Friday, August 14, 2015

Charles Manson’s Hollywood

A blog reader tipped me off to this ongoing series of podcasts called "You Must Remember This" by Karina Longworth. Longworth tells the sordid tale in her unique masterful storyteller style. Afficianados will pick up on minor errors, but they are easily overshadowed by the incredible detail that goes into this series. There are terrific photos from the archives of Michael Ochs and some excellent archived videos, too. Highly recommended.



You Must Remember This is a storytelling podcast exploring the secret and/or forgotten histories of Hollywood’s first century. It's the brainchild and passion project of Karina Longworth (founder of Cinematical.com, former film critic for LA Weekly), who writes, narrates, records and edits each episode. It is a heavily-researched work of creative nonfiction: navigating through conflicting reports, mythology, and institutionalized spin, Karina tries to sort out what really happened behind the films, stars and scandals of the 20th century.

This season, You Must Remember This will explore the murders committed in the summer of 1969 by followers of Charles Manson, and the Hollywood music and movie scene surrounding the killings. Throughout the series, we'll learn how a single sociopath’s thwarted dreams of fame and fortune led to the gruesome events which became the symbolic "end of the sixties." Future episodes will explore the various celebrities, musicians, movie stars and filmmakers (including Roman Polanski, Sharon Tate, The Beach Boys, Dennis Hopper, Doris Day and more) whose paths crossed with Manson’s in meaningful ways, both leading up to the murders and in their aftermath. Today, we’ll talk about what was going on in the show business capital that made Manson seem like a relatively normal guy. Then we’ll lay out the basic facts of who was killed, and how, in order to begin to explain how these unthinkable crimes fit in to the tapestry of one of the most tumultuous times in Hollywood history.

Part 1: What We Talk About When We Talk About The Manson Murders

Part 2: How Manson Found His Family

Part 3: The Beach Boys, Dennis Wilson, and Charles Manson, Songwriter

Part 4: Spahn Ranch and the Beatles' White Album

Part 5: Doris Day and Terry Melcher

Part 6: Kenneth Anger and Bobby Beausoleil

Part 7: Sharon Tate and Jay Sebring

Part 8: Sharon Tate and Roman Polanski

Part 9: August 8-10, 1969

Part 10: Roman Polanski After Sharon Tate

Part 11: Death Valley '69

Part 12: The Manson Family on Trial





Thursday, August 13, 2015

Robert Earl Murray

There has been a question as to whether or not a certain picture identified as John Philip Haught is really him.  The only image that is certain is a picture taken of him in the LA County Morgue after his death.  This picture is rather creepy because it looks like someone has drawn in the eyes, the original is with his eyes closed but I couldn't find a copy large enough and clear enough to post.

Lt. Deemer's list of Family members and associates describes Haught as being 5'8" tall, weighing 130 pounds with brown hair and hazel eyes and a birth date of April 20, 1949.  The California Death Index has his birth year as 1947 which is probably correct as the info for the death certificate was supplied by his family.  Haught was born in Missouri and raised in Ohio, where he is buried.


The other picture thought to be him is this one which is the header for John Philip Haught's webpage at cielodrive.com .


I found a mug shot of the same picture and it is identified as being Robert Earl Murray.



I know the mug shot with the Robert Earl Murray identifier has been around for quite some time.  I think what people might believe is that John Philip Haught was arrested with the Family at some point and used the name Robert Earl Murray as an alias.  The fact is Robert Earl Murray was arrested with other Family members May 2, 1968 in Malibu, months before John Philip Haught was known to associate with the Family.

The arrest report is available for reading at mansonsbackporch.com  It's about 3/4 of the way down the page titled LASD Arrest Report May 2, 1968.

The info that accompanies the arrest report says that Robert Earl Murray was 6'6" in height, weighed 205 pounds.  He had brown hair and blue eyes.  His date of birth was Aug. 8, 1945.  His address was 8 Woodstock Lane Pittsford, NY.

Due to recent interest in Robert Earl Murray I was moved to hunt down his high school senior picture and it pretty well confirms that he is an actual person, in fact the one who was arrested in the 1968 Malibu drug bust.  He is not John Philip Haught.

This photo is Robert Earl Murray's senior picture from Pittsford Central High School, class of 1965, in Pittsford NY.  Most high school seniors are 17 or 18 years old when they graduate.  Unless Murray was held back a couple of grades it appears that he lied about his birth year when he was arrested because he would have been 19 or 20 years old when he graduated.  I have no idea whether or not the month and year of the birthdate he gave to the sheriff's department is correct.   It is a little spooky that the date he gave was August 8th, if it's not his true birthdate, because it was on the same date in 1969 that Family members left Spahn Ranch to commit the Cielo Drive murders.



 I have tried to locate Robert Earl Murray but have had no luck to date.  We, here at the blog, did contact Cielodrive and send him Murray's high school picture prior to this post.  He was aware that the picture in his header for John Philip Haught was Murray and has been meaning to fix that but hadn't gotten around to it yet.  He said he will soon though!






Monday, August 10, 2015

Photo ID Help: Garretson

My dearest readers, we would like you to study the following photo and please do let us know if you think the topless, or shall I say shirtless figure on the right in the photo below is one William (Bill) Garretson, who was known as Rudi Altobelli's boytoy caretaker at 10050 Cielo Drive:

Possible Garretson Photo # 1

Now, for comparison, please inspect the authentic photo of William "Bill" Garretson when he was finally released from jail after having been the first suspect of the Tate murders. This photo is the one below. A quick Austin Ann note: the hairless chest seen in photo # 1 seems to be the same as photo # 2. Of course, I could be wrong.....

Totally, 100% authentic Garreston Photo # 2


NOTE: We are not saying it is Garretson, however we do want to hear from our readers to see what y'all think! Ya dig?





Thursday, August 6, 2015

Lynette Fromme Responds

Lyn Fromme responds to "Pete P."


Sorry, young man, but your memories are faulty. Between 1967 and 1969 Charles Manson was not beat up by anyone but deputies from the Los Angeles Sheriff's department in an August 1969 raid on Spahn's Ranch. I lived on the ranch when Charlie was there, but the other ranch hands you describe as having been there were not. The cowboys who lived and worked on the ranch when Charlie was there are not in your story. So, unless you have written fiction, whatever memories you have of meeting Shorty Shea are about an earlier set of years, and the people who you believed were Tex Watson and Charles Manson were not. 

Lynette Fromme
(Signed)

I do not have a website or on-line capability so I can only respond through others.

*        *        *

Presenter’s Comment --

Since it’s likely that Lyn Fromme’s contribution disputing Pete P.’s claim that he saw Charles Manson get roughed up at Spahn’s Ranch on several occasions will generate commentary and controversy I thought I would weigh in with some of my own thoughts before turning it over to the readers of this blog.

First of all I have to say that I have no dog in this cliché, and I wouldn't even have questioned Pete's account had not one of the Admins of this site asked me if I could ask some of the other residents of Spahn's Ranch in 1969 whether they thought his story rang true. As a result of that request two of those persons (one of whom was Lyn) read the account as published here on the MF Blog. I also talked with two other persons ("family members," both of whose names would be instantly recognized by any reader of this blog) who did not read the account; I merely asked them if they remembered a 10-year-old boy who frequented the ranch, arriving and departing by mini-bike, and who hung out with Shorty Shea and was generally known as "the kid." Then I later asked them whether they remembered Manson ever being beaten up at the ranch aside from during the August 16 raid.

All four of the individuals had no recollection either of Pete P.'s presence at the ranch or of any serial CM sluggings. (Actually, it wasn’t that they had no recollections of any beatings; they said that they didn’t happen -- period.) In fact, one of the “secondary” girls corroborated Lyn's version, saying when asked if Manson had ever been beaten at the ranch, "Yes, [the police] definitely beat the crap out of him [during the August 16 raid] while I watched. They held an M-16 to my head as Bear cried. They made sure we watched. Other than that, not that I know." (One could argue that Lyn and the other girl have rehearsed their stories, but they have not seen each other in over forty years, so either they tell the same version because they had it planned out forty years ago, or they tell the same version because it is the truth.)

Pete says he was a witness to four Manson thrashings: two by Monte Laird (one of which Pete arrived late on the scene only to witness the aftermath thereof), one by Joe Soto, and one bear paw slap down of Manson by Shorty Shea himself. I think it's remarkable that one person would witness so many assaults. And if Pete’s recollections are true and he witnessed four assaults during his part-time presence at the ranch over a period of a few months, it figures that there must have been other assaults that he didn't see. In fact, based on the number of the assaults witnessed by Pete alone, I would have to imagine that Manson was getting pounded at least every week and likelier every few days.

Of course we all know that Manson is crazy, but why anyone would remain at a location where they were subjected to serial slappings and humiliations is a mystery. Also odd is the idea that someone who was basically raised in prison (and a small someone at that) would not have developed some kind of survival skills that would have enabled him to avoid violent encounters with larger men. In other words, Manson learned not to be confrontational with bigger guys when he was incarcerated for the simple reason that if he was confrontational he could easily have been beaten or even killed. And isn't it likely that he would apply those same survival lessons to large, hostile individuals he encountered on the outside? Or would he just keep walking up to big guys and pissing them off until he ended up in the dust?

Seeking confirmation of such beatings, I consulted the literature on the subject. And the first place I went to was Ed Sanders' The Family, because I figured that if there was any rumor at all about the activities at Spahn's Ranch that anyone ever thought they heard it was sure to be repeated in Sander's book. But there was nothing there except for one mention of Manson beating up Randy Starr, which is certainly not what we're looking for here. None of the memoirs of Charles Watson, Susan Atkins, or Paul Watkins mention any CM slapfests either. And not only that, there is also no mention of any Manson beatings in any of the parole hearings of the convicted murderers, and significantly not in the hearings of those persons convicted of murdering Shorty Shea, like Bruce Davis and Steve Grogan. At all of these hearings the convicted killers are asked for the reasons for Manson’s homicidal hostility towards Shea, and the allegations of him being a snitch are always brought up. But never once does someone reply, "Oh yeah, and Charlie was tired of Shorty and his friends beating him up all the time."

If Charles Manson was being regularly slapped around at Spahn’s Ranch it would have been a very big topic of conversation amongst his immediate associates who, of course, held him in high esteem. It would have been very big news. And yet none of those associates recalls any such occurrences. Not one.

I looked up the names of the Manson beaters on the Internet. There are references to Joe Soto bloodying Charlie’s nose in front of the Long Horn Saloon, but the references are based on Pete P.’s recollections. Ditto for Monte Laird. I found this extensive interview with Laird where for some reason he doesn’t mention that, incidentally, he twice beat up Charles Manson. Considering that show business is, after all, a publicity driven endeavor, is this likely? What show business person would omit from his resumé the fact that he beat up one of the most notorious mass murderers of all time?

Of course one could posit that the four "family members" I talked to are all lying because they don't want to admit that CM got beaten up a lot.  But why wouldn’t any of the other persons involved in the crimes (most of whom are doing life for murder and have no love lost for Charles Manson and are fond of bringing up every alleged negative facet of his character whilst trying to put the best light on their own) also mention that he was frequently getting the shit slapped out of him (perhaps as yet another reason for that legendary “anti-social hostility” of his?)?

As for Pete P. -- why would he lie? I could speculate on reasons for that, but my speculations would be just that and it wouldn't be appropriate or even meaningful to commit them to writing. But I can say that in my decades-long association with this case I've met many people who have had seemingly detailed fantasy encounters with Charles Manson, with “members of the Family," and even with me.  

So that's about as far as I can realistically go with this. I have offered some witness testimony and circumstantial evidence in support of Lynette's recollections. I'd be very interested if someone could find some similar corroboration for Pete P.'s version of events.






Monday, August 3, 2015

Current Mugshots of Tate/Labianca murderers

Supposedly these current mugshots were the latest taken in March or April of this year. Why does Tex Watson look like Ted Danson?









Saturday, August 1, 2015

Sharon Tate: A Life - by Ed Sanders

In 1971, Ed Sanders published The Family, his insider's account of the Manson family murders; it was an immediate sensation. Using the same investigative skills and insider contacts that informed his counterculture classic, Sanders delivers the definitive account of the brief and tragic life of Sharon Tate.

The biography takes a close look at Tate's life—from her itinerant childhood and early career in fashion to her transition to film, passionate marriage to the brilliant and troubled Roman Polanski, and violent murder at the hands of the Manson family cult. Sanders's Sharon Tate offers new insights into what happened on the night of her death and explores new motives for the targeting of the Polanski household.

Illustrated with Rick Veitch's evocative images, Sharon Tate is required reading for anyone fascinated by the dark side of the '60s.

Available on Amazon





Thursday, July 30, 2015

In Touch with Rudi Altobelli and Terrie Spahn

The July 1974 issue of In Touch magazine featured an article on great American tragedies of the late 60s and early 70s written by Barry Glassner.  The Manson murders were included in the article.  Glassner managed to depart from the usual recitation of the crimes by speaking with Rudi Altobelli and Terrie Spahn,  a granddaughter of George Spahn.

Altobelli comes off as if the murders were a personal affront to him depriving him of the full value of his home and he sure doesn't like Roman Polanski.  Included mid-article is an interview with Altobelli when he finally sold the home years later.  I guess he had to sit on that home for quite a while before realizing it's full financial potential.

Terrie Spahn, on the other hand, comes off as a reasonable, non-judgmental person, who attempts to see the brighter side of life.

Barry Glassner is the author of several books on social issues including of The Culture of Fear, a bestselling book that has recently been updated.    http://www.barryglassner.com/
Bel-Air, a suburb of the supreme suburb of Beverly Hills, is where the elite hip pose for Newsweek while talking of grass, group therapy and gayness.  I drive up Benedict Canyon and Chevy Chase Roads, trying to find a house on a street called Cielo Drive.

The street number of "The Tate House," where Sharon Tate Polanski and four others were brutally murdered on August 8, 1969, does not appear even after a half-hours search.  I finally decide to interview neighbors about the effect of the murders on their lives.

The answer comes from the loud barking dogs in every hallway and the alarm-system warning signs on each front door.  Nobody answers doorbells, even at those houses where piano playing and walking noises can be heard as I approach.  At last, a woman agrees to come to her window and point out the way to The House.  I trudge up a private road hidden by a corner, but once there can't figure out how to inform the inhabitants of my arrival.  A tall electric barbed-wire fence separates me from the building; for several minutes only the birds and the trees know that I'm there.

Then I find a telephone on a post behind some trees, pick up the receiver, and hear a loud male voice say "Well..."

I explain.

"So you're doing a story on this house," he replies.  "Why do you want to drum up old memories?  I have a lot of money invested in this home.  I've lost a lot.  I used to rent it out, but now I can't."

Another phone rings in the background and he's asking me to hold on.  When he returns, he says that he will not let me in, even though I sound like a songwriter friend of his.

The man never gives his name, but he does say that he has taken no additional security precautions since the day Manson's minions allegedly preformed their acts on Sharon Tate and her companions.
"What you see is what we've always had.  If you hadn't picked up the phone, I'd never had known you were there.  We did buy a dog, though.  If he attacks you, run into the car."
He takes a sip of something, thanks someone by kissing him or her, and continues:
"Yeah, I've owned this place all along.  This is a fucking private home, see, and I don't want it to be a museum.  They call it 'the house on the hill' now, don't they?  That's because of asshole Roman Polanski, you can quote me on that."
I ask him what he means , but he doesn't explain.  I try a question about how the neighbors have taken it all.
"Listen I don't even know my neighbors.  Try talking to them," he says.  Our conversation is obviously ending, and again I ask to see the house.  This time I am refused with a somewhat intriguing signoff:
"I have to go.  Just say that this is a house of love... In fact, if you want to make love, jump the fence."
I demur.  Driving away, I notice that the fence is 20 to 25 feet high and extends all the way up the steep hill.

Sunset Strip- the Whiskey-A-Go-Go, Dick Clark Productions, dozens of poster shops.  I visit a real estate agency, where a stately lady at the front desk tells me that I probably spoke to a talent agent, who she says owns the house with a fellow agent.
Near an out-of-business hot-dog stand once called "The Watergate," I find a phone booth and set out to reach somebody connected with the Spahn Movie Ranch, where Manson and his clan had lived.  The ranch, located in nearby Chatsworth, had burned two years ago, but my first dime gets me Terrie Spahn, the 20-year old granddaughter of former ranch owner George Spahn. 
Terrie Spahn says that her grandfather is now 87, blind, and not thinking too clearly.  When the fire hit the ranch- and several nearby miles of Chatsworth- her grandfather disappeared to someplace in Oregon.  "He was almost dead because no one was feeding him there, and he had lost 12 of his best horses in that fire. 
"Some of the girls still call him here sometimes, trying to reach him.  You know, almost 30 people lived there at the time, and most of them weren't involved.  Mostly the girls would take care of grandpa, and he liked that because he couldn't take care of himself and he's a dirty old man.  Of course he couldn't see what was going on because he's blind.
"I used to go up there and give them clothes I didn't want any more.  They were always real nice to me."  Terrie herself was just married at the time of the murders, working as a hairdresser.  When her husband died a while ago, she started using her maiden name again.
I ask if she thinks Manson's people committed the murders.  "I guess they were the ones," she says.







Monday, July 27, 2015

Lust and Marriage: Sweet, Sexy Portraits of Steve McQueen and Neile Adams

We live in an age filled with way too much information about celebrities — much of it shared by celebs themselves: tweets, photos, press releases, you name it, blithely chronicling marriages, affairs, divorces, sex tapes, public spats and all the other sordid and exalted endeavors that flesh is heir to. And yet, despite this unending torrent of information, it’s somehow rare to see portraits of famous couples who not only genuinely like one another, but are comfortably, obviously attracted to one another.

Of course, actors, actresses, musicians and reality TV mediocrities are more than happy to flaunt their sexuality. But their exhibitions often feel either cartoonish or desperate, rising from a place of calculation rather than from good old-fashioned, grown-up lust. To quote Mark Twain (who was commenting on another subject entirely), the difference between faux, manufactured sexuality and the real deal is the difference “between the lightning-bug and the lightning.”

Consider, then, these portraits (above and below) of Steve McQueen and his then-wife, the actor, singer and dancer Neile Adams, sharing some smoldering moments together in 1963. Here are two adults — comfortable in their own skins and clearly at ease with one another’s bodies — captured in postures recognizable to anyone of a certain age lucky enough to have enjoyed an intense emotional and physical relationship with another human being.

In other words, these two people are hot for each other. And that’s cool.

Far from the studiously audacious antics of today’s stars, the casual, evident pleasure that McQueen and Adams take in one another in John Dominis’ photos comes across paradoxically, as quite innocent. Steamy, yes. Carnal, absolutely. But innocent.

That Dominis was able to make such informal, revealing pictures — especially of an actor as guarded in his personal life as McQueen usually was — speaks volumes about the photographer’s talent; about the unprecedented access that LIFE enjoyed during its heyday; and, finally, about the predictable, closely managed and utterly bogus “allure” of so many of today’s stars and pop-culture power couples.

With McQueen and Adams, through Dominis’s lens, we’re reminded of what sexual attraction feels like, and what it looks like. Unkempt. Raw. Thrillingly real.


- Ben Cosgrove is the Editor of LIFE.com


Steve McQueen and his wife, Neile, take a sulphur bath at Big Sur, 1963.

Original LIFE story HERE






Friday, July 24, 2015

Never aired TV special from 1960's


Hi readers! It's been a while, so wanted to bring you a little retro weirdness that I found. Perhaps you have seen it already. If so, please forgive me. I haven't been able to keep up much with the latest & greatest from Mansonblogland, except to make comments every now & then. Please enjoy weird, 1960's era tv special (documentary) that never aired featuring famous film makers & shakers, including Roman Polanski, with his beyond-beautiful wife, Sharon.










Wednesday, July 22, 2015

THE MURDER OF GARY HINMAN: Drug Burn or Robbery? by D. LaCalandra

One of the most often debated topics of the life, times and crimes of the so-called 'Manson Family' is that of the murder of 35 year old music teacher Gary Hinman and the true circumstances leading to his death at the hands of his friend Bobby Beausoleil on July 27th, 1969. Was it, as the official record states, the result of a thuggish attempt to rob Hinman to "finance Helter Skelter" as ordered by Charles Manson? Or was it the result of a drug deal gone sour in which Beausoleil was acting as a middle man between Hinman and the Straight Satans MC club?

Before we examine the details of the Hinman case, let us first look at an event which took place only 27 days earlier on July 1st. The near fatal shooting of Bernard "Lotsapoppa" Crowe at the hand of Charles Manson. We know, beyond any reasonable shadow of a doubt that the shooting of Crowe was the result of a botched drug burn in which Charles "Tex" Watson had ripped him off of $2,000. But let's look at what some of members of The Family had to say of the crime, including one that the Prosecutor of the Tate-LaBianca murders, Vincent Bugliosi, would used as a star witness and go as far as saying was Charles Manson's "right hand man", Paul Watkins.

Dianne "Snake" Lake: "Gypsy told me Charlie had shot a black leader to start the revolution" (LAPD Police Interview)

Brooks Poston: "and he’s talked about killing a negro, militant leader in Los Angeles" (October 3rd, 1969 interview with Inyo County Sheriff Don Ward)

Paul Watkins: "Just because he said he was fuckin' little white girls. He says, "don't fuck with the white woman", BAM! He said he shot him with a 45 right through the heart" (Interview with Lawrence Merrick)

..and what did Watkins say of the Hinman murder?

"He said uh...Gary wanted to come with the Family, see, ah uh, he says that Gary said uh, "Can I come with you and the Family?" And old Charlie, "Sure, how much we have in our bank account?" And uh, Gary said, "what do you mean in our bank account? And Charlie says, "Well, what's mine is yours, so what's yours in mine" And old Gary said, "Well uh, no thanks". Charlie told me had ten thousand dollars in his bank account"

Again, Paul Watkins is the man Vincent Bugliosi lead the public to believe was one of Manson's "right hand men". Now, if we had gone by what these individuals in this supposedly tight-knit "Family" had said of the Crowe shooting* we just might be arguing today as to whether it was was really over a drug burn or just because he was "fucking little white girls" and now a great deal of the testimony regarding the murder of Hinman has to be put to the question. Clearly, many involved in the Family were kept in the dark about the true nature of the crimes of July and August of 1969.

* Various different motives for the murder of Gary Hinman have been given. Inheritance, stocks and bonds, Hinman wanted to join the Family, Manson wanted Hinman to join and the best, as given by Mary Brunner: Manson wanted Hinman to join his pop group. Leslie Van Houten in her interview with attorney Marvin Part claimed the reason was to get money for Dune Buggies.

Now let's look at the murder of Hinman. Rarely, if ever during debate about the crime is it mentioned that in early October of 1969, Danny DeCarlo and the Straight Satans were suspects in the case. This fact never made it into any homicide report and was obmitted from Bugliosi's Helter Skelter. Mark Arneson who had purchased Hinman's Microbus from Charles Manson, sold it shortly thereafter to a person by the name of Louis Puhek. Puhek was pulled over in Venice, California (HQ of Straight Satans) after an all-points bulletin was put out for the vehicle on October 5th or 6th. After questioning Puhek, it was learned that a Danny DeCarlo was one of the possible owners of the vehicle. A request was then made by Hinman detectives to locate DeCarlo and for general information about him and the Straight Satans.

Before that requested was fulfilled however, they had received information on October 12th that a girl named Kitty Lutesinger in Inyo County. who they already had interest in upon learning her name from Beausoleil himself, had information about the Hinman murder and thus an investigation into the involvement of the Straight Satans was temporarily put on the hold.

In Helter Skelter, Bugliosi writes that Kitty told LaBianca detectives:

"Manson had tried to enlist a motorcycle gang, the Straight Satans, as his personal bodyguard. With the exception of one biker named Danny, the group had laughed at Manson. Danny had stuck around for several months. Only learning that the motorcycle gang hung out in Venice, California, the LaBianca detectives asked Venice PD if they could locate a Straight Satan named Danny"

Bugliosi doesn't tell us that Hinman detectives, who had passed what Lutesinger said on to the LaBianca detectives, were already looking for him. It's safe to assume they too received this information, on top of what Puhek had told them, which was significant enough for them to consider DeCarlo a suspect. Was Bugliosi twisting the facts on behalf of one of is golden boys?

During Beausoleil's first trial, Sgt. Paul Whiteley, head of the Hinman investigation said on the stand:

THE WITNESS: "He had nothing to do with this car, as far as I know. In other words, I originally received information fourth hand that Daniel Decarlo had possibly been in possession of a Volkswagen bus at some time. Just about the time that I received this information, I was called to Independence, California, where I talked to other witnesses who told me that Daniel Decarlo had nothing to do with the car; that it was another person, and I just completely dropped him at that time"

THE COURT: But it subsequently revealed that he actually did have something to do with it?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

But what? There were no further questions and by this point, DeCarlo was already in bed with law enforcement and Bugliosi. Granted, he states that upon interviewing Lutesinger, that he learned DeCarlo wasn't involved. But whatever information he learned later that revealed he did, he does not elaborate on.

It was Lutesinger who implicated Susan Atkins in the Hinman murder. According to Helter Skelter, it was Atkins who revealed they went to Hinman to get money he "supposedly inherited". But as Bugliosi points out, she wasn't being totally truthful (was she ever?) and Hinman detectives suspected such. Because unlike Kitty, Atkins did not mention Manson, nor did she admit to stabbing anyone. If she was smart enough to leave out Manson, Brunner and Davis, all whom were eventually charged and convicted in the Hinman murder, it's safe to assume she was keeping her mouth shut about the possible involvement of DeCarlo.

Let's examine Lustenginger for a moment. She, the pregnant girlfriend of Beausoliel didn't learn until "several weeks later", according to Helter Skelter that he was even arrested and "much later" that it was for the murder of Hinman. Even she was kept in the dark, so if the crime it's self was kept from her, how could she be a reliable witness as to what the motive was?

On November 12th, Vence Police Department contacted the Parker Center and told them an Al Springer, member of the Straight Satans and his friend Danny DeCarlo had information about the Tate LaBianca murders. In this interview, Springer talked about everything from the shooting of Crowe to the murder of Shorty Shea and implemented Manson, Watson and Grogan in the murders. Despite this, detectives were unimpressed. Though Springer testified in the Hinman/Shea trial, he was not asked to testify in Tate-LaBianca trial as it was unclear as to weather he had heard about these things first hand or just repeating things DeCarlo had told him. Still, Bugliosi considered his taped interview with detectives to be of great, yet overlooked importance.

In regards to Hinman, Springer says something very interesting:

"this other girl kitty, or Patty or something like that. She not only probably has talked to ya, but once she sees Danny, her on her own, from what he hears, she's going to let it all hang out too. Everything she knows right to a T, So I figured I'd get the ball rolling. because I don't want to see Danny get in trouble for something he didn't do"

Right here we have evidence of a possible conspiracy involving DeCarlo and Lutesinger to establish a story that absolves Straight Satans of any involvement, or perhaps Lutesinger was strong armed into establishing the story she laid out. Clearly, they KNEW Lutesinger talked to police. Did they know before or after? Was there more to them squealing than pending charges? Did Venice PD tell them Hinman and LaBianca detectives were looking for them? What exactly was Springer worried about Danny getting in trouble over? Whiteley said he learned DeCarlo wasn't involved, but as pointed out, Lutesinger and DeCarlo were talking to each other at some point and they knew she would "let it all hang out" again.

The day after they had interviewed Springer, they spoke with DeCarlo. One week later, Bugliosi would be assigned the Tate-LaBianca case and Decarlo would be his personal tour guide of the Spahn Ranch. A little less than two weeks after DeCarlo's police interview, Bugliosi would be assigned the Hinman case after Beausoleil's first trial ended in a hung jury, thanks in part to the jury not believing DeCarlo.

Back to Atkins, why did say inheritance? We know, that Gary Hinman wasn't the hippie in Topanga Canyon to inherit $20,000. It was Charlie Melton. While it's safe to say that many of the Family weren't the brighest bulbs, I still think that they, especially those involved in the actual crimes weren't so stupid to believe that not one, but two hippies in the Topanga area connected to the Family had inherited a large lump sum of cash at the same time. So we can cross the idea that anyone really believed that Hinman had $20,000 off the list of possibilities. Could it be, Atkins substituted Melton with Hinman under pressure in an attempt to conceal the true motive, so to not incriminate Danny DeCarlo? She did, after also tell Ronnie Howard she stabbed Hinman while Bobby held him (sound familiar?) and that she stabbed Sharon Tate, when we know it was actually Tex Watson. Role reversal seems to have been a staple in the Fanciful story telling of Sexy Sadie.

Ronnie Howard: "She says he was a hippie too and I asked her, I said, "Well, why did they do it?" She said, "Well he owed them some money or something. He owed this Bobby and her some money and some other girl. I heard them talking on the telephone. I heard them trying to kill him. So they got him out for a ride. He thought he was just going out for a nice drive" (November 25th 1969 interview with LAPD)

Owed is the key word. Granted, Susan was obviously engaging in her aforementioned fanciful story telling during her jailhouse confessions. It's also possible Howard got her facts mixed up, since her statement contains clues of the Shorty Shea murder and not that of Hinman. But Atkins was clearly going for shock when she opened up her mouth to Howard and Graham, So why no mention of an inheritance rather than a mundane scenario involving Hinman owing money to Bobby? Again, owned is the key word.

"Kid come to me and said Hinman owes me" - Charlies Manson (1992 interview with Bill Murphy)

Ella Jo Bailey is one ex-Family member who's testimony is often used by people who favor the official record. However, what they fail to look at, is that Bailey wasn't interviewed in regards to the Hinman case until March of 1971. After Manson was already sentenced to death in the Tate-LaBianca trial and needless to say, long after the Manson myth has already been established. She was, yet another example of somebody with pending criminal charges of her own. So it's more than safe to assume she was simply telling them what they wanted to hear. Ella, also never said anything about any inheritance. Her reasons were stocks, bonds and the two junk vehicles Hinman owned. One overlooked comment from her interview though, is that fact she mentions Susan saying something about drugs before they left for Hinman's house. She claims Bill Vance left because he didn't want to go out on any "Capers". Yet we know the ex-con already was engaging in criminal activity on the ranch. As we'll see later, there might have been a reason she mentions Vance in regards to the Hinman case. Further more, did in fact confirm Hinman supplied the Family with mescaline.Those who claim the topic of drugs in relation to Hinman never came up during any of the trials, can no longer say that.

From the People Vs. Davis on January 12, 1972:

GEORGE DENNY: They got some of their mescaline from Gary Hinman; is that right?

ELLA JO BAILEY: I believe so, yes

GEORGE DENNY: And you got some of it for the Family from Gary Hinman; is that right?

ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't recall ever --Gary Hinman turning over any mescaline to me.

GEORGE DENNY: But you used that which had been gotten from him; is that right?

ELLA JO BAILEY: Yes.

GEORGE DENNY: He manufactured it for the Family and others; isn't that right?

ELLA JO BAILEY: I don't know if he manufactured it.

In Death to Pigs, Lawrence Merrick asked Mary Brunner if Gary Hinman "was into dope dealing" and her reply was, "yeah". What did Hendrickson and Merrick hear at such an early date that prompted them to ask about Hinman and dope dealing?

"Hinman deserved to die. He was selling bad dope" - Charles Manson (1971, Hinman/Shea trial)

In 2012, a relative of Gary Hinman, or somebody claiming to be so, made a letter from Beausoleil available to read online. This letter has been used as "proof" that the Hinman murder did not involve a dope deal by those in favor of the court's findings. But let's look.

"However it would be hypocritical and disingenuous to say that Gary was a drug dealer. The story about the drug burn was just something put into my head by others, and there are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of the story considering its source. Gary wasn't the kind of guy to burn anyone in a drug deal or otherwise. I chose to buy into the story and allowed it to be part of the internal narrative I used to justify my decision to rob him. And later to rationalize some lame reasons for what followed."

Beausoleil says somebody "put into his head" by others, but doesn't say if it was before or after the murder nor does he name these "others". He then goes onto say:

"Back in the 60s everyone I knew traded in such things as pot and capsules of peyote cactus among friends and neighbors, and this includes me. None of us thought of one another as drug dealers"

So Bobby doesn't deny some sort of transaction too place, he only apologizes for the characterization of Gary as a drug dealer. A term that needless to say carries a lot of negative connotation.

Of the five people charged in the murder of Gary Hinman, only two have said that the that the true nature of the crime was drug-related. That is Charles Manson and Bobby Beausoleil. It's often questioned as to why this is the case and why none of them made this be known at trial. What must be understood is that Bobby Beausoleil was tried and convicted in a separate trial* in which his defense strategy was to lay blame on Charles Manson. Despite his efforts , he was convicted and sentenced to death in the slaying. Manson, Susan Atkins and Bruce Davis were tried together directly after the Tate-LaBianca trial. Atkins plead guilty having already been sentenced to death in the Tate-LaBianca trial and did not wish to go through with another trial. She received life in prison for the Hinman murder. Mary Brunner turned state's witness and testified in exchange from full immunity.

* Beausoleil had two trials. In both, he tried to beat the rap and deny any involvement.

..and what of Mother Mary? It should be said that Bobby Beausoleil has stated that neither Susan Atkins nor Mary Brunner were told why he was going to Hinman's home and maintains to this day that they were not sent by Charles Manson, they simply tagged along. This could very well be true. There is a more than likely chance that Beausoleil had too much pride to tell the girls he was more of less being pressured to recoup money for a group of tough guy bikers. Initially, Mary claimed that when being questioned by detectives, she was more or less pressured to repeat what Atkins had already told them and had threats of her son being taken away from her and being sent to the gas chamber. With the help of a good lawyer, she was able to strike up a deal to testify against her co-defendants in exchange for immunity. She then recanted her testimony against Beausoleil and claimed she was coerced into testifying and that the purpose of her testifying against Beausoleil was an attempt to absolve Charles Manson of guilt. Her initial reason for the murder? Hinman refused to join Manson's pop group. Another question one could ask is, why no mention of Danny DeCarlo if he was involved? In her police interview, she claims it was Bill Vance who accompanied Manson to Hinman's residence, rather than Bruce Davis. Obviously they were all very selective and careful as to who to name.

*Later on, her lawyer was able to maintain the deal made using the excuse her copporation helped the prosecution's case and charges were once again dropped.

Susan Atkins nor Bruce Davis have ever said that the murder of Gary Hinman was anything other than a botched attempt to rob him. However, both Atkins, before her death and Bruce Davis worked hard to get parole. In the eyes of a parole board, reality is on paper under the heading of "Statement of Facts". Parole hearings are not retrials and to go against what the records say are the facts is taken as deception. This is why Bruce Davis has been granted parole for a three years in a row* and Beausoleil denied at all 17 of his hearings to date. Atkins, claimed that after the shooting of Bernard Crowe there was a desperation to flee into the Death Valley and that money and Dune Buggies were needed, thus an idea to get funds off Hinman went into effect. If the murder of Gary Hinman was indeed not over a drug dispute, then this is most likely the true motive. But selling stolen property of a dead man is too risky of a business venture, so it's safe to say that murder wasn't apart of the original plan.

*Davis was granted parole in 2010, 2012 and 2014 but the decision was reversed by governors Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2010 and Jerry Brown in 2012 and 2014.

The changes in the story as presented by Beausoleil over the years has been a big reason people often cite that he and Manson have been lying about the drug angle. But has he really changed his story? The answer is actually no. Since 1981 the story has remained the same with the exception of some minor discrepancies and details. In his 2010 parole hearing, Beausoleil actually gives a logical explanation:

"Well, initially, I was too ashamed to admit to my parents that I had killed a man, and I made up a story that Manson had done it. And then later, in my first parole hearing in 1976, I wanted to accept full responsibility, but I wanted to do it without being perceived as a snitch*, because that would have been a death sentence in California at that time. So, I took responsibility for everything that had happened. I said that I had done it all, including slashing Gary across the face, and so that was the second version that I had told that wasn't entirely true. It was true other than that one part. And then subsequently, Manson himself admitted in this book that he had been involved in, admitted that he had slashed Gary's face, so I no longer felt an obligation to try to protect myself, and, you know, and being thought of as a snitch, because he'd already said that. So, I felt at liberty at that point to say exactly what happened, and that was, I think, in 1980"

*This may sound like a silly excuse to some, but in defense of Beausoleil, unlike Charles "Tex" Watson and Bruce Davis, he at that time was in San Quentin. A much harsher environment and he has, in the passed been involved in violent situations, one in which he was stabbed by another inmate.

In a 2009 documentary, Bugliosi dropped somewhat of a bomb shell when he said:

"Gary Hinman furnished drugs for the Family. He was not a member of the Manson Family, he was an associate"

In the end, it can not be proven for sure if drugs played a role in the death of Gary Hinman. But when one takes into consideration all that has been said and the progress and circumstances of the investigation and trial, I believe that there is good reason to believe there was in fact a drug transaction that escalated in a violent and deadly situation.


Sources:

The Family, Ed Sanders

Helter Skelter, Curt Gentry and Vincent Bugliosi

Death to Pigs, Robert Hendrickson

Police interviews, parole hearings and other documents found at cielodrive.com