tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post6237993095848522254..comments2024-03-18T15:40:57.986-04:00Comments on The Manson Family Blog: The TLB Motive - My Final Word Matthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comBlogger85125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-26923929615918608132021-10-03T15:31:15.672-04:002021-10-03T15:31:15.672-04:00Also, you're talking about drug-addled minds, ...Also, you're talking about drug-addled minds, who knows how clearly they were thinking.<br /><br />And I don't believe that Kasabian either - self-serving and willing to say anything to keep herself out of prison for life.RonnieJerseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957998788321001990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-40445012627672510832021-10-03T15:28:31.836-04:002021-10-03T15:28:31.836-04:00I just never believed all that helter skelter stor...I just never believed all that helter skelter story, if you look at a person's past actions it is a definite clue to their future - And Manson had gone after Hinman for money and drugs, also that Bernard Crowe, and he was aware of Frykowski's drug dealing, and allegedly Sebring was buying cocaine. So Manson was up to his normal routine - drugs and money. I really don't believe he was a very deep thinker.RonnieJerseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957998788321001990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-54447190195902844372021-07-13T06:10:18.500-04:002021-07-13T06:10:18.500-04:00David said..
But these murders occurred because M...David said..<br /><br /><b>But these murders occurred because Manson needed to reassert his control over a millennial movement in crisis. That is why they occurred, not because he believed there was a big rock candy mountain under the desert or that he would rule the world</b><br /><br />a]Except that he clearly did believe in the underground stuff under the desert and b]if, under the influence of LSD, someone can genuinely believe they are someone else that has already existed, then they <i>can</i> believe that they could "rule" the world. History records people that believed that {and acted on it} without <i>any</i> psychedelic drugs. <br />It's not being trite to say that the counterculture and many offshoots of it was not about sharing the world with the straights. It was essentially about taking over <i>with a better way.</i> Not vastly different to hard line Islamists of now or Christian nationalists that have blighted the USA for too long. Charles Manson was simply a smaller and more extreme version of that underlying thought.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-74678445143069326792021-07-12T14:02:19.258-04:002021-07-12T14:02:19.258-04:00David - I agree with you that whatever went down a...David - I agree with you that whatever went down at Esalen just prior to the murders may well have contributed to Cielo being chosen and executed. However, I disagree about the murders, or certainly the Cielo murders, being driven by Manson needing to reassert himself. I find that contradictory for a couple of reasons. Firstly, he didn't lead the trip to Cielo himself (as he did the second night) which you could argue he would've done had he thought he needed to re-establish himself (whilst clearly avoiding getting his hands dirty on the actual killings themselves). Instead, the events at Cielo elevated Watson's status amongst the girls rather than Manson's after the sheer brutality that he displayed. So a little self-defeating if that was Manson's motive imho. He clearly realised that when he decided to lead night two himself "Last night was too messy, I'll show you how it's done" etc. If we're to believe that was Manson's response to Cielo you can almost sense the perverse jealousy that he was feeling towards Watson and his need to find fault with what went down at Cielo and bring Watson down a bit. Atkins said in one of her books/interviews, almost admiringly, that Watson seemed to be levitating at Cielo and how in awe she was of him etc etc. If she said the same kind of crap to Manson after they returned from Cielo, you can almost sense him thinking AT THAT STAGE I need to reassert myself here. Hence imho the second night may well have been about him feeling the need to reassert himself and pull the limelight back from Watson. But I don't believe that's what drove the events at Cielo. Furthermore, if we're to believe the script, the very fact that Manson felt confident enough to instruct Watson and the girls to go out and kill without giving them any why or wherefore tells me that he felt very much in control of them at that time. I'd also argue that the purpose of motive from a legal perspective is purely another selling point to the jury to further enhance the chances of securing a conviction. In that sense, it can simply be a construct of the Prosecution and not necessarily the truth or even something that the Prosecutors themselves believe in. The end product (conviction) trumps the truth. Some might argue that HS perfectly fits that bill. Speculatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00489618949347706102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-13005656552753065732021-07-12T13:54:11.504-04:002021-07-12T13:54:11.504-04:00David said...
And also nice to see you still rede... David said...<br /><br /><b>And also nice to see you still redefine my comments to suit your agenda</b><br /><br />Oooch !<br />Actually, as I was reading your earlier post {your first one} a couple of weeks back, I was going to comment that I wasn't in disagreement with it, for the most part. It certainly makes up part of the puzzle, in my opinion.<br />In a previous thread, Col Scott made the point that many things can be true at once and as you know, I have long banged the drum for paradoxes and nuance.<br />I think he's right on that point.<br />I don't redefine comments, by the way. I examine and analyse them and comment on what they say to me. If I was off track on what I understood, it'll be pointed out soon enough !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-24438939893385087052021-07-12T12:31:07.829-04:002021-07-12T12:31:07.829-04:00 i think your explanation is likely
Is the 2nd ni... i think your explanation is likely<br /><br />Is the 2nd night Charlie reasserting ? Also shorty .<br /><br />Dan Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17058602981660065969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-27079934059880635492021-07-12T01:41:04.284-04:002021-07-12T01:41:04.284-04:00Grim, it is at least nice to see you are still ‘al...Grim, it is at least nice to see you are still ‘all in’ on Helter Skelter. <br /><br />And also nice to see you still redefine my comments to suit your agenda. <br /><br />The purpose of motive both legally and on a more basic level is to answer the question ‘why’ something happened. That simple question and its answer from a legal perspective is why it need not be proven in court. You shot someone. That is the crime. That is what we care about. Why you shot them doesn’t matter. Criminal culpability is action and intent based. <br /><br />The murders occurred because there was a crisis of the charismatic leadership at the head of a millennial movement. That really is ‘why’ they occurred. <br /><br />Manson was that leader. I assume I need not argue that point. The crisis happened for the same reason literally thousands of others have happened. The philosophy sustaining the millennial movement is Helter Skelter, which is why that is relevant. But it is not the motive. Anyone who argues Manson did not ‘proselytize’ this philosophy should, well, go read.<br /><br />The crisis, above, occurs for several reasons. <br /><br />First, there is outside pressure and stress. This can be seen both in the comments of ‘the girls’ about the police at the time, the Crowe shooting and the Hinman murder. These last two are similar to Jim Jones and the shooting of Congressman Leo Ryan.<br /><br />The second stressor is the inability of the charismatic leader to expand his message. Typically, he promises this will happen but it turns out others are not listening. This is the where the music comes in.<br /><br />I assume it need not argue that Manson’s music was supposed to be the vehicle to spread his message. If we must argue that point, perhaps I will come out of retirement and write a post. Even his most ardent followers agree with me. Read their quotes at the time. Read what they have written since. The instrument of Manson’s message, failed.<br /><br />The ultimate failure of that message, I believe, can be found in what happened at Esalan. But I operate from a ‘think-know-prove’ approach as to these matters and will admit the best I can say is ‘I think’ on that one. <br /><br />The third stressor is defections of key members. I think one can identify, in no particular order, Ella Jo Bailey (and Bill Vance if memory serves) and move on to Paul Watkins et al. Put simply: devout members start telling the charismatic leader ‘no’ and leave him.<br /><br />The final stressor is the failure of the millennial event to occur. This event is according to that leader a cataclysm that will usher in the new age. An event that only those, tuned in will see coming. I believe (‘think’, again) that it is no coincidence August was chosen for the advent. August 11th is a particularly important date for Manson’s revelation. <br /><br />These stressors lead the charismatic leader to seek to try to reestablish control. Some have noted this in their comments. <br /><br />In other movements it is actually ‘die for me’ as in suicide. Control over life and death, of course, is ultimate control. In all cases the violence turns either outward or inward. <br /><br />Again, I can neither prove nor do I know why Manson chose those two houses. I suspect what we have been told may be true as to the Polanski residence- to scare Melcher, which, if I were to believe O’Neil, appears to have succeeded. Unfortunately, he quotes only dead people. <br /><br />I have come to believe the second night did have something to do with the True House and that the LaBiancas were, much like Steven Parent, in the wrong place at the wrong time, but, again, I neither know nor can I prove this. <br /><br />But these murders occurred because Manson needed to reassert his control over a millennial movement in crisis. That is why they occurred, not because he believed there was a big rock candy mountain under the desert or that he would rule the world.<br /><br />Thank you for reading. <br /><br />Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-89633274279993659502021-07-11T10:25:13.882-04:002021-07-11T10:25:13.882-04:00D. said...
So it's not as if he ended up with... D. said...<br /><br /><b>So it's not as if he ended up with a full $1000. The rest could have easily went to bills or who knows what</b><br /><br />The timeline of when Gary supposedly received the money, supposedly gave Bobby the drugs, and when Bobby supposedly returned with Mary & Susan will, {all taking Bobby's word as truthful} <i>always</i> defeat any defence you try to make. When trying to dilute the Charlie/Bobby culpability in the Hinman murder, you continually run into murkier waters that in actuality, simply throw more culpability Charlie and Bobby's way. And the amusing thing for me is that it is all geared to trying to scotch HS. It's like watching a kid lying their arse off about an incident in the playground when <i>you already have the whole scenario on cctv</i>.<br /><br /><b>then just cozy up with your copy of Helter Skelter, drink your milk and walk your dog. If you are so content with believing Bugliosi's horror script, why do you even bother with this case?</b><br /><br />One could just as easily say to you that if you are content to believe the myriad contradictory stories that exist only to absolve Charles Manson of murder and the incredible visions that he had and convinced others of, and for which there is barely anything that can be described as evidence, then you might as well cosy up with all the Charlie supporter contradictions that enable you to not have to face reality, drink your <i>warm</i> milk or Ovaltine and stroke your cats.<br />Mind they don't scratch you though !<br /><br /><b>If you are so content with believing Bugliosi's horror script, why do you even bother with this case?</b><br /><br />The days when this kind of rhetoric could embarrass people into repudiating whatever they thought or scurrying for cover into frightened anonymity have long gone.<br />People come to discuss this case for a whole host of different reasons. Some do so because they have issues with women killing. Some do because they do not believe another human being is capable of coercing/persuading/talking another human being, let alone a group of them, into murder. Some do because they do not want the drug subculture to be denigrated in any way. Some do because they have such issues with authority that they refuse to accept that authority is in any way ever right. Some do because they are fascinated by mental illness and see it in droves in the case. Some do because they see it as important to call out police and judicial corruption. Some do because they are dedicated conspiracy theorists. Some are interested in the totality of the case. Some do because they have an affinity with the legal world. Some do because they want to find out more about it or that particular time in American history. Some do because they dig the Beatles........and so on and so forth.<br />Someone should do a post titled "Why are you interested in this case ~ or let me count the ways..." <br /> grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-90909707725496196362021-07-11T06:14:51.181-04:002021-07-11T06:14:51.181-04:00ColScott said...
The current parole system requir... ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>The current parole system requires you to accept the crime narrative you are convicted of. Leslie and Pat have to subscribe to the reality that was invented or never get released</b><br /><br />David said...<br /><br /><b>Col Scott’s comment: Bingo!!!!</b><br /><br />Problems have always abounded with that view.<br />Bobby does not accept the crime narrative he was convicted of. Hasn't done since at least 1976. Yet, he was granted parole. Sure, he was denied this last time but that's neither here nor there. He was granted it the prior hearing.<br />Pat wrote "HEALTER SKELTER" as we all know, on the LaBianca fridge. So how can she honestly deny it had anything to do with the murders ?<br />Leslie spelled out the story to Marvin Part in <i>Dec 1969</i>, before there was even any trial.<br />Stating or implying that they only trot out the HS stuff because it's the only way they can ever be released is denying reality that has already and actually happened ~ 50+ years ago. From the moment their parole hearings began in 1978, neither have ever denied murder. Neither was on trial for believing HS. Interestingly, neither has changed their story either.<br /><br />D. said...<br /><br /><b>It's a fact that Charlie told Bobby to say whatever he had to say and blame "The Family" if he has to in his second trial. Charlie was already convicted and sentenced in Tate-Labianca. "One of us out is better than two of us in" was his exact words and something he repeated multiple times over the years</b><br /><br />Quick question ¬> are you Dennis ?<br />Anyway, whoever you are, it's not possible to take you seriously. You're so up on the throne as Charlie's cheerleader that you knock out stuff that simply is not true, in the hope no one will check what you say. You state that <b>Charlie was already convicted and sentenced in Tate-Labianca</b> when he supposedly told Bobby to go ahead and implicate him as Gary's murderer {!!} which is your kingpin to demonstrate Charlie's honesty and selflessness. But Bobby's trial and sentencing were concluded long before Charlie was ever on trial. Bobby was a done deal by April 1970. Charlie's trial didn't even start until July {well, June, but it took ages to select the jury} and his conviction sentencing weren't until 1971.<br />So what are you talking about ? <br /><br />Speculator said...<br /><br /><b>Whether he said he was JC or the devil incarnate, why for a minute think he actually believed it himself. He said those things for impact and design rather than true belief imho</b><br /><br />"I may have implied on several occasions to several different people that I may have been Jesus Christ, but I haven't decided yet what I am or who I am" doesn't sound to me like someone just conning for impact. Not when they're saying it before the world's media !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-91347700115790443692021-07-09T03:24:59.861-04:002021-07-09T03:24:59.861-04:00Oh yeah, re-reading her statement right off the ba...Oh yeah, re-reading her statement right off the bat, she told a lie: that Bobby called Charlie and she didn't hear the call....SHE called him hysterical to tell him that a fight broke out and Hinman got the gun away from Bobby.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-59069003446284802442021-07-09T03:18:13.688-04:002021-07-09T03:18:13.688-04:00I'll put it this way: when I was younger and i...I'll put it this way: when I was younger and if I were living on a ranch with 25+ girls, my own adoring harem, as Bobby had and a ton of male competition. I doubt very much I'd tell any girls a motorcycle club threaten me in getting their money back after I tried to stand up like one of the big boys and conduct my own drug deal, as Charlie and Tex were doing constantly. Especially if my ego was as big as his. I'd most likely lie and front like it was a strong arm robbery. D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-313549045045155552021-07-09T03:07:44.723-04:002021-07-09T03:07:44.723-04:00One somebody gets a deal and whatever there story ...One somebody gets a deal and whatever there story is, sticks and cops will push the rest to conform to that.<br /><br />For instance:<br /><br />We made a drug deal with him..<br /><br />Cops: come on. We know that isn't true. So and so said____<br /><br />and they'll lie and do everything they can to get you to crack. <br /><br />Bobby never snitched on Susan. But police lied to her and said he did and told them "everything". Police manipulate. Police lie. Police give deals to people they know are guilty to bust others.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-65986984910478735292021-07-09T03:05:04.399-04:002021-07-09T03:05:04.399-04:00Mary at one point said he was killed because he re...Mary at one point said he was killed because he refused to "join Charlie's music band". Mary like Ella also got immunity. Her story is a half truth too, because Bobby didn't tell them the nature of what was going on. Those aren't her utmost earliest statement. That took place in Wisconsin when she said "all the trouble started when those motorcycle bums showed up".D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-40728473912018525572021-07-08T18:18:26.429-04:002021-07-08T18:18:26.429-04:00Mary's stocks and bonds statement is four mont...Mary's stocks and bonds statement is four months older. Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08760641498649508874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-50833182930876591332021-07-08T16:59:46.186-04:002021-07-08T16:59:46.186-04:00They knew he had no money:
www.cielodrive.com/mar...They knew he had no money:<br /><br />www.cielodrive.com/mary-brunner-statement-04-06-70.php<br />MS. BRUNNER: I didn't really know what to expect like eh - cause - eh I know that he didn't have any money and I told Bobby I knew that he didn't have any money. But Bobby said come along, so I went along and - and Bobby had said, you know, that he said like you know, if Gary doesn't come through well, you know, -<br />MR. STOVITZ: Rough him up a bit?<br />MS. BRUNNER: Yah, little bit but I didn't really think, you know, it wouldn't turn out to be - why I didn't think Bobby would do it, you know, and he knew Gary didn't have no money. He must have known, 'cause I knew. starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-45956810520288753142021-07-08T16:18:46.288-04:002021-07-08T16:18:46.288-04:00After he was cut he (or before) he signed over the...After he was cut he (or before) he signed over the cars and Bobby accepted that as sufficient. His being cut clearly became a much bigger issue than the money at that point. <br /><br />If Hinman did manufacture it himself, obviously he had to purchase supplies, including the Cactus. So it's not as if he ended up with a full $1000. The rest could have easily went to bills or who knows what. D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-81162589264088942142021-07-08T09:38:36.884-04:002021-07-08T09:38:36.884-04:00GEORGE DENNY: They got some of their mescaline fro...GEORGE DENNY: They got some of their mescaline from Gary Hinman; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I believe so, yes<br />GEORGE DENNY: And you got some of it for the Family from Gary Hinman; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't recall ever --Gary Hinman turning over any mescaline to me.<br />GEORGE DENNY: But you used that which had been gotten from him; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: Yes.<br />GEORGE DENNY: He manufactured it for the Family and others; isn't that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't know if he manufactured it.<br /><br />It continues:<br /><br />ELLA JO BAILEY: There were a couple of occasions where Gary Hinman did - you know, give the Family, either mescaline or something else, but --<br />GEORGE DENNY: What else?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: - to say "source of supply," I don't know, you know.<br />GEORGE DENNY: What else?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: Marijuana Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08760641498649508874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-76398115582988372482021-07-08T08:24:51.322-04:002021-07-08T08:24:51.322-04:00Do you even know what a treasurer is?
A treasurer...Do you even know what a treasurer is?<br /><br />A treasurer is an individual, typically a pirate or leprechaun, who hides something valuable (i.e., Spanish doubloons, pots of gold, jewels), often in a large wooden box called a "chest." Treasurers are known to record the location of these deposits on parchment maps with rough or burnt edges using a large "X." In more recent times, treasurers have also treasured under a giant "W" in Santa Rosita State Park. <br /><br />I'm not retarded. Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08760641498649508874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-31264529592434186352021-07-08T06:53:54.958-04:002021-07-08T06:53:54.958-04:00I will accept that the Davis trial testimony raise...I will accept that the Davis trial testimony raises questions. But this, come on ? If the question was stupid, the answer is stupider.<br /><br />Why he didn't give up any money is a rather stupid question. I sell on eBay a lot an I cannot stand to refund anyone, especially when I'm not sure they aren't pulling a scam and I'm not the only one. Does any store refund anything without a product and the contents and receipt?<br /><br />If a buyer showed up at your front door and cut your year off, you'd refund if you had it.<br />Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08760641498649508874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-83144210333276243332021-07-08T06:21:31.820-04:002021-07-08T06:21:31.820-04:00You just curl up with your Bugs and walk the dog.You just curl up with your Bugs and walk the dog.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08760641498649508874noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-36987297527811162082021-07-08T04:57:53.749-04:002021-07-08T04:57:53.749-04:00"Gary Hinman furnished drugs for the Family. ..."Gary Hinman furnished drugs for the Family. He was not a member of the Manson Family, he was an associate" - Vincent Bugliosi 2009<br />D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-81370182950801956192021-07-08T04:49:51.740-04:002021-07-08T04:49:51.740-04:00Oh yeah, it wasn't Beausoleil's trial, it ...Oh yeah, it wasn't Beausoleil's trial, it was Bruce Davis'.<br /><br />From the People Vs. Davis on January 12, 1972:<br />GEORGE DENNY: They got some of their mescaline from Gary Hinman; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I believe so, yes<br />GEORGE DENNY: And you got some of it for the Family from Gary Hinman; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't recall ever --Gary Hinman turning over any mescaline to me.<br />GEORGE DENNY: But you used that which had been gotten from him; is that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: Yes.<br />GEORGE DENNY: He manufactured it for the Family and others; isn't that right?<br />ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't know if he manufactured it.<br /><br />There also remains the possibility that Hinman had no time to make some, thus bought it from somebody and only made a very small profit which he later spent.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-1371985825422348082021-07-08T04:11:08.268-04:002021-07-08T04:11:08.268-04:00I can tell you that isn't an absolute 100% fac...I can tell you that isn't an absolute 100% fact that Krenwinkel said she doesn't nor did she ever believe the motive was Helter Skelter in private. Although she never told, which she knows. She always maintained that as far as she knew, it was another creepy crawl (i.e. robbery/drug heist). She also said other bullshit in the same breath, like that Stephine Schram was the one who went to Cielo with Charlie later in the night. That's a lie, it was her and they weren't alone. Not that it means much, but I'll throw it out there and say that she claimed William Garretson wasn't on the property at all that night and speculated he might have been walking the dogs.<br /><br />The "rich fag" comment holds no water and sounds something more like DeCarlo would say.<br /><br />Beausoleil and all of them knew Hinman very, very, very well and they knew he wasn't rich.<br /><br />You are contradicting your own story here to. Gary Hinman was planning a trip to Japan, but only had $6 to his name? The day prior to his death, he went to obtain a passport but couldn't because he arrived too late. Yet, they say he had a ticket which he paid around $500 for. It's odd somebody would buy a ticket first and obtain a passport later. So perhaps he purchased that ticket the day before he was killed. He was also preparing to take part in a festival.<br /><br />Why he didn't give up any money is a rather stupid question. I sell on eBay a lot an I cannot stand to refund anyone, especially when I'm not sure they aren't pulling a scam and I'm not the only one. Does any store refund anything without a product and the contents and receipt?<br /><br />That DeCarlo is all over this case and the fact he was the SS treasurer doesn't mean anything right? Do you even know what a treasurer is?D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-9304915415875053182021-07-08T02:37:39.419-04:002021-07-08T02:37:39.419-04:00That's an interesting article and take there S...That's an interesting article and take there ST.<br />By the way is that for a street or a what?<br />Just kidding, I sometimes joke about some people's goofy names...ah, forget I said that. <br />That was fair of St. to point out that some of the gang, such as our P.H.D. candidates Sadie Susan and weird Pat, for example, probably/or did swallow that Heelter Skealter bull. (sounds like a bad spelling bee contest. Or a bad barn dance tune gone off key) How about Helter Skittles?<br /> Though Charlie (life is good for two years and a half years, then I threw it all away) Maddox Manson, probably didn't. Or came to believe some of it. After all, he could point out to the riots, by blacks, in Detroit, Memphis, L.A. and so on as to the strife...as if he 'predicted' such events coming to fruition.<br />I generalize but what do you expect?<br />Now, walk with me into this nice, very nice, Ranch style house on Cielo here.<br />Nice sofa there, Voytek, what's up? Where are the drugs, where are the bundles of cash, know what I'm saying. By the way,what are you, a foreigner or something? Well, let's try the cabinets and the desk drawers. Nothing but nick nacks. Nothing in the bedrooms, no cocaine, hash, any pills to sell? No. maybe a small bag of pot? Big hairy deal.<br />What are you, good middle class citizens?<br />Wait, the sofa, with the the stars and stripes. Under the cushions, yeah!<br />Oh man, nothing. Just a place for something to fall into. Like a Buck knife. Or a Harmonica. You know, to fall between the cushions. Did you all know that John Lennon played the Harmonica in the song 'Lust Me do?' Er, Love Me Do, that is. <br />So? What happened? We go to Gary's living room, we look around and all we find is...a bag with green stuff in it. What's that Gary, fess up now, dammit.<br />Oh, herbs. What are you a vegetarian? What are those beads for? Oh, you meditate?<br />Like George, While My Guitar Gently Weeps (for millions more dollars) Harrison does?<br />No drugs. You're obviously a good man Gary. as opposed to nasty, ignorant Bobby the big dummy. <br />What do you say you killers? Did you all know any of the victims? No.<br />Did anyone say "drugs" or "drug money" or "rip-off the dinero from their drug dealing," over there at Cielo or at Wavely? No.<br />Who, dear Sadie, who said, "go and do what Tex says to do, cause that'll show Bobby wasn't the criminal low life that did the deed at Gary's?" Who? No one said a thing about that, but give some of 'em time, that sounds like they can then rationalize some of our and their bloody murders, dig?<br />If, if I say, y'all think that Charlie thought that a couple days of a murder spree was gonna have blacks or whites 'rise' up in numbers and...well, do what?<br />Lemme tell you something. He did not. Charlie was clever. It was a combo for Charlie.<br />That, he gets off on having some revenge taking, hoping that a benefit too, would be, Bobby having a defense, with those two crime scenes as diversions and I think that he knew that Mary and Sandy were arrested and that really pissed him off.<br />The use of a phone after an arrest in those days? A lot easier, more lax than it has been for some years, in the past couple decades anyway.<br />It's dark, where's Mary, where's Sandy? <br />Tex, go on. Sadie, Pat, Linda, go with Tex, do what he says. Revenge at Cielo, a follow up by True's house at some 'well off' people's house, more diversion from Hinman's, more revenge against some of society, some more money would be good and also...<br />let 'em get their hands dirty, these cute girls from middle class families and so, Charlie, "I'm not the only one that steals and attacks someone, once in a while, and what about what's been done to me?" <br />Well? Well, yeah, I see what you're saying brother Charlie. Ah, hey man, Can I hump Leslie tonight after dinner? Dig, brother? The year of '69.Fayez Abedazizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05365559516095364539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-48230925835099774862021-07-07T23:50:59.123-04:002021-07-07T23:50:59.123-04:00Col Scott’s comment: Bingo!!!!Col Scott’s comment: Bingo!!!!Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06551377673977145628noreply@blogger.com