idiot that owned the car had run out of the house and took a couple of shots at the truck. Luckily, no hit to the driver. The car ownere was arrested.
So I said, 'well, people go get bail for people arrested for traffic and some other
things and visit them, but not when your in a some state or federal prison.'
He said, 'why not.' I said, 'I don't know.'
'Sure you can,' and he told me to just call the prison and ask for permission to be able to do that.
I called Susan's prison. You can, they said, with approval. The sent me information in the mail. I filled them out, including myself as a friend.
I called back a week later and they said, you may, we sent you a form to fill and to bring, the inmate approved your visit. Visitors can have a few optional days, to pick from, as the prison staff and inmates have meeting, activies and so on.
There were several days offered and I was to confirm one. That was to be between the coming week, after that week and the one after.
Then I wrote the letter to Susan and found myself standing, like a lost kid, near the post office door. I didn't know what to do. What am I gonna do, really go out to see her? Everybody thought she and the other girls and Brother Charlie were monsters, they would think I was actually mentally off, crazy.
Then, as the years approached, moved along, like leaves floating and swirling in thr air and going away, near and far away, I kept reminding myself that I would blame myself for Susan's continued denial for freedom, if I was to be a friend and more if I kept visiting her and I just knew and know, that I would tell myself:
just what she needed, someone like me, with my name and perceived nationality and religous background. That was what made sure she never got paroled to freedom. If it's alright, I'll explain in further detail, soon about that, as this is long enough, I guess.

Unknown said...

i was wondering if George can write an article that explains how jason freeman is the grandson since he's friends with him.?

beauders said...

George I'm sure you realize that Manson's body was left on refrigeration and not on freeze on purpose. They wanted his body to rot and it did.

Fayez Abedaziz said...

Everybody hard a hard year
everybody saw the sunshine
everybody let their hair down
I've got a feeling
a feeling I can't hide- The Beatles
oh yeah oh no- Fayez

Yes, here we are are the trial where we were seeing and hearing the gatherings, the gatherings of those clouds that made for the 'perfect storm.'
Those clouds had the writings on them as they hung and waved, slowly around, up their, just below the ceiling of the courtroom and were repeated again and again by the prosecution, the media of all manner-radio, television, newspapers and magazines.
A perfect storm that formed the end of freedom for the singing trio we know affectionately as Susan, Leslie and Pat. The singing queens, oh yeah. Take it away kids, they're a walking melody. The silly slippies. The swaying sluttees. (a little fun here, take it easy)
See those clouds. They said, see the writing:
What? oh, Civil war/civil strife.
And, the girls and Charlie acting funny and goofy?
Then, what does Charlie do?
He goes and gets a tatoos on his forhead. A swastika, of all things.I thought it was a carving, whatever.
How in the world is this going to be taken as?
That simply reminded people of the terrible events of the war games known as WWII.

They invaded a house and murdered people. Innocent, obviously, people and those people were in an upper class area. Good citizens, as most people are of a society.
Upstanding, working victims.
Those contributing to society vistims were also famous.

A gathering of clouds that made the perfect storm of having and making you girls and Charlie go to prison and that's all.

My movements would have added yet another cloud, even as Susan Atkins walked around and sat and crafted things, there at that California budget hostel, all meals, soap and shampoo included. Perfume Channel no. 5 only if given from outside and approved.
My walk would have taken me to the American Airlines or American Express office, stores really, that we had in the good old days. Downtown or in malls, strip or otherwise. That was better than now and more fun, to buy tickets, get advice and information on trips.
So, instead of doing the usual, as I did, when traveling; getting travelers checks and a weekender bag, I walked the other way and had the indecision and not pleasant at all of feelings. I didn't go to see Susan Atkins at her current residence in the countryside of one of America's paradise states. That's former, for California, sad to say.
That visiting of Susan, by me, would, I know, had made yet another cloud in that comtinuing, visible in all ways, storm. As I said, in my former comment, I would defintely have blamed myself, as Susan's appeals for freedom were denied.
Last thing she needed, so to speak and to put it. The media would have reported on it and they would sensationalize and run with it.
And, with ignorance and/or with hate for whatever nationalities of people,in this case myself, media and public have, well, take it from there.
We all have our preferences and likes and I don't need to analyze myself and apologize to anyone about anything about what I like or love. Neither should you.
I'm sorry that I didn't follow up to see Susan again and I'm glad that I didn't.
Anyone can as me anything they want. I don't care

Fayez Abedaziz said...

Hi, that last sentence should read: Anyone can ASK...

Unknown said...


Jay said...

Another interesting post Fayez.

Dan S said...

You guys know that a Brooks saddle is very firm but eventually perfectly takes the form of its owners butt, right?