tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post2955477610984351622..comments2024-03-18T15:40:57.986-04:00Comments on The Manson Family Blog: TMZ Reporting Manson HospitalizedMatthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comBlogger202125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-69502053176161867052017-04-03T10:43:49.578-04:002017-04-03T10:43:49.578-04:00ColScott said...
He threatened witnesses
Harold ...ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>He threatened witnesses</b><br /><br />Harold True however does say that Bugliosi threatened him with being charged with conspiracy if he didn't cooperate. Unfortunately he never goes into detail as to how it all came to be or the context. It seems like a dumb thing for Bugliosi to have done if true {no pun intended} because True's whereabouts were fairly easily traceable from the fall of '68 through to August '69 and True spoke at length to Aaron Stovitz in late January 1970, the whole conversation of which can be found at CieloDrive's site.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-81731776283531073262017-04-03T10:24:49.223-04:002017-04-03T10:24:49.223-04:00ColScott said...
He threatened witnesses (like th...ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>He threatened witnesses (like the girls) with their children being taken away if they didn't swing his way</b><br /><br />Mary Brunner and Sandra Good were the only other Family members with children.<br />I'm not at all certain that there's any record at all that outside the penalty trial, Bugliosi ever even spoke to Mary Brunner. When speaking to Laurence Merrick {as recorded in "Death to pigs" pg 172~6} Mary says a lot about how the women of the Family were leaned on by LE. She says that first they'd be threatened with the gas chamber then if that didn't work, they'd be threatened with having their children taken away. Mary does name names {Guenther, Whiteley, Burt Katz} but Bugliosi is not among them.<br />It is interesting however, to note that Mary was being leaned on to provide hard core info on Bobby's involvement in the Hinman murder ~ a murder he subsequently admitted to and one that both Susan & Charlie have said he did and both Bobby and Susan heavily implicated Mary in one way or another. Furthermore, Mary had been in trouble with the law regarding her baby as early as April '68 and that is the month her baby was born !<br />So one needs to look at her words carefully and ask if LE were out of line to say to her that she would be gone after and possibly end up in the gas chamber unless she cooperated. Because that is what may well have happened had she not so it's not as if they were lying to her. When she was relaying these to Merrick, she was clearly lying ~ for example, she said that they told her about Hinman's cut ear {how could she have missed that !} and what the ear was sown up with ~ but no kind of suturing was even found. She very much tries to give the impression that she had been unaware of these things which brings me to the point that it is <a href="http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2007/01/point-of-law.aspx" rel="nofollow">constitutionally permissible</a> for the Police to use deception and trickery as long as it doesn't lead to an innocent person confessing to a crime they did not commit. Mary's son was in the care of her Mum ~ in fact the '68 charges against her were reduced and Pooh returned to her because she said she was taking him home to Wisconsin. He had been taken into care prior to this. So regardless of what the cops said, her son was not going to be taken from his family and put in the care system. It was also somewhat disingenuous of Mary to talk about how LE would "fuck with your head" regarding the kids because the women in the Family didn't look after their specific children anyway and were all of the mind that the father of the child was irrelevant. One only has to look at the way they subsequently showed their caring of their kids ~ Sandy gave hers to someone else to bring up, Mary ended up in jail for a long while after the Hawthorne robbery and Susan was in no position to look after Zezo or have any real say in who looked after him.<br />On Sandy for a moment, she was hardly coerced into testifying. In fact, when Bugliosi didn't question her during the trial, she apparently got angry with him and wanted to know why he hadn't asked her any questions !<br />When the point is made that Bugliosi threatened the women with their kids being taken away, it can only stand if a] it is true and b] the children in question would have been taken away from caring Mums that were giving those children something far better than what they were purportedly going into. The latter certainly is not the case.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-61946606736945302072017-04-02T18:53:49.956-04:002017-04-02T18:53:49.956-04:00ColScott said...
He threatened witnesses (like th...ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>He threatened witnesses (like the girls) with their children being taken away if they didn't swing his way</b><br /><br />"Swing" is an appropriate choice of words, given this excerpt from Susan's 1st autobiography ¬> "Since the birth of my baby, Charlie had an additional grip on me to go along with my addiction to his internal power which I thought was from God. If I got out of line Charlie would subtly maneuver me to the children and go to work on me about their security & their future. He frequently became cruel, manifest most horribly when he would take my baby by the feet and swing him around and around high over his head & then down to within an inch of the rocky ground."<br />According to Atkins, if there was anyone that threatened her and other female Family members with their children being harmed, it was Charlie. She states this in both autobiographies, almost 30 years apart.<br />She does say that she saw the DA's office as part of the same system that took away her son and she also says that Bugliosi said she'd be executed if she didn't say what Bugliosi wanted her to say ~ but what he wanted her to say was what she had already told Virginia Graham and Ronnie Howard because at the time he was involved with her, he hadn't understood and put together HS. And the reality is that Bugliosi was pissed that she'd gotten a deal from the DA and there was no way she <i>could</i> have been executed. So what the hell was she talking about ? <br />Truth be told, she was on her way to the gas chamber and her son had been taken away long before Bugliosi was on the scene. They had a case against her so her only choice in reality was death or life in prison. How could her son have stayed with her ?<br />Her son was going into the system whatever. Her Dad didn't want anything to do with her, she was hardly going to let Zezo stay with him, given her later claim that family friends of his abused her when she was young. She was hardly going to let her son stay with her big brother, given that he & his mates had sexually abused her, her younger brother was only 16 when she was arrested, the child's Dad was out of the picture. Who was her son going to stay with ? There was no one. As she herself put it not long before she died, "while I was on Death Row my son was legally taken from me because <i>no one in my family was willing to raise him</i>."<br />More to the point, she herself had told fellow inmates that she'd been sucking his penis ~ that <i>alone</i> warranted him being taken away from her, at least for investigation ~ that is if she was actually out of jail, which she wasn't. And there was the little matter of her involvement in the murder of a <i>pregnant</i> woman.<br />So again, when one looks at the claim that Bugliosi threatened the girls with their kids, in Atkins' case that isn't true. Had it been true, it would have been arguably justified. The child had already been taken away before after the Spahn raid, been kidnapped by Atkins from the foster home, Atkins had already confessed to killing and being involved in the murders. Most LE, in order to convict a killer would make overtures like "we will see to it that your children are taken away if you do not cooperate...."<br />But Bugliosi didn't. It was spelled out to Atkins what her options were and the end result was that the death penalty would be gone for. Bugliosi was not the one that decided this. He didn't want any deals with Susan Atkins. It was done without his consent because at the time he was not the main player in events & his consent wasn't needed.<br />What's somewhat odious about the charge of threatening "the girls" with their kids, at least in Atkins' case is that she didn't end up testifying under coercion anyway.<br />So the threat charge doesn't apply to Atkins either.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-17954577286045026732017-04-02T13:45:51.431-04:002017-04-02T13:45:51.431-04:00ColScott said...
He threatened witnesses (like th... ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>He threatened witnesses (like the girls) with their children being taken away if they didn't swing his way</b><br /><br />This is an interesting point that needs some examination because of what is implied here. Let's have a look at this.<br />"Threatened witnesses {like the girls}." ¬> Aside from "the girls" {presumably the girls in the Family} which witnesses did Bugliosi threaten with child removal for non compliance ? Has anyone ever come forward in the 47 years since the trial to say that this happened with Bugliosi ? Come to think of it, which of the witnesses or anyone that could be a witness had children and was in such a position that their children could be taken away ?<br />Realistically that leaves "the girls." Van Houten and Krenwinkel didn't have kids. Atkins and Kasabian did. I'm not aware of Kasabian ever coming forward and saying that Bugliosi threatened her with her kids, nor her lawyer, Gary Fleischman. In fact, from the moment she turned herself in and waived extradition {against his advice} he was trying to set up some kind of deal for her with the prosecution. There never was a point where she had to be coerced into testifying ~ the prosecution came looking for <i>her</i> once Atkins recanted. Prior to that, she'd been {through Fleischmann} after <i>them</i> looking to testify.<br />So it can't be her that was threatened by the naughty Bugliosi to have her kids taken away. Besides, Tanya was safely ensconced with Linda's Mum in New Hampshire so the child was in no danger and had a family to look after her, should Linda be convicted {though the prosecution had virtually no case against her thanks to the strictures of California law}.<br />That said, <i>had</i> Bugliosi tried to have her child taken away, he would have had ample grounds, just from the way Linda had left Tanya in the care of a group of people she'd seen commit murder and from Tanya being already taken into the care system after the Aug 16 Spahn Ranch raid when, as her Mother, she was nowhere to be seen. When she went to claim Tanya back, she sure as hell said nothing that could assist the Police in their investigation of the Cielo murders. She was very quiet about that. So if Bugliosi had been so minded, he could have possibly leaned on her and threatened to have her child taken away and he could have made the same noises regarding the one she was carrying, given that she was in prison and Robert Kasabian wasn't up for taking care of his child or the one on the way.<br />But he didn't.<br />So it can't be Linda he supposedly threatened.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-22406916274012489402017-01-10T18:24:45.179-05:002017-01-10T18:24:45.179-05:00Irving Kanarek once apparently said......{I can...<b>Irving Kanarek once apparently said......{I can't verify it because I saw it in a random page online in some book that I never bothered to check the title, so take it with a pinch of salt}</b><br /><br />Interesting <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2_0DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=irving+kanarek+daughter&source=bl&ots=v7N97BDjIz&sig=DOkKeeOSJrWeZ6g_JOm2NrPogRI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjR2oW017jRAhXFIMAKHYyFCp4Q6AEIeTAV#v=onepage&q=irving%20kanarek%20daughter&f=false" rel="nofollow">little piece</a>. He said it in 1996.<br />But he's demonstrably wrong because at the end of the day it was the jury that put Charlie, Pat, Susan and Leslie away. When people keep making the case about pre~trial publicity, Nixon and even the infamous celebrity hit list, they seem to do so in ignorance that it has to be shown that the members of the jury are the ones that were swayed by all of that. It doesn't matter if the rest of the country were. That jury don't seem to have been fans of the story pre~trial, they were sequestered for 9 months and weren't allowed to watch the news or read papers and therefore had little handle on what was going on outside. And whenever there was trouble, the bus windows were blacked out. They tried hard to look for reasons not to condemn them to death. Even though Zamora believed they deserved it, he welcomed every delay in decision making in the hope that someone would make a compelling argument against it. <br />It's a huge assumption that the members of the jury were all rabid Nixon Republicans that hung on his every word. The impression William Zamora gives is that was not the case at all. He didn't give a shit what Nixon thought. <br />But even if he had, who was it that brought to the attention of the jury that Nixon had gaffed in publicly stating that he thought Manson was guilty ?<br />Was it not Manson himself ?grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-48446614266591135802017-01-07T20:15:23.493-05:002017-01-07T20:15:23.493-05:00penny lane said...
ask a question about charlie b...penny lane said...<br /><br /><b>ask a question about charlie being a BIG FAT LIAR and I'm rewarded great answers</b><br /><br />Here's an interesting quote from Bobby Beausoleil at his parole hearing a few months back:<br />"....you know, Charlie was a liar. I mean, he just lied to everybody. He manipulated people by telling different people different stories. And you know, the story that he told the other people would have been a story to one set of person, would have been a different story than he told to someone else."<br /><br />I guess Bobby has his reasons for saying that....grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-17997894051595284712017-01-06T15:34:39.539-05:002017-01-06T15:34:39.539-05:00St Circumstance said...
Home Charles Manson Too W...<br /> St Circumstance said...<br /><br /><b>Home Charles Manson Too Weak For Potentially Life Saving Surgery<br />Charles Manson Too Risky for Surgery<br />1/6/2017 11:24 AM PST<br />EXCLUSIVE<br /><br />0103_charles_manson_twitter<br /><br />Charles Manson was supposed to have surgery Thursday night for intestinal bleeding, but doctors determined he was too weak and the procedure too risky ... TMZ has learned..</b> <br /><br /><br /><br />I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that the original source to TMZ of Manson being hospitalized was Matthew Roberts. They did a story on him previous to this, and Matthew has a history of selling his story to tabloids.<br /><br />I wonder how much money Matthew Roberts is making from selling info on his "Daddy"?<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-3284545526076618062017-01-06T15:31:29.828-05:002017-01-06T15:31:29.828-05:00ziggyosterberg said...
...and it was a YUGE waste...<i>ziggyosterberg said...<br /><br />...and it was a YUGE waste of time. Consider yourself forewarned.</i><br /><br /><b>I think I know a shortcut :)</b><br /><br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-31158609443684329342017-01-06T15:27:13.859-05:002017-01-06T15:27:13.859-05:00ColScott said...
Is revenge not as big a motive a...ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>Is revenge not as big a motive as an imaginary civil war?</b><br /><br />It's a better, more understandable and much safer motive. It's also just as hard to prove. But Bugliosi still went with it too.<br />Aaron Stovitz was the head guy. He thought HS was something of a crock. He was the lead prosecutor. He believed a major part of the motive was the copycat. Yet he acquiesced to his subordinate. We have funny stories in "5 to die" and "Witness to evil" about his cool, calm, mature demeanour in contrast to the highly strung, impetuous, egotistical nuclear hothead Bugliosi. <br />Yet he acquiesced to his subordinate.<br />He was shown to be right to do that, yet the uncomfortable reality remains that he would have been, if not content, then prepared to let Charlie go because he couldn't "see for miles." Bugliosi was the right prosecutor for this case because he was canny enough to be able to take on board what was coming his way, even though it was highly unusual and churn it out on the other side in a way that the common person could get alongside. He's almost the George Martin of the saga.<br /> <br /><br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-73551312343247398612017-01-06T15:18:01.942-05:002017-01-06T15:18:01.942-05:00Matt said...
Yes Deb, that's the quote. I...<br />Matt said... <br /><br /><b>Yes Deb, that's the quote. I'll find the video one way or another.</b> <br /><br />Not if it was from something like Sally Jesse Raphael or one of those other daytime shows that people forgot even existed, let alone videotaped and uploaded to YouTube.<br /><br />I was looking for the video source of one of those Doris Tate quotes a while back (maybe even the same one that you're looking for, can't remember), and it was a YUGE waste of time. Consider yourself forewarned.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-53154548782724734932017-01-06T15:17:19.457-05:002017-01-06T15:17:19.457-05:00Thanks all...ask a question about charlie being a ...Thanks all...ask a question about charlie being a BIG FAT LIAR and Im rewarded great answers ...and yes I would love to hear Georges take on how he actually knows charlie is speaking the truth...oh and as bizarre as it sounds I dreamt charlie kicks it on the 11 of this month...who dreams that stuff ?? Penny lanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10401896105440499937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-87926282785991989852017-01-06T15:06:12.757-05:002017-01-06T15:06:12.757-05:00St Circumstance said...
This is all I can find fr...<br />St Circumstance said...<br /><br /><b>This is all I can find from yesterday as far as if he is is alive or not?<br /><br /><br /><br />Roberts, 48, traveled to Bakersfield from his home in Los Angeles on Thursday to see Manson who is being treated at the city's Mercy Hospital.<br /><br />Hospital officials refused him entry because he hadn't submitted the appropriate paperwork, but he managed to send a message to Manson, and is hoping to speak with him in the coming days.<br /><br />Speaking exclusively to DailyMail.com after the failed visit, he said: 'The hospital wouldn't let me in so I spoke to an official at the California Department of Corrections and they promised to pass on a message to him on my behalf.<br /><br />'They told me my father is hanging in there and still in custody, but wouldn't share any more.'</b> <br /><br /><br /><br />I can only hope that there's a Bakersfield version of Captain McCluskey to straighten that walking freak show out. Where's Sterling Hayden when you need him?<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-87953269846650830082017-01-06T14:57:42.505-05:002017-01-06T14:57:42.505-05:00St Circumstance said...
I have to speculate that...<br />St Circumstance said... <br /><br /><b>I have to speculate that if he had passed yesterday- we would know by now???<br /><br />so maybe those reports were false...</b> <br /><br />I'm doubting the accuracy of a lot of the info that we've gotten so far. I don't think that the hospital or corrections would they even give out any info about Manson, for security reasons. So unless this info is coming from someone receiving info from the medical staff working on Manson, it's pretty suspect.<br /><br />If Manson was really sick and they thought that he was dying, wouldn't they put him on a morphine drip or something? Morphine drips don't usually take this long.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-60609909013370006102017-01-06T14:55:38.287-05:002017-01-06T14:55:38.287-05:00Home Charles Manson Too Weak For Potentially Life ... Home Charles Manson Too Weak For Potentially Life Saving Surgery<br />Charles Manson Too Risky for Surgery<br />1/6/2017 11:24 AM PST<br />EXCLUSIVE<br /><br />0103_charles_manson_twitter<br /><br />Charles Manson was supposed to have surgery Thursday night for intestinal bleeding, but doctors determined he was too weak and the procedure too risky ... TMZ has learned.<br /><br />Sources familiar with the situation tell us ... Manson was taken from Corcoran State Prison to a Bakersfield hospital a few days ago because of a lesion in his intestines that was causing significant bleeding.<br /><br />We're told doctors wanted to perform surgery shortly after the 82-year-old arrived at the hospital but he refused. <br /><br />Our sources say Thursday Manson had a change of heart and agreed to the surgery, but during pre-op late yesterday doctors determined he needed to go under the knife ... but felt it was life-threatening because his condition was too weak.<br /><br />Manson remains at the hospital and doctors are trying to figure out their next move.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-52870638450938265102017-01-06T14:34:17.822-05:002017-01-06T14:34:17.822-05:00Dreath said...
From= "Grim"
From=Me
Fr...Dreath said...<br /><br /><b>From= "Grim"</b><br /><br />From=Me<br />Fromme !<br /><br />ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>BUG did not care about the truth just about getting Charlie. He already had the actual killers cold</b><br /><br />Maybe it's the American way. All the killers died on 9/11 but Bin Laden was still pursued for 10 years and killed.<br />More to the point, it was California law that dictated that Manson be looked at, once the investigation started. He was on the LaBianca suspect list a full month before Bugliosi was assigned the case.<br />People forget Steve Zabriske.<br />He's the guy that walked into a cop shop in Oregon at the start of November {2 weeks before Bugliosi is on the case} and told the cops that a "Charlie" and a "Clem" had done the TLB murders. He says he got the info from Ed Bailey and Vern Plumlee. Why would Vern tell him that ? Could it possibly have been true ?<br />He'd never even met them or the Family but Zabriske was certainly on the ball about those two even if he got the wrong murder for Clem.<br /><br /> Zelda Formaldehyde said...<br /><br /><b>Resting with no defense witnesses called was an open invitation to summarily put them all away, Charlie included. For the jury, it was an easy out</b><br /><br />Not according to William Zamora who was on the jury.<br />Yet for all that, Irving Kanarek once apparently said {I can't verify it because I saw it in a random page online in some book that I never bothered to check the title, so take it with a pinch of salt} that the reason he didn't present a defence was because he did not think the prosecution had proved its case. Even Bugliosi says that he was worried about which way the verdict cold go. <br /><br /><b>In Helter Skelter, he tells Melcher (in order to get him to testify for him) that Charlie was not looking for him- that he knew he and Candy had moved away. There is substantial evidence that this is false. But Bug wants the reader- and presumably Melcher- to think otherwise</b><br /><br />And what is this substantial evidence ? Virtually every single item on Melcher that I've ever read {except when it is some hack who doesn't check their facts and does that lazy media write up bit} including the things said by the killers, Charlie himself and William Zamora are more than clear that it was well known that Melcher wasn't at Cielo anymore. Zamora wrote in his book how Charlie nicked the telescope from his new place {the way Jacobson says Charlie related the incident is so funny}, an incident George Stimson wrote up 40 years later as Charlie "fucking with" Melcher.<br />Your monomania with Bugliosi and your unwillingness to try to embrace a psychedelic mindset, if only to understand where these guys were coming from, keep you chasing your tail in an endless spiral from which you may never break free.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-15090918509857313032017-01-06T14:14:46.790-05:002017-01-06T14:14:46.790-05:00This is all I can find from yesterday as far as if...This is all I can find from yesterday as far as if he is is alive or not?<br /><br /><br /><br />Roberts, 48, traveled to Bakersfield from his home in Los Angeles on Thursday to see Manson who is being treated at the city's Mercy Hospital.<br /><br />Hospital officials refused him entry because he hadn't submitted the appropriate paperwork, but he managed to send a message to Manson, and is hoping to speak with him in the coming days.<br /><br />Speaking exclusively to DailyMail.com after the failed visit, he said: 'The hospital wouldn't let me in so I spoke to an official at the California Department of Corrections and they promised to pass on a message to him on my behalf.<br /><br />'They told me my father is hanging in there and still in custody, but wouldn't share any more.'<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-68563595717966333092017-01-06T13:26:39.568-05:002017-01-06T13:26:39.568-05:00starviego said...
From GrimTraveller: "They ... starviego said...<br /><br /><b>From GrimTraveller: "They even looked into Black power revolutionaries."<br /><br /> They did? I have never seen any evidence of that</b><br /><br />Have a read of the <a href="http://www.mansondirect.com/police-report-tate-2nd.html" rel="nofollow">2nd Tate progress report</a> and keep going down the page until you see the name "Kate Saxton" then have a good look at the info that follows.<br /><br /> St Circumstance said...<br /><br /><b>by the way- speaking of Doris Tate</b><br /><br />Going totally left field and theoretical, I suspect that Doris Tate felt guilty for pushing her daughter into acting and may have been overcompensating once she became serious about opposing parole.<br /><br />Dreath said...<br /><br /> <b>I believe this quote from the Col's article explains the skepticism so many had, including me at one point.<br /><br /> "The sheer insanity of it boggles the mind. It seems so patchwork and stitched together. It seems so drugged out. It seems so obviously the work of someone who needs psychiatric help."<br /><br /> But I think it is also the point- it is insane. It is a patchwork. It is drugged out and it is the philosophy of someone who needed psychiatric help</b><br /><br />If you take out the notion that the Family could kick start the revolution with murder, then it's really not any more unique or insane than some of what is fully believed by both mainstream and esoteric religions. Or by many cultural groupings both in the West and 3rd world. Or by people who have transcended the straight and normal through tripping. Lots of people believed in variations of HS. For example, the Black Muslims. Psychedelic drugs caused tons of people to believe all manner of stuff. Dylan was full of contempt of the way people thought they were birds and fire hydrants once they'd tripped.<br />However insane HS seems, it was a product of its time and place and in a period when rejection of previously accepted certainties and norms was the order of the day. HS was a psychedelic vision played out in the mind of a psychedelicatessen and given further support in the way it was taken up by others. It's the Family's transatlantic cousin of "Yellow Submarine," that notion of "we will take the old and refashion it <i>our</i> way." The fact that it could be discussed rationally with Gregg Jacobson and the fact that Charlie could talk about aspects of it {the biblical aspects of it !} to Rolling Stone or even Bugliosi speak volumes.<br /><br />Nonymous said...<br /><br /><b>Helter Skelter was a thing that a lot of the group was actually into</b><br /><br />Peer pressure played its part too, the way it can in any group. If the highly esteemed ones catch the vision, those further down the food chain may start to feel that they are odd because they <i>can't</i> see it. So they might start 'seeing' it even stronger than the others or giving themselves to it more. One mustn't forget that pleasing Charlie was not something the Family was ashamed of or embarrassed about. For them it was a beautiful and selfless thing, at least in principle.<br /><br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-44698425613189380742017-01-06T11:38:08.421-05:002017-01-06T11:38:08.421-05:00lol I have that book and knew I heard it somewhere...lol I have that book and knew I heard it somewhere too.. I watched old Doris interviews all morning trying to discover the source lol<br /><br />Deb beat me to it :) much better researcher... but I am more full of shit :)<br /><br /><br />I really believe what I said earlier. She was basing that statement on things Charlie said in his interviews after the crime more than his general nature.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-20646841394923739342017-01-06T11:31:01.616-05:002017-01-06T11:31:01.616-05:00From GrimTraveller: "They even looked into Bl...From GrimTraveller: "They even looked into Black power revolutionaries."<br /><br />They did? I have never seen any evidence of that.starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-48210225429730672472017-01-06T11:26:51.643-05:002017-01-06T11:26:51.643-05:00Yes Deb, that's the quote. I'll find the v...Yes Deb, that's the quote. I'll find the video one way or another. <br /><br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-56098309599284679272017-01-06T11:13:53.977-05:002017-01-06T11:13:53.977-05:00“Though I’m grateful for Vincent Bugliosi’s helter...“Though I’m grateful for Vincent Bugliosi’s helter-skelter motive and the convictions it brought, I don’t buy into it for a second. There’s something more, some deeper motive for the killings. Even though Manson talks in riddles, he seldom lies. So I watch and wait for that morsel of truth that might slip from his lips, revealing the true motive.” <br /><br /><br />- Doris Tate, mother of Sharon Tate (Source: Restless Souls) <br /><br />I found this at-<br /><br />http://www.mansondirect.com/others.htmlDebShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17093893870315262396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-19536914837251919282017-01-06T10:06:10.176-05:002017-01-06T10:06:10.176-05:00by the way- speaking of Doris Tate lol
if you hav...by the way- speaking of Doris Tate lol<br /><br />if you have a spare 4 minutes and change and want to watch a classic Video of Dorris Ripping Tex to his face watch this:<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q6daYTQceU<br /><br />Good for you Doris!!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-50338502314335503592017-01-06T10:00:21.174-05:002017-01-06T10:00:21.174-05:00I think thats the point..
When Charlie gives an a...I think thats the point..<br /><br />When Charlie gives an answer in an interview- he is actually kind of predictable in a sense:<br /><br />He says a few things that are reasonable and coherent, but when pressed, or put in a position to say something uncomfortable, he gets defensive, evasive, or simply says outright nonsense purposely.<br /><br />He usually doesn't directly lie in his responses to questions in the context of interviews about the case. Doesn't mean he doesn't lie in other ways, or isn't deceitful in his direct interactions with people in other aspects of his life...<br /><br />But I think Doris was talking more about his on the record responses she had seen or heard...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-89906223244006769152017-01-06T09:42:24.948-05:002017-01-06T09:42:24.948-05:00Penny et al, I'm pretty sure I've seen San...Penny et al, I'm pretty sure I've seen Sandra and Squeaky say Charlie never lies in an interview. And George Stimson, in his book, says something like he tends not to lie. CM probably repeated it so many times it became truth for people, and they must have also seen him talk and act in ways that convinced them it was true. He seemed/seems like the real deal to some people, but, as Grim and others show, there are many examples of him lying his ass off. I can think of many lies he tells.<br />And when he doesn't want to lie or knows it won't work he switches to the "riddles."<br />It is surprising to me Doris Tate said it too.Mr. Humphrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18206702171683458150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-89358963443984911162017-01-06T09:24:30.654-05:002017-01-06T09:24:30.654-05:00I have to speculate that if he had passed yesterda...I have to speculate that if he had passed yesterday- we would know by now???<br /><br />so maybe those reports were false...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10291550902325920904noreply@blogger.com