Monday, October 24, 2022

Barker Ranch 10-12-1969 Arrests

 

Getty Images


Unlike the information on the October 10th arrests there is no police report. The only documents I could find were the Arrest and Property Records. There is also a document that details the Complaints filed against those from both days of arrests included at the end of the pdf.

Though Bruce Davis was also arrested on the 12th there is no Arrest and Property Record for him. Not all of those arrested were charged with a crime, some were released without charges. 




Law enforcement went back to Barker Ranch in the following days to make sure that they arrested everyone connected to the "hippie car theft ring". They went so far as to hire a helicopter to fly over the area. No other arrests were made.

Some of the documents are difficult to read.  

Those arrested, in the order that they appear in the pdf-

Benson, Charles T/N Charles Manson
Hamic, David Lee T/N William VanSickle but best known as Bill Vance
Brown, Kenneth Richard 
Jesus, Christopher T/N John Philip Haught
Bailey, Lawrence Charles T/N Larry Giddings

Andrews, Sherry T/N Colleen Sinclair
Beth, Tracy T/N Claudia Leigh Smith
Bartell, Sue Phillis T/N Susan Phyllis Bartell
Jardin, Patti Sue T/N Catherine Gillies
Bluestein, Dianne Elizabeth T/N Dianne Lake





38 comments:

starviego said...

Instead of basking in the glow of capturing Manson, the higher-ups were not happy with the Barker arrests:

medium.com/@brentellesmith/on-the-track-of-the-death-valley-hippie-gang-a69855c4c46b

On the Track of the Death Valley Hippie Gang, Jim Pursell’s Harrowing Arrest of Charles Manson- Aug 6, 2018
At that time, the county sheriff ... would not allow his people to become involved in this. ... Sheriff of Shoshone, Don Ward, just about lost his job. ... Don Ward interviewed them(Posten and Crockett) on a wire recorder... He then drove to Independence, so the sheriff there could hear what these witnesses were telling us about the strangeness going on out there. Don told me the sheriff listened for about a minute, jumped up, grabbed the reels off the machine, and threw them across the room. He ordered Don back to his resident post, and that he was not to be involved in this at all. ....
...
When the higher-ups heard about the Bishop area sending officers out into the boondocks to chase hippies, our (CHP)chief got called to Sacramento and got(his butt) chewed on like it never been chewed in his career. So, he asked Dave(Steuber), ‘What the hell’s going on with this thing?’


What to make of this? Had they been ordered to leave Manson alone--so he could continue his reign of terror?

DebS said...

I doubt that the county sheriff was ordered not to approach Manson because of the various other agencies that were involved in the arrests. The CHP, the district attorney's office, the Federal Park Service and Fish and Game were all involved with the arrests. Why would whoever you think may have ordered the sheriff's office not to become involved single out that one agency and not order the other agencies to do the same?

The Park Service was a federal agency, CHP and Fish and Game were state agencies and the district attorney's office was a county agency. That's a well-rounded mix of agencies involved; they did not answer to the same boss.

The CHP chief may have been pissed because typically the CHP is not involved in heading up arrests like the one at Barker. The CHP's focus from their website:

"The Purpose of the California Highway Patrol


The California Highway Patrol was created in 1929 to provide uniform traffic law enforcement throughout the state. Assuring the safe, convenient and efficient transportation of people and goods on our highway system is still our primary purpose."

Purcell and his fellow officers were working way outside of their jurisdictional duties. They were trained primarily in traffic issues and served only as back-ups for other law enforcement agencies like the police and sheriff's departments. I imagine the chief was thinking about liabilities had the whole arrest situation gone south.

I think the sheriff was both inexperienced and lazy so did not want to become involved.

While I appreciate Purcell's actions and remembrances of the bust, he does have a few facts mixed up when comparing what he has said in the interview to reading the contemporaneous documents. I get it. He was in his 80s and the arrests took place 50 years ago so he's allowed to be forgetful.

grimtraveller said...

Nice try Star.
Doubtless, you'll keep on trying !

starviego said...

DebS said...
I doubt that the county sheriff was ordered not to approach Manson because of the various other agencies that were involved in the arrests. The CHP, the district attorney's office, the Federal Park Service and Fish and Game were all involved with the arrests. Why would whoever you think may have ordered the sheriff's office not to become involved single out that one agency and not order the other agencies to do the same?

The covert operators didn't have the imagination or the legal experience to figure out that other agencies might have jurisdiction. Barker is in the middle of nowhere. It's not on Park Service Land, it's not near any Highway, and the local DA's not going to act unless the Sheriff does first. So there's really only the County Sheriff to worry about.

D. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
D. said...

I'm pretty sure LA was involved in the Barker Ranch raids. Inyo County told me LA has the photos from the raid and to check with them. They did after all contact LA with the information Kitty told them and that Poston tape of HS nonsense went along with them and no doubt ended up in the hands of her mobbed up lawyers and Bugliosi most likely heard that tape much earlier than he claims he did.

Please, put a rest to this "left him alone", "Reign of terror" bullshit. Nobody was protecting Manson. If there was any "hands off" bullshit, it was the opposite of them wanting to protect him and the most likely scenario is LE know fully well about the Crowe ordeal and knew fully well what it was about, despite bullshit like "Charlie shot a black leader" coming out of the mouth of that hayseed Poston who didn't know jack shit about what was really going on. Crockett was couching him. They wanted Manson busted, because when Poston started to go into the amount of drugs they were expecting, Crocket corrected him and made sure Poston said "he did", in regards to who said that.

Manson got fucked in the end worse than anyone in this, so the idea he had protection is pure stupidity. If you want to know why 50+ years we are still asking questions, go take a deep hard look at what was happening. Manson wasn't bullshitting when he said the East Coast Mafia were moving into LA into legitimacy in Hollywood via Paramount with narcotics and pornography. It's there for everyone to see and that's why they had Italians like Bugliosi and Caruso working together on both ends.

and anyone stupid enough to doubt this should take a look at how Evans got his role in Hollywood and what he did. Firing people and bringing Polanski to the top, who was making hardcore porn in England for the Compton Cinema Group and Joel Rostau's partner in airline thieft ring was Colombo made man Cosmo "Gus" Cangiano, who made millions selling porno for the Colombo Family and had labs all over the country selling the shit they were filming up at Cielo with any hippie they pulled off the streets. The Colombo Family who controlled over 90% of porn nation wide and put on that phony act as if they were angry with The Godfather, meanwhile their porn and drug money helped fund it from the start and films like Paramount produced Coonskin, which was handed over to mafia pornographers (Bryanston) after another fake protest they put on was basically the celebration of going legit after Bugliosi helped keep the sheets on it with his Helter Skelter bullshit. He wrote that book at the PlayBoy mansion. Hefner was in on it all too. That's why he made the X-rated McBeth for Polanski. It was all about of an agenda to challenge censors to change obscenity laws that were the roadblock to the mafia getting legit with smut.

THAT is the conspiracy and what people should be looking at. When people stop looking at what Squeaky said or a moron like Poston or how pretty RuthAnn Moorhouse was.....THEN you'll see what went on.

starviego said...

D. said...
I'm pretty sure LA was involved in the Barker Ranch raids. Inyo County told me LA has the photos from the raid and to check with them.

If this is true, that means the LAPD knew by Oct 12 that Manson was responsible for TLB,

Which of course they did:

LADA files Box 46 vol32 pg69 Paul Watkins Aug 11, 1971 testimony in Grogan's murder trial
"A(Watkins): The first time I started talking to the investigators was in Inyo County, the Inyo County Courthouse, on August--no; September* the 13nth, 1969.
Q: I talked to Dave Steuber, head of the Highway Patrol; I talked to Frank Fowles, District Attorney(of Inyo County); I talked to Buck, Lynn Compton, Assistant District Attorney(of Los Angeles County); I talked to Paul Whitely, Homicide Officer(LASO); I talked to, I believe it was, I talked to some auto theft guys. I think it was Gleason(LASO)."

*He probably meant October

D. said...

I was going to lack Inyo might have lacked resources for a raid too.

I think a lot of people knew whoever did it came from Spahn, the problem was proof and finding out who. Gregg Jacobson and Dennis Wilson's wives talking to police in the immediate aftermath. If I could get any police interviews it would be those. Beausoleil was actually living with them in Summer of 1969 right near the Tate house. Polanski's man Gene Gutowski saying in the press the police know who did it, but then back peddled on that with an apology later in the same paper.

cielodrivecom said...

LA has the raid photos because Inyo gave them to them. The photos were taken by a local photographer unaffiliated with law enforcement

starviego said...



If this comment is true, then heroin was the only illegal drug seized during the raids:

Desert Shadows by Bob Murphy, c. 1993 pg100
(at the Barker Ranch house on Oct 14) "An interesting pin cushion was found by (Superintendent) Murphy. The stitches were cut and inside was a buckskin bag containing an amber or cream-colored powder. The rangers speculated it was a cheap form of heroin, Mexican brown, prized by the Family for a special event. It was turned over to the sheriff's office for analysis. There it disappeared, and it was never seen again."

IF it was heroin, who brought it up?

starviego said...

From the Arrest and Property Records linked by Deb: Last page, headed

"Complaints filed against the following:

"Elezebeth Williamson
Marnie K. Reeves
Donna Powel

"These three defendants have been held for Los Angeles Police Department regarding a Homicide investigation"


As the Records were probably compiled soon after the arrests, this would mean that yes, Squeaky, Patty, and Sadie were being sought for their role in TLB by mid-October, 1969.

Vera Dreiser said...

Nope, it was the Hinman murder big guy,

DebS said...

Vera is correct. Along with Kitty Lutesinger the three were questioned about Gary Hinman's murder.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said:

IF it was heroin, who brought it up?

That's something of a daft question, given that no one knows what it was, no one analyzed it and it was never seen again. The rangers' speculations are pretty irrelevant. As far as we currently know, it's never been mentioned by any Ex-Family member. So really, it's mooter than moot.

As the Records were probably compiled soon after the arrests, this would mean that yes, Squeaky, Patty, and Sadie were being sought for their role in TLB by mid-October, 1969

And you were so sure, that, yes, it would mean just what you wanted it to mean.
I would personally never trust a conspiracy theorist to defuse a bomb or unblock my drainage.

D. said:

Manson got fucked in the end worse than anyone in this

Well, as Hitler, Sadaam Hussain, Colonel Gadaffi, and others might have told you, that is a major risk when one starts balls rolling that end in people's deaths....

the idea he had protection is pure stupidity

Hey ! We agree on something !!
Solidarity and brotherhood !!!

that's why they had Italians like Bugliosi and Caruso working together on both ends......and anyone stupid enough to doubt this...

Stupidity can be most refreshing.
Especially when that which stupidity upholds, consistently demonstrates itself to be more robust and unshakable in the face of such D-style smarts.

Peter said...

"THAT is the conspiracy and what people should be looking at."

I already look at a lot of pornography.

starviego said...

DebS said...
Vera is correct. Along with Kitty Lutesinger the three were questioned about Gary Hinman's murder.

If so, wouldn't they have been held at the request of the LASO, instead of the LAPD?

--------------------

grimtraveller said...
That's something of a daft question, given that no one knows what it was, no one analyzed it and it was never seen again.

Well in that case, I guess we are free to just ignore that evidence, as so often happens in TLB research!

cielodrivecom said...

D. said...
If this is true, that means the LAPD knew by Oct 12 that Manson was responsible for TLB

Lutesinger implicates Atkins in Hinman
Gary Hinman Murder - Supplementary Report - October 13, 1969

Manson appears as a suspect in the Labianca 10/15/69 progress report, via LASO/Lutesinger
Second LaBianca Homicide Progress Report

LAPD go to independence and talk to the family in early November
Frank Patchett 12/8/69 Grand Jury testimony

Gorodish said...

starviego typed:

From the Arrest and Property Records linked by Deb: Last page, headed

"Complaints filed against the following:

"Elezebeth Williamson
Marnie K. Reeves
Donna Powel


and....

If so, wouldn't they have been held at the request of the LASO, instead of the LAPD?

Like the typos in "Powel" and "Elezebeth", the LADP reference was obviously a mistake. The desert cops evidently weren't differentiating between LA police bureaus in the written reports. The reason these three were held is the following: When Guenther and Whitely talked to Kitty Lutesinger about Hinman, she mentioned Sadie and Mary, a "slim redhead". They quickly figured out "Donna Powell" was Atkins, but did not know who Mary was (Brunner had returned to Wisconsin instead of going to Barker). Since Marnie Reeves t/n Pat Krenwinkel had a past arrest using the alias Mary Scott, they held her for questioning as the potential "Mary". Elizabeth Williamson t/n Lynn Fromme was the only slim redhead they had in custody, so she was also held. When Krenwinkel was questioned, apparently forgetting Manson's "no snitches" edict, she quickly threw Brunner under the bus and gave up her name. Once they had Brunner's identity they cut the two women loose. Krenwinkel then fled back to Alabama where she was later arrested for TLB.

Gorodish said...

I love how the arrest report of Charles Benson AKA Charles Manson AKA Jesus Christ lists his birthday as 12/25 and his occupation as "Shoe Repair". What a character!

grimtraveller said...

starviego said:

Well in that case, I guess we are free to just ignore that evidence, as so often happens in TLB research!

No, what often happens in TLB research is that Rumpelstiltskin appears on the scene to spin gold out of straw.
Two that you posit here are a good example ~ Vera, DebS and Gorodish have dealt with your Squeaky, Patty, and Sadie gold that turns out to be mere straw. While your heroin gold turns out to be that most strawy of straw. There is no evidence. The cops found powder. They clearly didn't know what it was. They speculated. It was taken to be analyzed. They took their speculations so seriously that the powder was lost and never seen again. As an episode, it has less relevance than the size of Sue Bartell's toenail on the small toe of her left foot.
Granted, when we all die and go to wherever we're going, maybe we'll learn that it was actually heroin. But as for this life, there's speculation relating to genuine happenings and there's "speculation = dredging up the driest blade of grass imaginable and trying to show that it was the centrepiece of a lush pampas, somewhere."

If this is true, that means the LAPD knew by Oct 12 that Manson was responsible for TLB,

Which of course they did:


Well, perhaps they did suspect on the 12th. They certainly did suspect by the 15th, which is only 3 days later. The LaBianca detectives' progress report came out that day and Manson is on that suspect list ~ along with about 10 other people.
So the question has to be asked again, Star, what's your point ? This isn't some earth-shattering information that has just been discovered and shows some kind of seedy conspiracy going on. It's old and ancient information that anyone that has read "Helter Skelter" knows and has known for almost half a century. It's like revealing that Richard Nixon resigned from the presidency in 1974. Sure, it may be new to you if you're a 12-year-old kid reading about it for the first time today, but to the adult population, it's not even old, stale news ~ it's history.

starviego said...

grimtraveller said...
... They speculated. ... They took their speculations so seriously that the powder was lost and never seen again.

Well, the NPS Rangers were law enforcement officers, and they thought it was heroin. Does not their informed decision count? And the reason it disappeared was because it didn't fit with their HS scenario. The public might want to know: who in the Family was doing heroin? I'll give you a hint:

https://news.italy24.press/trends/116293.html
Angela Lansbury in The Mail in 2005
“That time was a terrible page in the history of both Sharon Tate’s family and ours, so it’s not something we really talk about.” ...We eventually found a doctor who prescribed methadone.

But certain names were too sensitive to be mentioned, so they were suppressed.

starviego said...

grimtraveller said...
Well, perhaps they did suspect on the 12th. They certainly did suspect by the 15th, which is only 3 days later. The LaBianca detectives' progress report came out that day and Manson is on that suspect list ~ along with about 10 other people.
So the question has to be asked again, Star, what's your point?

My point, Grim, is that they didn't 'suspect,'--they knew. How often does the second-in-command of the LA DA's office sit in on the interview of a witness to a--what? An auto theft ring? Destroyers of Federal Property? The murder of a musicion? And the Mainstream Media also knew, in the week after the Barker Raid, who dunnit at Cielo:

Watkin, ch23
On October 13, Brooks, Crockett, and I were escorted to Independence ... later that week during Charlie’s preliminary hearing in the Inyo county courthouse.
But during that hearing, things changed drastically.
One morning flocks of reporters appeared in the courtroom; not only L.A. and local press, but foreign correspondents as well; what had started out as a quiet, routine procedure became suddenly a circus of spectators, reporters, cops, and lawyers. Word was out that this was not a simple case of auto theft. Charles Manson had become a murder suspect.

LADA files Box 46 vol32 pg69 Paul Watkins Aug 11, 1971 testimony in Grogan's murder trial
"A(Watkins): The first time I started talking to the investigators was in Inyo County, the Inyo County Courthouse, on August--no; September* the 13nth, 1969. ...
Q: Did you talk to any newspapermen?
A: Yes.
Q: At about this time?
A: Yes.
Q: Would it be fair to say that there were quite a few newsmen up there in that area?
A: Yes.

*He obviously meant October, not September

Cielodrive.com said...

“ One morning flocks of reporters appeared in the courtroom; not only L.A. and local press, but foreign correspondents as well; what had started out as a quiet, routine procedure became suddenly a circus of spectators, reporters, cops, and lawyers. Word was out that this was not a simple case of auto theft. Charles Manson had become a murder suspect.”

Paul is talking about the December 3rd hearing

grimtraveller said...

Cielodrive.com said:

Paul is talking about the December 3rd hearing

Pay good attention to that, Star. Your assertions of fact keep getting torpedoed with.....actual facts.

the NPS Rangers were law enforcement officers, and they thought it was heroin. Does not their informed decision count?

i. Some officers of the law in the big cities were pig-shit ignorant of communities and events they encountered regularly, let alone rangers out in the wilds of Death Valley.
ii. Thinking a powder is heroin does not make it so. You have no idea why some of them might have reached that thought.
iii. You call it an "informed decision." No offence mate, but that is clutching at straws in a way that's a bit embarrassing. They did not reach or make any decision, much less any informed ones, they merely speculated. People speculate on all kinds of premises that go absolutely nowhere ~ rather like you have been doing, actually. So no, their "decisions" don't count.
How much of a heroin problem was there in the Death Valley region circa '69 ?

And the reason it disappeared was because it didn't fit with their HS scenario

What HS scenario existed in mid-October 1969 that any LE understood, had considered or took seriously ?
You're a bit like a politician that refuses to acknowledge that their opposition actually do things that are good and to the benefit of all. Much of the time, bias renders you ineffective.
And one could easily argue that part of the reason the powdered substance disappeared was because of inefficiency, laziness, and the fact that they didn't regard it particularly seriously. Which I find hard to believe if they arrested some perps with what was seriously considered to be heroin. Remember, that's the drug that gave all the others a bad name.....

My point, Grim, is that they didn't 'suspect,'--they knew

Well, we beg to differ on that. I try to piece the scene together in the reality of the time and sequence in which it happened. You piece things together because you have an already ironed-out scenario to which you fit the bits, whether they actually fit or not.
Now, to be fair, I think that there were some LE officers that, by the time of that 2nd LaBianca report, thought that Manson was good for the murders. That's what suspecting means. When you have a list of 11 suspects, sheer logic alone tells one that not all will be ascribed equal weight.

The public might want to know: who in the Family was doing heroin? I'll give you a hint:

The public probably doesn't give a shit, now or then.
But tell me, was Deidre Lansbury arrested at Barker ?

starviego said...

Cielodrive.com said...
Paul is talking about the December 3rd hearing

Watkins' statements clearly support an October time frame for when the mass media got there.

---------------------

grimtraveller said...
When you have a list of 11 suspects, sheer logic alone tells one that not all will be ascribed equal weight.

Lynn Compton clearly gave more weight to one suspect out of the 11 named.

---------------------

grimtraveller said...
...was Deidre Lansbury arrested at Barker?

No, but that doesnt mean she wasn't there. I find it interesting that the untested powder was found hidden inside a pin cushion. Of course Nancy Pitman was known as the seamstress of the group, and she was closest to Didi.

cielodrivecom said...

"Watkins' statements clearly support an October time frame for when the mass media got there."

Show me the articles...

starviego said...


cielodrivecom said...
Show me the articles...

My sources are, as previously mentioned, Chapter 23 of Watkins' book, and
LADA files Box 46 vol32 pg69 Paul Watkins Aug 11, 1971 testimony in Grogan's murder trial

Cielodrive.com said...

I understand that’s your source. When I say show me the articles, I mean where’s the coverage from this 10/13 hearing Paul describes in his testimony. The AP article Deb posted with this article is the only you’ll find. Whereas, the quoted paragraph above that talks about the massive influx of media, Paul is clearly talking about what happened in December. If you look at just 12/3/69, you’re looking at hundreds of papers from all over the country covering this with multiple articles. Same with video and still photography. This obviously doesn’t exist from back in October

starviego said...


The news media did not break the story of the decade when they found out about the arrests in mid-October. I can only suspect that The Powers That Be reached out to kill the story.

Interestingly, there was on October 13, 1969 a paragraph in the Los Angeles Times’ Southland section which covered a raid on a “Hippie Commune” in Death Valley National Park.

See the header:
https://derangedlacrimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/manson-raid_october-1969_LAT.jpg

[If one of our readers with access to the archives of the LA Times could look this up and tell us what else the article says, that would be great.]

In the 12-2-69 news conference, LAPD Chief Ed Davis and the Mayor of LA Sam Yorty were effusive in their praise of the news media for keeping a lid on the story up to that point.

see https://youtu.be/zWZJdMtSi84 3:15 mark

"Throughout the course of this four months investigation, the Los Angeles Police Department
has received excellent cooperation from the news media. The news media has been tenacious in their attempt to keep the public informed, but they have also tempered this with a great deal of responsibility in the welfare of the community in allowing the department to proceed to this point without any undue advance disclosure of some of our investigative efforts that they might have been partially aware of."
...Mayor Sam Yorty: “The city government and the Police Department are very grateful to the news media for the cooperation we have had . . . many people could have damaged our case if they hadn’t been so cooperative . . .”


grimtraveller said...

LAPD Chief Ed Davis said:

but they have also tempered this with a great deal of responsibility in the welfare of the community in allowing the department to proceed to this point without any undue advance disclosure of some of our investigative efforts that they might have been partially aware of

This could refer to all kinds of things like the writing of "HEALTER SKELTER" on the LaBianca fridge. Instead of trying to weave the tangled web of conspiracy, you need to be specific as to what you are referring to.

grimtraveller said...

It's such a vague statement.

DebS said...

I updated the post with the LA Times Oct.13 article. It's very short and not particularly accurate. Several sawed-off shotguns, hand guns, rifles and ammunition were not found. There was one sawed-off shot gun and one hand gun which was the hand gun stolen four or five days prior to the raid. The number and sexes of the people arrested are off, too.

Starviego wrote:

"In the 12-2-69 news conference, LAPD Chief Ed Davis and the Mayor of LA Sam Yorty were effusive in their praise of the news media for keeping a lid on the story up to that point."

I believe what the news media was keeping a lid on was that the Hinman murder was connected to the TLB murders AND while LE had some of the suspects in custody, they did not have all in custody so they wanted to secure those arrests before making any public statements.

They did not want to tip off Krenwinkel and Watson that there were warrants for their arrests. Both were in other states and LA had to work with those two states to make the arrests.

grimtraveller said...

starviego said:

Watkins' statements clearly support an October time frame for when the mass media got there

It doesn't matter what they support if they're inaccurate. Or to put it another way, if they're inaccurate, they don't support what you're claiming they do.

grimtraveller said...
...was Deidre Lansbury arrested at Barker?


No, but that doesnt mean she wasn't there


By the accounts of actual Family members, Deidre is conspicuous in her absence after 1968.
I'm putting the onus on you to make the case for her being part of 1969 proceedings, for her being at Barker and for her introducing heroin into Family circles, seeing as though you're happy to imply all this.

Of course Nancy Pitman was known as the seamstress of the group

Actually, she taught the others various forms of sewing and in time, they were all sewing. Squeaky in her book refers to "10 or 12" of the women and specifically mentions Cathy and Pat.

Cielodrive.com said...

You think that a mass of media that included foreign correspondents arrived in independence in mid October and waited a month and a half? Do you think it’s more likely that Paul, who is testifying about this two years later, is mixing up two separate events?

In the other exchange, you state “He obviously meant October, not September.” Doesn’t that suggest you don’t have great faith in the accuracy of Paul’s timeline

D. said...

Prior to December 1st there was no media coverage about their connection to Tate, except I think one little article about the case about to crack. No names were mentioned. They were all over Inyo by the 3rd or at least the 1st. As soon as the Dec. 1st press conference happened, there was a media storm. Within days the papers were full of stories about them, blaming Black Panthers, Helter Skelter...all of it. There is no doubt there were people in the media who already had information they were sitting on waiting for it to crack.

Paul Watkins was a zero who should have never been allowed to testify because he knew nothing about the crimes and lied at the drop of a hat for Bugliosi. Like most people who testified.

starviego said...


Blogger Cielodrive.com said...
You think that a mass of media that included foreign correspondents arrived in independence in mid October and waited a month and a half?

The covert operators knew that the My Lai massacre story was about to break. (It was published the last week of Nov 1969.) So they waited until the first week of Dec. 1969 to announce the arrests of the TLB killers, which had the effect of pushing the My Lai story to the back pages. So the American public quickly forgot about the story of US Army soldiers going bad, to a story about the dirty stinkin' hippies going bad. which is as it should be.

grimtraveller said...

D. said:

There is no doubt there were people in the media who already had information they were sitting on waiting for it to crack

That's a rather vague statement. Had information specifically when ? The day before ? In October ? In November ? What information ?

Paul Watkins was a zero who should have never been allowed to testify because he knew nothing about the crimes

Paul Watkins wasn't there to testify about the crimes per se, because as you point out, he wasn't at Spahn when they were going down and he was never told by anyone in the Family of the Family's specific involvement in TLB. He was there, along with Brooks Poston and Gregg Jacobson {and others}, to connect the pieces that ensured Charlie was well and truly tied to conspiracy to commit murder and ∴ the 7 murders.
Bugliosi made a point of harping on about circumstantial evidence. This case actually was a masterclass of a few things, one of them being how to make circumstantial evidence work for you.
But Watkins was essential in the Grogan trial and it's no good having a pop at him for that. Blame Grogan's big mouth and bragging.

and lied at the drop of a hat for Bugliosi. Like most people who testified

No offence Dennis, but that's a foolhardy statement. There were 81 or so witnesses in the Tate/LaBianca trial. If you're going to make assertions like that, you need to specify who lied, what lies they told and what the actual truth of the matter was. "Like most people who testified" implies at least 43 people lied in that trial.
I can think of one person that did lie in the trial though. Their lie was so whopping that it has stood the test of time for 53 years. That person was Charlie Manson when he said "Had you not arrested Robert Beausoleil for something he did not do…"

grimtraveller said...

starviego said:

The covert operators knew that....

πŸ€₯πŸ‘ΉπŸ‘€πŸ•΅️πŸ¦ΈπŸ»πŸ‘©πŸ»‍✈️πŸ•΅πŸ½‍♂️πŸ₯·πŸΎπŸ€³πŸΏ