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.

The 2013 Official Eviliz Tour Shirt

Last year we printed shirts that we wore on the trip (yes, we're geeks). We received many requests for them but we really hadn't planned on that. This year, you can get one of your own. Presenting:

The 2013 Official Eviliz Tour Shirt.

Black 6.1 oz. 100% cotton Beefy Tee (the good stuff).
California map tour logo and web address imprinted on left chest pocket. 

CLICK HERE

The Ballad of Brenda McCann



One of Charlie's fiercest, most loyal peons had a song composed in her honor. Miss Nancy Pitman aka Brenda McCann was in the mind of The Shangs when they wrote this haunting, mellow groove. Funny, but when I think of Brenda McCann, I picture a mosh pit blaring National Socialist black metal-type melodies. Enjoy:

That Charles Manson likes his ZuZu's

How ironic is it that Sara Jane Moore, who attempted to assassinate President Ford 22 days after Squeaky made her attempt, and Charles Manson lived in the same town growing up and frequented the same candy store?  This ought to set the conspiracy theorists atwitter.  I've read a few theories related to Sara Jane and the Family women but none that directly involved Charlie.

Also, the candy man was named Watson!  oo-ee-oo 

                                          mostlikelytokill.blogspot.com                 forteanswest.com

Corbin Daily Tribune
Corbin KY
Sept. 25, 1975

Manson, Sara Have Same Hometown

Charleston W.Va (AP) Sara Jane Kahn and Charles Manson bought a lot of candy from Van Watson when they were children.

"Sara Jane was a serious pupil but Manson liked to play a little bit of hooky," says Watson.  Sara Jane, now Sara Jane Moore, is in jail for trying to kill President Ford.  Manson is serving life in prison for the 1969 murder of actress Sharon Tate and six others.  And, one of Manson's followers, Lynette Fromme , also is charged with trying to kill the president, in a separate incident.

"Kathleen Manson, Charles' mother, was a clerk in my store for three or four months," Watson said in an interview Monday.  Charles was about 9 or 10 years old then, around 1942.  He was an ordinary boy, nothing outstanding, I sold him a lot of candy.   He'd come in two or three times a day, whenever he got a penny."

Watson said he was shocked to learn that Sara Jane Kahn was the person accused of shooting at the president.  "I knew her from childhood," he said.  "She came into the store to buy candy on her way to school.  She was a loner- almost always by herself.  She never had much to say about anything.  She always had a couple of books under her arm and seemed to take school seriously."

The Kahn's lived in a big log house up Woodward Dr. from his store and the Manson's lived in a house across the street from his store.  "I was very much surprised the way those two turned out," Watson said.  "Charles wasn't much good at going to school- he liked to play a little bit of hooky.  But I expected Sara Jane to grow up and become somebody with a good education and a responsible position in life.  I never dreamed she would be somebody who'd try to kill the President."

It is not known whether Manson and Sara Jane Kahn knew each other while living here.

Pics from Fearless Vampire Killers

Yana the Witch 2013

A mutual friend of  Eviliz.com and Linda Kasabian's got in touch with me recently providing me with a few recent pics of Linda to share. Please be kind in the comments so we can keep this mutual friend.