Burton Katz and the First Grogan Trial

Burton Katz worked for the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office as a Deputy District Attorney. He was the prosecutor for Bobby Beausoleil's second trial in 1970. In 1971 he was the lead prosecutor for both of Steve Grogan's trials for the murder of Shorty Shea.

In Katz book Justice Overruled, 1997 Warner Books, he relates why a mistrial was declared in Grogan's first trial. Newspaper articles hint that the mistrial was because of something Nancy Pitman, aka Brenda McCann, said while on the witness stand. There is a little more to it than that. Here is the story from Katz's book, pages 167-175.

                                   *******************************************

Scared Off by the Manson Family

In many ways, the worst judges are not the corrupt or crazy ones. The worst are decent, well-meaning judges who are just not up to the job. The first time I tried Steven Grogan for the murder of Donald "Shorty" Shea, the case ended in a mistrial because Judge Joseph Call could not keep going when things got rough. When you were dealing with the Manson Family things could get rough.

Judge Call had been appointed to the bench over thirty years before the Grogan trial. Few lawyers were willing to risk a complicated case before Judge Call. As luck would have it, we drew him for Grogan. We reluctantly agreed to Judge Call. It was to prove a costly mistake for both the defense and prosecution.

During the trial, Nancy Pitman, (aka Brenda McCann), "Squeaky" Fromme, Mary Brunner, Sandra Good, and other Manson Family members slept out and "held court" on the corner of Temple and Broadway, just outside the Hall of Justice. 

Each morning, outside my office, I would encounter the Family huddled together picnic-style, looking like innocent suffragettes bonding together for the cause. The Manson girls were as schizophrenic and enigmatic as Charlie himself. Sometimes they were pleasant, even coyly flirtatious. They would invite me to go camping with them at Spahn Ranch so they could reindoctrinate my misguided and corrupt establishmentarian ways of thinking. When things were going poorly for Charlie, they were menacing and dark-spirited, rubbing the sheath knives they kept lashed to their hips. They were always strangely entertaining, shrouded in mystery, myth, and rumor.

During the Grogan trial, a fierce rumor floated about that the Manson Family was going to free Manson, Steve Grogan (the defendant in my trial), and Tex Watson. Death threats had been directed at Judge Call and everyone else involved in the trial- even at the defense attorneys. Security was beefed up. Undercover cops were sprinkled throughout the audience. I was told I was to dive under the counsel table if a shootout started, because I was (as they delicately put it) "expendable" in any court shootout. The cops' priority was to protect the judge. The DA's bureau assigned a personal bodyguard to protect me, and my family, and armed me with a snub-nosed .38, which I carried strapped under my arm. We were all edgy. But Judge Joseph Call came completely unglued. It started in the judge's own chambers.

Fearful that Grogan would accuse him of something sinister if a chambers hearing occurred outside Grogan's presence, Judge Call allowed the defendant to be present in chambers during a discussion with counsel. The judge sat there nervously, jiggling some coins. Grogan sat only a few feet away. As the judge attempted to reassure Grogan everything he could do to provide a fair trial, Grogan suddenly moved. He knelt in front of the startled judge, his hand on the judge's knee- like a supplicant with a beatific smile, kneeling before Christ. We all stared, transfixed. At that moment Grogan could have killed him. The judge's face was ashen; his hands shook. Before the bailiff could help, the judge looked at Grogan for reassurance and said in a quivering voice, as if to convince himself: "Steve doesn't mean anything by it." Grogan, looking up at the judge and still smiling, gently replied: "It's oaky, Joe, I know you're just trying to be fair... you'll do the right thing." From that moment on, the judge began to unravel. All he wanted to do was to get out of trying this case. The only way he could do that was to declare a mistrial. You will probably not be surprised that he found a way to do just that.

Things might have settled down, had there been no further incidents. But that was not to be. Several Manson Family members, including Mary Brunner and Catherine Share (aka Gypsy) tried to rob a gun store. In the ensuing gun battle with the people, over fifty rounds of ammunition were fired, but miraculously no one was seriously hurt. Manson Family lore has it that Gypsy's bra was shot right off of her by police gunfire ripping through the getaway van in which she was waiting. The police did find a bloody bra in the bullet-ridden van, which amazed me. To my knowledge, Gypsy had never previously been sighted wearing a bra. Following their arrest, an additional cache of weapons was recovered- weapons that were to be used in freeing Charlie Manson and his faithful followers.

Needless to say, we were all on edge as we began the third month of trial. The stage was now set for the showdown on the stand with Brenda McCann. McCann was an important witness because she was present during a conversation between Grogan and Paul Watkins, a Manson Family member and close confidant of Charles Manson.

After surviving a mysterious trailer fire that nearly took his life, Watkins turned state's evidence. He believed Manson was behind the fire, and he was probably right. As a government witness, he had testified to a stunning confession made by Grogan in that conversation. You have read part of it earlier:

Charlie told me to cut his [Shorty Shea's] head off. So, I had this big machete and I chopped his head off and it went bloop, bloop, bloop and rolled out of the way...it was really groovy...

Grogan told Watkins that he had blood spattered all over him, and it was all warm, and he had it all up his arm.

Watkins then asked Grogan if he felt guilty. Grogan replied,

Any guilt I have is my changes [a term used in scientology] because in reality one baby should be able to kill another baby and then reach over and eat his shit... any guilty I have is something I have to work out with myself.

Defense attorney Charles Weedman called Brenda McCann as a witness in an effort to refute the damning confession. She claimed she had heard the same conversation, and denied that Grogan had ever confessed to the murder of Shorty Shea. In an effort to discredit Watkins, she claimed he boasted he was avoiding the draft by feigning mental instability, epilepsy, and seizures. Further, she said that Watkins he had learned to mock up cancer in his lungs so that an x-ray would reveal a black spot! She also added that he claimed to be a homosexual. The last point was hilarious inasmuch as the jury had just observed the extremely handsome and youthful Watkins on the stand for several days, regaling them and the court with his tales of lust for the Family females, who, like honey attracting bees, had induced this adventuresome youth to join the family. Watkins testified,

Well, when I first met Charlie, I was all alone and I wandered into a house and then there was Charlie and a couple of guys and ten girls, and that was what I had been looking for. I knocked on the door and three girls met me at the door, and right away I recognized the smell of marijuana, and they asked me to come in. And so, then I went in, it was [sic] some people didn't have their clothes on, and so right away I felt the free atmosphere, and I was overcome by a feeling of this is what I was looking for.

Watkins was as homosexual as John F. Kennedy. I began my cross-examination. I wanted to show the jury this witness was completely untrustworthy because of her Manson affiliation. The attitude of the "family" towards conventional values was summed up as follows in their own words:

Whatever is necessary, you do it. When somebody needs to be killed, there's no wrong. You do it, then you move on. And you pick up a child and you move him to the desert. You pick up as many children as you can and you kill whoever gets in our way. That is us.

Virtually from my first question, I knew it was not going to be easy, as Charles Weedman and the court kept jumping in. I began to focus on the subject of her being a member of the Manson Family, and her obvious loyalties and biases. Here is some of that testimony:

KATZ: [Y]ou understand at this time Mr. Grogan is on trial for his life, don't you?

McCANN: Yes.

KATZ: You understand the significance of your testimony, don't you?

McCANN: yes.

KATZ: You understand... if the jury believes you, they might acquit the defendant; isn't that right?

McCANN: Yes.

Manson and his followers had disavowed society's rules and laws; they X'ed themselves out of society. I explained to the judge that, during the Tate-LaBianca trials, Charles Manson, Susan Atkins, Katie Krenwinkel, and Leslie Van Houten had carved X's on their foreheads. Other Family members quickly followed suit, symbolizing the Family's rejection of society's rules and conventions. Hence, I felt it appropriate to ask whether Brenda recognized her duty to tell the truth under oath.

KATZ: [Y]ou would do anything you could, you would lay down your life for Clem [Grogan]; wouldn't you?

McCANN: Yes.

KATZ: As a matter of fact, Brenda, with respect to the so-called establishment and society as we know it, you have X'd yourself out from society, haven't you?

WEEDMAN: Oh, Your Honor, for heavens sakes. How long is this going to go on?

The court said it was not a proper cross. Then I asked her if she believed in the law against perjury. More objections were sustained by the court. Now I turned my attention to the actual conversation between Grogan and Watkins. On direct, I had deliberately refrained from asking Watkins about the entire conversation in which Grogan and McCann had talked also about killing Frank Retz, who owned the property next to Spahn Ranch. Retz had physically thrown Manson off his property and advised George Spahn strongly to kick the Family off Spahn Ranch. He was regarded as an enemy of Manson. I believed that this information was irrelevant to the confession and arguably too prejudicial. However, when Weedman made a tactical mistake in asking Brenda McCann on direct whether she had described the whole conversation, to which she replied yes, the door was open wide enough to accommodate two elephants and a rhino. The law allowed me to elicit the entire conversation, which included the damning death threats to Retz. I asked McCann whether she and Grogan had talked about killing Frank Retz. Of course, I expected her to lie about it, and she did. Before I could ask a follow-up question, Weedman jumped up and asked to go into chambers. The testimony was reread. Weedman argued that this was impeachment on a collateral matter and highly prejudicial. He then made a brief argument and a halfhearted motion for a mistrial. Judge Call had been terrorized with the news of the gun-store shootout just five days earlier. Weedman’s mistrial motion was just what the judge had been waiting for – a way to get himself out of this case.

The judge started talking about a whole series of small matters he claimed were prejudicial, things that had not even come up as objectionable at the time of the testimony, things that were not even the basis of Weedman’s motion. What is absolutely amazing is that he was ignoring virtually indestructible, well-settled rules of evidence. I asked for a recess so I could prepare a brief on the law permitting such questions to be asked. This was summarily denied. It was clear where Judge Call was going, and he wanted no impediment to his decision to jettison the case by declaring a mistrial. The judge said, “I am serious on the question of a mistrial. I am serious about it. I think it is highly prejudicial, highly inflammatory, and it can’t be otherwise.”

Dejected, I went home. The next morning, I appeared in court. Weedman and I were locked out of chambers for two hours. I had case citations with me establishing that my cross-examination about Retz had been entirely proper. But Judge Call never heard about those citations because he did not want to hear anything that interfered with his decision to get out of the case. At 10:50 A.M. we were ushered into chambers. The judge immediately started picking over the entire transcript of the previous day’s proceedings. He read into the record minor points having nothing to do with the subject of Weedman’s mistrial motion, and even alluded to questions asked of a witness other than McCann. This nitpicking went on for nearly three hours. Then the judge stated, “This is my final summation. I do grant the motion for a mistrial.”

As the old saying goes, you should be careful what you wish for, because it may become true. Wedman was horrified. I know he had moved for a mistrial. The judge had granted his motion. Why was he upset? In truth, a mistrial was the last thing he wanted. All he was trying to do was set up an issue on appeal. Basically, he had moved for the mistrial so he could argue to an appellate court later that he should have gotten a mistrial he did not really want. Defense lawyers do this all the time. This was nothing different. What was different was having such a weak motion granted by the court.

Weedman frantically tried to backpedal. First he asked the court if he could confer with his client before the jury was dismissed. The judge was ready to discharge the jury, but Weedman asked for another chambers discussion in which Grogan was present. Craftily, Weedman then told the judge that while he did not necessarily agree with his client’s assessment, Grogan had expressed “feeling that some of these matters could be sufficiently cured as to insure [sic] him a fair trial in this matter.” Weedman mentioned this this had been a long trial, and it had been a considerable strain on Grogan; who might disagree that a mistrial was necessary. Weedman had cleverly placed the court in a vise, on the one hand suggesting his client might object to a mistrial, even though he, as his lawyer, believed it was warranted. A declaration of mistrial over strenuous objection oof the defendant can result in double jeopardy, barring a retrial. The trap was being set.

Judge Call quickly began to reiterate, apparently for the benefit of Grogan, how devastating the supposed prosecutorial error had been:

Your jury is prejudiced. I’m telling you my opinion again. It is deadly. I think it has created irreversible prejudice in the minds of those folks. You should go out and get a new jury on this and a new judge; let somebody else rule on it. I’m out of it. I mean, in a new trial, they should get somebody else in.

Note Judge Call’s insistence that he personally should be removed from the trial. The usual rule is that the trial judge at the first trial also presides over the second. Because he is already familiar with the evidence and the law pertaining to that case, the rule saves time and makes good sense. But Judge Call was the senior judge. He was not worried about anyone junior to him telling him he had to retry this case. Not on your life.

Weedman took one last stab. First he told the judge he had no objection to his continuing in this trial. Then he was allowed to confer once again with Grogan. Upon returning, he asked that the court delay the discharge of the jury until the following Monday (it was Friday) with a view towards withdrawing his mistrial motion. The judge refused. The jury was dismissed. The case was over, as far as Judge Call was concerned. The jurors were confused, shocked. Not one juror understood the reason for the mistrial. Not one thought the question about Frank Retz was that important. Fortunately, the case was quickly reassigned to the very competent Judge James Kolts. He conducted a fair and expeditious trial. The case was tried swiftly and without incident to a conviction and a death-penalty verdict which Kolts reduced to life in lieu of granting a motion for a new trial.

                                       ********************************************

Steve Grogan after sentencing Dec. 23, 1971

Katz's account of why Grogan's death-penalty sentence was reduced to life is likely what is in the official records. We don't have the transcripts from that trial, only the first trial. The newspaper accounts of Judge Kolts, saying that Grogan was too stupid to have acted on his own, are an opinion and not part of the official record.

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.

Nancy Pitman aka COBRA?

 In 1978 a House of Representives Select Commitee on Assassinations was created to explore the death of Martin Luther King, Jr. The file that was obtained mainly deals with requests made by the Committee for interviews with certain FBI agents and  for documents held by the FBI pertaining to King's assassination.

Inexplicably there is a document on page 38 of the file that was sent to the FBI director in reference to a couple of organizations that the Los Angeles office of the FBI identified as possibly being pertainent to the Committee's requests. The two organizations are COBRA and FREE RIGHT. The document goes on to name Nancy Laura Pitman, saying that COBRA was an alias used by her.

First, Cobra is not an alias that has been documented anywhere that I know of for Nancy Pitman. The document does not give any indication of when that intel was obtained by Los Angeles.

Second, why would Pitman have been included in an FBI file in the first place? She did not commit any federal crimes unlike Manson or Susan Atkins who was charged with the Dyer Act for the stolen car across state lines in 1966. There are probably a lot more FBI files on the Manson Family and hopefully we will see them some day.

I can't help but think that this is the kind of stuff that spawns conspiracy theories.

The complete 106 page file

Hinman Progress Report 12-4-69

This is a progress report compiled by Deputy's William Gleason and George Palmer of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. There are summations of interviews done with Nancy Pitman and Stephanie Schram. Also, the recounting of an interview of Susan Rogers, an inmate at the county jail housed with Susan Atkins. The interview with Rogers did not yield any information except to convey that Susan was blabbing about her exploits to anyone who would listen. Apparently, Ronnie Howard and Virginia Graham were not the only inmates Susan spoke with about her crimes.

The interview of Nancy Pitman has a little more information than Nancy has parted with in other interviews or court testimony. She's quite chatty.  Whether or not it is all true is anyone's guess. Nancy does say that it was Juanita Wildebush that gave George Spahn the $5000.00 not Manson. I suppose that's splitting hairs a bit because I'm sure that Manson would point out that if it wasn't for him Juanita would have never known about Spahn Ranch to give George the money.

Then there's the recap of Stephanie Schram interview with Gleason and Palmer. Cielodrive has the Q and A version of this interview posted at his site. 

It is interesting to compare the two. It's akin to a "this is what I said and this is what you heard exercise." One noticeable difference that I saw is that the summation claims that Manson threatened to cut off the women's breast if they dared to disobey him. Stephanie never said that in the interview.

In both the summation and the actual interview Stephanie says that she and Manson visited Dennis Wilson at his home on Sunset. I thought that Dennis let the lease run out at the end of August 1968.    

This is supposed to be a progress report on the Hinman murder but there is very little in the document related to his murder.

Orrin Monfort Arrested Again

Orrin Monfort, Nancy Pitman and Michael Monfort's youngest son, was arrested yesterday for threatening to kill a 16 year old girl while trying to take her bicycle.  Orrin has a long criminal record dating back 10 years.  He is currently living in Albany Oregon.

You can read the latest article HERE

Nancy Pitman and Michael Monfort were married January 27, 1976.  It was a jailhouse wedding.  All three of their sons were conceived during conjugal visits in prison.  Orrin was born in Napa CA just days after Michael was released from prison, May 4, 1984, for the murders of James Willett in Guerneville CA and Lauren Willett in Stockton CA in late 1972.

Michael Monfort died in prison while serving an 800+ year sentence, July 3, 2005.

There are two previous articles, with video, about the incident involving Orrin Monfort at these links.

http://katu.com/news/local/police-looking-for-man-trying-to-take-girls-bike-outside-albany-store

http://katu.com/news/local/officials-arrest-man-accused-of-threatening-16-year-old-girls-life-in-bike-theft

The Guns of Helter Skelter

For two months in the summer of 1969 violence rode in the winds over Los Angeles, California. It started with the shooting of Bernard Crowe in a Hollywood apartment in the earliest days of July and ended with the stabbing death of Donald "Shorty" Shea near Spahn's Movie Ranch almost two months later. In between those two events eight other persons would lose their lives in a series of slayings that culminated in the infamous Tate-LaBianca or "Helter Skelter" murders on the nights of August 8-9. In its entirety the Tate-LaBianca case is one of the most complicated in the annals of crime. There were many different victims, killers, locations, dates, motives, methods of mayhem, and weapons involved, including many different kinds of guns. The recent MF Blog about Shorty Shea's guns made me think of all of the firearms connected with TLB, either directly or indirectly, and after some contemplation I came up with the following list. Herewith, then, in order of their chronological appearances that summer, is a catalog of the Guns of Helter Skelter.

The first gun in the series -- a .22 caliber nine-shot Hi Standard Ned Buntline revolver -- was the most important, because it was also the most widely used and deadly. In early July of 1969 Charles Manson shot the drug dealer Bernard Crowe with it in an act if self-defense while attempting to mollify Crowe after he was angered by being ripped off by Charles "Tex" Watson. That presumed fatal shooting set off the violent chain of events which eventually led to the murders on Cielo and Waverly Drives. The same revolver was used to lethal effect at the former address, where Watson used it to shoot and bludgeon three people to death. 

 The .22 caliber Hi Standard Buntline revolver used in the shooting of Bernard Crowe and the murders of Stephen Parent, Jay Sebring, and Voytek Frykowski (Photo courtesy of Cielodrive.com)

A nine-shot Hi Standard Buntline with the cylinder open

The origins of this particular firearm are murky. According to Vincent Bugliosi in Helter Skelter, "The gun, serial number 1902708, had been among a number of weapons taken from the Archery Headquarters in El Monte, California, during a burglary on the night of March 12, 1969. According to [Randy] Starr, he obtained it in trade with a man known only as "Ron." Manson was always borrowing the gun for target practice, and Randy finally gave it to him in trade for a truck that had belonged to Danny DeCarlo." (Manson implied in his 1986 interview with Charlie Rose that the "Ron" who was the source of this gun was then President Ronald Reagan.)

After the murders on Cielo Drive the gun was tossed out of the car window by the fleeing killers. It was found by a boy and turned in to the Los Angeles Police Department on September 1, 1969, but wasn't connected with the Tate murders until later, a cause of much subsequent  hand-wringing by Bugliosi over the Keystone Kops incompetence of LAPD.

In Helter Skelter Vincent Bugliosi used the search for the Buntline as another excuse 

to point out the incompetence of L.A. law enforcement.

If you want a Buntline today, this one should do.

The second firearm relevant to the sometimes savage summer of 1969 was used during an event which was sandwiched between the shooting of Bernard Crowe and the murders at the Polanski residence, namely the assault and murder of Gary Hinman at his home on Old Topanga Canyon Road on July 25-27, 1969. Although Hinman was beaten and stabbed to death, a firearm still figured in the overall occurrence. According to the January 27, 1970 police report of the incident: 

"On January 8, 1970, at the request of Sgt. Whitely, Homicide Bureau, Undersigned conducted an examination at 964 Old Topanga Canyon Road, Malibu, for bullets and bullet holes.

"What appears to be a bullet hole was observed in a wood upright portion of a cabinet under the sink in the kitchen. This piece of wood was removed for possible further examination.

"A bullet was recovered from the inside of the exterior wall immediately behind the sink. The bullet is 9 mm jacketed weighing approximately 126 grams and was fired in a weapon having six lands and grooves with a right twist and a land to groove ratio of approximately one to one.

"Bullets on file in this office with similar characteristics to the recovered bullet include those fired in Astra, Browning, Lugar [sic], Radon [sic], Star, and Walther semi-automatic pistols." (Thank you, Cielodrive.com!)

The gun used in that incident was in fact a 9 millimeter Radom automatic pistol loaned to Bobby Beausoleil by Bruce Davis to be used to help persuade Hinman to refund money due to Beausoleil as the result of a failed drug transaction. According to Danny DeCarlo, Davis purchased the gun at a gun store in Canoga Park about a month earlier.

A 9 mm Radom pistol

Radom automatics were military pistols designed and manufactured in Poland starting in 1935. After the German invasion of that country in the fall of 1939 Germany took over production of the weapon and continued to make them until the end of the war. Radom pistols have an excellent reputation and are regarded in firearms circles as one of the finest military sidearms ever made. If you want to buy one today you can, but it will cost you.

A current Internet ad for a Radom 

One gun I can't present here is the gun that was supposedly along on the night that Leno and Rosemary LaBianca were slain. Never accounted for before or since that night, the gun (according to Linda Kasabian during her trial testimony and Charles Watson in his book Will You Die For Me?) was wielded by Charles Manson during an aborted assault on the driver of a sports car on Sunset Boulevard. Manson also supposedly used this gun to cover the LaBiancas while Charles Watson tied them up (or, variously, while he tied them up himself). Linda Kasabian claimed to have seen the gun "on several occasions" that night but she was unable to give any kind of description of it, even as to whether it was a revolver or a pistol. One version of events says that this gun was buried on the beach by Steve Grogan. It has never been recovered.

But the guns that definitely were in the house at 3301 Waverly Drive that night were those belonging to Leno LaBianca himself. An apparent aficionado of the old west, LaBianca had an impressive collection of 19th century firearms that included several varieties of Colt-type Navy revolvers, a nickel plated 1858 model Smith & Wesson revolver, two Colt "Peacemaker" single-action revolvers, and a muzzle-loading dragoon pistol. Probably unnoticed by the killers, these classic guns were discovered in the house by police officers investigating the murders. Their value (and that of a coin collection and other valuables still in the house) was part of the reason that authorities were disinclined to believe that robbery was the motive for the killings.

Leno LaBianca's gun collection (courtesy of Cielodrive.com)

A replica of an 1851 Navy Colt revolver

Internet auction for a genuine Navy Colt

LIke Bruce Davis' Radom, the next gun in this series also arose out of the Second World War. During the raid on Spahn's Movie Ranch on August 16, 1969 authorities recovered the infamous "submachine gun in its violin case" pictured in the book Helter Skelter. This weapon a Maschinenpistole (MP)-40, was discovered during the raid along with several long guns in a room that has been described as a "gun room" but was actually just the room that Danny DeCarlo was temporarily residing in with his guns. 

An assortment of Danny DeCarlo's firearms found during the August 16, 1969 raid on Spahn's Ranch

Danny DeCarlo's MP-40 as presented in Helter Skelter

The same gun during the August 16, 1969 raid 

Sometimes incorrectly referred to as a Schmeisser, the Maschinenpistole (MP)-40 was a workhorse of the German Wehrmacht during World War Two. After the war stockpiles of the weapons were distributed into the international gun world by the victorious Allies and some examples continued to be used in combat situations as late as the Vietnam War.

A beautiful example of a Maschinenpistole-40 submachine gun

If you thought the Radom was expensive, then don't even think about acquiring an MP-40. Even if you could get a license to own one the cost of buying a genuine wartime example is astronomical. 

Check out the price on this offering!

The next guns to be connected in sequence to the events of the summer of 1969 were the matching set of .45 caliber pistols belonging to Donald "Shorty" Shea, the complete story of which you can read here.

Shorty Shea's guns 

Guns figured in the immediate aftermath of the Hinman-Tate-LaBianca-Shea murders as well, most notably when they were used to propaganda effect in the 1973 Robert Hendrickson/Laurence Merrick documentary Manson. That film features several segments where Nancy Pittman, Lynette Fromme, and Sandra Good handle an assortment of long guns. And there is also a famous still photograph from the film of Steve Grogan holding a large caliber revolver of unknown manufacture.

Nancy, Lyn, and Sandy with shotgun and rifles

Steve Grogan and revolver

Other weapons later associated with persons and events connected to the so-called "Manson Family" include the .22 caliber Iver & Johnson revolver with which John Philip "Zero" Haught either intentionally or accidentally killed himself in Venice, California on November 5, 1969, and those used in the shootout at the Hawthorne Western Surplus store on August 21, 1971 (over one hundred firearms were ultimately involved in that incident!). But both of those events were separate incidents that occurred after the murderous Helter Skelter summer of 1969, and they did not directly reflect on the Tate-LaBianca murders and the acts of violence related to them (Crowe, HInman, and Shea) as did the girls' propagandistic posturing in Manson, and therefore they are beyond the scope of this post.

Nancy Pitman

Color Footage of Monfort, Pitman, Craig, Fromme and Cooper's Stockton Arrest

This is some recently released film of those arrested for Lauren and James Willett's murders.  It's from San Francisco Bay Area television station, KPIX.  It's kind of cool that it is in color and you can tell exactly where the newspaper pictures came from.  There is also some footage of the exterior of the house on Flora St.

Brenda's gonna get married

It sure seems like just another normal day at Spahn's Ranch, but then what's considered normal at the Manson Family's commune in Chatsworth, California? Again, I'm driving up old Santa Susana Pass Road to do some more filming at the "commune"! But where does the word "commune" fit into the more proper label of gang-hangout? The young gangsters, that inhabit the old run-down western movie set, don't grow any vegetables there. They don't even grow their marijuana there. And the mind-blowing Belladonna-used to get someone to NOW - grows wild all around their Death Valley home commonly know as the Barker Ranch. No, these media labeled Hippies, shop at the supermarket just like all civilized beings-except they use the pick-up dock at the back of the store where the food is actually FREE. And "run-down old western movie set," just what is a Western town movie set supposed to look like? A Universal City amusement park with buildings two or more stories tall?

The point being, maybe all these little media misconceptions add up to a totally distorted "big picture" of the notorious Manson Family. Instead of listening to so many third-party stories, come along with me to a place where the real under-world meets "middle class" society and where "no sense makes sense."

"Good morning, my favorite actors, what's up for today" my greeting would sing out. "We've got to get Brenda to the LA free-clinic, right away" was their urgent response. Oh shit, "this doesn't sound like fun" was my immediate thought. "She's got to get her blood tested" Gypsy explained. I'm sure my responsive expression was a clear "Is it contagious"?

Gypsy quickly reversed a negative to a positive - "Brenda's gonna get married and she has to have a blood test, to get a marriage license. "But what's the hurry" I said. The girls all began to chatter, but I did recognize, "the wedding is this weekend."

Of course, now the big question is: "Who's the lucky guy and why this weekend"?

"Ron, the lawyer" - and with her trademark sheepish grin - Gypsy continued: "Mr. Hughes is going to marry Brenda and that way she will be emancipated and won't have to go back to her parents." I don't know why (there's already been massacres, missing bodies, etc) but Leslie Van Houten's attorney marrying one of the Manson Family's junior gangsters struck me kinda funny.

"Hey, do I get to film the wedding"? drooled from my wicked lips? Stares like I don't know what suddenly made the rounds. Oops, say what? Did I miss something? Then the girls all chimed in. "Sure, but you'll need lots of cameras" said one. "And there'll be a feast too," quipped another. Then, I noticed Squeaky's priceless expression of "What's going on"? But before I knew it, Brenda's rather simple legal remedy for not being ordered by the court (she was under aged) to be returned home, was turning into the wedding event of the season.

"Gee," I thought, "Will they invite ALL the lawyers and what about the Judge"? And what about Ronald Hughes, does he understand what he's got himself into? Wait till Brenda's mother hears about this, it'll be all over the high society page of the LA Times. "Pitman daughter to marry prominent attorney."

After a short while the whole Ranch was on fire with gossiping excitement and even the simple "blood-test" had become part of a grand ritual. Many piled into the bed of my pick-up and we headed off to the LA Free Clinic. All the while, the chatter of the girls continued and drowned-out the hum of my truck's engine. Typical female excitement associated with a thousand years of sacred traditional values was now actually upstaging the infamous MANSON trial.

As might be expected, upon realizing the entire scope of his "commitment" to a Manson Family darling, Ronald Hughes committed the unforgivable sin - he called off the wedding. Soon thereafter, mother nature drowned the life out of him.

As a consolation to me (for missing the wedding film event) I was invited to film Clem's infamous ritual where he puts on a black hood and hangs the judge.

Copyright 2013 Robert Hendrickson
used with permission for posting on eviliz.com

Order The Collection and take advantage of the EVILIZ SPECIAL

$89.95 for the MANSON Media Collection (the MANSON Book and both DVDs - including Priority Mail shipping. The DVDs come in smaller thin plastic cases so everything fits in flat rate package, but includes larger personalized DVD inserts. Must be purchased via PayPal or M.O. Just email rarefilms@yahoo.com for his PayPal account to send payment.

Como Captured After Jail Break

murderpedia.org

POLICE NAB MANSON PAL IN  JAILBREAK

 

 

Kenneth "Curly" Como, a reputed member of Charles Manson's hippie-style clan, was captured today seven hours after a daring predawn escape from a 13th floor cell at the Hall of Justice in Los Angeles.

 

Sheriff's deputies said Como, 31, was arrested in a residential are of West Hollywood where he had been the object of a massive door-to-door manhunt in a six-block residential area.

 

Deputies said Como was found hiding in a small shed behind a garage by Deputy Roger Anderson.  Anderson said Como offered no resistance and had no weapons.

 

The deputy said he just opened the door of the shed and shouted: "Freeze! Come out."  He said Como uttered a brief obscenity when he surrendered.

 

Mass Search

 

The shed was located behind a small wood-framed house occupied by Mrs. D.B. Trad, an elderly, partially blind widow who was in her home behind locked doors when Como surrendered.

 

Nearly 100 sheriff's deputies and policemen had taken part in the search, accompanied by a small army of newsmen and cameramen.  It was their second search of the area- one was made before dawn- and scores of residents still in their bathrobes and slippers watched from their doorsteps.

 

Como was awaiting trial on charges of armed robbery and assault.  He and four other reported Manson Family members were arrested Aug. 21 following a brief shootout at a Hawthorn Calif. surplus store in what police said was an attempt to steal guns.

 

They said Como escaped from the facility in a waiting car.  The car was spotted by a police mobile unit in Hollywood and a brief chase ensued until the stolen car crashed.  Police said Como escaped on foot through an alley and a person in the car, Sandra Good, a clan member, was arrested for investigation of aiding and abetting an escape.

 

An all-points bulletin was issued for Como and two other alleged Manson Family members, both women.

 

The Sheriff's department issued an all-points bulletin for Como and deputies conducted a house-to-house search for him in a sealed off two-block square area of West Hollywood, where he has escaped.

 

Deputies also arrested five more persons, in addition to Miss Good, all said to be Manson clan members.  They were booked for investigation of conspiracy to aid and abet an escape.

 

They were identified as David Lee Stauffer, 20; Susan Bartel, 20; Katherine Lutesinger, 19; Lynn Alice Fromme, 23; and Nancy Pitman, 23.

 

Los Angeles police said prior to his arrest in the Hawthorne robbery incident, Como had escaped once before while being brought from Folsom to testify at Manson's trial in the slaying of a Malibu musician.  Como had been serving a term for armed robbery, police said.

 

 

Star News Pasadena CA October 20, 1971

Kenneth Como was born in Morrison County Minnesota November 22, 1939 to Ernest and Mae Como.  He died September 4, 2004 in California.  The Social Security Death Index does not give the county where he died.  The last known address for him was in Rialta CA.

According to the 1940 US Census Como had three older sisters and his father was employed as a foreman for WPA Park Improvement.  The family was living in Little Falls, Minnesota.

Did Manson Return to Cielo Late on August 9th???

In a previous thread, Starship & I were debating whether or not Charles Manson may have returned to Cielo the night of the murders. My response is too long for the comments, so here it is:


Short of Bruce Davis taking a polygraph when he's paroled and writing a million dollar tell-all book, you can't disprove the theory nor prove it.

You can make anything fit any scenario if you try hard enough. I think the evidence easily supports many scenarios.

My opinion? No, Manson didn't go to Cielo that night...

The first logical question I have to ask is why would Manson put himself at the scene of the crime hours later not knowing if the police were notified of the crimes through reported screams and gunshots - and supposedly, Watson told him it was total chaos. It's a HUGE risk factor - especially when Manson had worked so hard to distance himself from the murders (and I believe the girls were always intended to be the fall guys). There is only one way in and out of the Cielo house. If the cops arrived while Manson had returned to "see what my children had done" he was trapped. Sure, he could run down the hillside, but what about the car left behind - even at the bottom of the cul-de-sac. And, chances are, he would have gotten caught in a foot chase - he's short and short legs get caught.

If the crime scene were at the corner of Hollywood and Vine, busy with people and a gazillion escape routes, maybe, but not at the Cielo house. Even if Manson scouted the opposite side of the canyon on Beverly Grove to see if there was any activity at the Cielo house he was at risk of getting caught--these are basically deserted, just shy of one lane, dark neighborhood roads in the middle of the night. If the cops had been alerted and arrived at Cielo, a car (containing Manson/Davis, Manson/Pitman or which ever version you are thinking of) would have been easily detected from almost any sight access to Cielo and could have been pursued as suspect by the police - especially an old POS Ford  Fairlane in Beverly Hills.

The next logical question I have to ask myself is if Manson returned, why would he cover Jay's head with a towel? According to experts, covering a victims head is done for only a couple of reasons: Avoid identifying the perpetrator, keeping a victim from knowing a location, or the fact that the killer knows his victim and uses a cover to depersonalize the victim. None of those reasons fit Manson (or Davis) covering Jay's head - But, think about who might have one of those reasons and who did cover the LaBianca's heads the next night.

Starship wrote: And, no one ever accused CM that he went up there after the murders. He offered up that info himself...more than a year later too I believe? It is only with that premise in mind that the scene that was found in the daylight makes any sense at all.

I may be wrong here, but I thought Manson admitted going to Cielo in Emmons' book which was years later and a lot of speculation on blog sites. Did he state it in another interview just a year after the murders?

Starship wrote: And the tales the killers tell, which are consistent enough, don't explain it all either.

The biggest problem with this for me has always been that everyone assumes all the killers agreed and testified to the same account. But the reality is that Atkins was the only one (early on) to give a statement of facts (to Bugliosi & the Grand Jury) to what transpired inside the house. Her account then hit the international news.

It wasn't until after the trial and verdicts that Watson spoke his first words about what happened inside the house at his own trial a year later when both Watson and his attorney heard what Atkins testified to, what Kasabian testified to, etc which gave him his diminished capacity defense and an easy series of events to mimic and manipulate for his own sake - same for what he and or his author wrote in his book.

Then there's Krenwinkel who tells her version years later at a parole hearing when she basically takes on the role of Kasabian and then lies every year after until she finally comes "clean" and gives Atkins' statement of events, but at that point, she can hardly remember which victims were where and at times, doesn't even remember the victims names.

Then, you have Kasabian testifying to what happened, but she never entered the house and could only testify to what happened outside for a very brief window of opportunity. AND, the biggest question for me in her testimony is that the blood evidence doesn't support her testimony either - She said Woytek came out onto the porch drenched in blood with Watson stabbing him and hitting him over the head with the gun. He hung onto the post for an extended moment - enough time to look her in the eyes and plea for help before tumbling into the bushes - yet there was no blood evidence of Woytek's collected from the front porch or (for that matter) what would have been his path from the living room leading to the front porch.

So, saying that they all "agreed" on what happened during the commission of the crimes is a non-starter. I think they all (lawyers, writers, etc) just later mimicked what Atkins originally said and used it to their advantage. And we all know how many times Atkins changed her story about what happened inside the house.

Other points Starship made:

The steamer trunks.

IMHO the trunks were stacked in an orderly fashion against the inside wall of the living room and knocked over and into the position they were found during a fight with one of the victims - easy explanation - it's just the way the cookie crumbles. If they'd been ripped open to look for drugs they would have been flat on the ground--and did the killers really take the time to repack Sharon's belongings in them and then set them at an odd angle?

The blood smears on ST body 

Again, in my humble opinion those smear marks on an exposed body could just as easily be consistent with a struggle while she was being stabbed. Her hands, the killers hands, the carpet, etc all causing swirling marks on the skin making it appear that she was moved--and she was, just not by Manson hours later. It could be just as easily explained that Sharon was on her stomach for a  period of time, then pushed back by Atkins to dip the blood in her chest blood. It's as plausible a scenario as dragging Sharon to the front porch and then returning her to the living room.

The killers not wiping anything down but then it's pretty well wiped. 

Actually, it wasn't pretty well wiped because they got 2 fingerprint matches. Any cop will tell you that the odds of lifting a fingerprint from a crime scene are really low even in an un-wiped house. Yet at Cielo they got lucky enough to find two. Chances are, Cielo was never wiped down for prints. Watson realized his mistake (as did Atkins when she told the inmate she left a hand print on the desk at Cielo) and made the effort to wipe down the LaBianca's

The glasses. 

A mystery for all time. But lets remember that hundreds of people were in this house in the time between Sharon & Roman's residence from February through August. Those glasses could have been left in the house at any point by anyone and knocked under a piece of furniture or whatever. Months later they were kicked out during the commission of murders as furniture was bumped, victims scrambling on hands and knees reaching for anything to grasp. Again, just as competent and explanation as Manson/Davis leaving them as a false clue.

Starship wrote: 

The blood map. How accurate is that blood map? We know that Granado did a crappy job at the scene on the blood analysis even from Bugliosi's perspective - he often didn't sub-type or even type at all, missed many blood spots, or made an assumption that a blood spot was the victims' due to vicinity. Sloppy, sloppy work that makes for great (eventual) conspiracies.

I'm not saying absolutely that someone didn't return to that house, I'm just playing the devil's advocate and saying that sometimes evidence can be manipulated into any scenario, one as plausible as the other to suite one theory or another. One thing that we know for sure is that LAPD did a really crappy job of first securing the scene and then processing it, leaving more questions than answers and opening the door to many conspiracy theories.