Charles Manson's 1997 Psych Eval

 

LINK

The CIA's Review of Chaos

Did you think that Tom O'Neill's Chaos would fly under the radar of the CIA notice? Of course not. All in all it's a generous review though one might get the feeling that there were a few eye rolls along the way when writing the review.

Intelligence in Public Media 

Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties 

Tom O’Neill with Dan Piepenbring (Little, Brown and Company, 2019), 521 pages, plates and illustrations, bibliography, index. 

Reviewed by Leslie C.

 Authors, or their agents and publishers, seem unable to resist using the word “secret” to modify that apparently pedestrian word “history.” Its use promises something the finished work invariably fails to deliver, implying as it does access to the eldritch or the gnostic, when the reality is often more mundane. Such a force is at work in Tom O’Neill’s Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties. 

The book has its origins in a magazine article O’Neill was commissioned to write marking the 30th anniversary of the Tate-LaBianca murders. Charles Manson, a semiliterate drifter and purported cult leader, and members of his “Family” were convicted of the killings. The episode transfixed the American public and suggested the forces unleashed by the social tides of the sixties, not least the anti-war and youth movements, had dark if not violent undertones. O’Neill never finished his article. The threads he uncovered while doing his research led him instead on a 20-year odyssey that crossed the line into obsession, as he switched editors and publishers, borrowed money from relatives, and did anything else required to unearth the truth about Manson. 

Chaos is a monument to O’Neill’s determination to get the story and a narrative of his efforts to track down reluctant witnesses, obtain forgotten or buried documentary evidence, and pull the pieces into a coherent picture. Chaos is not—at least not in the way its title suggests—a “secret history of the sixties.” With its fascinating allusions to a host of Southern California characters from Cass Elliott to the Beach Boys, it is more Once Upon A Time In Hollywood than Manchurian Candidate. This review will not summarize O’Neill’s theories, though it will touch on them insofar as they are germane to the primary question for this audience, which is, of course, what did Charles Manson have to do with the CIA? But first, some housekeeping. 

Over the course of August 8–10, 1969, Manson’s followers, at his urging, murdered eight people during two home invasions: six at the home of actress Sharon Tate and the director Roman Polanski, and two at the home of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. Manson believed the killings would trigger a race war, and his followers—using the victims’ blood—left behind graffiti meant to suggest the Black Panther Party was responsible. A four-month investigation, spurred by the jailhouse confession of a member of the “Family,” resulted in the arrest of Manson and his accomplices. Vincent Bugliosi, the Los Angeles district attorney who tried the case and secured the convictions, wrote a book about the crimes. Titled Helter Skelter—after a Beatles song Manson used a code word for the race war—it went on to become the best-selling “true crime” book in the history of American publishing. 

All of this is straightforward. However, O’Neill’s research uncovered a litany of problems and unanswered questions about the conduct of the investigation that might, had they been brought to light sooner, have justified a re-trial, according to one of Bugliosi’s associates in the DA’s office. In O’Neill’s telling, Bugliosi emerges as a villain who seized his chance to profit in the wake of a terrible crime and who spent the subsequent decades consciously foiling any effort to question the methods or outcome of the investigation. O’Neill’s scrupulous catalogue of the myriad omissions in Bugliosi’s case certainly paints an unflattering picture of the entire process and of many of those involved. 

Manson’s responsibility for these crimes in not in question. O’Neill’s interest is in the motivations and actions of many secondary players, together with the grip Manson continues to hold on the American imagination. Most people were horrified—yet fascinated—by the brutality of the killings, though others saw them in a different light. The leftist radical Bernardine Dohrn of the Weather Underground infamously elevated Manson to a revolutionary hero. New Left chronicler Todd Gitlin was more reasonable, and closer to the mark, when he observed that “For the mass media, the acidhead Charles Manson was readymade as the monster lurking in the heart of every longhair, the rough beast slouching to Beverly Hills to be born for the new millennium.” O’Neill reaches a similar conclusion, which brings us to the main point, which is the CIA’s alleged role. 

If, as Gitlin suggests, Manson embodied for most Americans the darkness hard wired in the counterculture, then how did the US government benefit? O’Neill delves into the FBI’s COINTELPRO and CIA’s CHAOS, domestic surveillance programs designed to infiltrate, discredit, and neutralize civil rights, student, and anti-war organizations that first Lyndon Johnson and then Richard Nixon regarded as subversive. These programs, which in the case of CIA violated its charter, were ultimately exposed and triggered congressional hearings in the mid-1970s, in which the Intelligence Community was held to account. 

And this is where O’Neill ultimately falls short. Despite what his title implies, he cannot document any compelling link between these programs and Manson. This was not for lack of effort. Extensive research and a slew of FOIA requests did not produce a smoking gun or much beyond the shadowy, ill-explained presence around these events of Reeve Whitson, an alleged “intelligence operative.” O’Neill also examines the CIA program MKULTRA, which may have gotten him closer to his goal—but not much. Conceived by Richard Helms and authorized by Allen Dulles in 1953, MKULTRA studied mind control, one possible path to which was hallucinogenic drugs. 

The standard histories of the subject indicate that the CIA, through MKULTRA, spent considerable effort to understand the use and effects of LSD and other substances, and contracted with a number of researchers to that end. One was Dr. Louis Jolyon West, who is the closest O’Neill gets to tying Manson to the CIA. West, purportedly at the behest of the agency, opened an office in San Francisco, the purpose of which was “studying the hippies in their native habitat”, Haight Ashbury.  Manson had, at the same time, been a denizen of the Haight before moving the “Family” to Los Angeles, and he liberally dosed his followers with LSD, which was one of his tools for bending them to his will. Indeed, defense attorneys unsuccessfully attempted to use this as a mitigating factor during the trial. 

While O’Neill not unreasonably asks how a barely educated criminal like Manson could use sophisticated methods to control his “Family,” he cannot link Manson to Dr. West. There is no evidence the two ever met, or that Manson was—in what O’Neill admits is the most “far-out” theory—the product of “an MKULTRA effort to create assassins who would kill on command.” (430) His own conclusions about CHAOS—which are less relevant to his theory of the case than MKULTRA—are dubious. He describes a program that kept tabs on 300,000 people, sharing intelligence with FBI, the Department of Justice, and the White House, but he then claims it was so well-hidden within CIA that “even those at the top of its counterintelligence division were clueless.” (233). And yet, when the program was exposed and Director William Colby admitted its existence, James Angleton, the longtime head of counterintelligence and presumably no stranger to such efforts, was the official who resigned. 

O’Neill also makes the occasional odd statement. One example will illustrate the point. In untangling the web of connections surrounding the Manson case, O’Neill links one figure to former Air Force Chief of Staff General Curtis E. LeMay, who, he writes, “tried to organize a coup against Kennedy among the Joint Chiefs of Staff” during the Cuban Missile Crisis (83). This was news, as the standard Cold War history fails to mention it, as does LeMay’s biographer. LeMay did forcefully advocate for military action against the missile sites—and he was famously satirized in Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove— but a coup? Presumably if his advocacy had reached even the level of significant insubordination Kennedy would have removed him. There was, after all, precedent for doing so. 

O’Neill’s narrative is never uninteresting. His research has raised legitimate questions about the investigation and prosecution of these notorious crimes, and the actions of a number of people, from the district attorney’s office to the sheriff’s department; from the associates and relatives of the victims to the perpetrators. However compelling his determination to follow every last thread, O’Neill has not written a “secret history” of the 1960s, unless the secrets are those certain individuals wished to keep for their own reasons. The author cannot definitively tie Manson to MKULTRA or CHAOS; he can only imply it on circumstantial evidence. At least, in the end, he has the grace to acknowledge it.

The reviewer: Leslie C. is a CIA operations officer. 

Studies in Intelligence Vol 65, No. 3 (Extracts, September 2021)

Original Article 

Scrapbooks

 

Someone has compiled a series of scrapbooks with images of newspaper articles, documents, and public and personal pictures. I say someone because there is no stated author. The books have a title page but nothing else, no copyright page, no dedication page, no acknowledgement, no table of contents, no chapters, no forward or introduction pages. There is a website address on the back cover of the books.

The website associated with the books is https://family-jams.company.site/  Because of the Family Jams name I contacted George Stimson and asked him if he knew anything about who put the books together. He did not but he did want to take a look at the books to see if he might be interested in getting them for himself. George came by for a visit and ended up ordering the books. 

These books are put together well. They are mostly chronological, the articles and documents are readable. There are pictures in the book that I have never seen. The books are large measuring 12"x 8 1/2"and 1 1/2" thick. They all have 500+/- pages. They are available as a paperback or hardcover. The hardcover books are $25 more than the paperbacks which are $60. If you go to the website they are offering a deal on all four books for $200 in the paperback format.

These are print on demand books that are published by Lulu. I have also seen them new on Ebay but they are $10 more each. Family Jams has a couple more books that are strictly documents with few pictures. One is the Grand Jury testimony for TLB and the other is The Process Church v Ed Sanders documents for the trial held in the UK.

The books would make a good Christmas present for yourself! What? Don't you treat yourself at Christmas after spending all of your hard earned cash on other people? They also would be a good suggestion for that person who asks you what you want for the holidays. 

There were a couple of documents in Volume 1 that surprised me. I have these documents and have had them for at least 15 years. I've never posted them because I was asked not to. Copies of the documents were given to me by Howard Davis, author of "The Zodiac Manson Connection", who said he had the originals. He was trying to sell them at one point and I'm not sure if he ever did sell them. Howard passed away July4th of this year so I guess it's alright to publish them now.

The first document was issued upon Manson's release from Terminal Island March 21, 1967 and his arrival at the Federal Parole Office in Los Angeles. It is signed and dated by Manson. The amount of money that he was given at the time of parole was left blank.

I had emailed with someone who said they had this document, too. It was a "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" moment. We exchanged documents. There was a difference between the two, though they were both the same form. The other document had the money section filled out but no signatures in the Section Two portion of the form. Manson received $75.00 plus $1.09 for transportation upon his release on this other document.

The second document I have is a form that is mostly handwritten. It gives Manson permission to travel on the same day that he was released from Terminal Island. He can go to San Francisco, California, Spokane and Seattle, Washington to look for relatives and establish employment.

Addresses for the parole offices in each city are listed as well as the parole officers names. Handwritten, in Charles Manson's handwriting, next to the list parole offices is the name of Roger Smith and a phone number. The phone number is for the Federal Parole Office in San Francisco.

Making Manson

 

Making Manson is a new three-part documentary debuting on November 19th, the 7th anniversary of Charles Manson's death. It will be shown on NBC/Peacock. All three episodes will be released on that date. Each episode is about an hour long. It was produced by Renowned Films.

Making Manson has been a two-year effort. The program consists of phone conversations between Charles Manson and John Michael Jones over a 20-year period. Jones initially pitched the project to Netflix but after a year Peacock showed interest and it was ultimately picked up by them. Peacock wanted director Billie Mintz to spearhead the project.

Billie Mintz is an award-winning documentary filmmaker and journalist among many other activities. His documentaries include Selena and Yolanda, The Guardians, Portrayal, and Jesus Town USA. He spent two seasons as a correspondent for National Geographic's show Explorer.

This is what Mintz had to say about Making Manson-

"We spent a year delving into two decades' worth of never-before-heard recordings of Charles Manson and his closest confidant. Until now, Manson has only been heard through brief interviews where journalists and prosecutors shaped the narrative without being questioned or contested. In our series, we bring a fresh perspective to his story, allowing Manson to present his own version of events. Everything you knew about Charles Manson is now up for reexamination. Grateful to Renowned Films and Peacock for entrusting me with these tapes and this story.

In our series "Making Manson" we present Manson in a way he's never been heard or thought of before, with an unprecedented level of intimacy that allowed us to interview contributors like never before. Despite countless interviews for past films that have shaped the widely accepted narrative of Manson and the murders, this series breaks new ground, challenging those familiar perspectives."

There were nearly 20 people interviewed for the series. It was learned that the people being interviewed listened to recordings of Manson, presumably regarding something he said about them or an event they were familiar with, and then they were asked to comment and discuss.

The trailer shows Dianne Lake, Catherine "Gypsy" Share, Phil Kaufman, and Steven Kay. Another interviewee was reporter Linda Deutch. Mintz wrote a heartfelt tribute to Deutch upon learning of her death.

"Linda Deutch stands as a trailblazer in the world of journalism, particularly known for her groundbreaking work in covering some of the most notorious and high-profile trials in American history. She made her mark as one of the first women to break into the male-dominated field of courtroom reporting. Her career is distinguished by her coverage of landmark cases, beginning with the infamous Manson Family trials in the late 1960s, where she became a familiar face in the courtroom and established herself as a reliable and insightful journalist. Her career continued with comprehensive reporting on the O.J. Simpson trial, which captivated the nation and further solidified her reputation as a leading figure in legal journalism.

Over the decades, Linda Deutch covered countless other significant trials bringing her sharp analysis and dep empathy to each story, making her reports resonate with the public. Her work has left an indelible mark on journalism, and she had been a role model for many aspiring reporters, particularly women looking to enter the field.

I had the unique privilege of being the last journalist to interview Linda Deutch, an experience that was both humbling and inspiring. She was tough as nails and hilarious as well. She didn't put up with any shit- including mine. I got many eye rolls during the course of our almost 8-hour interview. She liked me and was impressed by my ability to cut through the shit- including her own. As we discussed her storied career and the impact of her work, it was clear that her contributions to journalism were immeasurable. I can only hope that she is still able to watch the film, a tribute to her legacy, and she how her pioneering spirit continues inspire and inform."

Others interviewed include Family members, victim's survivors, law enforcement, the LA DA's office and more. Billie Mintz conducts all of the interviews.

 

Mintz was aided in creating this film by James Dawson a longtime Manson researcher and friend to John Michael Jones. Dawson proposed questions for some of those Mintz interviewed and guided him through the connections of the different people being interviewed and activities of the Family.

The film will be an interesting departure from the current offerings by looking at events from a totally different perspective. 

Prison Art

 

Creating art while imprisoned has been found to be good for the mental health of the prisoner. It has been learned that the act of creating reduces stress, allows for an emotional outlet, improves self worth, encourages creative thinking, and provides a sense of self worth and accomplishment. Art helps the prisoner become more humane and authentic by allowing them to open up and express feelings that they can't vocalize.

Charles Manson was a prolific artist working in various mediums during his 50+ plus years in prison this time around.

Art is very subjective to both the artist and the viewer. What one person thinks is absolutely fabulous another will think it is garbage. There are artists who never saw fame in their lifetime, only to be revered after death.

Piet Mondrian was a Dutch painter who is regarded as one of the greatest artists of the 20th century for his paintings of precise blocks of color on canvas back in the 20s, 30s and 40s and it wasn't until the 60s that his work was celebrated. I totally do not understand Mondrian's popularity. It's just not for me.

Andy Warhol, who was very popular during his lifetime, made a name for himself by taking everyday objects and making them larger than life. Today one can go to a good photo editing site and replicate what Warhol did with his 1967 Marilyn Monroe screen prints, for instance, in just a few minutes with their own photos.

Abstract art is even more subjective.

I am not going to say that one day Manson will be celebrated as one of this century's great artists but his art does have an appeal.

I suppose that if one were to look at Charles Manson's art chronologically that they might see a progression of self-awareness and growth. Chaotic periods of angst and frustration might be identified as well as good times and satisfaction. Manson's art might be the only measure of his true self.

This past summer George Stimson created a one-day pop-up exhibit of Charles Manson's artwork. Pieces by Sandy and Lynette were also featured. George decided to film the exhibit and present it as a 3D offering. The video is like one of those 3D house tours that you see on real estate websites. It takes a moment to get the hang of it. I found the best way to view each piece was to follow the circles on the floor and then use your cursor to make your way up to the art piece. You can get pretty close to each piece.

The show is comprised of artworks from three different collections.

The string art was made in the 70s, 80's and 90s. The paintings were done in 1994 and 1995.

George told me a little bit about obtaining materials and what materials were used in his pieces. " The string art was made with anything he could use. That would include underwear, socks, and other clothing threads but also anything else he could work with. Blue remembers sending him socks that were specifically for making dolls. Some of the scorpions and parts of A Mac Eggus were made with toilet paper."

George heard that Charlie learned how to make the dolls from a woman he knew while he was in Mexico.

When Charlie was not in the Security Housing Unit (SHU) he could receive art supplies from an approved vendor. "The mediums he used were acrylic, pen and ink, colored pencils, clay, papier mâché, fabric, food coloring, and little scraps of this and that that he worked into his pieces."

Manson did not participate in any prison art classes, he generally worked on his art in the common areas or outside.

I asked George what the inspiration was for his art work. This is what he replied.

He said that he was trying to do art that was different. And he certainly did!

Here’s how he described the thoughts behind the large hanging doll, A. Mac Eggus :

“It’s a blamer. You know what a blamer is? When everything goes wrong, the doll’s name is “Egg Us.” Eggus. And when things go wrong, you blame Eggus. If anything happens that’s wrong, if it’s an earthquake, it’s Eggus’ fault. Anything that happens that you don’t like, you blame Eggus. Don’t ever blame yourself. Don’t blame me.... We blame Eggus. And then, after a while, we look at Eggus and we go hang it somewhere where our enemy is. Someone you don’t like? Go hang it in [name deleted]’s yard. You know what I’m saying? In other words, after you’ve blamed it and you got all that negative bad on it, then you can take it over to your friend’s, or someone’s house that’s done you wrong, and give it to them. I put a button on his knee, and I put a rock in his head. You got a rock for a head. It glows in the dark. So if I ever see the rock out behind my window, I know you’re out there.”

And below he talks about the painting The Purple Turkey, which is based on an experience he had in school when a teacher derided him for doing a drawing of a purple turkey. As Lyn Fromme recalled in Reflexion:

We were talking about artwork when Charlie said that his first grade teacher had criticized his painting. He looked dejected. Mary and I laughed.

“No, really,” he said, half-really. “She put her nose in the air and said in front of the class, ‘Now, Charlie, everyone knows that TURKEYS are NOT PURPLE.’”

He said that was the last time he tried to draw or paint.

Manson on The Purple Turkey:

“When you see this next picture you’re really gonna like it, I think. Everybody else likes it. That’s what I call it, The Purple Turkey. It’s really, it should go down in history. I’ve never seen anything like it in my life. And I’ve looked at a lot of art. It’s close to a Braque. But Braque would probably laugh at this one. I don’t have any talent. This is pure, pure doodle.... It’s a lot of time, and a lot of little delicate things in it, just for something to do. I don’t have any talent, man. Did you ever see some of the stuff that Beausoleil does? That’s talent. Beausoleil has talent.

“What I do is, I paint the background in the glow-in-the-dark stuff. And then I come in with the lithographic pens, and I paint over that. Then when I put it in like a shadowy light? It jumps out at you. It don’t look cheap, like a lot of that glow-in-the-dark stuff looks kind of cheap, you know. I’m trying to look into something like a different kind of perspective.... What I’m trying to do there, I’m trying to make things that are not identifiable with anything else. I don’t want to make it look like something. I’m trying to make it look like nothing.”

Here's the link to George’s website and the 3D art tour.

 

 

Were the cops intentionally trying to push Charlie over the edge?

It sure sounds like it!

https://www.cielodrive.com/archive/no-family-exists-media-created-it-manson-testifies/

Manson testimony on 2/27/1973, during the Hawthorne surplus store robbery trial.

"During his hour-long testimony, Manson stressed that the antisocial, violent attitude of the group around him was the outgrowth of many contacts with law enforcement.  Questioned by Miss Share’s attorney, Richard Hirsch, about problems with society in general and police in particular, Manson said, “We were pushed into a corner … we didn’t have any choice.”

Speaking about what he called an escalation of police interference with their existence, he testified:
“It started with a polite knock on the door and ‘May we come in?’ I’d opened the door because my door was always open to everyone. They would, at first, politely check IDs. That’s how it started. But two years later it became a 250 storm trooper raid. They were steadily pushing, pushing and pushing until there was nothing left…it was like a yo-yo game and we were their favorite game.” "

Box 57 pg150of491  Grand Jury testimony of Mary Brunner:

Q: And when you speak about raiding, had the police been there when--when I speak of the police I am also including the Sheriff's Department as well -- had the police or Sheriff's Department been to the ranch before this particular day? (July 28th)

A: They were there almost every day.

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

Squeaky:

Box 6 Vol176 Testimony in the Penalty Phase of the TLB trial  pg38of164   Lynette Fromme

Q: During the time that you were at the Spahn Ranch, did you have any contact with the police, either the Los Angeles Police Department or the Sheriff's office? ...  Did you have almost daily contact with them?
A(Fromme): Almost, yes. ..
Q: Were you also, the group of people that were at the Spahn Ranch, frequently arrested?
A: We were. I have been frequently arrested with everybody. They would keep us for three days and let us go, never take us to court.

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

Sandy:

Box 6  vol3076 pg17of302   Testimony in the Penalty Phase of the TLB trial     

   Sandra Goode: The police. They came--we almost--They became a part of our daily life actually after a while. We were friendly to them, and then they became--they began coming in greater numbers, the more of us there were the more of them, the more of us--and it grew.
Q: How often would they come to the ranch to harass you?
A: It became nightly. Always with, "We'll get you yet, Charlie," this type of thing.

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

Gypsy:

Box14  vol3076  pg265of302
Q: Would you tell us, please, Miss Share, the ...frequency that law enforcement came to the Spahn Ranch while you lived there with some other people?
A: At least every day. ..Sometimes more than once a day. ...I know that for months and months and months the police were always there, always there, always trying to arrest somebody for something, and taking some people to jail, and then letting them go two days later. ...I saw police often, often, for a long, long time.

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

Nancy Pitman:

LADA files Box 6 Vol176 Testimony in the Penalty Phase of the TLB trial  pg150of164
Q: Did the police come to the Spahn Ranch all the time?
A: Yeah, all the time, every night.

 

Had you let him put on a defense, he could have explained to you why 

his face was planted in the dirt.

=============================================

 

 

 In a related vein: 

Even before TLB, Manson and Family were the subjects of an active investigation by, or had previous contact with, an astounding array of local, state, and federal entities.

--The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)

--City of Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD)

--The Los Angeles Sheriffs Office (LASO)

--L.A. County Fire Department (LACoFD)

--The Inyo County Sheriffs Office

--The California Highway Patrol (CHP)

--The Las Vegas Police Department (LVPD) and/or the Clark County Sheriff's Department

--The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (Justice Dept)

--The Federal Parole Officers of the Justice Dept

--Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) (Treasury Dept)

--The US Secret Service (Treasury Dept)

--National Park Service (Interior Dept)

--Ventura County Sheriff's Office

--Kern County Sheriff's Office

--Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office

--Mendocino County Social Services Dept.
(... the Welfare Department files contain extensive information about Manson and the “family.” --Louise H. Renne, Deputy Attorney General, State of California)

--The Office of the State of California Attorney General (in Sept of '68)
(Renne memo)

--The Mendocino Probation Department and the Los Angeles Probation Department.

 

--And that doesn't count the inclusion of any covert operators of the police/intelligence agencies.  People like Reeve Whitson. 

--A mention should be made of Melba Kronkright, that "executive for a government social service," as Fromme said in her book,  Melba, who showed up one day in Topanga Canyon to hand out freebies for the Mansonoids, the beginning of a two-year relationship.

Charlie and the Family and a Cabin in the Redwoods

 Quite a few years ago I came into possession of a guest book the belonged to people who owned a vacation cabin in San Mateo County, northern California. The cabin was located in the redwoods, seven miles from the ocean, between  the towns of Pescadero and Half Moon Bay which are on the coast. The owners would rent or loan the cabin to friends and family. They had a guest book that people would sign when they stayed at the cabin.

I did not get an exact location for the cabin but I am somewhat familiar with the area. There is a road that goes inland between Half Moon Bay and Pescadero. It's Hwy 84 or locally known as La Honda Rd.  That road runs between Hwy 101 at Redwood City, through Woodside where the Folger's lived, and out to the coast ending at San Gregorio State Beach. 

Back in the day San Gregorio Beach was a nude beach. You could go there and get naked and not get hassled by anyone, including the sheriff's. I have a feeling that it may have been a destination for Manson and the Family and that the cabin was on or just off of La Honda Rd. It would have been a great place to troll for additions to the Family.

Apparently, Manson and some of Family members, I don't know which ones, made themselves at home at the cabin. Chas Manson even went as far as signing the guest book!

I also got a letter of authentication when I got the guest book.

Matthew Roberts RIP

 On August 28, 2024 Daze with Jordan the Lion posted a YouTube with Matthew Roberts announcing definitively that Charles Manson is NOT his birth father. Matthew hooked up with a woman named Kim who had her own experiences with using Ancestry DNA to find her birth father and offered to help Matthew. Once Matthew's DNA was processed Kim was quickly able to rule out Manson as Matthew's father. She was also able to narrow down who Matthew's father was and learned he was one of two brothers. 

But then...

On September 5, 2024, a week later, Jordan the Lion announced that Matthew Roberts had unexpectedly died. Jordan posted a heartfelt tribute to Matthew who he considered a friend although the two had never met in person.

I'm glad that Matthew was able to find the answers he was seeking before he passed. 

Unsolved Murders and the Tex Tape Situation

On August 8^th 2019 the Los Angeles Times published an article for the 50^th anniversary of the Tate LaBianca murders focused on the idea that members of the Family may have committed other murders. The article also talks about the Tex Tapes.

The article states that the LAPD has 12 unsolved cases that are believed to be linked to the Family. Bare in mind that the LAPD has jurisdiction only within the city limits of Los Angeles. There are many cities in Los Angeles County that have their own police departments and the unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County are served by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. 

How Many More Did the Manson Family Kill?

It's an enduring murder mystery involving several slayings that fit the cult's pattern

By Richard Winton

The Manson murders mostly are remembered as two events that occurred 50 years ago this month; the killing of Sharon Tate and four others in Benedict Canyon and then the butchering of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca is Los Feliz.

But cold-case investigators and others have long believed that Charles Manson and his cult followers were responsible for many more deaths.

The Los Angeles Police Department officially has a dozen unsolved homicide cases linked to Manson. And there are additional slayings outside the jurisdiction that some believe to be the work of his “family.” Some of those ties seem more plausible than others, but all have been extensively examined and theorized — as are all things involving Manson.

The supposed suicide of one Manson follower’s boyfriend in England. The drowning of an attorney whom Manson declared during the middle of his trial he never wanted to see again. A young man killed during a game of Russian roulette with family members present. Two young women stabbed to death off Mulholland Drive and a couple of young Scientology followers who met a similar fate.

Manson “repeatedly” said many others were killed, said Cliff Shepard, a former LAPD Robbery-Homicide Division detective who worked some of those cold cases. “We may never know or identify all their victims.”

In all, Manson and his followers were convicted of nine murders — the Tate and LaBianca attacks plus the slayings of musician Gary Hinman and stuntman and ranch hand Donald “Shorty” Shea.

Dan Jenks, an LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective, said the unsolved cases still were under active investigation and that the department would not comment on specifics.

“There is no statute of limitations. We are always developing new techniques. The last 10 years, DNA has come a long way,” Jenks said. “We will stay on them and keep them as active as we can.”

The LAPD repeatedly has declined requests by the Los Angeles Times for information about those cases. But seven years ago, while seeking to obtain audiotapes of a Manson follower that detectives hoped would yield clues, the department formally declared that a dozen unsolved cases might be tied to the family.

The tapes involved conversations between convicted killer Charles “Tex” Watson and his attorney in 1969. The LAPD obtained the tapes after a legal battle, but they appeared to provide few clues. The department, however, refused a Times request to review them, citing ongoing investigations. A judge in 2017 ruled that attorneys for Manson follower Leslie Van Houten could not have the recordings as part of her efforts to gain parole.

“The thing we discovered after reviewing the tapes, there was no new information related to any of the unsolved cases,” Jenks said. The death of Manson in 2017, as well as those of other family members, has made efforts to pursue the cases harder.

Manson prosecutor Stephen Kay said he and his partner, the late Vincent T. Bugliosi, always suspected that the cult had killed others.

“I know that Manson one time told one of his cellmates that he was responsible for 35 murders,” said Kay, who has attended 60 or so parole hearings to keep those he convicted of the Manson slayings in prison. “Whether that is true or not or just jail bragging, I don’t know. We prosecuted him for nine murders, and those were all the murders we had evidence on.”

A suspicious death in London

Just months after the Tate and LaBianca murders, Joel Pugh — the 29-year-old boyfriend of Manson clan member Sandra Good — was found dead in the Talgarth Hotel in London. His wrists and throat had been cut. British authorities listed it as a suicide, saying Pugh had been depressed. No suicide note was left.

Kay and others said Manson hated Pugh. “He had no reason to commit suicide, and Manson was very unhappy that Sandy” was with Pugh, Kay said.

Manson follower Bruce M. Davis, who recently was cleared for parole after nearly 50 years in prison, was in London at the time Pugh died. Kay said that Davis, now 76, was the family member most able to kill. The prospect of his pending release — which still could be blocked by Gov. Gavin Newsom — has energized investigations during the last decade.

Davis was convicted in the killings of Hinman and Shea in 1971 and sentenced to death. When California for a time abolished the death penalty, Davis and other members of the family were given life sentences.

At a parole hearing, Davis said he hadn’t known about the Tate killings until the morning after they happened but had committed the other murders because “I wanted to be Charlie’s favorite guy.”

Deadly game of Russian Roulette

Davis also was a witness to the November 1969 death of John “Zero” Haught in Venice, according to investigators. Authorities concluded that Haught had died accidentally while playing Russian roulette with a revolver, but that finding came under question.

The gun recovered didn’t have any fingerprints on it, The Times’ Jerry Cohen reported in 1969. A young man who held Haight’s head after the shooting told Cohen he entered the room to find a female Manson follower with the gun in her hand. Several Manson followers were inside the home that night, including Davis, The Times reported.

Davis could not be reached for comment, and his attorney did not return messages.

Jane Doe 59

In his book about the Manson family murders, “Helter Skelter,” Bugliosi said he believed that a woman known for years only as Jane Doe 59 was killed because she had witnessed Haught’s killing.

She was stabbed 150 times. A bird-watcher discovered her remains on Mulholland Drive, about six miles from the Benedict Canyon home where Tate and the others were killed.

Three years ago, the LAPD identified her as 19-year-old Reet Jurvetson from Montreal, using a DNA sample from her sister. She had come to Los Angeles from Canada to join a man she had first met in a Montreal coffee shop.

“She thought he looked like Jim Morrison,” Shepard, the former LAPD detective, said.

She sent a postcard to her mother about getting an apartment in L.A. 16 days before her death.

LAPD detectives asked Manson about Jurvetson before the killer’s death. He denied knowing her.

“It was like talking to a wall,” said LAPD Robbery-Homicide Division Capt. Billy Hayes.

That Manson wouldn’t say much doesn’t surprise his son.

Manson’s son Michael Brunner told The Times recently that “Charlie lived by a code. He was an outlaw. He was not a nice guy. But he lived by a code and he was not gonna be the one that was snitching. And there was a lot of snitching going on. And the people that were snitching, you know, they say snitches get stitches.”

Shepard said much of the speculation about Jurvetson stemmed from a photo of a woman resembling her who was dancing at the family’s Spahn Ranch hangout with Manson follower Steve Dennis “Clem” Grogan. He was paroled in 1985 after being convicted of murder for his role in Shea’s death.

Grogan told detectives a few years ago that the woman was another Manson follower, not the Jane Doe, Shepard said.

Still, the LAPD has not ruled out the Manson cult in her killing.

A violent time

Complicating the effort to solve Jurvetson’s murder is the fact that the period of the late 1960s and ’70s was marked by numerous serial killers roaming California.

Sandi Gibbons, a former City News Service reporter who later served as the spokeswoman for several L.A. County district attorneys, said the area off Mulholland was a popular place for dumping bodies at the time.

On New Year’s Day 1969, the body of 17-year-old Marina Habe — who was kidnapped outside her West Hollywood home — was found less than half a mile from Jurvetson’s remains in a ravine off Mulholland Drive. Habe, the daughter of a Hollywood screenwriter, also had multiple stab wounds to her neck.

Shepard said Manson also was asked about Habe and dismissed any suggestion she was one of his crowd.

LAPD homicide detectives also saw similarities between the vicious knife attack on Jurvetson and the November 1969 killings of James Sharp, 15, of Crestwood, Mo., and Doreen Gaul, 19, from Albany, N.Y. Stabbed and beaten, their bodies were dumped in a downtown Los Angeles alley a week before the discovery of Jurvetson’s remains.

At the time, LAPD Lt. Earl Deemer described the wounds on the pair as being inflicted by a “fanatic.” Each had been stabbed 50 to 60 times. In “Helter Skelter,” Bugliosi wrote that Gaul was rumored to be a former girlfriend of Davis — who, like the dead teenagers, once was a Scientologist.

Davis had lived at the same housing complex as Gaul, but in a police interview in the 1970s he denied knowing her. Years later, another man confessed to killing the pair in a robbery but was never charged. He has since died.

Death of a lawyer

Then there was the death of Ronald Hughes.

The 35-year-old attorney strongly defended Leslie Van Houten during the family’s murder trial, seemingly at the expense of Manson.

“We recessed for the weekend, and Manson — who sat in the corner of the counsel table — pointed to Hughes and said to her attorney: ‘I don’t want to see you in this courtroom again.’ And we never saw him again,” Kay said.

In late November 1970, as the trial neared its end, Hughes disappeared. Four months later, his decomposed body turned up wedged in a rocky creek in Ventura County. Kay said Hughes was last seen swimming in the nearby hot springs right before a flash flood.

In “Helter Skelter” and in later interviews, Bugliosi suggested that Manson directed Hughes’ killing, calling it “the first of the retaliation murders.”

But Charlie Rudd, a retired Ventura County sheriff’s sergeant, told The Times in 2012 that Hughes’ death probably had nothing to do with Manson. Authorities recovered Hughes’ body near Sespe Hot Springs in the Los Padres National Forest, and Rudd said there was little evidence of foul play.

According to Rudd, the creek probably swelled dangerously and Hughes died either because he drowned or because he was battered to death by debris and rocks. “There was nothing else to indicate otherwise, and the medical examiner couldn’t come to a conclusion of anything other than that.”

Was Hughes murdered? Kay said he wasn’t so sure.

“I’m on the fence.”

(Times staff writers Maria L. La Ganga and Hector Becerra contributed to this report.)

The LA Times seems to have randomly chosen to write about deaths that have been discussed in the past as being related to the Family rather than trying to come up with a dozen deaths that would qualify as being in LAPD's jurisidiction. 

The first death that the article delves into is that of Joel Pugh. The death occurred in London England. Pugh's death is certainly not in LAPD's jurisdiction. Authorities in England determined that Pugh's death was by his own hand and not a murder. It cannot be proven that Bruce Davis was in England at the time of Pugh's death. The late Simon Wells wrote an excellent piece on the death of Joel Pugh, if you haven't read it you should. 

These are the letters exchanged between Inyo County, Interpol, and Scotland Yard.

John Philip "Zero" Haught's death is discussed next. This death, IMO, should never have been declared a suicide as quickly as it was. At a minimum it should have been reopened once Manson and the others were arrested for the TLB murders. LAPD wrote the police report.

Here is an excerpt from an article about the Gaul/Sharp murders that discusses Haught's death. It relates the incident written above about the young man holding Haught's head as he died. 

Oddly, the unnamed young man does not appear in the police report. Linda Baldwin, Bruce Davis, Susan Bartell, and Catherine Gillies are the only ones named in the initial report. Bill Vance has also been rumored to have been at the Clubhouse Drive home at the time of Haught's death but split before the police arrived. It's not likely that Bill Vance is the unnamed young man. Mark Ross claims not to have been home when Haught was shot and he was pictured with Family members during the trial so he is not likely the young man.

Haught Police Report

Reet Jurvetson/Jane Doe 59's body was discovered November 14, 1969 off Mulholland Drive. Bugliosi claimed she was killed by the Family because she witnessed the death of John Phillip Haught. LAPD detectives had a picture that they thought was of Reet dancing with Steve Grogan on the boardwalk at Spahn Ranch. The trouble with that is the picture was a still shot that was taken from Robert Hendrickson's movie Manson. That movie sequence was not filmed until after Reet had been murdered. 

The persons of interest sought by current investigators are two men named Jean who Reet followed down from Canada because she was seriously interested in one of the men. He may not have reciprocated her interest. The two men have never been located.

Marina Habe's abduction on December 30, 1968 and the subsequent finding of her body on New Year's Day is another death with a very slim connection to the Family. Sonic Youth bassist Kim Gordon in her book "Girl in a Band" tells us that her older brother Keller, once dated Marina Habe and that he knew Bobby Beausoleil who he met at a house at the bottom of Topanga Canyon.

Next up are the Doreen Gaul and James Sharp murders. As far as Manson Family involvement is concerned Bruce Davis was considered a suspect. It's rumored that Bruce Davis, for a short time, lived in the same Scientology rooming house as Doreen Gaul at 1032 Bonnie Brea in Los Angeles. There is no evidence that Bruce did live in a Scientology run rooming house/apartment after returning from the UK in April 1969. Bruce was asked to leave the Scientology quarters in the UK for drug use. I doubt that they would welcome him back on short notice. 

Bruce was released from the Inyo County jail, along with Christopher Jesus, "Zero", the week prior to November 4, 1969. "Zero's" death occurred November 5, 1969. The Gaul/Sharp murders were November 21, 1969.

In September 1975 two black men were investigated for the Gaul/Sharp murders. They were James Green and Arthur Davis. Green gave a statement to a Detective Lambert of the LAPD. It was quite a detailed statement but not everything that was revealed in the police report about the condition of the bodies and facts of the crime was related by Green. The detective sent the statement the LA DA's office to hopefully get a warrant to charge the two for the murders. Deputy District Attorney Charles F. Girot declined to press charges and numerated eleven different things that needed to be investigated or cleared up before charges could be filed in a letter sent to Detective Lambert December 12, 1975.

Green's statement and the DDA's letter

A previous post with a link to the Gaul/Sharp police report.

The murders of Marina Habe, Reet Jurvetson, Doreen Gaul, and James Sharp were all within LAPD's jurisdiction. They were also very similar in that the victims died by multiple stab wounds that one would describe as "overkill".

The tragic death of Ron Hughes occurred in Ventura County. Despite what Manson said in the courtroom about not wanting to see Hughes again after the extended Thanksgiving break from the trial Hughes death was likely due to bad decisions on Hughes part. Hughes should have gone home with the young couple he came to Sespe Hot Springs with when the downpour began. Barring that he should have stayed with the car he arrived in as it was found in good shape after the rain stopped. We can't know exactly how it came to be that Hughes drowned but we can look at previous events that happened at the hot springs.

In late January of 1969 there was a torrential rain storm at Sespe that caused the death of ten persons. Because of the terrain, that area received copious amounts of runoff that flooded the creek raising the swift running water 8-10 feet above its normal levels.

Here's an article that tells of conditions at Sespe during that storm.

We have identified five murders that happened in LAPD's jurisdiction. All have tenuous links to the Family, with the exception of John Haught's death. We still have no idea of who the other seven murder victims are that the LA DA's office believes the Family could have killed.

The murder of Mark Walts could fall in that category though I've never seen a police report so I am not sure if that could have been a sheriff's case.  

Other deaths that DA's office believes the Family may have had a hand in are the murder of Karl Stubbs in Inyo County, the murder of a Santa Barbara County Jane Doe, the murder of a Casatic Jane Doe, the death of Fillipo Tenerelli in Inyo County, the murders of Nancy Warren and Clyda Dulaney in Mendocino County, and the murder of Darwin Scott in Ashland KY.

The blog has done stories on the deaths of Karl Stubbs, Filippo Tenerrelli, Nancy Warren and Clyda Dulaney, and Darwin Scott. Look through the tags or do a site search to find those articles.

We haven't done much on either Jane Doe. The Doe's are difficult because without knowing who they are there is no way to learn who their families and friends were. They are the very people who would be able to shed light on the deceased normal activities and know if the person was having trouble with anyone in particular.

Santa Barbara County Jane Doe was discovered near Grefco Quarry five miles south of the town of Lompoc. There was ligitimate reason to investigate Family members regarding this murder. Bobby Beausoleil drove by the turn off for the quarry on his way to the San Francisco Bay Area after the murder of Gary Hinman. Other Family members were known to frequently travel Highway 101 between the Los Angeles area and Mendocino County and points in between, including Manson.

Articles on Santa Barbara County Jane Doe.

Castaic Jane Doe was discovered in the Angeles National Forest about nine miles north of the town of Castaic located on Highway 5. Highway 5 which now runs the length of the state was being built during that time. Portions of the highway were finished including the run from Los Angeles to Bakersfield. Castaic is in Los Angeles County. 

It's interesting to note that Detective Norman Lambert worked this case as well as the Marina Habe and Gaul/Sharp cases.

This is a scan of a 1970 road map showing Los Angeles at the bottom of the map. Castaic is due north of Burbank. There is a fork at San Fernando where the turn-off to Highway 14 is. Highway 14 is the route you would take to go to Barker Ranch. You can see the towns of Ridgecrest and Trona. So, Castaic is only about 15 miles out of the way if you're on your way to Barker. I'm not surprised law enforcement looked at the Family for this murder. Of course, it doesn't mean they committed it.

Articles about Castaic Jane Doe.

We have identified seven unsolved murders that were committed in Los Angeles County. What are the other five cases that LAPD believes were committed by the Family in the county? There is no shortage of murders in other jurisdictions but LAPD is the one holding onto the Tex Tapes claiming they can't release them because of the murder investigations that are still active. 

What would be the harm in naming the victims in the dozen cases that LAPD deems possibly committed by Family members? Why all the secrecy? Divulging the names of the suspected victims just might result in tips that can be acted on. It's not a given that all the victims named here are among the dozen that LAPD deems to be related to the Family. We could be spinning our wheels on one or more of the cases.

Quoting from the article: Manson “repeatedly” said many others were killed, said Cliff Shepard, a former LAPD Robbery-Homicide Division detective who worked some of those cold cases. “We may never know or identify all their victims.”

Manson also allowed Family members to spread the rumor that Donald "Shorty" Shea was dismembered in nine pieces and his head was cut off. But we know that isn't true because when Shorty's remains were eventually found his skeleton was intact save one hand that was missing and believed to be the result of animal depredation. It's just as likely that Manson bragged about more victims to bolster his prison credibility.

Given the number of people who were in the Family and the number of those people who were willing tell what they knew at the time of the Barker Raid and later when the facts about the TLB murders came to light, does it make sense that none of those people after 50 years would have told authorities about any other murders the Family may have committed?

Another quote, this one about the Tex Tapes: The tapes involved conversations between convicted killer Charles “Tex” Watson and his attorney in 1969. The LAPD obtained the tapes after a legal battle, but they appeared to provide few clues. The department, however, refused a Times request to review them, citing ongoing investigations. A judge in 2017 ruled that attorneys for Manson follower Leslie Van Houten could not have the recordings as part of her efforts to gain parole.

“The thing we discovered after reviewing the tapes, there was no new information related to any of the unsolved cases,” Jenks said. The death of Manson in 2017, as well as those of other family members, has made efforts to pursue the cases harder.

Well, if there was nothing on the tapes that gave any information about other possible murders why the heck is the LAPD still hanging on to them and not releasing the tapes to the media? The whole premise for LAPD to take possession of the tapes was to hopefully gain information about other murders. What is on those tapes that LAPD feels they must keep secret? Are they protecting someone? If so, I certainly hope it's not Tex Watson.

Do the tapes contain something that could result in grounds for one or more of the convicted to have a new trial?

Do the tapes contain more information on one or more of the cases, where there was a conviction, and should have been acted on by law enforcement or the DA's office, but wasn't? Manson, Davis and Grogan were convicted of Shorty Shea's murder. Tex was also involved but not tried for the murder. There have long been rumors that Larry Bailey and Bill Vance participated in that murder but they were never charged. 

Did Tex reveal something on the tapes that could put law enforcement and or the DA's office in a very bad light that could jeopardize the convictions they were able to obtain? 

The whole Tex Tape situation makes it seem as if LAPD is hiding something. It's also a situation that is ripe for spawning conspiracy theories.

It's been five years since the LA Times wrote this article and nothing has changed. We would like a progress report, please.

Was Charlie at Cielo the night before?

Terry Melcher

A number of sources do suggest that very thing:

 Death to Pigs, by Hendrickson pg501    Bugliosi interview by Merrick.

Bugliosi: "I'm the one that put Manson inside the gates of the Tate residence. I put him in there, not on the night of the murders, but a couple of nights earlier."

Manson's Right Hand Man Speaks Out by Charles "Tex" Watson, c.2001  pg43

It's believed that Manson was at the house looking for Terry the night before the murders and was  offended by the new occupants.

 LINK     Grimtraveller said:      "Back in 2005 on Col Scott's site, someone called GLH said that he'd spoken with Tex the month before and this is what Tex had told him "Manson had been to Cielo the night BEFORE the murders". I debated that with him, saying I'd heard that Manson had been there in March '69. He stood firm on his claim that Manson was there on August 7th (in the evening). ...and Manson was agitated the next day"

 

LINK     Jay Sebring’s business partner Jim Markham:

"I believe Manson had gone up to the house” — Polanski was away shooting a movie — “and Manson wanted to sell cocaine and marijuana,” he says. “He showed Jay and Wojciech the product. They were going to buy some of it, but the two of them beat him up at the gate. The next night, Manson sent the Family up [to kill them].”

 

Beausoleil: "He(Charlie) had been over near his [Melcher's] house and, as he said, he checked out the wires, telephone wires and the electric gates and exits from that property."

 

Wait...  wasn't Charlie down in San Diego County on that date, bringing Stephanie Schram down to her sister's house in Jamul and having dinner there, and then sleeping on the lawn of the residence of one of Stephanie's friends?  Well, that is what Bugliosi claimed.  But what was that based on? 

Not Charlie.  He admitted going down to Jamul but didn't put a date on it.  

Not Schram.  She couldn't remember the date:

Helter Skelter, pg368 

"Stephanie was a bit vague when it came to dates. She "thought" the day they returned to Spahn Ranch was Friday, August 8, but she wasn't sure."

 

Not that traffic ticket Charlie got from the Highway Patrol near Oceanside on the way down.  It's never been made public.

Not Stephanie Schram's sister, identified only as "Mrs. Hartman," who allegedly claimed that Charlie told her that "people were going to be slaughtered, they'll be lying on their lawns dead."    Her interview was never released.

Not Stephanie's 'friends' in San Diego on whose lawn Manson and Schram allegedly slept on, the night of Aug 7 to the morning of Aug 8.   There's no evidence they were ever identified.

Though of course Schram never said anything about Charlie stopping by Cielo Dr. in the time she was with him, from her meeting him near Esalen to when they allegedly returned to Spahn, "arriving there about two in the afternoon" on Aug 8, in Bugliosi's version.  

But Schram claimed it was Aug 5 when she first came to Spahn with Charlie.  They had dinner there, and then in the evening drove off the ranch, but only for a couple of blocks before Charlie pulled over and they slept in the bakery truck that night.  The next day, which would have been Aug 6 if Schram is right, they drove down to San Diego, spent the night, returning to Los Angeles on what would have been Aug 7.  Note that during his trial Tex claimed he saw Charlie at Spahn the next morning, on Aug 8.  There are now enough gaps in the timeline to make a trip to Cielo the night before very possible.

So why didn't Bugliosi use evidence of this alleged visit by Charlie up to Cielo the night before, at the trial?  It would have been very incriminating to Charlie, whether the visit was to do a drug deal with Voytek, as per Markham, or to do a reconnaissance, as per Beausoleil.   The only realistic scenario is that Bugliosi could not have entered this evidence without revealing the source, which might refer to the house being under surveillance before the murders, as Doris Tate claimed.

 

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

 

Bugliosi apparently based his Jamul timeline solely on the traffic ticket issued by the CHP near Oceanside. From Helter Skelter, pg367-8:

"Manson... drove to San Diego... to pick up Stephanie's clothes.
Enroute, about ten miles south of Oceanside on Interstate 5, they were stopped by California Highway Patrol officer Richard C. Willis. .... The date was Thursday, August 7, 1969; the time 6:15P.M. The ticket, which (LAPD Sgt.)Patchett and (LAPD Sgt.)Gutierrez found, proved Manson was in Southern California the day before the Tate murders."


Bugliosi is quite explicit on the time and date of the ticket. Yet he only implies--but does not explicitly state--that this was on the way to San Diego(in the southbound lanes of I-5), but what if it was while on their way back from San Diego(in the northbound lanes of I-5)? That would allow Charlie to make it to LA in time for an evening trip to Cielo Dr. the day before the murders.

 

 

 

 Is this why CHP officer Willis became unavailable to be interviewed?

 

 

Charlie: "...ask him why the District Attorney moved the Highway Patrolman to the east coast, along with the traffic ticket...."

 

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

 

 

 --The evening of the 7th of August, 1969, the four occupants of the Cielo house--Sharon, Jay, Gibby, and Voytek--are over at Sebring's house, located at 9810 Easton Dr. in Beverly Hills, watching a movie on cable TV and having dinner when the wires going into the house are allegedly cut, messing with the lights and interrupting the cable signal. Leading to the conclusion that this was an aborted murder attempt on the house's occupants, presumably by the same cast of characters that would finish the job the next night at Cielo Dr.

Listening to the recorded interview with the butler, the only time mentioned is 11pm, when the group finishes their dinner. Thus they probably would have arrived at the Sebring house that night between 9-10pm. This timeline is roughly consistent with Manson's alleged trip up to Cielo Dr., with a subsequent angry or even violent encounter with Jay and Voy as per the account of Markham, at around 8:30 to 9:30pm on Aug 7.

Jay Sebring's Cut Wires    Video                 


In Helter Skelter, Bugliosi implied the immediate precipitater to TLB was Charlie's anger for being snubbed by the audience at Esalen several days before. But the idea of Charlie being slapped around or disrespected at Cielo, just hours before a first murder attempt at Sebring's house, is a far more realistic proposition, IMO.



So what did Charlie do? Did he race back to Spahn, quickly gather up a kill posse, and then race over to Easton Dr. to do the dirty deed, somehow knowing Jay's location and address, only to be stymied by some complicated wiring?

Or did Charlie hang around Cielo, following them in their vehicle as they left the Cielo house, all the way to Easton Dr. a mile to the north? Did he then launch a plan to mess with their minds by cutting some of the wiring on their house? This would explain why none of the other family members ever mentioned this foray to Jay's house the night before. They didn't know about it. And if Schram was told to stay in the bread truck while Charlie walked up to the Sebring house, all she would know is that Charlie parked on some dark residential street somewhere and that Charlie walked off and didn't return for about half an hour.

Bugliosi claimed that Manson slapped Schram after being snubbed by the Esalen audience. Schram claims Charlie slapped her for messing up the chance to get a free meal, even before they went to Esalen. I speculate that was just a cover for Charlie slapping Schram after he was dissed by the Cielo residents, and before the wires were cut. Manson was so angry he couldn't control himself. IMO only!

 

 

 

 =====================

 

 

 To reiterate, there was plenty of hard evidence to establish an accurate timeline in the week before the murder:


--The credit card slips used at the four gas stations where Charlie got gas on the way to and from Esalen.

Aaron Stovitz to Rolling Stone
DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AARON STOVITZ: You see, Manson has an alibi right up until August 7th, 'cause he met this girl, and he, uh, drove with her from Big Sur all the way down to Oceanside. And they made gas purchases on these stolen credit cards all the way down the line.

Helter Skelter, pg366-8
Aug 3 - "...sometime between seven and eight(am)(Manson) purchased gas at a station in Canoga Park, using a stolen credit card.
"On August 4, Manson, still using a stolen credit card, purchased gas at Lucia. ... he did it again the next day."
"...Manson left Big Sur on August 6, making gas purchases the same day at San Luis Obispo and Chatsworth..."

[And presumably any credit card slips on any gas purchases made on the way to and from San Diego.]


--The front desk register at Esalen, and any witnesses to Charlie's presence there.

--The people who encountered Charlie and Stephanie in San Diego. Meaning Schram's sister and the people at the house where they spent the night

--The CHP ticket given to Charlie near Oceanside.


Plenty of evidence, but all of it has been kept from the public eye! So there was definitely a cover-up going on. The only reason for this has to be that none of it is in accord with Bugliosi's own timeline.