Take the Back Alley to Langley - Part One

Reeve Whitson - Freshman Year of High School 

Did photographer Shahrokh Hatami doom Sharon Tate and her friends one March morning in 1969 after a confrontation with Charles Manson at the Cielo front door? Were Rudi Altobelli's tenants cursed that evening when the Rudi told Charlie he'd be in Italy for a year after Charlie stood in front of the guesthouse and said he'd like to talk more in the future? 

Was Manson even there that day? Hatami wasn't sure. Mighty Max Frost, I am reaching out with my mind. Beep boop tell me what Rudi said. 

Today, we're exploring Tom O'Neill's claim that a possible CIA agent named Reeve Whitson has been left out of the Manson study history. According to O'Neill, after hearing Hatami's story, Whitson delivered his friend Hatomi (and his Ides of March tale) to Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, and then sat in on the unrecorded interview.  

-  Here is Hatami's backstory in case you think he's some hanger-on with a fancy camera who took a two year degree at Santa Monica College after UCLA laughed at his high school GPA and asked him to jump through hoops before achieving main campus status. Hatami was no state school guy. 

 - Here is Bugliosi's closing argument in the Manson, et al, trial. Photographer Hatami is mentioned fourteen times. 

During the trial, Bugliosi argued that Hatami's high-handed dismissal at the Cielo  to the guesthouse sent Charlie over the edge. Bugs asked about Hatami's aggressive posture, tone, and had him describe how he jabbed an index finger toward the guesthouse when dismissing Manson. 

- Here's a newspaper article from a courtroom reporter (via the almighty) if you are new to our study or desire a quick refresh on Hatami's testimony.  

Others weren't so sure about the encounters. Filmmaker and author Robert Hendrickson smelled a rat and believed Bugliosi needed those March 1969 confrontations to convince the jury Charlie visited Cielo before the murders took place and had an axe to grind after the Hatami and Altobelli brush offs. Hendrickson was so passionate about about Bugliosi's duplicity that he continued his argument across two Hatami posts in our blog library. 

- This video in Matt's post from 2014 shows Sharon and Hatami in better days. Hatami is the shirtless hunk. Sharon is as pretty as pretty gets. Hatami's girlfriend is hanging around because she's no fool. 

That fateful day in March, Hatami takes the chivalry route when an uninvited man reaches the Cielo front door. Not shocking. Manly man exhibitions in front of attractive women have always been a thing, even if sometimes it's only pretend. 

According to author Tom O'Neill, Hatami first shared his Charlie encounter story with possible CIA agent Reeve Whitson. The son of an actress and a circus acrobat, Whitson enters our story when Tom O'Neill has Whitson phone Hatami early that Saturday morning we all know so well before anyone else discovered the bodies up on Cielo. 

In O'Neill's Chaos, Whitson claims to friends he was the CIA surveillance team watching the Cielo house. He was supposedly on the scene early that fateful Friday but didn't stick around. According to his friends, Whitson forever lamented his inability to prevent the killings.  

We need to back up a bit because things are already not making sense. How does Reeve Whitson, a rumored CIA super spook, find his way to the Cielo crowd? 

Bugliosi never mentions Whitson in his book, but Chaos provides insight. According to O'Neill, Whitson might've bonded with Sebring over race cars. And Whitson's mom was good buds with Doris Tate. Third, O'Neill writes, Paul Tate told him Whitson was a friend to himself, Sharon, and Roman.   

So there's three hows. Whitson maybe became a family friend after meeting Sebring at the track. Unfortunately, answering my first question created a second. Why was Whitson surveilling his good friends? 

Reeve Whitson was an archconservative on an anti-drug mission. By some accounts, an ounce of blow was found in Jay Sebring's Porsche the morning following the murders. That's more than a personal stash, Idgaf who you are. An ounce was enough to get half the houses on the block trembling while searching for the man through their bedroom blinds the night of August 8th. Was Sebring doing deals out of the Cielo parking lot? 

English Major Math time: 

* In 1969, one gram of cocaine cost $100-$150 dollars in Los Angeles

* We know Jay sold little baggies out of his briefcase

* Sebring would be a fool to give rich people his lowest price - let's err on the bigger side this time 

* Twenty-eight grams come out of an ounce - more if Sebring stepped on his dope 

* $150 x 28 = $4200

* $4200 in 1969 money is more than $32000 today 

** Let's pause for reader corrections on the amount of cocaine found in Sebring's car, and also to give others a chance to describe how much blow they snorted some random Friday night in the 80's at a Huey Lewis concert. 

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

Discussion Materials: 

In addition to what is linked above, we're using newspapers articles, Helter Skelter, and Tom O'Neill's Chaos. Feel free to add links to any supporting or counterarguments in the comments below the posts. 

Most of O'Neill's research we're discussing in this piece is found in Chapter Six of Chaos, titled Who Was Reeve Whitson? I'm using the Kindle version. You should explore digital searching if you don't already. Yes, chopped down trees feel great in my hands, but they are garbage when I wonder how many times Whitson is printed in the text (150). 

Or Hatami (43). Btw, O'Neill doesn't care which version you buy. Both cost about the same. 

Continues in Part 2...

Knockin' On The Golden Door

Rosalie Jean Willis

Apologies if my discussion topic today was previously covered in a book that is no longer in print, or the edition is crazy expensive on the resale market, or even if I missed fifty-two posts here or on lsb or the Col or any of the other sites that discussed the Manson milieu during the last half century and then some since the crimes occurred. Yes, I read Sanders but probably the 2015 printing or whichever was available. Same for many of the other tomes. Regardless, there's no excuse for my failures. I've been goofy since birth, my brain is mush, and I forget much of what has been said since Brenda McCann's cyan headband was found beneath the passenger seat in Tenerelli's Beetle. 

Okay, there was no headband. But wealthy surfer chicks amirite? Sunshine. Warm salt air above the waves. Baby, young me would kill a giant shark for young you if it swam near our boards.

You can use your sharpened knife to help send that joker down to Davey Jones' locker. Later, we will listen to the Beach Boys in a giant convertible with faux wood panels on the doors. Right, maybe not the Beach Boys. How about a live performance of the Milky Way on a cassette in a cassette player that has not been invented yet? I'll say girl I know we just met but I love you and you will reply shut up you old fool. Wake up and get your post back on track. 

 

Which is sound advice so here goes. I think it's dumb that everyone has to be on Manson teams. Valid reasons abound although I wish we could be like Rodney King. I attempt to mend fences but faces quickly glaze and mouths immediately begin frothing and raging about the Statman-Schreck wars of 2014 and etc. The air around those posts and resulting arguments still hangs heavy like Gettysburg at first light on a foggy, cool morning. 

We should bury hatchets. Scene politics are exhausting. Nearly a decade has passed. 

Personally, I enjoy talking and writing about what went on during the lifetime of Charles Manson with everyone who wants to discuss it even if I'm still learning. 

Now is the best time for researching Charlie & Company since Billy came back to Ohio. New information is uncovered frequently even if it doesn't crack the case wide open. The Internet is an amazing tool. Why can't someone research areas that interest them and seek out convos with others trapped inside this hateful loop without being on a team or an idiot? Stick your expert nose up your butt or go watch Matlock if you already know everything. Or tell your doctor your medication isn't working.

Is solving the murders all that matters anyway? The settings and characters call out to me. Terrified people dying...not so much. 

We study a fascinating subject which endures. New people will never stop entering the community during our lifetimes. Should they continuously fuck off en masse because unbalanced Manson consumers, groupies, and dilettantes masquerading as authorities already argued Carl Stubbs on some primitive website the year the noobs were born or even decades earlier? Time will eventually place more noobs online than traditional Manson"experts." The tables will gloriously turn on who gets to fuck off, and the revenge will be sweet, but what's the point?  

Maybe they're turning now. Who knows. 

I know my pleas fall on deaf ears but dammit Esterhaus was right. Let's be kind out there and remember that Manson history is not an online campaign for student body president at Manson High, but rather an ongoing investigation with constantly improving research tools.  

Imagine how wild it would be if someone you were acting cruel toward was a professional writer and could hilariously nuke you all day long in places that matter. Quick as a hiccup, too. Some would say effortlessly. 

Sermon ended. I appreciate the little crew of  friends I've made here and thank you all for being my pal. You make my time well spent. +ggw

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

Okay the post: 

Last week, while digging for nuclear bombs previously hidden by penniless and cigarette smelly white trash in the polluted muck beneath la belle riviere, I realized I was aware of three completely different versions of Charlie's life during the mid to late 1950's.

First, there's the story Rosalie told her coworker in 1978. I screen capped a bit below. 

Deb quickly shuts down Rosalie's fibbing. The birth records she used remain available online for verification if you're a crazy person like me who needs to prove things to themselves instead of choosing a squad and repeating (often) unverified reruns forever alongside a chorus of new best friends in a (personalized) online wind tunnel. 

Always remember that no one in history ever anticipated the Internet. You have a clear advantage over researchers in the past. Even in the last decade or year. Nobody needs to tell you anything. Look for yourself. 

Since we're all liars at times, I propose we forgive Rosalie and move on. 

While there are many books out there brimming with information, and I think we can bring several into our discussions down the road, let's keep things simple for today. I used the most famous work published on the subject, Helter Skelter, and compared it to arguably the most informative eye witness account ever produced in the genre, Lynette Fromme's Reflexion.

If you haven't bought Lynette's book yet you should today. And read it more than once. If she's not the smartest resident of this unforgiving tar pit, she is certainly at the top of the class. 

Charlie doesn't mention anything about his time in California with Rosalie in Reflexion. As always, all citations from Fromme's book refer to the Kindle version. 

"When I married Rosie at twenty years old, I had never been around chicks. Rosie played me like the fool that I was (103)." 

Sixteen year old Rosalie must've really done a number on him. She was cool like cucumber salad when freedom was on the line though. Vince forces Curt to point out that Charlie beat on a pregnant woman. 

via Helter Skelter 

Such is life. One person is told a lie while another person hears the truth. Or both people are bullshitted. You know we live in dangerous times. No one should be alone.

I said I wouldn't hate on lies told for perseverance anymore and shall refrain today. Survival is an absolute necessity. No two ways about it. 

Charlie's version of 1954-1958 in Fromme's book differs from what I found in public records so I made myself a basic timeline in an attempt to keep everything straight in my mind. I left some things out so we don't have to discuss pimping sixteen year old girls and various other successful and failed capers. 

Let's dive in. 

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

May, 1954 - Charlie earns an early release for good behavior at the Maximum Security Reformatory in Chillicothe, Ohio, and moves in with his aunt and uncle. God bless you, Glenna xo. High school freshman Rosalie Jean Willis lives and works nearby. 

"One of my mom's husbands was a window washer at a U.S. Courthouse. His name was Deere. They got me out of prison and she got me a 1954 Ford. I traded it for a 1952 Cadillac and used the name Charlie Deere (103)." 

---

I imagined a convo that went a something like this:

"Hey, Judge. Got a minute?"

"Sure thing! What can I help you with, Mr. Bailiff?"

"You know that window washer guy who's always out front cleaning the glass when we arrive at work in the mornings? Deere? He asked if you might consider calling over to the prison and telling them to cut his wife's son loose?"

"Say no more, cherished friend and sworn lodge brother. I've always had a soft spot for squeegee men." 

(I could not find a husband named Deere online for Kathleen but maybe you can. I didn't look super hard.) 

The Fifties in Fromme:

The final screen cap is from Frank Costello's FBI files. Charlie and Frank are together in Lewisburg in 1952. Manson claims Big Frank raised his hand and vouched for him in the Fromme passages above. There's no way of proving they were buddies but there are more hints in our pages from Fromme. 

Charlie talks in code so I always look up every name he mentions. For example, he mentions Dewey in his letter to Fromme. Dewy took down Murder, Inc. Charlie later did time with Murder, Inc. member Frankie Carbo. You remember Frankie don'tcha? 

Even though he killed Bugsy Beatty, Carbo is small potatoes compared to the rest of that backstory. Murder, Inc was a dark child of some the most infamous of NYC mafia fathers. Meyer Lansky. The Brain. Lucky Luciano. Frank Costello. 

Let's jump back to Charlie's life in the '50's as told by Fromme. He is released from Chillicothe in 1954 and heads to Cleveland in Fromme's version of events.

That's John Scalish. He's the godfather of the Cleveland mob when Charlie shows up with a stolen car. A Viking Englishwoman says Scalish looks like my Italian brother. I don't think I've ever been that dashing but I do feel like I make that face a lot. 

Scalish had five sisters although I'm unsure if Charlie was implying something or not. I have a mysterious relative everyone in my family thinks was a con man who is buried near Scalish and the rest of Cleveland's gangster royalty. Danny Greene. People blown up by Danny Greene. Scoundrel after glorious scoundrel. 

They're all waiting to resurrect inside this beautiful, old, city cemetery. Huge mature trees dot the spacious landscape making Calvary Cemetery a great place for a walk. You don't want your car to break down outside the gates though. Times have changed in the neighborhood. 

I spent a day learning about the Cleveland mob last week and here is the road to Charlie. Scalish was the second true godfather of the city. Before power was consolidated, several gangs, Jewish and Italian, operated at the same time and sometimes worked together. Eventually, the money coming in from Prohibition became outlandish and everyone started fighting. 

Scalish married a Jewish girl whose father was the boss of a Jewish crew. Maybe they married to consolidate power or perhaps they were deeply in love. I always choose love. 

Around the same time, a local gang split into two rival gangs and a boss and his brother were killed in a Little Italy barbershop with New York's blessing. This is how it went down: Boss Joseph Lonardo, pictured below, steamed to Italy supposedly on vacation. 

Big Joe left his brother John (below) and another fellow in charge while he visited overseas. 

This is the other fellow, Big Joe's advisor, Salvatore "Black Sam" Todaro.

I know what you're thinking. Dude looks totally trustworthy. I felt the same way. The backstory here is Big Joe and the guys who split off into their own crew, the Porrello's, were lifelong friends. Both families emigrated from Sicily together and even named kids after one another. 

This was until Prohibition changed everything. Greed is number two on the list of the Seven Deadly Sins and don't ever forget it. 

Right. So anyway Black Sam cozies up to John while Big Joe is in Italy (It-LEE) and convinces him everything is copasetic between the feuding crews. When Joe returns, Black Sam lures Joe and John to Angelo Porrello's barber shop for a sit-down. Bang bang bang you know the deal. Joe and John are made to feel comfy with a card game, ambushed, and slain by their former friends. 

Following this act of magnificent treachery, Joseph Porrello becomes head corn sugar baron in Cleveland. Corn sugar is essential to every bootlegging operation in case you've never been a bootlegger.   

Porrello was suddenly king but he was also no fool. At least not at this time. Later, definitely. But for now he made Black Sam believe he was the boss of the crew. 

Killing Lonardo got rid of one enemy but another enemy immediately stepped up like they always do in organized crime. The new guys were called the Mayfield Road Mob. Fearing the MRM and attempting to place the local crown officially upon his head, Joseph Porrello holds what becomes the first big mafia summit in a downtown Cleveland hotel on December 5, 1928. Top mafiosos from New York and around the country began to arrive. 

Momentarily, the Cleveland cops said, "Dudes, how stupid do you think we are?" Gangsters were arrested as they showed up. Fearing his imminent demise, Porrello paid everyone's bail. No one was overly offended, Porrello was secretly handed Cleveland, and the MRM was told to go kick rocks. 

To their credit, the MRM was like okay cool yeah we understand no hard feelings. I'm joshing. Don't be so gullible. The MRM waited until June and violently ended Black Sam's lifetime of double-dealing in front of the same barber shop Big Joe and John Lonardo were killed. 

Black Sam, stooge the entire time and betrayed at the end, was gunned down by Lonardo's wife, his son Angelo (named after traitorous barber shop owner Angelo Porrello), and a Lonardo hit man. All had defected to the MRM. 

By the end of Prohibition, most of the Porrello gang is either dead or with the MRM. Porrello is invited to a sit-down at the Venetian restaurant on Mayfield Road. The building on the right in this photo from 1930 still exists today. You probably guessed that Porrello meets his end here and you are correct. 

Porrello and his bodyguard foolishly believe they are picking up more than a hundred grand in today's money. Greed, friends, it's a killer. Two hitmen light them up at their restaurant table. Porrello never moves and is later found with his unlit cigarette hanging from his lip. 

The bodyguard is wounded in each side, makes it outside, collapses on the sidewalk out front, the restaurant was where the parking lot is now btw, and perishes following two more shots to the dome. Neither killer was ever identified.

The owner of the Venetian Restaurant, Frank Milano, leader of the MRM, is responsible for the assassinations. But the coast is not clear yet. Porrello's brother Vincenzo "Jim" Porrello becomes the new boss of the Cleveland mafia and vows revenge on his brother's killers. His reign lasts three long weeks before the back of his head is blown off in a grocery store on his home turf. A third Porrello brother, Raymond, swears double revenge. I'm sure you see where this is going. 

Raymond's house explodes three weeks later. Bits of brick, glass, and wood splinters fill the sky before cascading back to Earth in a grotesque shower. Raymond is not home at the time but the Porrello's are nearly finished in the crime game. A couple more guys and a wife await their murders but the Porrello run is over.   

Frank Milano officially becomes the next King of Cleveland. The MRM is mentioned in The Godfather 2 and called by its first name, The Lakeville Gang. Johnny Ola and Michael Corleone discuss the gang and Hyman Roth in that clip. "Our friend in Miami." Roth is Meyer Lansky's character's name in the film. 

I wanna be handsome like young Al Pacino just for one day. "Brenda McCann, leave those slippies alone," I'd say while removing a white bow tie I was born knowing how to knot. "Let's go hang out with Hynson and August."

In 1931, Frank Milano joins the National Crime Syndicate with Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano. Meyer Lansky is one of the players connecting the Manson cases to Cuba and JFK. If not for the JFK and RFK assassinations and Black Flag concert flyers, I would not be here today. 

In case you're keeping score, Angelo Lornado, Big Ange, killer of Black Sam, was a brother in law of eventual godfather John Scalish. Angelo swore and got revenge on his father's killers and then the government removed him from the mix. He currently resides in Calvary with his obligatory statue and is surrounded by family, friends, and enemies.  

And my relative who does not have a statue. 

John Scalish was running things as the godfather of Cleveland for ten years when Charlie showed up. Cleveland had a big piece of the Teamsters and were also behind Moe Dalitz in Las Vegas. The neighborhood Charlie describes housed Scalish's headquarters. No idea on the Dago Mick. If you can prove Murphy was Danny Greene, I will send you a giant-sized candy bar and a box filled with assorted zoo zoos and wham whams. 

Charlie might be lying about his connections to the most powerful mafia group in the US but then again he might be telling the truth. He lied all the time but was also honest about things that made me question his sanity, so I am never sure. 

(B.S. Murphy had parts or all of this worked out almost three decades ago. I'm sure it's also in some other books I'm unable to buy and on ten websites that all look like 1995, but I wanted to put it here on the MFB for everyone who arrives after this post and wants to look into Charlie's time in Cleveland, Ohio. +ggw) 

Bonus: Here is the Internet's reaction to Frankie and Charlie in an earlier time. The comments section makes me feel right at home. 

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

All righty then. First, we covered Rosalie's lie about never making it out to California with Charlie. Next, we squared away Charlie's 1950's as told to Lynette Fromme, and explained the people and their connections inhabiting those years of his life. All that's left is a bit more from Vince and Curt, and our Charlie/Rosie/Mafia timeline culled from public records and author Jeff Guinn.   

Oh. Duh. We also discovered that Rosalie's mom and sister(s) were somehow already out in Los Angeles when Charlie and Rosalie arrived. Idk if this is new info for the bloated corpus or if Ivor Davis published the news while taking a poop one day before I was born or if some other person who is the coolest toughest senior at Manson High carved it into the bathroom stall with his switchblade but the discovery was an eye-opener for me and the rest of the nerd table. I'm the guy in the letterman jacket showing his fellow concert bandmates the 1350 he got on his SAT in case any haters ever want to stop by and say hello after you finish your lunch of Marlboros and Little Debbies.

Have you ever noticed that even the extras with no speaking parts in this drama are good looking? What's up with that? Paranoid me would surely scream crisis actors were I not so grounded in the universe and oneness and love. I'm not quite sure how these people escaped our dirty river and made it all the way to La La Land and the mighty Pacific and but I'd high five the shit out of them if they were here right now. 

Did Bugliosi not know Rosie's family was out there? The number one selling crime book of all time.

I struggled to find information on Kathleen and Rosalie's roommate situation. If anyone wants to fill in the blanks with an address, I would be much obliged. Or just grateful really. We don't have to owe one another favors or anything. 

Friends, I think we're finished for this week. I provided Buntline with millions of things to look up and typed for two straight days. The remainder of my working timeline is below. I look forward to being called out on every bit of minutia or whatever the opposite of minutia is...bigmutia maybe Idk but basically whatever I got wrong. 

Until next week...

Keep it Green. 

xo

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

August-ish 1955 - Charlie and Rosalie arrive in Los Angeles. Charlie is caught with their stolen car and faces federal charges for crossing state lines with it.  

October 1955 - Charlie receives five years probation because Rosalie is preggers. 

March, 1956 - Charlie fails to appear at court in Los Angeles over a federal auto theft charge filed in Florida and is subsequently arrested in Indianapolis, Indiana. His probation is revoked while he awaits sentencing. Rosalie has carried their son nearly to full term. 

April 10, 1956 - Jay White is born in Los Angeles. (Jay dies by suicide at age 37.)

December 15, 1956  - Charlie receives three years in San Pedro for violating his probation. I'm so-so on this date. Why would they make him wait nine months? Merry Christmas regardless. 

March, 1957 - Rosalie stops visiting Charlie in prison. He finds out from his mom that Rosalie moved in with a new dude. 

July 9, 1957 - Rosalie files for divorce from Charlie. She is two months pregnant by Jack B. White.  

February 3, 1958 - Jesse James White is born. (Jesse dies of an overdose at age 28.)

September 10, 1958 - Rosalie's divorce with Charlie is official.  Charlie is paroled around the same time. 

November 8, 1958 - Rosalie marries Jack B. White. 

April 4, 1959 - Jed White is born. (Jed dies in a shotgun accident at age 11.) 

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

Risin' up to paradise. I know I'm gonna shine. 

The Bugliosi Letter

During my days as Charles Manson's "Minister of Information" in the 1990s I very often received mail and other communications from all kinds of people who had an interest in Manson and the Tate-LaBianca murder cases. Many of these contacts were made through "backdoor" channels by people who were involved in their own intrigues related to the case and who wanted us to be aware of their activities or the activities of others. One such backdoor communique was The Bugliosi Letter. 

The Bugliosi Letter was sent to me by a person who had received it from a literary agent after he had asked the agent for examples of pitch letters for a book. Amazingly, among the pitch letter examples sent by the agent was the one that Vincent Bugliosi wrote when he was trying to sell the concept of what would later become the bestselling true-crime book of all time -- Helter Skelter.

Bugliosi early on recognized the financial possibilities of the case he had been assigned to prosecute, and already during the trial he made arrangements with the literary establishment to position himself as the authority who could write the definitive book about the Charles Manson case. 

This in confirmed in the book The D.A.: A True Story, by Lawrence Taylor. Writing about an aspect of the political intrigues of the L.A. district attorney's office that he dubbed "Bugliosi syndrome," Taylor said,

"When the Tate-LaBianca slaughters had horrified the world, then-District Attorney Evelle Younger named the most experienced deputy in the office, Aaron Stovitz, to prosecute Manson and his "family" for the murders. A younger deputy by the name of Vincent Bugliosi as assigned to assist him.

"The carnival-like atmosphere of the Manson trial quickly turned Stovitz into a media celebrity. The press seemed hypnotized by the charismatic Manson; stories of biblical prophecies, race wars, and sacrificial murders captured headlines for months. Younger, who was later to be elected attorney general for California and later still to lose in a bid for the governor's mansion, began to perceive his ace prosecutor as a political threat: Stovitz was seen as using his new fame to position himself for a run at Younger's job. In a pattern that was to become familiar in the office for many years to come, the D.A. removed Stovitz from the case, replacing him with Bugliosi.

"Bugliosi, it turned out, was considerably more ambitious than Stovitz ever was. A younger deputy was assigned as "second chair" for the trial, but he was not to conduct any important cross-examination or present evidence to the jury. The younger deputy sat silently at the counsel table, content to research legal issues and organize witnesses, while Bugliosi performed daily before the world's press. Unknown to anyone at the time, Bugliosi had already arranged to write a book about the trial -- with himself as the hero; his ghostwriter, Curt Gentry, was given a valued press pass and sat in the courtroom audience. The book, Helter Skelter, eventually became a bestseller. And, ironically, Bugliosi used his newfound fame to do do exactly what Younger had feared of Stovitz -- announce his candidacy for the office of district attorney."  (The D.A.: A True Story, pages 33-34)

Lawrence Taylor

The Bugliosi Letter substantiates all of this.

Clearly the letter was written while the trial was still in progress. Note the references "After the trial, many more books will be written…." (page 2, emphasis added) and "I'm the one who is engaging in a veritable life and death struggle with Manson and who will ultimately ask the jury to return a verdict of death against Manson and his 3 female co-defendants." (page 3, emphasis added). The defendants were not even convicted and yet Bugliosi was very eager to go.

"It's a big case," Bugliosi wrote to the literary agent. "The book we're contemplating will likewise have to be 'big' in every sense of the word…. 

"I feel there should be one definitive, authoritative book on this case. I believe that I'm the one to write this book…. Other than Charles Manson himself, I don't think that there's any other person who knows as much about these murders and the madness that led to them as I."

Among the most base selling points, Bugliosi recognized, would be the inclusion of the death photos from the murder scenes on Cielo and Waverly Drives. "The book will have official photos of the murder scene that no other book on the market could possibly have since only the Los Angeles Police Department and the District Attorney's office have said photos," he explained to the agent.

Compare this photo pitch to the reason Bugliosi gave in Helter Skelter for not providing the defense with evidentiary copies of the death scene photos before the trial: "I also strongly opposed providing the defense with copies of the death photos. We had heard that a German magazine had a standing offer of $100,000 for them. I did not want the families of the victims to open a magazine and see the terrible butchery inflicted on their loved ones." (Helter Skelter, page 286)

Perhaps sensing the unseemliness of people finding out that he was shopping around a book about a trial while he was in the process of prosecuting it (is there any kind of ethics issue involved here?) Bugliosi later presented a different version of why he decided to write Helter Skelter. In a 1997 interview with Playboy magazine, when asked about the circumstances that led him to write the book, he replied (and lied), "When the trial was over I kept expecting someone of Truman Capote's stature to write a book about the case. But there was no one, and that's when I decided to do it."  (emphasis added)

One could collect together all of the fallacies presented by Vincent Bugliosi over the years and end up with something reminiscent of the closing sequence of Citizen Kane. We will never know if the Bug had a "Rosebud" moment before his recent death ("The…. 'g'…. is…. silent…"?), but one thing we do know: He will always be as big, as consequential, and as controversial, as Orson Welles' character in that film. 

Below, The Bugliosi Letter: 

Bugliosi letter to me for signature comparison:

Postscript Note -- One thing that was always of concern back in the busier days of the 1990s was the fact that people were frequently trying to set us up. Most commonly such efforts consisted of offering us some kind of financial gain through dubious means. Other times people would offer to "do anything" for us. And then there were efforts made in order to make us look bad or to put us into an awkward legal position. Thus, we were (and are) always on guard against anything that might appear to be too good to be true. The Bugliosi Letter fit into this latter category and thus was initially regarded with suspicion in that it might be a forgery. However, I think anyone reading it would agree that it is genuine. The tone is pure Bugliosi throughout. Note the mis-use of the word "societies" on page 6, an unintentional indicator of Bugliosi's incompetence as a writer. And there are details in it that can be checked (the name of the literary agent, for example). I have no doubt that it is the real thing, and I freely present it here without any concern that it will ever be shown to be a fake.

Motive: The Case For Helter Skelter

                                                                                                                                                                            "Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't."

                                                                                     -Mark Twain 

             

"I remember one time, which really impressed me that Tex really had gone for the whole idea of helter-skelter, when him and Ella and Mary went down to the city to do something and they came back and they both, they were all three of them shaking like leaves, you know, panting. I met them coming up the road and they were like they had been running from something. I said, "What's going on?" They said, "Boy, it's really coming down," Tex said. He said, "It's really insane down there and it's coming down right now. I mean it's happening today." I thought -- I just had never been impressed -- that is when I first became impressed that Tex was really -- really went for the idea"

                                                   -Paul Watkins 1971 testimony people versus Charles Watson 

 "Helter-skelter was the motive for the murders. Manson borrowed that term from a Beatles song on the White Album. In England, helter-skelter is a playground ride. To Manson, helter-skelter meant a war between whites and blacks that the Beatles were in favor of. When the album first came out, in December of '68, he got a copy, and he came racing back to the ranch all excited and said, "The Beatles are telling it like it is! The s___ is coming down!" It was this war that he felt he could ignite by killing white people and blaming black militants, this war called helter-skelter."

                                                           -Vincent Bugliosi

So, Today I make the case for Helter Skelter. It is my purpose and goal to convince the reader that after hearing similar arguments regarding all possible alternative motives, Helter Skelter is the motive with most actual evidence to support it. Then, I will leave it up to the readers to hear the other arguments and decide for themselves which motive makes the most sense based on real evidence. I ask you only to keep an open mind and remember- I am making an argument as to which motive can be backed with the most real evidence. I am not going to try to compete with rumors, legends, second hand stories, or unnamed sources. Having said that- here is my case for Helter Skelter:

I am not a lawyer. So for me, the fairest way to decide which motive is backed by the most evidence is to make sure I understand exactly what the definition of evidence is. As a common person with no real knowledge of the law- I resorted to Google. That should be simple and fair enough to use as a starting point. Obviously there are a few types of evidence. But, for our purposes: "In the Law, rules of evidence govern the types of evidence that are admissible in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include testimony, documentary evidence, and physical evidence."  I guess I can start there.  If someone wants to come up with a better way- I am all ears. Otherwise, using this as the launch point- I believe I can show that the Helter Skelter motive is supported by specific, verifiable examples of these three types of evidence. Then I will wait for anyone who supports another motive to do the same....

 Testimony-  In the law, testimony is a form of evidence that is obtained from a witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact. Testimony may be oral or written, and it is usually made by oath or affirmation under penalty of perjury.

Can anyone really argue there is not quite a bit of testimony to support Helter Skelter as a motive in the minds of the family, and specifically, the actual killers? Most of us have heard LULU's recently released interview, and I can reprint quotes from different people who were around at the time all day long but, for the stubborn ones among us, here are a few reminders:

Gregg Jakobson 1971 trial testimony: 

Q: From the time that Mr. Watson first met Mr. Manson, did it occur to you that Mr. Watson both accepted and agreed with Manson's philosophy?
A: Yes.
Q: Any doubt in your mind about that?
A: None.
Q: Did you ever have any discussion with Mr. Manson regarding helter-skelter?
A: Sure, yes.
Q: Oh how many occasions would you say that you discussed helter-skelter with Mr. Manson?
A: Well, it is hard to say. It would come up on a number of times.

 From Tex Watson's site in his own words in a Q/A:

Q:What were you thinking and feeling right when the murders were taking place?

 A:The girls and I didn't enjoy murdering our victims. It was insanely difficult for us all, but our slavish hearts were committed. We wanted this outbreak of violence to be over with. We felt we had to do it. We wanted to get it done and leave. It was horrific, and no way were we going to go to a second or third house, even though Manson had ordered it.There were no thoughts of concern for the victims. There was a total disregard for life. I was concerned with destroying everyone and not getting discovered. In some ways, punishment escaped my mind since Helter Skelter was coming down and society, as we knew it, was coming to an end.

 Tex's ( Will You Die For Me):

If anyone had asked me in March of 1969 why I was going back to Manson, I would have said I had no choice. Every day I stayed away from him I felt like I was running, running away from the place I was supposed to be, running away from changes that were necessary for me. Charlie was my destiny. Even when I talked to them on the phone, the Family women sounded different. All they could talk about was Helter Skelter. I knew the title from the Beatles' White Album, but I wasn't sure what they all meant when they kept insisting that “Helter Skelter is coming down fast, and we're getting ready for it. Everying had changed, they told me as they babbled on about a club they were starting and about buying dune buggies and about the White Album which explained everything, laid everything out-and that I'd understand if I'd just come out and talk to Charlie.

 "There were three basic motives behind the murders that took place sometime past midnight on August 9. The most obvious was the one Charlie had articulated to us that afternoon: to do what blackie didn't have the energy or the smarts to do — ignite Helter Skelter and bring in Charlie's kingdom."


 LULU at a Parole hearing:

 PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: And did you -- did you agree with the ideology of the group? You mentioned a moment ago something about the Helter Skelter and that sort of thing.

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes. I did agree with it.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: And what was that that you agreed with?

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: That the blacks had been suppressed and that it was their turn to be in charge and that the whites had treated the blacks in a bad way, and that there would be a revolution and the blacks would then be in control. That the whites that survived it would live in a hole in the center of the earth and reemerge after 150 years.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: So it was your desire to let the blacks get into charge of the world or this country?

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: This country was -- I was only thinking of this country.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: And was your group, the Manson Family, were they going to facilitate this revolution, this uprising?

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: And how were they to do that?

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: By committing murders of white people and making it look like it had been done by blacks.

PRESIDING COMMISSIONER FERGUSON: And you felt or you agreed anyway that by committing murders of white people that that was going to somehow empower black people?

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: It was to spark a revolution 

Linda Kasabian on direct at original trial:

 "The night of the afternoon that Mr. Manson said 'Now is the time for Helter Skelter,' were you still at the ranch that night?" 

"Yes." 

"Was this the evening of August the eighth, 1969?"  

"I believe so."  

"What took place that evening, Linda, at the ranch?"  

"I remember I was standing out front at this one point and Charlie came up to me and pulled me off the porch, and I was standing at the very end of the porch, closest to George Spahn's house, and he told me that-"  


Bugs questioning Brooks Posten at Tex's trial:

 Q: Directing your attention to the song, "Helter-Skelter," you do recognize these lyrics?
A: Yes.
Q: And I notice that there are some lyrics in the song, "Look Out Helter-Skelter, Helter-Skelter, she's coming down fast."

Would that be a common phrase in Manson's family?

A: Yes.
Q: And members of the family were saying this all the time?
A: Yes
Q: What about Tex Watson, did you ever hear him say that, that helter-skelter was coming down fast?
A: Yeah. 


 Paul Watkins:

Direct examination by Vincent Bugliosi:
 
"During your association with Charles Manson, did he frequently discuss Helter Skelter with you?"

"Constantly."   

"He used the word 'Helter Skelter' constantly?"

"I wouldn't go so far as to say constantly. He did not say, 'Helter Skelter, Helter Skelter, Helter Skelter.' But he did quite a bit, yes, it seemed to be the main topic."  

 

I think it is fair to say that there is adequate testimony available to support that people in and around the family felt that Charlie had strong belief in Helter Skelter, and I also think it is fair to say there is TESTIMONY to support that a few of them believed they went over there on those nights for just that reason. At least above is some TESTIMONY to support that. Two of the killers actually said it and the one who drove them didn't deny it either. That gives me some cause to believe that at least it was a factor to these individuals.  

Documentary Evidence- is any evidence introduced at a trial in the form of Documents. Although this term is most widely understood to mean writings on paper (such as an invoice, a contract or a will), the term actually include any media by which information can be preserved. Photographs, tape recordings, films, and printed emails are all forms of documentary evidence.

This one is a little tougher, but still something that offers me a couple of examples to demonstrate Helter Skelter as a potential motive. Now you will hear rumors and legends about films, and photos that could prove another motive. You will hear lots of second hand stories, rumors, and unnamed sources who say they have seen them. But have YOU SEEN any actual photos, films, or other video which can be attributed to another motive? Well, I have seen a few which could support Helter Skelter:

Now I know some would say that Sue Bartell has explained away the ranch door. Maybe. But, that still doesn't explain the refrigerator? And just cause country Sue said so, doesn't make it so. I would  submit that these are few examples of documentary evidence by definition, and so again I ask, does anyone have two or three examples of Documentary Evidence for another motive? I further submit that Mr. Hendrickson's Documentary would count here as well-as a couple of people close to the family speak on camera about the influence Helter Skelter had on Charlie. Does anyone have Photos, films, video, contracts, or anything firm in this category of evidence to support another motive? Ask yourselves some questions... Did the killers write " revenge", or "Death to Roman" on the walls? Where was any actual proof of drugs or money being involved? Where would the above evidence fit in with any other motive? For example - was writing Helter Skelter on the Labianca's refrigerator going to get Bobby out of jail? Think about this for a second. They wrote words like Helter Skelter, Rise, and Pigs. They carved the word War into Leno's body. These are words, and expressions, which can be attributed to the Helter Skelter Philosophy. Not words which indicated they were pissed about being burned by drugs, or seeking revenge, or getting someone out of jail. In reality, personally, more than I am impressed with the evidence for Helter Skelter, I am underwhelmed by evidence pointing in any other direction. When Tex says, by his own admission, that he told them he "Was the Devil, and was there to do the Devil's work"- that sounds much more like him following the instructions Testimony says Charlie was giving, than it does him being there for revenge, or as retaliation for a drug burn, or any other reason he would have on his own for being there. But don't take it from me:

Tex Watson in " Will you die for Me":
  
Charlie pointed out the repetition of the word “rise,” first whispered strangely, then screamed until almost unrecognizable. This was the Beatles' way of calling blackie to rise up and begin Helter Skelter, He said, and it was no coincidence that RISE was printed in blood on the walls the night of the second murders, along with HELTER SKELTER, just as PIG had been scrawled on the door of the house on Cielo Drive in Sharon Tate's blood. He showed us how the same weird chord that ended the song “Piggies” appeared later in “Revolution 9,” followed by the sound of machine-gun fire and the screams of the 
dying.

Then he laid out how he wanted the murders themselves done. He apparently didn't know who was living in the house or how many people we might find, but whoever and however many it was we were to kill them all, mutilate them (”Pull out their eyes and hang them on the mirrors!”), and write messages on the walls in their blood. Then he started listing what he wanted written — things like HELTER SKELTER and RISE.

Linda Kasabian on direct at original trial:

"We got about to the middle of the driveway, you know, and Charlie called us and told us to stop, and he came to the car to my side of the window, stuck his head in, and told us to leave a sign. He said, 'You girls know what I mean, something witchy,' and that was it." 


Of course, the Physical evidence in this case is morbid but not lacking. The actual walls and doors the painting of the expressions were on. The tuning fork, and knives. The frayed paper used to do the writing. The actual number of stab wounds wouldn't be physical proof of motive, but words pertaining to motive carved into one of the victims bodies might I would guess. I think in good taste I will keep this part brief.... But again I must ask- where is more Physical evidence of another motive?

Closing Argument:

It is hard for me to understand why some people would insist Bugs made up or "invented" Helter Skelter as a motive. There are just too many examples of people close to, or in, the immediate circle of Manson who attribute the same significance of its importance to Charlie. I only posted a few examples here of Testimony from those who talked about this. I assume everyone understands the amount of testimony to this that is available. Also, a few of those who actually participated in the crimes have said over the years that Helter Skelter was a reality at the ranch, and at least a partial reason for the murders.

Hmmmm.... Lets say Charlie tells Tex to go ignite Helter Skelter :

( Tex " Will you Die for Me")

When word of the arrest got to the Family, Charlie disappeared for a couple of days up to Big Sur, something very unusual for him. When he got back, he called us all together. It was the afternoon of August 8, 1969, and his message was simple. “Now is the time for Helter Skelter.”

"After Charlie's announcement in the afternoon, the ranch became very quiet, with an undercurrent of eletric excitement, even dread. With everything that had been happening over the past weeks there was no question that we would be the ones to bring down the Apocalypse, not some black militants fromWatts.  The only question was which of us and how."

“What I want...I want you to go to that house where Melcher used to live [we knew that by now Terry had moved down to a beach house in Malibu]. I want you to take a couple of the girls I'll send with you and go down there . . . and totally destroy everyone in that house, as gruesome as you can. Make it a real nice murder, just as bad as you've ever seen. And get all their money.”

 Then Charlie tells the Girls to do what Tex says.

INMATE KRENWINKEL: I participated because Mr. Manson came into a trailer where I was taking care of the children and he told me to come out to come to the ranch. When I came up to the front of the ranch there was a car and Mr. Watson was there and Miss Atkins was there and Miss Kasabian was there and Mr. Manson told me to go with Mr. Watson and do whatever he said.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: As a result you went to the rear of San Vincente Drive, and climbed over the wall.
INMATE KRENWINKEL: Yes. Mr. Watson --( she gets indiscernible here but clearly was about to say what Tex was telling her to do- hide in bushes which she goes into next)

 From Susan Atkins Grand Jury testimony:

A: I never recall getting any actual instructions from Charlie other than getting a change of clothing and a knife and was told to do exactly what Tex told me to do. 

Q: So Charlie told you on August 8, 1969, to get a fresh change of clothing, get a knife, and do whatever Tex told you to do?

A: Yes. 

And as far as LULU on nite number 2:

INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes. Early at my going to the ranch, Pat was the one that kept an eye on me. And she was kind of like, I guess placed like a big sister to me. And I was devoted to her. And I knew that she had crossed the line on her commitment to beginning the race war. And it was important to me that I cross that line too. So I wanted to go. I wanted to show my commitment to this belief system.

 So, they went out and actually did it at places they were semi- familiar with for one reason or another. Is that scenario really be so hard to imagine?

 I submit to you that the people who killed the victims those two nights did so in the name of Helter Skelter, and the people who died were murdered because of people who were wired to the idea of Helter Skelter.

I submit that Charles Manson lit the match and fed the flame that ignited the fire. Many people who were intimately involved with the family gave testimony of the passion Charlie had for the philosophy, and the fact he was constantly on pushing it on others. There is testimony, documentary, and physical evidence which all support this motive that Bugs was able to tie together for a group of people who agreed with him unanimously. I ask if anyone can show as much actual testimony, or hard evidence for another motive, as Bugs was able to show for this one? Drug burn, revenge killing, intended to get Roman, whatever your choice- do you have the testimony or physical evidence to match up with what Bugs had to offer for this motive?

Personally, I dont think Charlie had any secret reasons, or that he lied to them to get them to do his bidding. I don't think Charlie would have had to make up a reason to get Tex and Katie to do murder for him, and if he did have to make one up- I think it would have been much easier to use revenge or money. I think what may have really happened is that some of them bought into Charlie's every word. And there should be no doubt he spoke quite often about those two words.

This was a case and a group of people where "no sense make sense". I think some people today refuse to be willing to accept that, and want to force this motive into a box they can understand. I think if the motive was drugs, money,or revenge- then Bugs would have had an easier time convincing people of that, and he still would have reaped the same benefits from his involvement. I do not think Bugs was a stupid man. I think he would have went wherever the evidence took him. I think he investigated this case personally, diligently and that he worked it very hard. I dont think he was able get evidence to support any of those other motives. Maybe, just maybe, that is because there was no other motive.

Bugs wouldn't have needed to make anything up to tie Charlie in with the others either. I know that argument is out there. Whatever the motive Bugs was going to use to paint Charlie as the mastermind and string puller- it wouldn't have mattered. Charlie gave him exactly what he needed in front of the court, jurors, and the world. Charlie was an easy vote for guilty by the way he acted, and by the show he and the others put on in the courtroom, in front of a bunch of scared and shocked people who needed a monster to slay to make themselves feel better and safer. Charlie was his own worst enemy at that trial, and despite what his supporters will tell you- he has nobody to blame but himself for that. Whatever sensational story you think Bugs was telling those people- please remember that Charlie and company did just as sensational of a job acting it out for him in the public eye. They acted as crazy and as obedient to Charlie as Bugs was making them out to be and, frankly and disgustedly, they seemed to enjoy it at the time.

Let me finish with this thought:

Let us remember, again, that this motive was presented to a jury of people. Many of us think that these jurors must have been idiots who fell for Bug's ridiculous stories, or outright lies.

Maybe- Maybe not.

I submit that those jurors were told of a Brainwashing guru who convinced a bunch of kids to do his bidding so as to start a race war called Helter Skelter. Then those jurors saw a bunch of kids do exactly what Charlie did/said and act exactly how Charlie acted. They saw girls carving X's into their heads and laughing and singing at a trial where they were accused of murdering people- including a 9 month pregnant woman among them. They chanted, and screamed at the judge, and the people in the court room. In short- they totally acted the part of crazy, brainwashed zombies. Next, the jurors heard person after person testify about Charlie's obsession with Helter Skelter, and then they saw physical evidence including the words painted in blood at one of the murder scenes, and on a door at the ranch where he lived. Now some may call me crazy, but maybe those jurors saw the evidence presented, and it matched the story they were being told. Maybe the most bizarre tale they had ever heard was being acted out right in front of there eyes. Maybe- just maybe- those jurors heard the evidence, weighed the facts presented to them, and did their jobs based on everything that was available to them at the time. I mean think about it- they weren't being told anything that was weirder than what they were seeing right in front of their own eyes. Personally, while I am not sure that they got it 100% correct as far as the why, and although I think its possible there are multiple why's, until I see more evidence of another motive than what Bugs was able to present in regards to the Helter Skelter motive- I am willing to give both he and the jurors the benefit of the doubt.

Until someone can show more evidence of something else, or disprove some of the testimony about this motive- I personally cannot dismiss it simply because it sounds silly to other people. It sounds silly to me as well when you think about it without context, but I can read and hear, and I have done too much of both to pretend it wasn't a term that Charlie and the family used, and that some of them believed in. There is enough evidence there, for me, to support that.

Look, I feel ya. Helter Skelter may seem like the strangest most far out tale you ever heard. But, I submit these were some of the strangest most far out people you will ever encounter. All I am saying is- Helter Skelter as the real motive?  It just might be possible.

 "If I'm looking for a motive, I'd look for something which doesn't fit your habitual standard … something much more far out,"

Who knows? Maybe the selfish little bastard was right...

At the end of the day you have to ask yourselves the same question I have been asking myself:

Bugs had the story and trial of a lifetime at his fingertips due to no fault of his own. The nature of the people involved on both sides, as well as the behavior of the accused, in addition to the way the crimes were carried out, were going to make this a story for the ages regardless of why the crimes happened. This book was going to be written one way or the other. Bugs may have been a terrible human being, but he was a dogged investigator and prosecutor. And after his investigation- he came up with no sufficient evidence of any other motive, nor did anyone else. For the 40 years since then, investigators have looked into this case many times. With the rise of the internet- great researchers have studied it. Wealthy people with huge resources have gotten involved with it. Friends and family have used connections to pry into it. Entire web-sites are devoted to it. People intimately involved on both sides are writing about it in books and blogs. TV shows and movies are dedicated to it. Yet nobody, in all this time, has been able to show you anything concrete which points to another motive...

Why?


-Your Favorite Saint ;)