The Following is an exchange between Robert Hendrickson and Vincent Bugliosi after the publication of the below article

THE ORIGINAL ROBERT HENDRICKSON ARTICLE

LAPD Scandal and Vincent Bugliosi

February 16, 2000

It seems that in Los Angeles you can't even escape the "LAPD SCANDAL" long enough to have a quiet dinner and take in a movie. We're up to victim's blood splattering on police station walls and carpets, so God, What's next?

This entire event is unfolding just like the Manson Case did 30 years ago. The only difference is murder is now spelled phonetically S C A N D A L.

That police brutality is news to only one black man in these United States (the Chief of police) speaks dramatically to the question of cover up and or conspiracy. And that the mayor and members of the LA City Council would undoubtedly refuse to take polygraph tests only raises more suspicion of complicity.

If you are watching the sinful crumbling of the once great city named Los Angeles, you can see that the standard setup for the little guy to take the fall is already in progress.

But if you, like us, wish to see the actual responsible parties take their due, perhaps you would agree that there is only ONE solution. This is to take the 9 million dollars Bernie Fife wants to con L.A. out of and give it to, none other than, Vincent Bugliosi. Appoint Mr. Bugliosi as Special Prosecutor, just like the famed Kenneth Starr was.

Please understand, we do not endorse or recommend Mr. Bugliosi, as a particular person, nor are we affiliated with him in any way, but we acknowledge that he is quite possibly the ONLY man alive qualified to get the necessary complicity convictions of the higher ups. He has proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that he can accomplish such a feat as evidenced by his record in the Mason Case.

The parallels between the "Manson Case" and the "LAPD Scandal", what with idiots doing the bidding of their leaders are almost exacting and trust us on this one, ONLY a Bugliosi will bet justified conspiracy convictions. It's time we all stop accepting the practice of letting the little guy take the fall.

As for all the deranged cops that have gotten off for so long on the LAPD time honored exercise of Nazi-bation, we suspect most of those little cowards will run and hide at just the thought of Mr. "B" riding into town. And those that don't run will surely prove just how mentally defective they really are.

If you wish to comment on the above opinion, tell us your thoughts and if you are about to be a fall guy, tell us what you know and we'll publish it, only if you so request.

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


Hendrickson: "Because Mr "B" has claimed that HE ONLY uses an old typewriter and does NOT even own a computer, this may be the ONLY email of its kind."

BUGLIOSI RESPONDS

Whoever you are, you are obviously a conspiracy theorist and an idiot. Your "pigeon English" and failure to construct a logical line of reasoning clearly indicates that you have no credibility - or education, for that matter - and should simply be ignored. Your disjointed ranting goes nowhere and would undoubtedly fail to go any further even if you had the slightest grasp of proper grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling.

Nevertheless, here's where your reasoning is flawed. First, polygraph tests are so unreliable that they are barred from being introduced into evidence in a court of law. Yet, you want to hold them - or someone's unwillingness to submit to them - up as proof positive evidence. This makes no more sense than O.J. Simpson's defense. It's nothing more than a bunch of garbage without any foundation in reality. The fact of the matter is that you need credible, reliable evidence to back up your claims. In the absence of such, you have nothing more than the ability to raise eyebrows in the audience at a Jerry Springer Show taping.

Next, you completely contradict yourself. First you say this matter should be if away from the control of "Bernie Fife" - in reality the name is Barney Fife, just another incident in which your obvious and blatant stupidity rears its ugly head - and place it in the hands of ‘none other than" Vincent Bugliosi. Shortly thereafter, you say you "do not endorse or recommend Mr. Bugliosi, (sic) as a particular person..." That makes no more sense than the rest of your utterly stupid blithering. That is a complete and total contradiction. It makes as much sense as saying, "This is black, though it is not really black at all, but really white and completely white at that."

Third, what the hell does convicting Charles Manson of the Tate-LaBianca murders have to do with your "SCANDAL". That was a murder trial, not a scandal. The only thing remotely scandalous was the fact that these crimes were very high profile - due to the victims chosen - and the particularly gruesome way in which they were carried out. Furthermore, the challenging part of that case was convincing a jury that Manson was convinced that the Beatles were speaking to him through their music, that Helter Skelter was his way of igniting a race war that would ultimately leave Manson himself in charge of the world, and that Manson exerted control over a bunch of hippies to the extent of controlling even their sex lives. Is that what you're claiming, that this alleged "SCANDAL" involves a musical group communicating with its perpetrator(s), that the ultimate goal is igniting a race war to empower the perpetrator(s), and that it involves controlling every last detail of these people's lives? From your ineloquent ravings, it sounds more like an internal matter to be handled within an organization.

Finally you claim resolution of this matter might show "how mentally defective (these people) are." Sir, I suggest your website merely shows how mentally defective you and anyone who would buy into your ridiculous rhetoric and far-fetched notions are.

It's been said that , a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." If that's true, then I'm afraid you, sir, are extremely dangerous.

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


HENDRICKSON RESPONSE

Dear Mr. Bugliosi:

Because you appear to comprehend the complicated world of the English language, would you be so kind as to explain to us, in layman's terms, the meaning of the following?

1) "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right.... to have the assistance of Counsel for his defense."

2) "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Also, because you were deeply involved in the decision making process, with respect to "The Court Trial of the Century", could you explain the LEGAL grounds upon which Charles Manson was denied his Constitutional Right to represent himself with "the assistance of counsel"?

We humbly await your reply.

P.S. Please don't misinterpret our motives. We really don't give a damn whether MANSON is innocent, guilty, another messiah or just a mass murderer, but if the sacred Constitution upon which the glorious United States was founded has been reduced to a mere piece of' Ebay memorabilia, then we would like to inform our many listeners worldwide, that America just isn't what its forefathers had in mind.

By the way, it was uneducated Blacks, Mexicans and poor White folk that spilled their blood on battlefields so that YOU could attend the college of your choice. We certainly hope to help break that bad habit.

And while we have your attention, we have a most serious question, With respect to the LAPD SCANDAL if police officers have become such good actors that not even educated "officers of' the Court" can detect their false testimony, how can ordinary jury folk or "moon rocks" as one famous prosecutor describes them, be expected to make JUST decisions?

We, unlike the traditional media, are offering you a worldwide forum in which to express yourself UNEDITED and UNCENSORED and we admire your passion.

By the way again, in the third paragraph of' your letter, you make a comment with regard to our "utterly stupid blithering" in the context "This is black, though it is not really black at all, but really white and completely white at that."

Welcome to the 21st Century Mr. Bugliosi, the dinosaurs are gone and it's a NEW age. The following is a full-page advertisement taken from a recent national publication.

Now, pretend you are a detective and see how many inconsistencies or gray areas you can find in this NEW media ploy to raise money for low-income lawyers.

The Watson-Kasabian Dynamic

I think that one of the most overlooked relationships amongst the people connected with the Tate-LaBianca murders was (and is) the one between Charles Watson and Linda Kasabian. Going further, I would also contend that the personal interaction between Watson and Kasabian had much more to do with the murders on Cielo and Waverly Drives than any sinister plan on the part of Charles Manson. 

Charles "Tex" Watson

Linda "Yana" Kasabian

Charles Watson and Linda Kasabian had one of the more identifiable relationships of all of the characters living at Spahn's Movie Ranch in July and August of 1969. That relationship was based on two things: sex and criminality.

That Watson and Kasabian were bonded by sex is well known, because by both of their accounts their lovemaking was profound.  In his book Will You Die For Me? Watson remembered Kasabian's arrival at Spahn's Ranch on July 4, 1969 and their subsequent night together: "Linda joined the Family that same day, without even meeting Charlie, and that night I introduced her to our truth. Linda later said that when we made love it was like being possessed. For me it was a more complete sensation of oneness than I'd ever known with a woman. It was as if our two bodies literally became one and it was no longer possible to feel where I ended and she began. Linda and I talked very late that night, just the two of us in a little room in the ranch house. I told her she should steal some money that the man she'd been staying with had inherited, and when she protested that she couldn't do that, since he was a good friend who trusted her, I quoted Charlie and told her that there was no wrong, no sin; everything anyone had was meant to be shared. Linda had already given the Family whatever she owned and the next day she went back to Topanga and returned a little while later with $5,000 she'd ripped off according to my instructions." (all emphasis added)

At his murder trial Watson elaborated on why he thought he was such an impressive lover of Kasabian: 

 Sam Bubrick (Watson's defense attorney): "The first time you saw Linda, wasn't it about three or four minutes later that you were making love to her?"

Charles Watson: "That is correct."

SB: "What was it about Linda that caused you to be so amorous?"

CW: "Well, I guess the fact that she was a new girl there and that all the other girls, they kind of looked down upon me because they were all with the family before I was and they saw how straight I was when I first got there, and that was always in my mind and their mind too, I believe."

Kasabian was equally impressed by her initial tryst with Watson. Talking to Vincent Bugliosi while preparing her testimony for the murder trial, Kasabian recalled that when she was having sex with Watson she felt as though she was "possessed," and during her testimony at the murder trial (transcript pages 5570-5571) she said:

LInda Kasabian: "Well, first I will have to explain to you the night of July the 4th."

Paul Fitzgerald (Attorney for Patricia Krenwinkel): "Okay."

LK: "I met Tex, and Tex took me into a dark shed, shack, whatever you want to call it, and he made love to me, which was an experience that I had never had before."

PF: "You had never had sexual intercourse before?"

LK: "No. I'm saying that the experience I had in making love with Tex was a total experience, it was different."

PF: "In what respect?"

LK: "That my hands were clenched when it was all over and I had absolutely no will power to open my own hands, and I was very much afraid, I didn't understand it.

"And I questioned Gypsy about it later and she told me it was my ego that was dying."

It's certainly true that a short or even singular sexual relationship can affect a person for the rest of their lives. That is what I think happened here. I think that Charles Watson and Linda Kasabian bonded through their sexual interaction and that a special relationship existed between them. And I also think that that relationship endured throughout the murder trials and indeed continues to this day. 

Watson and Kasabian were also bonded by their shared criminality. Watson's criminal inclinations are well known, from his days in Texas when he drunkenly broke into his old high school and stole some typewriters as part of a fraternity initiation, through his time in Hollywood when he supported himself by low level drug dealing, to his lying to the army to get a deferment, to his amateurish ripoff of Bernard Crowe on July 1, 1969 (just three days before Linda Kasabian arrived at Spahn's Ranch), and finally to his ending up as one of the most notorious mass murderers in American history. 

And Linda Kasabian was no stranger to the shady side of life either. She had been around quite a bit before she even arrived at Spahn's ranch. As her one-time panhandling partner Sandra Good later succinctly recalled, "She was experienced." After the murders at the Polanski and LaBianca residences Kasabian stole a car from a ranch hand at Spahn's to flee the Los Angeles area. Eventually arriving at her father's residence in Florida, he shortly thereafter evicted her because he suspected her of stealing items from his apartment and selling them to buy drugs. And before she was finally arrested at the beginning of December of 1969 she evasively never mentioned the crimes she was involved in to any member of law enforcement or "the Establishment" even though she had ample opportunities to do so.

Charles Watson and Linda Kasabian were partners and soul mates -- both in love and in crime. 

*      *      *

Linda Kasabian came to Spahn's Ranch on July 4, 1969, brought there by Catherine "Gypsy" Share, who had met her at the home of mutual friend Charles Melton. (Kasabian had been briefly staying at Melton's while attempting a reconciliation with her husband Robert, but the reconciliation didn't work out.) Upon her arrival at the ranch one of the first persons she met was Charles Watson. On that first day the pair hung out together, made love, shared drugs, and at some point decided to steal $5,000 from Melton, a theft that Kasabian carried out the next day before she even ever met Charles Manson. (Kasabian says that Watson encouraged her to steal the money. Watson denied this while testifying at his own murder trial, but later, in his book, said that he suggested that she take Melton's money.)

That this $5,000 theft was a major indicator of Kasabian's criminal nature was recognized by Manson Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, who succeeded in having any mention of the theft excluded from the Tate-LaBianca murder trial based on the legal principle that a witness's criminal history can only be mentioned if they have been convicted of a crime. In the case of the stolen $5,000 there was no legal process leading to a criminal conviction. But the technical fact that Kasabian never faced any legal consequences for the theft doesn't make the theft any less serious. (And to give the reader an idea of just how serious that theft was, consider that $5,000 in 1969 dollars would be worth a little over $33,000 today. In other words, Linda Kasabian stole a substantial amount of money.)

The primary driving motive for the Tate-LaBianca murders was to commit a series of copycat murders that would convince the police that Bobby Beausoleil didn't kill Gary Hinman. (You can say that it wasn't, but it was. There might have been other considerations in the minds of the people who killed on August 8 and 9, 1969, but the primary reason why they drove away from Spahn's Ranch on those two nights was to do something to help Bobby Beausoleil, who had been arrested for Hinman's murder only a few days previously.) Everybody at Spahn's Ranch wanted Bobby Beausoleil out of jail. But nobody did more so than Charles Manson, who knew that Beausoleil had killed Hinman to keep him from going to the police after Manson had cut his ear during an earlier violent underworld occurrence. When Manson wanted something done to free Beausoleil he summoned the people who owed him favors and told them to "do something."

All of the people at Spahn's Ranch owed Charles Manson generally for his shooting and presumed killing of Bernard Crowe to protect them from his threatened retaliation after being ripped off by Charles Watson. But some people owed Manson more than others. Charles Watson, of course, owed Manson because he was the one who put the drug burn in motion that led to Manson's shooting of Crowe in the first place. Susan Atkins owed Manson for times when he had resolved problems brought on by some of her careless social interactions, including her thievery involving hashish. Linda Kasabian owed him for when he smoothed over the problem of Robert Kasabian and Charles Meltion coming to the ranch and making a big stink about her stealing Melton's money and threatening to turn the theft into a huge law enforcement issue, or worse.

But the biggest debt by far was owed by Watson, who had forced Manson to (he thought) commit murder in order to straighten out the Crowe mess. Thus was Watson sternly assigned by Manson the task of "doing something" to get Beausoliel out of jail. Out of that command arose discussions around the ranch of what could be done. Out of those discussions arose the half-baked and stupid copycat motive. Was Linda Kasabian a part of those discussions? No one knows for sure, but it is not unreasonable to assume that she had some input into ways to deal with the demand that Manson put onto her lover and partner in crime.

At the murder trial Catherine Share testified that the "copycat motive" was Linda's idea. Certainly anything Share says should be taken with a Death Valley salt flat, but it is not too hard to imagine Kasabian being part of the discussion or planning that led to the ill-conceived copycat plan. She was, after all, criminally inclined, as her eager theft of Charles Melton's $5,000 demonstrated. Also, because of her intense and impressive sexual encounter with Charles Watson, she very possibly held him in a special regard, despite her denials during the trial that she loved Watson any more than she did any of the other men she made love with during her six weeks at Spahn's Ranch (including, not incidentally, Bobby Beausoleil). Thus she might have been especially interested in coming up a with a plan that would both free Beausoleil and get Watson off the hook with a furious Manson.

The prosecution has always claimed that the only reason ranch newcomer Kasabian went along on the murder nights was because she was the only person at Spahn's Ranch with a valid driver's license. But this contention is laughable and is in no way a credible reason for her being in the car. I mean, if you were sending people out to commit an atrocious crime would you really want to send with them a newcomer that you don't really know simply for the legal advantage of  her having a valid driver's license? And if you were on your way to commit mass murder in a borrowed car bearing the wrong license plates, with a rope, bolt cutters, several knives, and a gun, would there really be any reason to have someone along with a valid driver's license? (In fact, having a real driver's license along on such an endeavor would be the exact opposite of what you would want to do if you thought there was a likelihood that you would encounter the police.) And what, really, is the likelihood that Kasabian even really was the only person with a valid driver's license amongst the fifteen or so "Manson Family members" who were present at Spahn's Ranch on those nights? 

Kasabian's activities at Cielo Drive are also inconsistent with the behavior of an innocent bystander. There, Watson sent her around the house to reconnoiter the layout and accessibility of the premises. Later, he had her stand lookout by Steven Parent's car while he and Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkel entered the house. Neither of these tasks are  assignments that would be given to a group's weakest link. After the murders, Watson chewed Kasabian out for abandoning her lookout post and returning to the car at the bottom of the Cielo Drive cul-de-sac after her nightmarish encounter with a bludgeoned and bloody Voytek Frykowski at the front porch of the Polanski house. And as the killers were fleeing the scene, Watson assigned her the task of ditching the murder weapons and had her hold the steering wheel while he changed out of his bloody clothing. 

(Much of all of this, incidentally, is at variance with the testimony that Watson gave at his own murder trial in 1971. While completely uninformative as to why the group went out to commit murder on the first night, he says that Kasabian was driving the car while he rode in the back seat. He also says that Kasabian provided him with the bolt cutters that he used to cut the wires leading into the Polanski property on Cielo Drive and that she drove the car when the killers left the murder scene.)

Lending further credence to the possibility of a special Watson-Kasabian dynamic are the details of the killers' recollections of the second night of murder, when the carload of people from Spahn's Ranch went on a supposed city-wide search for potential murder victims. At his own trial for murder Watson testified that he didn't remember much of the ride that night before the group arrived at Waverly Drive. But by the time he wrote Will You Die For Me? seven years later his recollection accurately mirrored that of Linda Kasabian. Did Watson actually later remember the exact same chain of events that Kasabian did? Or was he merely parroting the story put forth by his former lover in order to provide her version of events with false corroboration?

And yet another bond between the Watson-Kasabian pair is an apparent affection that the two have demonstrated for the type of drug generally referred to as "speed." 

Charles Watson's affinity for the drug is well known. He has recalled his extensive use of speed many times in his book and elsewhere. At his 2001 parole hearing he remembered, "There was a friend of mine across the street, that had the ranch across the street. He had obtained an ounce of it and had given me a jar of it. And Susan Atkins and myself and one other was sniffing the methamphetamine." Was the "one other" Charles Watson referred to at this parole hearing Linda Kasabian? And was Watson still being protective of her by not naming here over thirty years after the murders because he still had special feelings for her?

On Linda Kasabian's part there is not much contemporary evidence of her favoring speed in 1969, but the substance was Watson's drug of choice at that time and it is therefore highly likely that she indulged in it with him while they were together, perhaps even from the first night that they met. Also, Kasabian is known to have had experiences with speed later in her life, some of which experiences led her to have negative encounters with law enforcement. 

In the 2009 History Channel "drama-documentary" Manson, Kasabian made her first extensive public statements about the murders in almost forty years. In the program she practically beamed when talking about her early idyllic days at Spahn's Ranch. She described Charles Watson as gruff and creepy but with beautiful eyes and a beautiful smile. She was attracted to him. Regarding their love-making she said, "He made me feel like I'd never felt before." Although Kasabian's theft of Charles Melton's money was recounted in the show there was no mention whatsoever of the Bernard Crowe burn and the resulting threatened and real violence. Thus, the "Family's" sudden transformation from a peace and love commune into a paranoid and armed camp was left unexplained. Kasabian did say that the killers in the car the first night had taken speed (white pills supplied by Charles Manson) and also that she took Steven Parent's wallet from his corpse after he was shot to death and scouted out the rear area of the Polanski house. In recalling the actual murders she affected weeping but there were no tears. At the conclusion of the program she said, "I could never accept the fact that I was not punished for my involvement in this tragedy. I feel then what I feel now, always, and forever, that it was a waste. It was a waste of life that had no reason. No rhyme. It was wrong. And it hurt a lot of people. Still now, today, and always forever."

Linda Kasabian -- was she really just a poor innocent hippie girl who accidentally fell in with a group of ruthless murderers? Or was she a tough, amoral, and criminally inclined individual who willingly participated in (or maybe even instigated) some of America's most infamous murders? And are she and Charles "Tex" Watson still engaged in a life-long special relationship based on their shared experiences at Spahn's Ranch? Are they like the characters in German folklore known as Doppelgänger (literally "double goers"), biologically unrelated persons who nearly or completely resemble one another? In the folklore when someone meets their Doppelgänger it is an omen of impending death. Perhaps Watson and Kasabian are life-long soul mates, and perhaps they are not. But whatever the true nature of the relationship between Charles Watson and Linda Kasabian was or is, no one can deny that death followed in the wake of their fateful introduction to each other on July 4, 1969.

Sanders New Book

Both Matt and myself have Sanders new book Sharon Tate- A Life.  We are both trying to read it but we are having trouble because it's so damn bad.  Speculation and flights of fancy abound.  We have agreed to each work on certain parts of the book and present a book report together.  So stay tuned.

When Sanders wrote his first book, The Family, veteran reporter Mary Neiswender who covered the Tate  LaBianca trial for the Long Beach Independent did a review.  In the opening paragraph she proffered an alternative title for the book "Rumors I Have Heard Or Thought About Re: Manson, Cults, Weirdos, Etc." .  This would have been a great title for the new book!

Transcribed:

Manson book mixes fact and fancy

REPORTER'S NOTEBOOK
Mary Neiswender

"The Family — The Story of Charles Manson's Dune Buggy Attack Battalion." (E. P. Dutton & Co., $8.95) by former Free Press writer Ed Sanders should have been entitled “’Rumors I Have Heard or Thought About Re. Manson, Cults, Weirdos, Etc.”

It's 412 pages of journalistic minutiae, put together in an attempt to show the “real" Charles Manson, the "real" Manson Famiiy and the "real” blood-and-guts behind the Tate-LaBianca killings and any other murder that looked or sounded similar.

But what it really shows instead is a massive amount of disjointed stories tied together with the now-infamous name of Charles Mlles Manson.

HOWEVER, it's a fantastic piece of journalism. No one I know except the long-haired, always-digging Sanders could come up with all the fact-and-fiction he did, then get it all down chronologically as well as comprehensively.

If you're not used to underground press phraseology - shock instead of sharpness - some of the tales may raise year eyebrows. But, to Ed's credit, there are fewer four-letter words in his book than there were in any one of the Manson articles he wrote for the Free Press.

Although Sanders uses many dates that don't match with the faces (they may be typographical errors), many of his "facts" sound more like the writer's Imagination than Manson’s actions. And, In many of the shady arrests of the Manson story, Sanders uses rumor to fill the void where no  known facts are available.

BUT THEN, no one - except the hippie chief himself - knows how to fill those voids accurately.

Sanders seems to gloss over this "real" Manson - and this also may be because no one really knows the "real" Manson. Sanders apparently hasn't talked with Manson sufficiently - if at all on nitty-gritty matters - to illuminate the subject.

Sanders himself seems confused about what he thinks Manson is all about. But that's understandable too.

He accepts the courtroom testimony of Juan Flynn, a Spahn ranch hand, without question.

WHEN I FIRST interviewed the curly-haired Panamanian at Spahn Ranch a few days after Manson was arrested, he was quoting the Bible and telling anyone who would listen what a rotten guy Manson wae oed what a rotten VD-infeelod bunch of girls he had.

A few months later, I saw the same Juan Flynn in a corridor of the Hall of Justice playing "hand love" with one of Manson's girl “followers and telling television reporters Manson was his "brother" and the greatest guy since Jesus Christ.

When he got an the witness stand, he was back to his his first stories - only vastly expanded and strengthened.

AT THIS POINT I don't think even Juan Flynn knows where he stands, but Sanders took his courtroom testimony only - without hedging his bet, or letting tits readers know the background.

Sanders apparently did the same with other Manson "contacts."

There are a lot of questions Sanders left unanswered in his book - but the answers probably will never be known until Manson tells his own story, if he ever does.

Until then, Sanders' book is the most detailed on the subject to come out… even though the details have a little to be desired.

What I’m waiting for now is Sanders' next book -  which he told me a few months ago would be on another carachter: Richard Milhous Nixon.

Manson's Lost Girls

A new TV movie, Manson's Lost Girls, is set to debut February 6th on the Lifetime channel about the Family as seen though the eyes of Linda Kasabian.  MacKensie Mauzy, portraying Kasabian, is the lead actor.

I don't have high hopes for this production though I'm sure I will set the recorder and watch it at some point.  Lifetime is known more tugging at heartstrings than getting things right.  The very fact that they have made the movie from Kasabian's perspective is telling.

Read about it HERE and HERE

 

MacKensie Mauzy

Pat Krenwinkel as a 'Tween

Thanks to Thomas G for these rare photos!

 

MansonBlog Tour 2016

The dates of the 2016 Tour will be April 27 - May 2. If anyone is interested in tagging along please email either myself or Deb.

The itinerary is still fluid at this point but we've got some interesting and fun ideas!

Past tour links:

Manson Tour 2016: MansonBlog Tour 2016 - Jane Doe 59
Manson Tour 2016: MansonBlog Tour 2016: The Gun Toss And Steven Weiss' House
Manson Tour 2016: MansonBlog Tour 2016: Independence, CA
Manson Tour 2016: Death Valley, The Racetrack Playa and The Michigan Loader Site
Manson Tour 2016: Nude Hippies And The Origin Of An Icon
The End Of Summit Trail

Manson Tour 2015: Earth Day at Spahn Ranch
Manson Tour 2015: A Discussion With George Stimson: Part I
Manson Tour 2015: A Discussion With George Stimson: Part II
Manson Tour 2015: Olancha - Karl Stubbs' Neighbor and Hannum Ranch
Manson Tour 2015: Goler Wash
Manson Tour 2015: Gary Hinman's Bus -- Not
Manson Tour 2015: Benedict Canyon and the Surrounding Areas: Report on Strange Sounds, Gunshots, Indications of Violence, Related by Persons who were in Hearing Distance of the Polanski Residence on the Night of 8-8-69 and the Morning of 8-9-69

Manson Tour 2014: Stoner's Spahn Ranch Hike
Manson Tour 2014: The Museum of Death and The Sounds of Laurel Canyon
Manson Tour 2014: A Day With Aes-Nihil
Holy Cross

2013 Tour - Robert Hendrickson at The Silent Theatre
2013 Tour - Cielo Drive
2013 Tour - Easton Drive / Rudy Weber
2013 Tour - LaBianca
2013 Tour - El Coyote
2013 Tour - Lotsapoppa
2013 Tour - Westchester/Venice
2013 Tour - Hanging out with Michael on his Back Porch!
2013 Tour - Spahn/Chatsworth

2012 Tour Day 1 - Vegas & Pahrump
2012 Tour Day 2 - Devil's Hole, Father Crowley Point & Olancha
2012 Tour Day 3 - Trona, Ballarat & Barker Ranch
2012 Tour Day 4 - El Coyote
2012 Tour Day 5 - Lower Topanga, Spahn, Box Canyon

A Painting, A Pinocchio, & The Manson Murders - Antiques with Gary Stover

Chris has a painting done in 1968 at the home of one of the victims of the Manson murders, Abigail Folger. He has a wooden pinocchio given to him by Sharon Tate and a book given to his brother by Abigail. You won't believe how these objects and Chris' remembrances of the victims intersect to create an improbable, but true, story set against the backdrop of Hollywood's most notorious crime, the brutal murders perpetrated by the Charles Manson Family at the home of Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate in August 1969. Chris paints an unforgettable portrait of Gibby Folger and Sharon Tate, both of whom he knew as a child. These victims turn out not to be the people you thought you knew from accounts written by the sleeze press of the 1960's. They were loving, compassionate human beings whose lives were tragically cut short. You won't want to miss one of the great untold stories of the year!

Thanks, Chatsworth Charlie!

Tex Watson's Beard

"At the same time I interviewed Linda's husband, Robert Kasabian, I also talked to Charles Melton, the hippie philanthropist from whom Linda had stolen the $5,000. Melton said that in early April 1969 (before Linda ever met the Family) he had gone to Spahn Ranch to see Paul Watkins. While there, Melton had met Tex, who, admiring Melton's beard, commented, "Maybe Charlie will let me grow a beard someday."

"It would be difficult to find a better example of Manson's domination of Watson."

 --  Vincent Bugliosi in Helter Skelter,  page 392

That this is the best example Bugliosi could find of Charles Manson's domination of Charles Watson shows how negligible that supposed domination really was, for the only two photographs taken of Watson during the period he lived at Spahn's Ranch with Manson show him to be bearded.

Charles Watson after his arrest for being under the influence of 

Belladonna (Jimson Weed?) on April 23, 1969

Charles "Tex" Watson at the Spahn Movie Ranch in 1969

Oh, Charlie did tell him to shave, but there was really a more mundane reason for Manson's "demand" that Watson (and, indeed, all the males at Spahn Ranch) remain clean shaven beyond his alleged desire to take control over every aspect of their lives. While it might be hard to believe in a day and age where Grandma is tattooed and pierced and the guy checking your groceries has dinner plates in his ear lobes, in the late 1960s men wearing beards (not to mention long hair!) could actually be considered radical. George Spahn (the owner of Spahn Ranch) was running a business -- horse riding rentals -- that depended to some degree on drop-in customer traffic. Therefore, he wanted his ranch to be as welcoming and friendly -- and normal -- as possible to prospective riders. On top of this, Spahn was also somewhat "old school," and he equated "beards" with "bums." For these two reasons he didn't want a bunch of bearded bums lounging around when Mrs. San Fernando Valley came in to investigate the ranch as a possible place for Sally and her friends to go horseback riding. 

It was George Spahn who instituted the "no beards" rule at Spahn's Ranch, not Charles Manson. Manson's directive to Watson regarding his whiskers was merely a pass down of the orders of George Spahn; it was not part of any mind/ body/soul-control agenda of his own.

Based on my forty-plus years of beard wearing I would categorize Watson's efforts as pretty scraggly. Nevertheless, he looks more bearded than he does clean-shaven, and it's apparent that at some point Manson noticed Watson's facial hair and mentioned it to him. But Watson  was no more "dominated" by having to shave than are the hundreds of thousands of other males who have toned down their preferred appearances for the sake of dress code policies relative to employment opportunities. I did the same thing in 1980 when I cut my hair and shaved off my beard as a condition for working with the Fred Harvey concessionaire at Furnace Creek in Death Valley. (And as much as I enjoyed working there I would not have considered committing mass  murder on the company's behalf.)

Thus, Vincent Bugliosi's "no better example" of Charles Manson's supposed domination of Charles Watson turns out to be just like so much more of the District Attorney's case against the former: It turns out to be nothing. 

Happy X-Mas!

LA Beat Article: "Stoner Van Houten - Guardian of the Ranch"

Stoner Van Houten: Guardian of the Ranch
Posted on December 18, 2015 by Mike Ritchie

"I want to show the positive side of Spahn Ranch." Says ranch caretaker and history buff Stoner Van Houten.

Local Manson expert Stoner Van Houten dedicates most of his time to preserving the history and upkeep of Spahn Ranch for anyone who wants to come and see the sights for themselves. He's made numerous YouTube videos chronicling his ranch visits. He's also happy to take people on sight-seeing hikes, bestowing his knowledge with little known facts, anecdotes and his own experiences. He'll take you to places, other tours won't or don't know about, surprising even the most educated on Manson history.

He portrays a genuine love of the area, taking pride in care-taking the land. He's cleaned up graffiti in the Manson cave several times. He's even caught a supernatural occurrence on film during one of his older ranch videos with Manson expert, collector and mentor Michael Channels. He's also a history and geology teacher of sorts showing how the land has changed from time, weather and erosion.

Van Houten, George Stimson (Goodbye Helter Skelter), Barker Ranch

 He admits that many people think what he does is morbid and ‘glorifies' that period. He's been to the ranch thousands of times and besides two unexplained events he's never experienced any bad vibes, events, happenings or hauntings. In fact he finds the area peaceful and inspirational. After all "it is a state park" he says and has seen many people in his visits including walkers, hikers and people just coming to see the place on their own.

He encourages people to seek legit information, look up case files and find out for themselves. Not rely on sensationalistic books and movies. He has his opinions as everyone does. However he admits he's not the first to do what he does and was introduced to the Manson saga by Channels. There are things he probably doesn't know about the cases and history that others within his group and network do. He knows that even though the Helter Skelter motive is widely accepted by many at face value, the real history and motives were much different and he's trying to get that information to the public. He encourages anyone interested to pick up George Stimson's Goodbye Helter Skelter focusing on Tex Watson's involvement.

Van Houten has made numerous on location videos at the ranch along with many Manson related locations in LA and the Haight, Ashbury district in San Francisco where Manson began recruiting women after his prison release and The Russian Embassy. He's also been to the former house of Sandra Good and Lynette Fromme in Sacramento. He's filmed in front of the Hall of Justice at Temple and Broadway where the girls held their trial long vigil, and the tree where Fromme gained infamy for trying to shoot Gerald Ford. He's been to Ballarat near Death Valley and Barker Ranch where Manson and the family were arrested. More recently he received a personally signed note with photos from (Blue) Sandra Good, thanking him for his work at the ranch.

He's led the way to the Zodiac car, the baby caves and recently found the remote area where the outlaw shacks once were. A while back with help from Channels, they uncovered the truck frame laying hillside under the main area, believed to be the truck with the Spahn Ranch sign in vintages photos, later debunked by Pete Porteous.

In January, he did an on location video interview with Porteous, who as a 10-year-old boy was mentored by ranch hand Donald "Shorty" Shea, later murdered by the family. Porteous gave invaluable first-hand knowledge of life on the ranch and personal insight of the happenings and power structure between the ranch hands, bikers and Manson. He also gave insight into experiencing the ranch through the excited, magical eyes of a child, being at the ranch for the first time in over 40 years. His training with Shea turned into a 30 year career as a stuntman.

He talked about riding to the ranch on his minibike wanting to become a stuntman. Ironically, the first person he met on his first trip there was Manson. He and Shea hit it off and Porteous learned the safe way to run a chainsaw, ride a horse and do a saddle fall under his mentorship. Shea christened him "The Kid." He talked about the group barbeques, the live music and the Wild West shows. He described the ranch as a very happy place. It's a shame that no historical landmarks documenting what was there have been placed due to a short period of time at the end.

Porteous said contrary to widespread belief, Manson did not control the ranch. The ranch was a business and Charlie was not the dominating force as media has portrayed. The family was kind of a separate group in a different area occupying the same large space. As far as Manson being a dark powerful figure, he had influence over the family but not the rest of the ranch occupants. Porteous said, besides the girls, the cowboys and ranch hands didn't pay much attention to the family.

Van Houten with Mansonblog.com, Michael Channels, Pete Porteous.

Though most of the ranch's history has been forgotten and eclipsed under the shadow of the family, their stay only lasted roughly two years. The ranch burned down in September 1970 during the Tate/LaBianca trial. The ranch itself was owned by silent film star William S. Hart and purchased by George Spahn in 1948, giving it its name. In its heyday many westerns, movies and TV shows were filmed there including Duel in the Sun, The Creeping Terror, Bonanza, The Lone Ranger and Zorro along with various cigarette commercials. By the time Manson and Co. got there Spahn was 80 and the ranch was in severe disrepair with horse rentals being the main income source.

Among lesser known local spots, Van Houten has taken people to the Munch Box where Manson ate hot dogs waiting for the girls to get off work. One of the actual ‘garbage run' grocery store back lot dumpsters dived in by the girls. The Candy Cat bar where Susan Atkins (Sadie) danced. Gypy's Waterfall, (a name bestowed years later) a ‘natured' off the path spot and hard to find unless you know exactly where to look. Seeing it up close you can imagine what the lay of the land would have looked like without modern developments as Chatsworth was considered ‘out in the woods' back then. The waterfall usually doesn't run due to the draught but you will see the exact spot where the family stood and bathed under the water from Robert Hendrickson's Inside the Manson Gang DVD.

Van Houten recently made a video standing by the 118 Freeway and De Soto talking about it. He's paid homage at the gravesites of Steven Parent and Sharon Tate. He's also visited the location where the Spiral Staircase (an early Manson haunt) once stood and Dennis Wilson's house. There are other ranch sites to be seen, depending on your love of hiking such as the Zodiac car, the Manson (stoner) caves, and the dune buggy graveyard down the road

Once at the ranch, you'll see the tree riddled with bullet holes that the family and the Straight Satans used as target practice. He'll point out a vintage tree that can be seen in some old shots of the ranch days. You will see the pile of rock, concrete and debris that was dumped over the side by bulldozers after the fire that destroyed the ranch and left to be forgotten.

The first thing seen walking up to the main area is the dirt mound where Spahn's house once stood. He will point out some vintage rocks, a piece of the concrete foundation from where a fuel tank once sat and one of the last remaining manmade remnants of the ranch days, a telephone pole burned in the fire.

Many people from around the world enjoy his videos, hoping to someday walk the trails. He has announced through Facebook that he will be going on to the next chapter of life and moving north soon. Before he leaves he's doing a "31 Days of Spahn Tour," filming a daily video and taking viewer location requests. He will try and return from time to time and hopes people will follow his example and keep the place nice for those who come to see history.

Van Houten's videos can be found on YouTube under spahn ranch worker, Michael Channels' videos under MichaelsBackporch.