Showing posts with label sharon tate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sharon tate. Show all posts

Monday, March 10, 2025

Disappearing Act: The Avulsion Cut (GRAPHIC)


Video interview of TLB first responder LAPD Robert Burbridge:

"The only wound I could see on Sharon Tate was right in her pregnant belly. It was a big gash... like an avulsion cut... It's like they were almost going to cut the baby out of her, that's what it looked like."


It appears to me that there is indeed a large, deep, horizontal 'avulsion' cut across Sharon's belly, filled with blood.  Also, there appears to be a shorter vertical slash through the middle of the horizontal cut, as though an 'X' was cut into the flesh of the belly.  

 Greg King, Sharon Tate and the Manson Murders, c. 2000  pg243
Time magazine 8-15-69: "..there was an X cut on her(Tate's) stomach." 

 

Also note the puckering and swelling in the flesh along the borders of the horizontal cut.  This suggests the wound was inflicted while Sharon was still alive.





Though this prominent and clearly visible cut mark is not mentioned in the autopsy report of Sharon Tate. 

Nor is it marked on the autopsy diagram.


Tate Autopsy Report
'There are four stab wounds on the chest.  ...others labeled #5 through #16 are described in a subsequent report.'


So why the discrepancy?  Was it because the avulsion cut suggests it was done for the purposes of removing the baby from the womb, as Burbridge suspected, and that the prosecution did not want to go there, for whatever reason?


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


The only possible reference to the avulsion cut on the frontal autopsy diagram is a 'stab wound #5'.  Oddly, there is another 'stab wound #5" marked on the rear view of the autopsy diagram.


Was this the coroner's roundabout way of letting us know that there was something hinky about 'stab wound #5'?  Or did The LA County Coroner's Office suffer a bout of "sudden-onset amateur hour" syndrome?





Tuesday, December 24, 2024

Happy Holidays!

 Happy Holidays!






Sharon and Doris Tate with Guiness celebrating Christmas 1965 at Jay Sebring's.



Wishing everyone at Manson Blog a very happy holiday season and happy New Year!

Please check out the Christmas video from 1971 in the following link: 

This video comes from a time when the world was perhaps just a little less crazy.

Tuesday, January 24, 2023

Sharon Tate at 80

January 24th marks the birthdate of Sharon Tate, and this would have been her 80th. Peace be on Sharon and her child, Paul Richard Polanski.

Please click on the video to remember Sharon. Music by: Bob Welch, "Sentimental Lady," 1977.

Saturday, January 22, 2022

Gail Bugliosi Calls Hef Her Good Friend


A&E is kicking off a ten part documentary series, Secrets of Playboy, Monday at 9 pm EST. One of the big reveals is Hef was fascinated by Charles Manson. Someone claims Hef had Manson home videos and studied them. He also studied Helter Skelter. 

I hope Gentry got a night in the Grotto, gratis. Hook a writer up every once in awhile. 

Another person pretends they're shocked because Hef was great friends with Sharon Tate and blah blah blah Charlie. Anyway, I thought you might want to check it out. 

Oh, Mrs. Bugs says Hef, "Couldn't have been a better friend to all of the people he invited to his home."

If you say so, Mrs. Bugs. 

Monday, January 17, 2022

Will You Die Imprisoned? Tex Watson Parole Hearing - 10/15/2021

Sometimes a person makes a giant mistake and kills another person. They do their time and live with themselves and their consequences. When they die, maybe they meet their maker. 

But not every killer stabs a pregnant woman in her hands while she covers her unborn baby. Or carves WAR into a fellow the following evening. That stuff falls into another category. I don't have a name for the category but something like sickos-who-get-off-on-terrorizing-and-murdering works just fine. 

Thanks as always to almighty Cielo  for providing me with new ways to embarrass myself each week. Tex Watson went up for parole again just over ninety days ago. If you search "Inmate Watson" inside of the pdf things go faster. Tex conducts business like an executive on a Zoom meeting and says "uh" every third word.

Tex's excuses: 

Insecurity. 

Charlie turned my brains into noodles but at first I thought it was a game. 

Meth. 

Demonic Oppression. 

Possession. 

DUN DUN DUN! 

Lightning flashes and just like that, Old Mr. Scratch is back in town. Tex could not sound crazier if he tried. I know he doesn't expect the board to nod like sages and surprise him at the gate with a free Uber but come on. 

A white Prius pulls up. Tex dashes past Debra Tate and an angry mob. "Where we goin, pal?" 

"The knife store and I ain't got all day."

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

Linda update. I was unsure if I'd seen this before. 

"Yeah, so like the craziest thing happened, Commissioner Gordon. Dennis Wilson was hitchhiking around Los Angeles one day. I stopped and he took me to meet Charlie Manson. What's crazy is Dennis met Charlie after picking up hitchhikers from Charlie's group! I mean what are the odds in a city that big? Oh, and also I was feeling less insecure because the Beach Boys were my friends." 

Remorse? Manipulation? I promise I have feeling(s) now? Please never let him out.

Ever become possessed but then find yourself unpossessed and remember you are out murdering people because a smaller dude said hey go kill for me? Me neither but life is slow here. 


"I'm scared of Karate even when I've got a gun."


I hoped the Commissioner would ask why Abigail's face was slashed but he did not. Maybe next time. The Parole Board sent Tex back to his room when they'd heard enough. Goodbye, we think you're a monster was written between the lines in the official minutes. +ggw 


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

Bonus Material:

Tex in Witness to Evil


French comic book: 





Monday, January 3, 2022

Joan Huntington - Writer - Oscar Nominated 1973 Robert Hendrickson Manson Documentary


I went chasing rabbits instead of Omicron over New Year's weekend. My constant and faithful companion was chocolate in obscene amounts. Self-loathing accompanied the binges and was drowned in endless eggnog coffees. My beloved Buckeyes won the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, against a bunch of state school Mormons from Utah. Indoor bike races everyone claimed to win happened here and Monopoly games I escaped took place in the evenings. 

I hope your weekend was smashing. 

The road to Joan Huntington was a big circle. Inside the Manson Gang (2007) was the first stop. Manson from 1973 came next, out of order like Matthew and Mark, after I found myself unable to stop asking why the girls would say some of the things they said. Both films could be alt titled: How To Ensure You & Your Friends Remain Proper F*cked Forever.

There's a moment early on in Inside where one of the girls says something like I've been thinking about letting someone believe they're making one movie but it's actually another movie. Outside of that single line as a possible motivator, I was baffled. Knives? Davey Crockett rifles? The Neverland outfits?  

Dudes. Ya gotta know they're playing you. And Nancy stop digging in your ear. 

The girls did not realize what they were up against. Too much naive faith in their mojo maybe and steep prices were paid for sure. Just an all-around terrible idea. Their parents must've thought they lost their minds. 

A double shot of Hendrickson drove home how important the filmmaker is to the foundation of this study. I'd prefer a comedy voiceover on the 2007 edit but then I'm cynical. Either way, his footage and interviews remain huge in this community five years after Hendrickson's death. 

Some in our community agree with Hendrickson's take on the Family and others are offended. The offended folks always mention the film had a script and the girls read from them. Again, why? And who wrote the script? 

Hendrickson says in the 2007 film that financier Laurence Merrick and his people joined when the project was half completed. Merrick was older and from Israel. That might be him doing the weird Charlie voiceover sounding like an Israeli who watches Cheech and Chong movies. Hendrickson was twenty-seven or twenty-eight and the Spahn's Ranch kids confused him even though Mary and Gypsy were contemporaries, and he does not have a writing credit anyway. 

Enter Joan Huntington. Only her and Merrick are listed as writers on Manson. 


Huntington passed last June. She was nine years older than Sharon Tate but did the same beautiful women spots in Los Angeles sitcoms and tv shows. Beverly Hillbillies and so on. 

Huntington's husband, Laurence Merrick was mortally wounded in the parking lot of his business by a crazy man who believed Merrick and others performed a black magic ritual on him during a class held inside the building. Because Merrick ran an acting school, everyone assumed he was acting when he crashed through the door announcing he was shot. 

Some of Huntington's one liners in Hendrickson are as good as any top action film. She was a smart lady who might've helped the victims get a bit of long-term revenge. Please enjoy this screen cap of Huntington's tail right after she changed from a cat to a human on Season 3 Episode 7 of tv's Bewitched. I thought the tail would disappear with the rest of her cat parts but it did not and no explanation was offered. 


Nosy Gladys Kravitz across the street sees the cat change into Huntington's character, Eva, and calls in two city council members to investigate. Links to the full version and a shortened version are below. Here is thirty-two year old Huntington at the feet of Paul Lynde (OHIO!), Dick York, and Elizabeth Montgomery. 


The Say Hey Kid Willie Mays is in this episode too. Turns out he's a warlock or whatever male witches are called in the tv show. Mays zaps himself away from a Halloween Party at just before midnight to "the ballpark." Elizabeth Montgomery tells Dick York that's the reason Mays hits so many home runs. The scene is edited out of the shorter version below. 


 Honorable Dick York resisting the advances of Huntington. What a guy. 


Big problem. Just like Cinderella, Huntington turns back into a cat at midnight, and Elizabeth Montgomery keeps her marriage. 

This episode aired the week of Halloween, 1966. America remains number one although internal discontent bubbles and burps. The draft lottery is three years in the future but almost half a million Americans are in Vietnam and offshore. Six thousand Americans will die in Vietnam in 1966, and the US government will claim sixty-one thousand Vietcong deaths. 

Charlie strums his guitar at Terminal Island. Mary shelves books while Squeaky avoids her father while Dennis avoids his father. Bewitched finishes in a three way tie for seventh highest rated tv show of the year along with two other programs Huntington guest stars on, Daktari and Beverly Hillbillies. 

Bigger picture, Huntington is half a decade away from a writing credit on an Oscar nominated documentary that will help shape American history. Wild. 
+ggw

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

Bewitched S3E7 edited but better player on IMDBtv. 

Bewitched S3E7 full episode but small player on Youtube.

Episode fan page with continuity errors. Did you notice Boris was inside the party before arriving at the party? 

Episode page on Rotten Tomatoes.

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

The Manson Family Blog is now in its twelfth year. Thanks to all the readers, writers, and commenters who got us here. 

Monday, October 25, 2021

Polanski's Macbeth


This is the first post in a series that will discuss Roman Polanski films after 1969.

Roman Polanski chose Shakespeare's The Tragedy of Macbeth as his first project in the months following the murders of his wife and unborn son on August 8, 1969. Apologies for the spoiler but Polanski's first celluloid hero after that grizzly night is a man who is delivered into the world via a bloody cesarean section performed with a sharp knife. The director flashes a baby being removed from his mother's womb across the screen twice during the film.

Funding was a problem from the outset. Shocking, I know. Oh to be a fly on the wall in those pitch meetings. You wanna do what? 

Eventually, Polanski's good buddy Hugh Hefner agreed to float the boat. Columbia Pictures released the film October, 13, 1971. US opening night took place at the Playboy theater in New York on December 20, 1971. No one gave a shit. 

They hit the jackpot with Easy Rider in 1969 but spent three times what they took in over the next three years. With blockbusters like The Brotherhood of Satan, I struggled to understand how Columbia was hemorrhaging money. In fairness, Columbia also released The Last Picture Show in 1971. You should watch that one if you love movies. The film was a commercial and critical success and likely fueled a merger with Warner Bros the same year. 

Definitely do not watch The Last Picture Show if you are opposed to seeing young Cybil Shepherd topless. I know sometimes I trigger readers with my effervescent verve. They told me all about it during my review at blog corporate last week. Made me drive seven hours.


Columbia also released Nicholas and Alexandra in 1971. A box office bomb, the film was nevertheless highly regarded inside the academy, earning six nominations and two awards. Sometimes atta boys are free and sometimes they cost two million bucks. I did not watch this one because I generally stay away from movies where actors display physical intimacy on the poster. Germs and mushiness are no fly zones for this buckaroo. 

The remainder of Columbia's catalogue from 1971 I've never heard of but if there's one you think I should watch, please drop a note in the comments below the ones from the people letting me know I'm a bad writer and etc and I will check it out. 
 

A quick and painless Macbeth refresh. The battle at the beginning of the film is fought between Scottish Highland rebels led by the head of the Macdonald clan, the Irish, and the King of Norway, versus forces commanded by Scotland's rightful King Duncan, the soon to be wretched Macbeth, and a nobleman named Banquo who is so likable and friendly you just know he's doomed.

You can rent or buy the film on YouTube. It's worth both fees imo. 

Here is an awesome side-by-side translation bridging 1606 and now. I'd watch a bit, hit pause, and get caught up on the modern translation. 

I also linked Roger Ebert's review from New Year's Day, 1971. Ebert was a genius. He was an adjunct lecturer and PhD student at the University of Chicago until he became so successful writing film reviews that he was able to escape the soul-draining clutches of academia. I sat for an hour last week reading his columns. Such craft. 

Anyway, you don't need me to summarize Macbeth. The play has been available to the public for the last four hundred and fifteen years and is commonly taught in schools. Plus I provided links. 

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

Polanski's three weird sisters are captivating. Their scenes threaten to steal the show. 

"WHERE HAST THOU BEEN, SISTER?"

"KILLING SWINE!!!" 

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

Vices are discussed (Modern)...

PRINCE/KING MALCOLM: I know I have so many vices that when people see all of them exposed, evil Macbeth will seem as pure as snow in comparison, and poor Scotland will call him a sweet lamb when they compare him to me and my infinite evils.

Drugs (Modern)...

BANQUO: Were these things we are talking about really here? Or are we both on drugs? 

The weird (Modern)...

DOCTOR: Evil rumors are going around. Unnatural acts will cause supernatural things to happen. 

Guilt (Modern)...

MACBETH (TO THE GHOST): You cannot say I did it! Don't shake your bloody head at me!

Antisemitism (1606): 

THIRD WITCH: Scale of dragon, tooth of wolf, witches mummy, maw and gulf, of the ravined salt-sea shark, root of hemlock digged i' th dark, liver of blaspheming Jew...

The self-harm never stops. Polanski assaults himself with this work. Our hero Macduff is asked by future king Malcolm why he (Macduff) fled to England and left his defenseless wife, children, servants, and castle household behind so they were easy victims for Macbeth's evil men. 

All were slaughtered with blades. 


A bit of joy is experienced when Charles Denton Macbeth's head is shown to the crowd!

Have no fear. The actor did not die. 'Twas nothing more than movie magic. Here's our godly sovereign pondering the open-ended invitation Heff gave him for a weekend at the mansion. 

If you have thoughts on the film, I'd love to discuss it. I feel like Polanski punished himself with this project. Listening to the actors repeat those lines until they were perfect had to be brutal. Regardless, the director delivers a great take on one of Shakespeare's most famous works. Definitely worth a rainy afternoon. 

"Out out brief candle..."

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

The Col Presents: The Last Word on JAY SEBRING... CUTTING TO THE TRUTH

In 1985 I came to California to get a graduate degree from USC.  I knew absolutely no one and had only enough money to get a small room in a roach infested “graduate” apartment building eight blocks from the campus.  I didn’t mind, I was away from home pursuing my dreams.

 

I didn’t have a car yet and, after orientation, school would start in another week.  Plenty of time to read large books, go to the cinema and explore the area.  Although then as now the area near USC is shit.

 

Hell, I thought one day, I am going to the Cinema School and there is a Cinema Library and I am in fucking LA, Hollywood adjacent.  Let’s check it out.Alabama born celebrity hairdresser died defending Sharon Tate from Manson  Family - al.com

 

At the time it was a small space.  It had lots of cool movie star bios and other things along that line.   Good reference materials for film students.  I quickly learned that they had “files” on many subjects.  Like if you asked for the Errol Flynn file they had several folders filled with clippings of articles and photos.   Thus you could read about Flynn’s abuse of underage girls, his movie stardom- or even learn that he had once been an actual slave trader!

 

Even in 1985, learning these files existed, I only wanted to ask about one- Manson, TLB. Tate.  Years before founding the ONLY official TLB Blog I was still obsessively bothered by the case.  I had not learned that BUG had committed perjury during a capital murder case, and was in fact a sociopathic liar.  But I knew something was wrong.  No way this Helter Skelter shit was the motive.

 

I spent several hours going over the files and learning nothing new, although as Deb will tell you primary sources are the most accurate and fascinating, being up close time wise to the events occurring.   As I was set to go probably eat a shitty cheeseburger, a fellow student, undergraduate, came up and said “I understand you have the Manson files”.  I said yes, I was finished. I handed them to him.  He was younger than me, but equally new.

 

“Thank you.   What is your interest?” he asked.  I said “Obsessed since the TV film.  Still seeking facts.  You?”  “ Jay Sebring was my uncle”.

 

Awkward.   Although weird juxtapositions would come regularly in the future as effortlessly, I was three days in LA and without trying met one of the victims relatives.  I quickly did the math, was uncertain, but doubted the guy really knew his Uncle before he was slaughtered.

 

As Patty will attest, I do have a habit of sticking my foot in my mouth and then was no different.  “Yes, he was one of the victims with Tate.  I guess he was into tying women up and beating them.  He apparently loved Sharon till the very end.”  DUMB.   I don’t even know this guy.  I gave him the files and left.

 

Circa 2011, DiMaria became one of the sad people showing up at Parole Hearings to make sure the killers stay put.  I say sad, because it has been clear since the 90s that all the Mansonites in prison are dying in prison. Not even a chance.  Not even LVH who “only” stabbed a dead body (eye roll).  So when you show up it feels to me pretty sad.  You spend hours driving to a remote prison and reliving shit that happened decades ago and why?   They were not getting out anyway.  And people like Orca Tate, showing up at hearings of people who didn’t kill anyone she knew, after her own mother specifically did not WANT her to take up the mantle I mean wtf?  If it isn’t some sad attention seeking what is it?  It feels like a fake mailbox explosion, like why did you do this, who cares?

 

I recall saying all this, either here or on the Official TLB Blog, and meaning it.  Yuck.

 

A year or so after, I was at Musso and Franks the legendary restaurant in Hollywood and a guy came up to me.  Anthony DiMaria.  Maybe he was with a mutual friend.  I was awkward again, like how does he know who I am?  Is he upset at my opinions?  He was nice and gracious and I reminded him of the USC library and that’s that.

 

I think back story is important so the reader can judge.  I never, unlike Nelson/Molesto, inserted myself into the story but often I became inserted into it.  So in the same way you needed to know that Tom O’Neil was an assclown as far back as 15 years ago, I passingly met DiMaria 35 years ago last month.

 

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

JAY SEBRING….CUTTING TO THE TRUTH is a strong documentary look at a mostly forgotten and tragic figure, Jay Sebring, arguably one of the early fathers of modern men’s hairstyling.  It is told from the point of view of his nephew, who was a toddler when Sebring was viciously murdered by Tex Watson and his comrades.

 

Unlike say HBO’s The Vow, the director does not have access to a lot of primary footage.  The main footage used seems to be a Sebring International hair cut training video.  (I did wonder, with so little footage available, why the sequence from MONDO HOLLYWOOD was omitted- they could not have asked a large fee ffs).  He relies on the usual talking heads along with some home pictures and, certainly unusual for the genre, a lot of footage of himself on the phone.   That sounds boring but it isn’t.

 

The film gives a clear, for the first time, view of Jay:The Early Years.   His upbringing and military service and family life gets more attention here than anywhere I have seen.   It really is not enough, and the director struggles to connect cause and effect several times but it does portray a three dimensional picture of a real human being.

 

As he moves to the second act of the film I feel like the director struggles because of one simple fact- HAD Jay lived he was on his way to worldwide fame and fortune.  He would have been a millionaire and his salons would be in every state.  Instead he was murdered.  So the film tries to make an argument that Jay WAS what he probably would become, if that makes sense to you all.  When Jay died he was a jet set playboy with money and star access, who was on his way to the top.   But to argue that he somehow already WAS there is silly.   $100 Steve McQueen haircuts were great, but that would not make him remembered today had he not been killed.

 

The filmmaker also struggles with who would show up.  Jay’s pretty ex wife is there and does the obligatory “I still love him today” dance  But the person you really want to hear from is Sharon Tate and yeah, well, she’s dead too.

 

Despite these struggles the second act works for me because of how thorough the director is.   He glosses over things- I really do not think a guy who moved to LA and changed his name should be portrayed as close to his family, and his dad does not sound like fun.  There is some weird obsession with BUG.  Unusual for BUG who will show up for a supermarket opening, he refused to be interviewed by Di Maria, saying he never knew Jay.  He didn’t.  Why did DiMaria want him?  No clue but he tried hard to get him.

 

If I was impressed by Act 1 and enjoyed the massive data dump of Act 2 I felt Act 3/Denoument goes off the rails a bit.   There are still many people not named Orca who knew Roman and Sharon around in Hollywood.  No one is interviewed.   Would Beatty not come and speak for his fallen friend?  Hell he could have set the ground rules- talk only about Jay, not the TLB stuff.   Act 3 is where everything needs to come together.  DiMaria tries but he does not quite get there.  He’s stuck with the fact that he’s said everything he really can about Uncle Jay.  You see, because JAY didn’t get to his third act.

 

Instead we get DiMaria showing up at one of the Parole Hearings.  Remember, he’s a toddler when Jay is killed, he doesn’t know the guy.  No one from the immediate family showed up through the 70s and 80s when, conceivably, some of the girls could have been released.  Yes, DiMaria has the right to show up, but is he there to “make sure’ these old people stay put – or for a “movie moment”?

 

He also falters in the “bring the film together section”.  To tie my above story to the review, much is made about Jay’s s/m peccadillos.  Now in 2020 there is a thriving community of s/m fans on the internet, Reddit, where have you.  In 1969 less so.  But DiMaria brings up the accusations AS accusations and makes a big deal about portraying these and accusations, more or less saying “Can you believe this shit?”.  You sit there waiting for him to show us that it was bullshit.  But he just moves on.

 

 

DiMaria spends some time finessing an ending making his Uncle a hero for standing up to the hippie psychos and defending Sharon.  I didn’t get why.  All versions of the story have him trying to tell these killers that the lady was pregnant and stop being assholes, which leads to his death spiral.  It is surely brave if not heroic (I mean, he fails).  The problem was that Jay had no reason to believe they would not all get out of there alive because this kind of shit DIDN’T HAPPEN.

 

Look, I am being picky, probably because this is likely to be the only profile of Sebring we will ever see.  As such, OVERALL, it is very good.  It TRIES to be excellent and doesn’t quite get there.  DiMaria is too much a fan of his Uncle to make a warts and all film. (Look at the photos from the last day that we have thanks to Statman lifting that roll of film off the puke LAPD cop- tell me Sharon and Jay weren’t still fucking.)  But he obviously worked on this for ages and I get the full rounded sad story.

 Jay Sebring

I didn’t expect to like this film, and bought it just because.  But if you are on this blog you care about the TLB victims.  Had she lived I think Sharon possibly might not have acted again.  She wasn’t good and she didn’t love it.  Had Jay lived he would have been a big deal. The fact that none of the five made it is the tragedy.

 

Hollywood being Hollywood, I am certain I will see DiMaria again somewhere.  I will tell him that he did his Uncle proud and buy him a Musso’s Martini.

 

The rest of you check it out- Amazon has it for $5.99 and it is worth it.

Monday, November 4, 2019

Channeling Sharon Tate



For the most part I have trouble believing that the dead can be contacted. I suppose it can be a positive thing for those here on the earthly plane who need reassurance after their loved one has passed.  Even if it is not true, that the dead can be contacted, there's a sort of tying up of loose ends that transpires, and the loved one can feel a sense of peace with the loss.  Maybe whatever helps a person cope isn't such a bad thing as long as they are not being taken advantage of and only receive reassurances that the person who died is at rest.

In the case of Sharon Tate being summoned by the medium for an afterlife interview it is difficult to understand exactly why.  While we all care about what happened to Sharon, the baby and the others, the general public really has no stake personal stake in the matter.

How do you feel about this subject?

A reader sent us this article which I have copied and pasted below.  If you go to the link there is a YouTube of the same interview.






Elisa: Hey, there, Kim. How are you doing? We’ve got our boy, Erik, and we are going to try to get Erik to bring in Sharon Tate. All I know about Sharon is that she was murdered. She was pregnant, murdered by Charles Manson, and I’m sorry that I don’t really know that much more, but that doesn’t mean I don’t love her.
Kim: Yeah.
Erik: Good morning.
Kim: Yep, he’s getting her.
Erik: I love you, too, Mom.
Kim: Sharon comes in and her energy feels very, very soft. This is actually the first celebrity interview that I’m doing with you and I may be a little bit–I don’t want to say “leery”, but a lot of people do celebrity interviews, and I thought, well, you have so many people that do that for you. So a few weeks ago, because I’d seen it on the Facebook page where people ask, like, if somebody could channel her, and a few weeks ago, I was working with some clients, and I wondered about that. Erik introduced me to her, and she said she would come through. She’s telling me there’s a few common things in her and the baby’s story and you and Erik’s story.
Kim: She’s just starting with, a lot of the reason that celebrities are coming through to mediums is because you connect with the personality, and so a celebrity’s personality has been out there so much that they’re very easy to connect with and for the media to recognize.
Sharon: Me, it was late sixties, I believe, 1969, when I died, and so people aren’t really aware of my personality so much.
Kim: She said she really never tried to do this either. She said the other thing was that the situation was so gruesome that she didn’t want to add any energy to that.
Elisa: Oh, yeah.
Kim: But she said it’s been a long time now, and so she is ready to talk about it.
Elisa: Why did he kill you?
Kim: This was a time of the free love, hippie kind of movement. She says those particular individuals really got into a cult kind of mentality, very mentally depraved-thinking, and she says that he was very paranoid and delusional. She says he had actually, at some point, come to her house and knocked at the door. She must have answered the door. I think he was looking for work. That’s what she’s making me feel.
Elisa: So they had contact before. They knew each other?
Kim: Yes.
Elisa: He was involved with this hippie cult?
Kim: Yes.
Elisa: Okay.
Kim: So she didn’t offer him any work. He went away. She didn’t think anything of it. Then the night of the ambush, that it happened. So she’s saying she hasn’t slowed down really to think about this in a long time. She’s saying so many of these things are published. You can read about them, but she was 8 ½ months pregnant. They had bought a house, L.A., Hollywood area, kind of on the outskirts of town is what it looks like, what she’s showing me, and that her husband, Roman, was actually still across seas, but was coming back soon. She had three friends staying with her at the time, and it was hot. It was summertime. All of a sudden, they were ambushed. These people came in through the window before they even realized it. They had cut either the phone lines or the electrical lines so that they were not able to call for help.
Sharon: They had actually killed somebody else prior to entering the house, but by the time we realized they were there, there was no way for us to get help or communicate.
Elisa: Hm.
Kim: She just briefly talks about it being very scary. They separated. She’s making me feel like two of them were in one room, two of them were in the other room of the people that were killed. Those moments were very scary for her.
Elisa: Oh, gosh.
Kim: And this has been publicized. She was begging for her life, and they were not going to allow her to have it.
Elisa: Did Charles Manson kill all four? Or did others in that–
Kim: Charles Manson wasn’t there. It was his followers.
Elisa: Oh. Oh, wow.
Kim: He put them up to it. It was his followers that committed the murders.
Elisa: So did Charles Manson ever kill anybody? That you know of?
Kim: She’s making me feel like, yes, but it’s more inspired the others to do it, but yes, that he did some. He did do some, she’s making me feel like. I don’t know–she’s not making me feel like it was ever discovered. If I’m understanding it correctly, I don’t think that he was ever caught or discovered, but that he was responsible for many, and that there were more we didn’t know about.
Elisa: Okay.
Kim: I just asked if she’s connected with him and she says no.
Elisa: Okay. Was your transition painful?
Kim: So she said immediately when this started happening, she was stabbed multiple times. She was in such a state of shock that it seemed very surreal, almost like a dream, so she was terrified, but there was an air of calmness around (over-talking 6:14)
Elisa: Detachment. Yeah, sort of like detached emotionally from the–
Kim: Yes. Yes, she said it was like that. She said at the first blow she left her body, although her body didn’t appear to die right away. She said her infant son did not exit the body right away. He did not let go right away. He was kind of in and out, so she stayed at the scene, which was very chaotic, and waited for her baby to exit the body. She said that within a fairly short amount of time, it was like a tunnel experience for her. Her and the baby went together. She talks about her family. She had a couple of sisters and her parents. One of the sisters is with her now on that side of the veil. I’m not sure about the parents.
Elisa: Well, that’s not important.
Kim: She said that her mother had like, a nervous breakdown.
Elisa: Aw. I can imagine. I know.
Kim: Yeah. It took her many, many years to turn that around, but she said that her mother actually, and one sister’s still here. They worked with the court systems and legislation to try to change rights for victims, and that type of thing.
Elisa: Oh, good.
Kim: So they did not allow her death to completely destroy them.
Elisa: Oh, good. Thank God.
Kim: But she said, with her mom, she stayed really close to her because she really had a hard, hard time with it.
Elisa: I can imagine. What about the father of the baby? Your husband, Roman? Is he still on this plane?
Kim: He is.
Elisa: How’s he doing?
Kim: He been involved in some controversy. He’s overseas. I’ve read about this, too. He was accused of something, and so I don’t believe he’s come back to the United States.
Elisa: Was it Roman Polanski?
Kim: Roman Polanski.
Elisa: Oh, okay. Okay, all right. Got it. Got it. Any messages for him?
Kim: She loves him. She watches out for him. She tells me that he felt a sense of–because there was some conversation of him coming back, when he should come back because they were filming overseas, that there was a sense within him of a guilty feeling that if he would have come back with her at the time, that none of this would have happened.
Elisa: Oh. Hm.
Kim: And that he was devastated. He was very devastated by this. She said that she loved him dearly. She said the culture at the time was this free love kind of culture.
Elisa: Yeah.
Kim: She’s making me feel like–I don’t know if Roman was a cheater, but with the position he was in, he had a lot of girls that would throw themselves at him.
Elisa: Okay, well, that’s not important. What about the baby? Are you still with the baby?
Kim: Yes. She’s talking about–I have to have Erik help me with this. What she’s talking about is her and the baby–this was not a charted exit point for them.
Elisa: Whoa.
Kim: This was somebody else’s free will infringed upon her.
Elisa: Oh, gosh.
Kim: She said this was not an exit point, but what she’s saying is that her and the baby, in this lifetime that she was coming into, that they were to have a lifetime where they either died together or died within very short order of each other.
Elisa: Why?
Kim: Because–and I’m having Erik help me with this because it’s a little bit confusing–I don’t want to mix up the stories. There were two lifetimes. One where she was a little boy, and the baby, who Roman named Paul, was the mother. As a little boy, it was in the country. It looks like maybe a couple hundred years ago. The little boy wandered off playing and something happened, and he was lost and never found. He died. She’s making me feel like he might have fallen into like, an animal burrow or a hole in the ground or something and he was never found. That was Sharon in that lifetime.
Elisa: Right.
Kim: Mom, who was the baby, never quite got over that, and longed for her baby her whole life and carried a lot of depression. So that was one contributing lifetime.
Elisa: So she decided to die this life?
Kim: Yes.
Elisa: Both of them together?
Kim: They were going to live a lifetime where they got to stay together pretty much to the end, through the whole life.
Elisa: Okay.
Kim: The next lifetime–or maybe it was before then, I’m not sure I have the timeline right–she was the mother. The baby, Paul, was the child. She died. She hemorrhaged shortly after giving birth to this (inaudible 12:07) who I think was a girl in this lifetime. The baby, Paul, was a girl in this lifetime. She died giving birth. She did not transcend. She stayed on the earth plane with her baby. She carried depression and fear, and that type of thing from the death, and it influenced the baby in that lifetime and as the child grew up because her energy was so sad and being around the baby all the time and had a negative impact.
Elisa: What was that negative impact?
Kim: The baby could feel the sadness–or the child, because it eventually grew up. I keep saying the “baby”–could feel the sadness, could just feel this weight of this (over-talking 12:57)
Elisa: Yeah, but did that make her depressed?
Kim: Yes and didn’t know where it came from. It wasn’t even the baby’s.
Elisa: Aw. So the common theme is–was your mother, and her struggling with your death, what is the lesson to be learned through these three lives? It’s almost like spiritual DNA.
Kim: Right. Well, she says for her and the baby, it was to learn that separation is only temporary.
Elisa: Oh.
Kim: Separation is an illusion.
Elisa: Yes.
Kim: Separation is an illusion. She said her mother kind of had an inkling that something could happen. Her mother–there was a time when they were separated because they were in the military and Sharon was doing something else where the family packed up to be with Sharon. She’s making me feel like her mother really had an inkling. Her mother, in this lifetime, was to be a support, and set up all the circumstances, so that she could bring this baby through and live a healthy life and not be overbearing and that type of thing and impact this baby negatively.
Sharon: We did fulfill what we came to do, which, I wouldn’t say we fulfilled our contract that we died together, but we were supposed to live a much longer life was what it was.
Elisa: Yeah.
Sharon: My mother was the support that helped put this all together. My mother–this wasn’t something we all agreed to in the beginning.
Kim: But it’s like during the course of it, she kind of switched. The grief kind of switched course, and like, “Okay, I have to pull myself out of this, and the only way I can do that is by helping other people with their tragedies.” So she’s saying that was her mother’s role in it was to help other people deal with it, make it better for others.
Sharon: Much the same way as you and Erik.
Elisa: Okay. Were you supposed to, in this lifetime, outlive your mother? You and the baby?
Kim: She said there were more than one exit points.
Elisa: Oh, yeah.
Sharon: We would have most likely outlived my mother. Say you’re given five exit points–
Elisa: Okay.
Sharon: – if that was the amount. You might have two of them early in your life, and your other three at age 70, 80, and 90. The exit point we got obviously wasn’t a chosen one. One of our exit points, we could have died before my mother.
Elisa: Oh, I see.
Sharon: There were exit points where we would have died after.
Elisa: Okay.
Sharon: It was kind of a lifetime that was to be determined by how long we wanted to stay.
Elisa: TBD. So what do you think you were to learn originally in this lifetime, Miss Sharon Tate? What did you intend to learn? The same thing, separation is an illusion or?
Sharon: That separation is an illusion. That life is eternal.
Kim:  She’s making me feel like there were some things with her star power–you know, she was a movie star–that there were some things that she was going to be doing, had she lived, that would have helped the planet growing consciousness.
Elisa: Oh! Okay.
Kim: She says the other thing is Hollywood–that can be kind of a dark place.
Elisa: Oh, God, yeah.
Kim: She was a very light, loving being, so it was kind of countered to who she was. So part of what she was going to be doing was to help shift that darkness, that consciousness. I would just describe her as just a cute, little, sweet girl that lives next door that you just love. She was very authentic, very soft-spoken, very sweet. That’s the personality that’s bringing through. She would have brought some of that through–
Elisa: Hollywood.
Kim: – Hollywood.
Elisa: What about the baby? What was his original lesson, or what was he here to teach or learn?
Kim: She’s talking about with him being a part of that culture, that–oh! Okay, so you know how sometimes things get kind of off-track with families out there, where the kids will get in trouble and the parents will divorce, and there’s all kinds of drama?
Elisa: Mm-hm.
Kim: They were going to demonstrate it down in a nice, loving way, where the child is well-developed, or the child’s not emotionally scarred, that type of thing.
Elisa: Okay.
Kim: They were going to demonstrate that. He basically was just going to have a nice, normal life, grow up. He’d get his family, get a career, that type of thing, but it was really to show how under the right set of circumstances and love that a family could really flourish, that it didn’t have to be all this drama.
Elisa: Oh, that’s good.
Kim: So that was part of it, and also to learn that separation is an illusion. This time, they got to choose to stay together all the way through, or you know, within a very short time at least. They did die separately. I keep seeing like a car accident where they possibly would have died together or maybe the mother would have died, and the child a few years later or something like that, or he could have been an adult at that point.
Elisa: Okay. Have y’all incarnated back on the earthly plane?
Kim: He is telling me that they are, and that they are together.
Elisa: As what?
Kim: He, the baby, is the parent this time. The baby is the mother, and she is a small child. Let me see. Boy or girl? I feel like a girl, like she’s a little girl again. The baby is the mom, and it feels like somewhere overseas, Europe.
Elisa: Okay, somewhere in there.
Kim: It’s going to be a very happy life, and they don’t have those separation issues anymore. They’ve worked through that.
Elisa: Oh, good.
Kim: She said it was like a big imprint where they were separated and torn apart, that they carried that with them, and it was very painful. They don’t have to do it again.
Elisa: Well, what is their spiritual mission now?
Kim: Hm? What is their spiritual mission?
Elisa: Yeah. Obviously, it can be different.
Kim: They’re going to have a happy, normal life.
Elisa: Good. You deserve it, girl!
Kim: Yeah. She’s saying just by them living through it, it’s like it helped them. They finally have come to peace with that and cleared all that trauma.
Elisa: Okay.
Kim: Go ahead.
Elisa: What is your life’s work from the afterlife? What are you trying to do here on Earth? Like, help your mother? I don’t know, whatever.
Sharon: Yeah. Helping my family was first and foremost, but working with victims of violent crimes.
Elisa: Oh, okay. Good, good, good.
Sharon: I’ll get them to clear that trauma because so many people go on where there was the before and the after, and the trauma now defines them.
Elisa: Yeah. That’s right. I know. I totally know. Now, what do you feel–can you tap into Manson’s current state of mind? Has he gotten better? I mean, what’s he like now?
Kim: She says that he did a lot of soul-searching in prison, and she says that he did reach a point. It was the highest point he could reach from where he was at in his understandings. She says it’s not necessarily that she’s opposed to it. She wouldn’t have been at the beginning, but it kind of feels like–okay, like they really have to match the vibrations to be able to connect and interact.
Elisa: Oh, yeah.
Kim: He’s still down here, and she’s up here. So it’s not–
Elisa: Not aligned.
Kim: Right. Yeah, she just doesn’t feel drawn to it at some point. She’s making me feel like eventually, he would raise his vibration where he’d be capable of that.
Elisa: Was he mentally ill at the time of your death?
Sharon: Yes. Yes.
Elisa: Was he paranoid schizophrenic, or what?
Kim: He had those tendencies. She’s saying he was a narcissist. He would feel a thrill when he was harming someone, very sick and twisted.
Elisa: Well, why did he come in with–why does he have mental illness? Was it his upbringing? Was it a spiritual contract that he made to come in that way or what?
Kim: It was his upbringing, his environment. He didn’t come in with that spiritual contract to kill a bunch of people. She’s saying, and I don’t know that she necessarily has full knowledge of that. I’m kind of asking Erik here if he can help to kind of clarify.
Elisa: What did he come in to do? What was his mission, if it wasn’t that?
Erik: You know how we have polarity in the world?
Elisa: Mm-hm.
Erik: And some come into be the good guys, and some come in the bad guys? This time he did really take a bad guy role, but that wasn’t contracted that he goes out and starts to–
Elisa: Yeah.
Erik: That he chose himself. He got this like, false messiah kind of complex where he felt like he could control people. He could hear the negative side of the astral realm. They were influencing him.
Elisa: Oh! Wow, did he have negative attachments, negative entities–
Erik: Yes.
Elisa: – that were influencing him?
Kim: Yes, and Erik also talks about the drug abuse, things like LSD and stuff like that, like heavy, heavy drugs, that that also played a role, and that when he would use those type of things, the astral realm would be able to influence him even more.
Elisa: Oh, gosh. I can imagine. So does he still have these attachments, these negative entities?
Kim: No. No. Not on the other side. That doesn’t happen, and he is on the other side with them. He’s just not as highly vibrational–
Elisa: Oh! Wait, he’s dead?
Kim: Charles Manson?
Elisa: Yeah. Uh-oh.
Kim: Charles Manson’s dead. Yes.
Elisa: Oh, okay. All right. Does he have any remorse?
Kim: Yes. He does, and embarrassment.
Elisa: Oh, man. I would be.
Kim: He’s still got work to do before he raises his vibration. She talks about another one that also died, a brain tumor.
Elisa: Oh, yeah? Who? One of the other killers?
Kim: Yeah. Susan. Susan was the one–oh, no. Okay. So when it happened, Susan and another man–the other man was the one who did the killing.
Elisa: Who was it?
Kim: One of the followers, I don’t get the name.
Elisa: Oh, okay.
Kim: Yeah, he was the one doing the stabbing. The woman, she was begging for mercy. This is the woman who’s died now.
Elisa: Oh, okay.
Kim: She said that she hasn’t connected with her either, but she said there was some talk–and I knew this, too. I’d read it. The family was asking for her to be released from prison because she was dying, and it was brain tumor.
Elisa: Okay. Did she get released?
Kim: No.
Elisa: Okay.
Sharon: At that point, yes, she was no longer a danger to society, and she had done enough work, and was remorseful of herself. But she’s saying, really, these people who were in prison thinking they’d turned a leaf, they did move forward some, spiritually, but as they started to awaken, they couldn’t let go and forgive themselves.
Elisa: Hm.
Kim: Which is something they really needed to do, so they’re still working on it from the other side. I’m asking her if she thinks it’s a good idea. Should that woman have been paroled so that she could go home and die with her family?
Sharon: It wouldn’t have mattered.
Kim: She wasn’t a threat to society, but she said with the intensity of that crime, the violence of it, she said that would have been really hard on her family if they would have paroled her.
Elisa: Yeah. On Sharon’s family, right?
Kim: On Sharon’s family.
Elisa: Okay.
Sharon: It just wouldn’t have sent the right message to the world.
Yeah, I agree.
Sharon: So that happened as it was meant to be. Although, we’re not still holding this woman–
Kim: I think Susan, she’s calling her.
Sharon: We’re not holding her in judgment.
Kim: But she’s got to work through these things on her own until she can connect with Sharron. Although Charlie Manson and them would have told you they’d done their rehabilitative work, maybe they were model prisoners and all that, she said, “That’s just what they thought.”
Elisa: Oh, okay. Well, let me ask you–
Kim: It was only half the way.
Elisa: Yeah. Let me ask you one more question. At the end of his prison sentence, before he transitioned, did Charles Manson stop believing he was the messiah?
Kim: I’m sorry.
Elisa: Oh, I know. I saw that.
Kim: I didn’t hear that.
Elisa: At the end of his prison sentence, when he was still alive, did Charles Manson still feel like he was some sort of messiah, or did he feel remorse for what he had done before he transitioned?
Kim: He was starting to come to a place where he knew what Christ consciousness was. He was starting to understand that. His ego was diminishing, the part of him that thought the was the messiah. He was somewhat remorseful, but not totally. He couldn’t even allow himself to be as fully into it and as remorseful as he needed to forget it and move on because it was such a horrendous thing he did. He couldn’t face himself. That’s what she’s saying. He could not face himself.
Elisa: Oh, okay.
Kim: When he transitioned, he was really forced to, and that’s what he’s in the process of doing now, facing himself and what happened, forgiving himself, and like she’s saying, he is really at the point of embarrassment.
Elisa: Okay, so any last things you want to share, Sharon? Or your baby, Paul?
Kim: She says to her family, she loves them, and they will be reunited.
Elisa: Awesome.
Sharon: Thank you for giving me this opportunity. I knew I wanted to, if I did this, come through on your channel because you know what it’s like for a mother to lose their child.
Elisa: Oh, yeah. Absolutely.
Sharon: I knew this would resonate with you and you’d understand.
Elisa: Of course. Well, thank you so much for coming in. Erik, thank you so much for bringing her forward and helping us out with this. I love you, and you can get in touch with Kim at Embody-Light.com. She’s awesome, as you can see. I will put it right here as the title splash, and I love you guys. Bye. Bye, Kim.