tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post6757633241488492350..comments2024-03-28T23:53:16.262-04:00Comments on The Manson Family Blog: DEBUNKING THE BUNK PART 1: A Look at Joel RostauMatthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-91212085752161291712023-02-28T00:51:59.751-05:002023-02-28T00:51:59.751-05:00My hat goes off to Shreck, whether or knot his inf...My hat goes off to Shreck, whether or knot his information is/was valid or not. The further we get from the 60's and counter culture, the more we discover how much the mob and our culture of glorifying crime had a choke hold on the "baby boomers" and pretty much all of its luminaries. Schreck has made a very pungent argument and has put together a quite valid piece of "what if" for the record. It may be a tad off in findable links, but it shows great insight and talent at speculation on the part of the investigator. The author of "The Manson File" is to be commended and admired for his work. Thanks, Nick. We ALL know that Charley never had a fair trial and was convicted in the media by everyone's favorite used car salesman, Tricky Dicky. This only enhances that supposition. THE FEDS can't be trusted. Leftcoastghosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02881392158022294533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-13113763589171169452020-08-09T06:44:32.409-04:002020-08-09T06:44:32.409-04:00I'm kinda new, I've been reading this blog...I'm kinda new, I've been reading this blog for a few months and this is my first post. Manson did appeal his right to represent himself and it was denied on appeal as it was no an absolute right(?) at the time he requested it. From the appeal court: "ight to Counsel<br /><br />[41] Only Manson contends on this appeal that he was erroneously denied the fundamental right to proceed pro se. However, all appellants early in the case applied to the trial court to so proceed. The ultimate decision of the lower court was that no appellant was capable of self representation. At the time counsel was appointed for each appellant, there "[was] no constitutional right to proceed pro se at trial." (People v. Sharp (1972) 7 Cal. 3d 448, 451 [103 Cal. Rptr. 233, 499 P.2d 489].)<br /><br />While this appeal was pending, Sharp was invalidated by the United States Supreme Court. (Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 [45 L. Ed. 2d 562, 95 S. Ct. 2525].) However, our own Supreme Court has concluded that "the Faretta decision is not to be given retroactive application. ..." (People v. McDaniel (1976) 16 Cal. 3d 156, 163 [127 Cal. Rptr. 467, 545 P.2d 843].) Consequently, Faretta has no application to this appeal. No other error is attributable to the fact that no appellant was permitted to proceed pro se. Manson's contention that he was prejudiced by not being permitted to represent himself is not supported by the record." As you can see, if I'm reading this correctly, they made quick of denying his appeal. This is the link: https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/61/102.htmlLeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07448878823988984705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-11077858363188458462018-06-26T07:33:48.084-04:002018-06-26T07:33:48.084-04:00Chris R said...
Same with the "family&qu... Chris R said...<br /><br /> <b>Same with the "family". All those girls' parents were high military. It was all just theater and a kangaroo court</b><br /><br />"All" ? How many of the girls' parents were high military ?<br />Substantiate, Chris R.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-22738531711864116392018-06-26T07:28:45.691-04:002018-06-26T07:28:45.691-04:00No, that's a different Charlene. In the 2nd Ta...No, that's a different Charlene. In the 2nd Tate Police report McCaffrey is actually listed as Karlene Ann McCaffrey.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-25002660832539981352018-06-01T09:23:31.853-04:002018-06-01T09:23:31.853-04:00Isn't it supposed to be Charlene Cafritz ? As ...Isn't it supposed to be Charlene Cafritz ? As in the DIA Cafritz building in DC ? As in Pam Cafritz from the latest Stupid hoodwink, i mean nxivm cult expose ?Kenneth Irkedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08179771857485360069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-32189824948644365572018-04-02T05:11:56.154-04:002018-04-02T05:11:56.154-04:00All you guys on here need to know that it was oper...All you guys on here need to know that it was operation, "Chaos", A false flag event to discredit the antiwar movement. There is a lot to reveal, here, but one important thing to remember is that Tate's father was military intelligence, and had just relocated to So Cal from Italy where he was involved with operation, "Gladio". Same with the "family". All those girls' parents were high military. It was all just theater and a kangaroo court.Chris Ruskoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09136918982673829432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-43937107458834611512017-02-05T17:04:25.166-05:002017-02-05T17:04:25.166-05:00william marshall said...
Glad I decided against t... william marshall said...<br /><br /><b>Glad I decided against the $90 + dollar purchase price of the book</b><br /><br />I'm glad I paid the £90 for the book. <br />It's definitely worth reading. It's full of really interesting stuff, coming from a variety of angles. For instance, Shreck's tracing of Manson's spiritual life and practice is utterly fascinating and were it the sole subject of the book, would make the book pretty much unbeatable.<br />Unfortunately, the sole aim of this book is to state that Helter Skelter is a myth, a lie, a fabrication of Vincent Bugliosi etc. And it rarely ceases to amaze me the lengths people will go to try and rubbish HS without truly understanding its genesis and application.<br />If one looks at the major TLB blogs and their subject matter and debates prior to around the time Shreck's book came out and compare it to what has been debated and discussed since, then one can see that Shreck has done his job well and has been responsible for the introduction of more red herrings than the combined fleet of EU fishermen trawling the North Sea. So many of his deflections and suppositions that he can't verify have bled into discussions about these murders and have, by many, assumed the mantle of facts. But many are left open to more than just doubt ~ some are demonstrably untrue. For instance, the post informs us:<br /><b>On page 485 of The Manson File, Schreck writes of a robbery against Rostau that he believes was conducted by Bruce Davis and Charles "Tex" Watson on April 13, 1969</b>.<br />Now, a central part of Shreck's attempts to deflect attention away from Manson is to put more of it on Charles Watson {and in this instance,Bruce Davis}. He is so keen to have Watson front and centre and Manson less so that he puts the hat on Watson and Davis for a string of drug burns, including this 13th April '69 one at the apartment of Joel Rostau. Unfortunately for him, it is a matter of international record that Bruce Davis was not even in the country until 25th April. Anyone that has read "Helter Skelter," even if they hate the book and think it's a load of crap will be aware of that. And thus Shreck discredits himself and forces the knowledgeable reader to start asking questions such as "if he will disregard facts that we know can't be shaken in his pursuit of sullying the name of Bugliosi and others, how much can actually be believed that he writes ?"<br />The answer is, "not much of importance."<br />If Helter skelter as part of the motive for the murders is to be discredited, real facts that stand up and not red herrings are going to have to be found and if you ask me, you can't find what does not exist.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-40406939800174557642014-08-30T15:32:13.106-04:002014-08-30T15:32:13.106-04:00Just in case you're still reading Gina, we pos...Just in case you're still reading Gina, we posted Rostau's FBI report on October 24, 2013<br />http://www.mansonblog.com/2013/10/joel-rostaus-fbi-file.html<br /><br />Your upload to ScribD was on Nov 21, 2013 - nearly a month AFTER us.<br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-55737782655879909772014-08-30T11:43:13.328-04:002014-08-30T11:43:13.328-04:00Gina, you really shouldn’t debate folks who have a...Gina, you really shouldn’t debate folks who have a much stronger command of the topic (and the English language) than yourself. I'm actually embarrassed for you...Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-45908811969298971902014-08-30T11:20:37.635-04:002014-08-30T11:20:37.635-04:00Gina, Gina, Gina.......
First you attempt to defa...Gina, Gina, Gina.......<br /><br />First you attempt to defame me, then you back off saying you guess I didn't plagiarize you but still accuse me of stealing your work which from what I can see isn't your work at all but publically available FOIA documents. How do you know whether or not I sent for the FOIA myself?<br /><br />I've never seen you write anything that could be considered "your work", you have only offered what is available to anyone who files an FOIA request.<br /><br />Perhaps you do not know the difference between plagiarism and copyright which speaks volumes about your abilities to come to any useful conclusions about Rostau and his murder.<br />DebShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17093893870315262396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-75172040581370849462014-08-30T10:17:21.264-04:002014-08-30T10:17:21.264-04:00I was just reading you're critique of Schreck&...<i>I was just reading you're critique of Schreck's Rostau section. Bravo you picked apart every tiny detail of what you call bunk and replaced it with more bunk.</i><br /><br /><b>Typical. You rant about our content, THEN you get around to reading it. FYI, we didn't replace it with ANYTHING except VERIFIABLE PUBLIC RECORDS.</b><br /><br /><i>just use the Freedom of Information Act to find out why people who were close to Joel Rostau were saying he was allegedly killed? These were federal cases which means they were FBI files.</i><br /><br /><b>Gina, Gina, Gina, what people say in interviews is hearsay. It isn't verifiable. Rostau was killed because he was willing to testify. Period.</b><br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-21918963105189712142014-08-30T08:53:39.952-04:002014-08-30T08:53:39.952-04:00I was just reading you're critique of Schreck&...I was just reading you're critique of Schreck's Rostau section. Bravo you picked apart every tiny detail of what you call bunk and replaced it with more bunk. You are so far off. Instead of speculating so much why don't you just use the Freedom of Information Act to find out why people who were close to Joel Rostau were saying he was allegedly killed? These were federal cases which means they were FBI files. In fact you can read the ones that I obtained on tlbradio.com Familiarize with the facts and then critique someone elses work. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-73592391376754539692014-08-30T08:31:05.443-04:002014-08-30T08:31:05.443-04:00Nikolas didn't make up what he wrote in his bo...<i>Nikolas didn't make up what he wrote in his book, he got it from people he can't cite and from sources that if he revealed he's have no choice but to expose someone innocent to this ugly topic.</i><br /><br /><b>Really Gina? REALLY? Can't cite his sources? That's the oldest line on Bullshit Mountain. <br /><br />Let me tell you something, prolific researcher - all of us read this book multiple times then took some of the most important lynchpins of his argument and dug up public records to try to verify what he said. With what we were able to dig up we could see that he has fabricated an elaborate story.<br /><br />When you can come up with verifiable public records that back up his theses, we’re listening. But don’t come on here with your poor grammar and spelling and accuse anyone of “plagiarizing” you (note the correct spelling). </b><br /><br /><i>I like Nikolas and I like that he has done what he has to expose that the judicial system lied, and that the media lied. I think its important for the public to know that. I don't understand why any researcher who finds the material you find would take it and turn around and seemingly use to support a big ass lie like Helter Skelter.</i><br /><br /><b>We agree on one point (you are an idiot nonwithstanding). Helter Skelter is a farce. Doing our due diligence and picking apart another novel doesn’t make us supporters of the first novel. If NS had been accurate we would have acknowledged it. Perpetuating new lies is as bad as disseminating old ones. <br /><br />Pull your head out of NK’s ass for a while and do some research in PUBLICLY AVAILABLE, verifiable records. Don’t tell me your sources cannot be cited. That’s a liar’s crutch.</b><br /><br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-71850755101926002452014-08-30T02:28:51.936-04:002014-08-30T02:28:51.936-04:00I guess you didn't. I guess you just took par...I guess you didn't. I guess you just took part of my research and claimed it as your own, which I really don't own anyway. It's all public information out there for anyone determined enough to find it. You and your cronies here just sort of piss me off the way that you seem out to bash Nikolas' work. Nikolas didn't make up what he wrote in his book, he got it from people he can't cite and from sources that if he revealed he's have no choice but to expose someone innocent to this ugly topic. That happened to me, I found something via your research that I did not know and combined it with something I recently found and I can't share it on any forums because it would involve identifying an innocent party in order to verify it as a fact. Instead of doing that I'll just keep it to myself and share it with a trusted few. I have a question for all of you, are you guy's Bugliosi minions? I mean why rip apart a book that's main purpose was to state the obvious and that was that Helter Skelter was a load of shit? I don't get it. I have found information that totally confirms parts of Schreck's book and I've only been researching this stuff for less than a year. I won't bother you people anymore. It's just that I like Nikolas and I like that he has done what he has to expose that the judicial system lied, and that the media lied. I think its important for the public to know that. I don't understand why any researcher who finds the material you find would take it and turn around and seemingly use to support a big ass lie like Helter Skelter. That's all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-81461800849054864622014-08-30T00:53:03.271-04:002014-08-30T00:53:03.271-04:00Hi Gina, could you please cite where I plagiarized...Hi Gina, could you please cite where I plagiarized you? DebShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17093893870315262396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-38906747772830594412014-08-29T16:18:09.209-04:002014-08-29T16:18:09.209-04:00I would give more info on what became of Beth and ...I would give more info on what became of Beth and who she married but I have been plagerized by DebS once already so I won't make that mistake again. But there's a little clue for you Deb.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-34849857715922616022014-08-29T15:56:29.934-04:002014-08-29T15:56:29.934-04:00Can you please site where you got that Rostau pass...Can you please site where you got that Rostau passed a lie detector test? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-53392437708772017612013-10-24T15:12:35.854-04:002013-10-24T15:12:35.854-04:00No no no Patty, don't be silly. Matt would not...No no no Patty, don't be silly. Matt would not be arrested.<br /><br />This is America... that kind of facist draconian law enforcement would never happen here.Max Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06931165830559683001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-45756167565564455212013-10-24T12:04:16.672-04:002013-10-24T12:04:16.672-04:00Matt if she actually does kill herself, then you g...Matt if she actually does kill herself, then you get arrested for bullying. That is the world we live in today, strange as it may seem. <br /><br />Vera deserves an apology for being bullied! Sorry Vera if Patty came off as a know it all. That's your department, after all.Patty is Deadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07717777500117142160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-1391075402064638832013-10-24T11:23:59.785-04:002013-10-24T11:23:59.785-04:00DebS, thanks for the info on Charlene Cafritz. Li...DebS, thanks for the info on Charlene Cafritz. Like Patty, I always get the two Charlenes confused. I have read that C. Cafritz was a friend of Sharon's. Do you know if that's true?CarolMRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06357698369178272616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-61303210965232987532013-10-24T05:41:05.107-04:002013-10-24T05:41:05.107-04:00Vera, please commit suicide.Vera, please commit suicide.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-88623305106787161192013-10-24T03:12:21.001-04:002013-10-24T03:12:21.001-04:00Uh oh...Uh oh...Max Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06931165830559683001noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-7400045287248411272013-10-24T00:38:24.574-04:002013-10-24T00:38:24.574-04:00"Even Patty" -- no, THE expert on the ca..."Even Patty" -- no, THE expert on the case?!Vera Dreiserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16434785258950871234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-81735472806314703842013-10-23T23:45:10.979-04:002013-10-23T23:45:10.979-04:00Even Patty has a hard time keeping those two strai...Even Patty has a hard time keeping those two straight.Patty is Deadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07717777500117142160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-36160093231253159782013-10-23T22:33:17.830-04:002013-10-23T22:33:17.830-04:00Just to be clear, Charlene McCaffrey and Charlene ...Just to be clear, Charlene McCaffrey and Charlene Cafritz are two different women with no relationship to each other. DebShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17093893870315262396noreply@blogger.com