Q&A from Grump

There has been a name that Charlie mentioned at least 2 times that I know of. The name is “Doc Hartman”.

In the Diane Sawyer interview: “I was raised in the judges robe, under Doc Hartman, I’m like his little boy”

In his 1992 Parole hearing: “So I went through the lieutenant there and they brought the guys - the lieutenants and the men that were in uniforms from the dentists office and all the Navy and the doctors from Doc Hartman, they brought them from back east…”

Any idea who or what a Doc Hartman is???

Question from "Neil of San Diego"

above: 122 Lyon Street, Haight Ashbury

Hello Patty ... I've seen that your site is well thought out....quite an achievement actually.

What happened after Squeaky, Brunner and Charlie first came together at Brunner's place?  I should be more specific in my question. The time frame: Charlie has picked up Squeaky and returns to Brunner's Place. Did Charlie, Brunner, and Squeaky hang together at the Haight (Cole St etc) for several months, when Squeaky first showed up from Venice?

I gather that the three soon ran into Atkins at Lyon Street. Shortly thereafter, they hopped on the bus to go north on a trip to Mendocino. Going south they pick up Krenwinkle. They eventually return to the Haight.Where are they all staying? Where is Krenwinkle staying? What are they doing for money? Hanging out on their renovated bus? What are Squeaky and Charlie up to in the Haight at this time?  Seems like the books I've read gloss over this hole in the early family history...

Is there some "pro" out there who might be able to sort me out on this?

Sincerely,
Neil of San Diego

An interview with Randy Starr's wife

Here at the blog we have been fortunate to have been invited to interview stuntman Randy Starr's wife. For the purpose of posting the interviews she has asked that we refer to her as Windy Bucklee.  Windy first arrived at Spahn Ranch around 1963 and went by the Windy name at that time.  Windy is a Native American Indian who has lead a varied and sometimes tragic life.  When young, in the 1940's, she, along with many other Indian children, was taken by the government from her family and placed in an Indian boarding school.  The government thought at that time this was the best way to assimilate the Native Americans into the white man's society and ways.  She was eventually placed with a white family in Ohio who treated her no better than an indentured servant.  Because of that she ran away at the age of 16 and never looked back.  At the time she ran away Montie Montana's Wild West Show was in the area and she was able to find work and a way to leave Ohio with the show.  Windy worked for Montana across the US ending up in southern California in the mid to late '50's.  She briefly worked for another Wild West Show which took her to the western states but those types of shows were dying out so she sought work in the many stables and ranches in southern California.

Windy is not very good with dates, it is not in the Indian culture to keep constant tabs on time in general, for that reason she has been vague at times about when certain things took place.  I have tried my best to organize her timetable by comparing it to when her children were born or some other well known event that could be looked up.  Windy had worked for a woman named Gladys Cox who took in horses that were less than desirable and turned them around to be well mannered and saleable.  Mrs. Cox was acquainted with George Spahn and his ranch having done business with him.  When Mrs. Cox became ill she arranged for Windy to work and live at Spahn.  This was in 1963 and Windy worked and lived there off and on until the ranch burned in 1970.  She did not always work full time and at times she took other jobs elsewhere.  Such was life on the ranch where people came and went with whatever opportunities seemed best in the moment.  Windy did tell me that Ruby Pearl was a constant at Spahn although Ruby gave up spending the night at Spahn when things with Charles Manson and the Family became overwhelmingly tense.

Windy met Randy Starr at Spahn around 1964, they fell in love and had a wedding ceremony up on Indian Mesa at the ranch.  Randy wore all black and rode a black stallion, Windy wore white buckskins and rode a white mare.  Windy told me that it was an Indian ceremony and I'm not entirely certain that it was a legal marriage.  Windy really did not have much use nor see the point in the white mans way and still doesn't.  Randy and Windy had a daughter in March of 1965 and named her Starlina.  Starlina was born, what Windy called a thyroid baby, and she lived only four months. After the baby died Randy was devastated and took off for his home state of Illinois for about 18 months leaving Windy behind in southern California.  While in Illinois Randy was in an automobile accident and lost the use of one of his arms.  Windy and Randy still had a bond and worked together at Spahn off and on but never lived together again. 

Sometime in 1967 Windy had moved from Spahn to a house on Gresham St. a few houses away from Bill Vance.  She knew Vance from working at Spahn, he had been a cowboy but wanted to try something else so he bought a semi truck, he had no trailer for it and was planning on getting jobs hauling other peoples trailers.  Apparently the semi was always needing repairs and he rarely used it.  At this time Windy was working for a company called New Art Publishing and Party Company full time and not working at the ranch.  She became close friends with Vance and his roommate Little Harvey.  Little Harvey was a midget who had a Bull named Elmer that he put in fairs, parades and sideshows.  Elmer was a Swiss bull with three eyes and four horns.  I kid you not!  Windy was telling at that time that part of Gresham St. and the next block were parcels with a little bit of acreage.  Kind of like ranchettes. 

Windy first met Charlie Manson in late 1967 or early 1968 at Bill Vance's on Gresham St.  She does not know how Bill and Charlie met, he just showed up there with a few of the girls and started living there along with Bill, Harvey and Elmer.  Since Bill and Windy were close friends and Bill's only mode of transportation was the semi she gave Bill a second set of keys to her truck and allowed Bill to use it while she was at work.  She never really knew when he was going to use the truck and she was fine with that as long as the truck was there when she left work.

One day while she and her daughter, from a marriage previous to Randy, were out in the truck she was pulled over by the police and questioned about where she was at certain times.  She learned from the police that there had been a number of robberies and that the license plate number of her truck matched the plate number of a truck seen at one of the robberies.  In total there had been eight robberies that they were investigating.  She was able to prove that she had been at work at the time the robberies were committed and couldn't have done them.  The police let her go but by this time she had put two and two together and knew who had done the crimes.  She did not tell the police her suspicions.  When she arrived home she went immediately to Bill Vance's madder than a wet hen, read him the riot act and demanded her truck keys back.  A couple of hours later Charlie came over to her house and asked for the truck keys back and she refused.  Charlie proceeded to beat the crap out of her breaking her jaw and causing other injuries.  She had a gun in her house that her brother had left for her, she tried to shoot Charlie three times but because she was unfamiliar with the gun and she was pretty beat up she could not figure out how to get the safety off.  Windy told me that Charlie ran when he saw she had the gun and she regrets not having shot him as she figured she could have saved a few lives down the road.   Windy ended up in the hospital for a couple of days.

Next, I will tell you Shorty Shea's reaction to Windy's beating by Manson.



Photo compliments of cielodrive.com

Q&A Back to the Barker raid ammo question

You all might recall one of our members "Matt W" asking a previous question (see below) about the ammo seized at the Barker ranch raid.  I was chatting with Matt W about it recently and he brought up an interesting question. Was it James Willett who stole the weapons/ammo for the Family?
Matt W also brought up a good point being we don't even know if James was ever stationed there.

Hi Liz, I've been reading your blog for a couple weeks, looking for specific information regarding a list of weapons that were seized during the Spahn and Barker ranch raids. Main reason was while I was stationed at Camp Pendleton (Ca) there was a report of  someone stealing grenades and other armaments. The only people having access to the armory would have been Marines (to my knowledge). Any help sure would be appreciated...

Brown Decides Against Release

From CNN:

California Gov. Jerry Brown reversed a decision to grant parole to Bruce Davis, a former follower of Charles Manson. "When considered as a whole, I find the evidence ... shows why he currently poses a danger to society if released from prison," the governor wrote.

Brown's office had received a formal recommendation from the state board parole Friday to release Davis, 70, who would have been the first Manson "family" member to secure freedom solely for good behavior.

In 2010, Davis secured his first formal recommendation for parole by the state board, but then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger reversed the board's decision.

 CBS:

http://www.cbs3springfield.com/story/21438387/governor-denies-parole-to-ex-manson-follower

The Steamer Trunks and The Timeline

... Continued from a previous thread, which was continued from a previous thread.

Splotches would indicate a pooling, there were 3 drops of blood on the trunks that dripped in a downward motion indicative of someone (bleeding) standing over them as they were being knocked over or after they were knocked into that position.

Look at the attached photo and take notice of a couple of things:

A) If you had the luxury to reverse a film footage of these being knocked over you would be able to see that they were neatly set (handle side up) against the inside living room wall, in front of a flat brown box, opening clasps facing inward, and out of the way. If you then ran the film forward and knocked into them in a struggle, they would then fall (depending on angle hit and force) in the approximate position they're depicted in, in this photo.

B) The trunk openings are facing toward the wall. The left trunk is still inches from the brown box. The average thinking person would turn the trunks out toward them to search them or move them away from the wall. So, not only are they left in an awkward search position, but again, the close proximity to the flat brown box would indicate they were knocked over from that position and never opened.

C) Notice the right trunk. There are three blood drops on the carpet - two of which are a direct trajectory from the blood spots on the trunk. These three drops are on the carpet at the bottom edge of the trunk which, in my mind, is absolute proof that the trunks were knocked over during the commission of the crimes and never moved or searched. Had these trunks moved even a centimeter after the murders the bloods drop would no longer line up as they do in the photo.

These trunks were heavy, therefore, in my mind, a delivery person had them on a hand dolly cart - handles up - pushed them into the living room, against that inner wall, out of the way, and left them there in that position until Sharon could deal with unpacking them. Even if you went out on a crazy-pants limb to say that the delivery person (and later an entire household) left the trunks in the middle of a major pathway of the house and that they were then knocked over while Jay was being moved to the front porch and in turn left out in the middle of the room, you still couldn't get the blood spots to match as they do. It all makes zero sense.

Sander's book - How does he know it was 2AM when they returned to Spahn? Again, this is all speculation in Bugliosi's prosecution to fit HIS timeline of events, which, quite frankly don't add up. There were no clocks at Spahn. People completely lose all sense of time during stressful periods. How do we know that it wasn't 3AM or 3:30AM when they returned. We don't and neither could any one of the killers because there were no clocks from the time they left Spahn to the time that they returned. It's all speculation!

First, lets look at the drive from Cielo after the murders. Kasabian (and therefore Bugliosi) put forth that the killers changed clothes in the car and then pulled off their first chance to dump the clothing - which was almost at the top of Benedict. Then, they went back down Benedict Canyon to Portola to hose off? And then went back up Benedict, across Mulholland and over Beverly Glen (where they dumped the gun) and then drove down into the Valley. Makes absolutely no sense - except that a TV crew supposedly recreated the actions to find the ravine where the clothes were found.

Still, this  series of events makes absolutely no sense when you're a killer escaping a crime scene - what, you hang around endlessly driving up and down Benedict? No. I would put forth that a more sensical scenario is that all but Watson changed clothes on the drive up Benedict. They then stopped at Portola simply for Watson to change clothes on a side street out of sight. But then saw the  Weber hose and decided to also wash the blood from their hands and face. They then ran into Weber, made a break for it and proceeded up Benedict. How did the news crew find the spot? Because the only ravine on Benedict between Portola and Mulholland would have been where they actually dumped the clothing and where the news crew later found them. 

Weber? Hm, you have a retired couple, frightened while awakened in the middle of the night. Again, I think that this was a guestimate of time - lets remember that Weber didn't give his account of the time until months after the murders. If, on the piece of paper Weber had noted the time along with the license tag, I might be less skeptical, but prosecution cases are lost all the time on eyewitness accounts because people aren't always accurate with their memories. And, all prosecutors love to have a timeline that they refuse to deviate from - it lost Marcia Clark the OJ Simpson conviction.

How do we know that during an interview with Bugliosi, again, months after the incident, that Weber didn't say he encountered the group in the "middle of the night" and Bugliosi asked, "Could it have been around 1A?" Yes. "Do you think that's accurate?" Sure, it sounds about right. So Weber's account, after being rehearsed with Bugliosi prior to his testimony - because in Bugliosi's own words, you never ask a witness a question you don't already know the answer to -  went something like:"What time would you estimate that this occurred?" Around 1AM... And, at that moment, history, albeit possibly inaccurate history, is recorded for all time.

Also, let's remember that Bugliosi's entire timeline revolves around a clock radio that was unplugged at 12:15A. Billy G's recollection of events that night is sketchy at best. How do we know that Steven didn't demonstrate the clock for him, unplug it and then stay for another hour? Didn't Billy even say something to the effect that the clocks in the house weren't working so he picked up the phone to call "time" and that's how he knew the phone lines weren't working? So, his estimate of when Steve left his house is very sketchy to me.

Again, I'm not saying that this account is accurate, I'm just saying that I can weave any scenario I want to fit my own needs. If the killers had been sighted on Topanga Canyon at 4AM, I guarantee that Bugliosi could have then taken all the "later time" accounts, brought them in as witnesses and made it work to his favor just as easily.

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.

Charles Manson's Half Brother

A Friend of the Blog has shared with us an undated photo of Charlie's half brother, Colonel W. Scott Jr.  We were told that Junior had been a coach at a small college in Illinois.  He was born slightly less than a year and a half after Charlie was born.

Do you see any resemblance to Charlie?

Colonel Walker Scott

A Friend of the Blog was kind enough to share with us the obituary and death certificate of Colonel Scott, Charles Manson's birth father of record.  He also relayed to us a few tidbits related to Colonel.

About 14 months after Charlie was born Colonel and his first wife Dorothy had a son and named him after his father.  On April 19, 1937 the bastardy suit filed by Kathleen Manson in 1936 was settled in Kathleen's favor.  The Colonel was ordered to pay a modest amount child support for Charlie.  In 1940 another son was born to Dorothy and Colonel.

April 17, 1941 Dorothy Scott sued Colonel for divorce and won.  His drinking problems, abusiveness and non support issues were brought up in court.  Dorothy won custody of both boys.

Colonel Scott dies in 1954 of cirrhosis of the liver at age 44. He was survived by his second wife Sylvia and his two sons.

Larry Bailey

While on hiatus, Detective Eviliz recieved a great recent pic of Little Larry to share.

Enjoy!

2012

1969

This is just a preview of all the good stuff to come in 2013.