Saturday, December 31, 2005
I just watched WALK THE LINE starring Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon (what names!) and could not for the life of me get out of my head Charlie being interviewed by Dianne Sawyer ten years ago and out of nowhere saying (not singing) some of the lyrics to the song "I Walk the Line".
Here's a courtroom drawing to end the year on. And a thought. This IS Charlie during his useless and rambling testimony during the trial. But squint a little and maybe like me you'll see Johnny Cash, the man in black, serenading the crowds at Folsom.
If things had gone like Terry and Dennis promised, would we instead be watching a Charlie musical biopic?
Drink responsibly tonight- I don't want to get hit by you!
Friday, December 30, 2005
Just got back from Holidays- I need to take my detox whenever I can find it. Pursuing the truth is hard on your favorite Col.
Thanks to the lovely Denise I got this link at ebay for an insane collection of Mansonalia.
Wow. I mean there is a lot of shit in these 20 boxes. Another aborted book. Trial transcripts out the ass. Correspondence.
My favorite bits in his rambling screed....
I received the distinct impression that Mr. Manson did not like me nor respect me aww poor baby
Bugliosi, the successful prosecutor was an odd and not entirely healthy human being himself as my work will show.
Hey we agree with you here.
Perhaps I should be thankful to Manson’s surliness to me since I had the potential to become as obsequious to him as so many others in my obsession to show the wrong done to him
It is almost impossible to believe that Bugliosi in an unrelated matter, burglarized a person’s apartment. Bugliosi’s bizarre conduct obviously at that time or any time could not have been prosecuted or publicized since he was so important to the prosecution of Charles Manson. Anyone else would likely have been convicted and sentenced to a jail term. Bugliosi’s conduct also included harrassment that was unquestionably frightening
Wowsa.... just wowsa
Anybody want to split the cost with the Col- looks like a motherlode has come in!
Thursday, December 29, 2005
These are Pat/Katie's Mom and Dad. They look just like my mom and dad. I would guess they look just like YOUR mom and dad. Here they are doing a news conference. In it they are stating that she was just your average little girl, just like all of yous are just average human beings.
Except average human beings do not slaughter their fellow human beings without any discernible reason.
Now, if you are here you probably do not believe that Charlie "hypmotized" his followers and "made" them do it.
I do believe Katie did it to please Charlie so that she could continue to fit in the only place she ever felt fitted in to. Apparently she was a hairy bitch and that didn't bother Charlie or Tex. There is a humdinger of a scene in Watkins' self-serving book where Clem goes down on Katie in front of the whole group at Charlie's instructions.
But still, for whatever excuses, Katie DID it.
Is Bug right? Do some of us have murder already running through our veins? Or is it like situational ethics- that is , if not for "A" plus "B" AND plus "C" coming together, no one would have ever heard of the homely girl from Alabama?
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
I wanted to use this alternative photo of Nellie with his mouth open somewhere so here it is....
Did I ever mention that he organized a trip to the Zodiac sites that a MALE friend of mine paid for, kid was then in his early twenties. Nellie wouldn't let him smoke (fair enough) charged him extra for guess ( fine ) and allegedly made a pass at him.
I'm just saying...
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
I just got word that Bobby Beausoleil's Parol Board gave him a three year denial because of some erotic art he exhibited here in LA this year and because of fear from the Governator.
I am sick to my stomach. This is such crap.
I will try to get approval to reprint Bob's whole letter but this summarizes it for me... fuckers...
No, what disturbed the hearing panel, he said, is that as late as 2005, this very year, I had contracted with an agent or gallery owner to allow my artwork to be displayed and marketed to the public in a manner that exploited the notoriety of my crime and the Manson connection to promote sales of my art and music (the Dreamways CD). This, he said, demonstrated a “serious lapse of judgment” that required a longer period of confinement so that there would be adequate time to allow the Board to evaluate my “ability to maintain a distance from Manson” in the public eye, and refrain from involvement with such displays in the future. He mentioned – again, with surprising candor – that he was concerned about possible repercussions from the governor and the public if he were to vote to parole me under the present circumstances.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
The Col would like to distribute his Xmas cheer to all far and near...
To Bret, a big thank you for your site along with wishes that you update it more often.
To Jon Aesnihil, many thanks for the use of the Archives and good luck on your quest to obtain the remainder from the Widow Nelson.
To Steve Oogly, the big Ooogler, a big Christmas wish for you to learn to respect the victims you claim to but instead mock with your very name. A plea for you to stop thinking that your flirting is anything but pathetic. And me down on my freaking knees BEGGING you to stop using those fonts that run on and make me have to click twice to get past your lame posts.
To Jan Urbin and a few others there who still dislike the Col's superior knowledge, a big Calzone that you can bite and pretend is me.
TWO Calzones for Jennifer Oakley, along with the Congressional Medal of Stupidity for blindly supporting a retarded war. Bite me twice you sad woman.
Chocolate Hearts of Love and Joy to Denise and Heaven and Janice and the others at KTS. I was wrong and I am glad we are all internet friends again.
To Bobby B, I hope last week's decision went well (please let me know) and I hope that you can no longer say " I have served more time for killing a drug dealer than anyone in American history."
To Barbara B, I wish you the hugs of your man. Our meeting this year was special indeed.
To Michael Brunner, email me I have an idea to make you some good, solid cash.
To Tom O'Neill, I send you love and the knowledge that YOU know and I know that you will never finish that book.
To Adam Parfey I implore you to please hurry up that Manson Encyclopedia Project. I want one.
To White Rabbitt- I nearly went blind reading your book- I will review it- but do you really want me to note how much time you served for Child Molestation? Icky.
To Bill Nelson- RIP, and if you find anything else we need to know, there is always the Ouija Board.
To Vincent BUGliosi- a warning, the Col still breathes and the truth WILL be known. You should be ashamed of yourself.
To my beloved Driver Dave, condolences on your gf's reduced implants.
To Mark Turner, sincere hopes that you at last are doing the right thing.
To one and to all, THANKS for reading. Much more to come.
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.
Col Scott, Proprietor, The Only Official Tate-LaBianca Murders Blog. 12-25-05
Friday, December 23, 2005
I keep reading these Yahoo groups like a crack addict. They annoy me, but occasionally I will find something out I didn't know, and the COL wants to know all.
Several of the groups keep going on and on about getting Sharon Tate a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
I could point out that she was a mediocre actress (at best), a very hot babe that is best known for being butchered. But that would be cruel of me.
I live in LA. I walk the Walk of Fame at least once a week.
It is MEANINGLESS. No talent nobodies like Ryan Seacrest get a star because they get publicity and money from it.
Having a star is meaningless. Find some other way to honor her.
How about a beautiful statue in Benedict Canyon commemorating her life?
I'd contribute to that.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Here's a photo of Doris Tate being interviewed at her hair salon.
OBVIOUSLY it was while she was alive.
Where was this place? Did any of you ever get your hair done there? Anyone you know?
Did Jay Sebring teach Doris how to cut hair?
Is it just me or is it ODD that besides the "crusading avenger" and "mother of a movie star" she also gave out rinses and sets?
Monday, December 19, 2005
Do you think Sandra Good and St. George are enjoying the news that Nellie is no longer with us?
Sandy always puzzled me to the point where I think she might actually BE crazy Just my opinion, mind you. I don't think that about any of the others, but if you hear her speak both then and now she sounds like mentally she has gone away and is not coming back. Supposedly she only slept with Manson occasionally, yet she talks as if he was the one and only love of her life. Her Dad supposedly had some cash, yet she insisted on going to jail for TEN years for writing letters. I mean I suck as an attorney but I could have got her probation without trying.
She could have been the Scary spice of the girls, that is for sure!
Sunday, December 18, 2005
These pictures reflect one fourth of the members of the Tate/LaBianca Jury.
The Wikipedia (usually bullshit but easiest for me to find) notes:
Some systems allow argument over whether a juror's particular background or beliefs make them biased and therefore unsuitable for service on the jury. In the United States, and probably other nations, it is hardly unknown for citizens to quite deliberately get out of jury duty (for example by mentioning knowledge of legal concepts).
What I want to know is, even with the bad haircut on that guy, what chance did any of the defendants really have? There were no commune or hippie experts who testified. There were no hippies on the jury.
I mean, I know that all of them except Manson were actually guilty... but would you even want to MEET these three?
Stupid Charlie never put on a defense so he gets what he deserves- but this is a fair jury?
Thursday, December 15, 2005
I found this while chasing Nellie details... back in the day Vanity Fair was getting sued by Roman Polanski for reprinting lies about what he did after his wife died. As we learned on the Blog this year, Roman won. Now Roman was and is a personal hero of the Col. When the suit was still in its infancy, Vanity Fair tried to use lies from Nellie's site and from some polygraph Roman gave the police to win the case. Nellie was excited to cooperate with the real media- as long as he got paid. The Col contacted both Nellie and Vanity Fair so they would know what a piece of shit they were dealing with. Enjoy the dazzling repartee. I most like that he concludes I am a Manson supporter (nope) and that if Charlie screwed underage girls it was okay if Nellie did, even if he didn't. (All typoes are as they were at the time).
To Michael Gross, Vanity Fair, From Col Scott
1- Go to www.mansonmurders.com- see May 17th posting wherein you areCol back to Gross
> > > > > attacked for having no ethics and for abusing his phone call
> > > >Bill
> > > > > Nelson.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2- Now go here- where it is revealed that your asshole buddy
> > > > > CONVICTED Child molester- he had to register and everything-
> > > > >
> > >
> > >http://web.archive.org/web/20000816192835/http://www.atwa.com/jacuzzi.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > 3- then do a followup article where this little man
> > > >what
> > > > > he is.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4- then email me back and thank me for my time.
From Michael Gross To your friend the Col
> > > >Subject: Re: Bill Nelson and Polanski
> > > >Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:56:34 -0400
> > > >
> > > >very creepy. how are you sure the two Bill Nelsons are the same?
> > > >
From Col Me to Gross
> >Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 12:30 PM
> >Subject: Re: Bill Nelson and Polanski
> > > They are- when confronted by this at the time he issued a
> > > that essentially said "The little girls made me do it, and
> > > a bad deal, but I know before God I am innocent" even tho he
> > > contest.
> > >
> > > But trust me not- just ask the guy- call to say you read
his website and
> > > play that you are sorry or angry, and catch him off guard
. He'll admit
> > > he'll just "explain it"
FROM Gross to Col Moi
Subject: Re: Bill Nelson and Polanski
> >Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 12:58:27 -0400
> >I'm not planning to dignify this by pursuing it, but thanks for the
> No problem.
> The guy is a menace.
> He has posted on his website that you are worst than a yellow
> You probably have some causes of action against him.
> That, coupled with his convictions for child abuse, I thought would be
> interesting to you.
> At least you can store this up in the future.
> I wonder if Vanity Fair knows about this guy's crimes.
> You might want to alert them too.
> All the best,
Now Nellie comes back to the Col
Then the Col amuses himself by getting all fire and brimstone and
biblical back--- IN CAPS
You just did not read the text very carefully that I published now
> This writer told me on the telephone that he could care less
> fleeing/conviction of Polanski for a felony and not a
misdemeanor. I READ
> EVERYTHING YOU WRITE VERY CLOSELY INDEED SIR.
> You must
> really be all eaten up with hate.I AM. HATRED IS MY PRIME
> Kay,YOU MEAN THE GUY WHO JUST WROTE TWENTY PAGES IN A NEW
BOOK THAT HIS
> FRIEND'S DAD WAS THE BLACK DAHLIA KILLER? YOU MEAN THE GUY
WHO RUNS TO THE
> CAMERA ANY CHANCE HE GETS FOR SELF SERVING FAME? WHAT
> Doris Tate,I SUSPECT SHE DID NOT and 1/2 the world knows
> YOURSELF- 1/2 THE WORLD DOESN'T CARE WHETHER YOU LIVE OR
DIE- OR WHETHER ANY
> OF US DO.
> about my plea, sentence, expungement, set aside for a
misdemeanor. You do
> that "real offenders of that nature cannot help themselves
and do repeat
> the crimes. You know that from research-right? It is a fact.
I KNOW NOTHING
> ABOUT RECIDIVISM RATES- WHO CARES
> One time,
> questionable filing, and you jump right on it.ONE TIME YOU
PLEAD NO CONTEST
> TO CHILD MOLETSTATION. ONE TIME IS ENOUGH!
> Now really, ever think that
> those beautiful people -killers you defend I DEFY YOU TO TELL
ME WHERE I
> DEFENDED ANY KILLERS? all had sex weith under age people
THERE IS A
> DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 16 YEAR OLD OUISCH WHO WANTED TO HAVE
> BEAUSOLEIL (FOR EXAMPLE) AND YOU ASSAULTING A TWELVE YEAR
OLD GIRL. THAT
> YOU CANNOT SEE IT SPEAKS VOLUMES AS TO WHERE YOUR HEAD IS AT.
> often? Now, they are convicted killers but if they moved on
> release they would not have do register under Megan's Law. And
> would I ever have to either YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO BECAUSE YOUR
> DONE TEN YEARS AGO.. You just cannot deal with that can you.I
CAN DEAL FINE.
> BY THE WAY, "AUTHOR', THAT SENTENCE NEEDED A QUESTION MARK.
> sorry for you. DON'T BOTHER- YOUR TEARS ARE FALSE.At least I
> my own name, web domain address/site
> that can be verified, and do not hide under a rock.THIS IS
MY NAME- SUE MY
> PARENTS IF YOU HATE IT. Who are you pretending to
> be this week? JUST LITTLE OLD SAL.Bill Nelson hate crime
leader? CIW prison
> guard? Leslie
> spokesperson? Defender of James Whitehouse as the best
attorney to ever
> represent Susan? He may have an action you say? Not
really.YOU HAVE SHOWN
> REPEATEDLY THAT YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE LAW. YOUR
ESSAY IS DEFACTO LIBEL
> SINCE YOU IMPUGN HIS REP AS A JOURNALIST. It was my
> impression, opinion, and right to say so. The writer
> interview. Period. He is a liar.
> God bless you,I DIDN'T SNEEZE. AND WHICH GOD?
THE ONE THAT YOU BELIEVE
> OKAYS WHAT YOU DO? OR MINE THAT TELLS ME YOU
WILL BE SMOTE BY HIS HAND?
> WE ARE LEGION.
Finally big Nellie tries to explain why his plea of no contest to
molesting a girl didn't
really mean that. Oh those were the days. Bye Bill. See ya
when we see ya.
I was not talking about Ouish. There were many under the age
of 14. Read the
stories from the members themselves.
My plea was for "to annoy" and it is clear you have not read
the case. "To
annoy or molest."647A, misdemeanor, dismissed, set aside,
My statement was entered into the record and there would have
acceptance of the plea by me without it. Kind of interesting,
when I had to go
to the police station and the female clerk read the
statement, she expressed
shock that I would have to come there. She had never seen
a case like it,
neither had Deborah Fraiser, or other attorneys who read
the case. This was
just not the smoking gun that you keep trying to
shoot me with.
Doris Tate knew very well and Judy Hanson, investigator,
told her after talking
with me. That is a fact. Sorry...My wife and I had many
Doris. Doris encouraged me to get it expunged. The
attorney for Atkins did just
that. And, it was not children (plural) the other girl
never said that I was
inapproiate with her. And, the other girl, witness
testified that she never saw
me touch, or do anything inapproiate to/with the other girl
. She also testified
that I was in her eye vision all the time in question!
Read the prelim and
learn the facts. I am not pleased nor am I proud of
that chapter in my life but
I know that God knows the truth. I rest in that and
am at peace with it. Very
few of us will get out of this life with the smell
of smoke not on us - again a
I have no idea what you are saying about Kay and his designs/desires...
I will not communicate with you again. You are a coward.
You do not have to sneeze to have a "God bless you."
Careful how you set
yourself up as judge for you will meet the real one
David, great kind of the Bible...he murdered,
committed adultry, and yet God
recorded him as "A man after my own heart". Now go
figure that one out...
Hebrews 11 is a remarkable chapter of faith. You
would not boast about any of
them being in your family, but God did. My work
on the Manson case has been of
truth, research, and keeping the killers inside
prison for the crimes they
received the death penalty for. That is reasonable.
You are legion....so is the devil and his powers
May God save your soul
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Word has reached the Col that Bill Nelson is dead.
It's a weird feeling, because that means that so much evil is now gone from the world, along with so much potential for good.
A quick summary for newcomers- but this cannot really do justice, you had to have been there.
In the early days of the web, there was only one site for Mansonalia. It was www.mansonmurders.com. Originally set up to promote his first book, Tex Watson- The Man, The Madness, the Manipulation, the site actually became Bill's raison d'etre, going up and down several times over a 6 or so year period.
The Watson book itself was an obsession- Watson had been allowed to marry while in jail for eight murders and had four children who were all living on welfare. The quest to expose this was a good idea, but the book was almost incoherent, and therein lay the tragedy- had Bill bothered to just spell check it before he self-published it, it would have sucked twenty times less. But he didn't. He never knew when to stop. Harassing Watson and his screw-loose wife was a noble thought, but then he started stalking and photographing the kids who did nothing wrong to anyone. This was the Nelson paradigm.
He claimed to be a Christian and a minister, but his morals were flexible and convenient. Supposedly an associate named Lisa Statman stole the death photos along with the final roll of Sharon/Jay at the house photos from a retired cop. He chastised her for it in his second self-published (and non-spell-checked) book Manson: Behind the Scenes. Yet he SOLD these very same photos on his site for years and provided them to Jon Aes-Nihil who sells them at swap meets to this day.
Without Bill we'd never know about Linda Kasabian and her kids' ongoing life of crime. He found Gypsy through her pastor, he found Michael Brunner and so many more. Yet he never understood the context of his accomplishments. To him it was all black and white. He was right and YOU were wrong. He was also obsessed about the Zodiac killings- so obsessed that he came to believe his two obsessions were linked, despite the absurdity of the thought. He would antagonize and rant biblically against anyone who challenged him. Ultimately every person who believed in him turned away, from Doris Tate to Barbara Hoyt.
Hoyt is another good example of his paradigm. For months he had her mouthing off on his site under the pseuodonym DESERT SPEAKS. Never mind the fact that she lied under oath at several of the trials as we explored earlier on the blog. Never mind the KEY fact that she was IN Hawaii in the first place TO AVOID the Bug when she got her special Burger. She never was that important a person in the group. But each of her edicts were taken as gospel. He started to record their interviews in the hope of a big book deal. He staged an illegal tour to Death Valley with Hoyt as the guide (Sandra Good turned him in but he eluded capture). He hosted a dinner for her and I think Snake Lake. Anything to profit and exploit. Later when Hoyt turned on him, the fucker SOLD the cassette tapes that he made of their interview and I PROMISE you she didn't get any of the money.
The most truly evil thing he ever did occurred after Patti Tate died. She hated Bill Nelson and broke him away from her mom. She was in a lesbian relationship at the time with the same woman who supposedly stole the death photos that Nelson so freely sold. His Christianity was appalled. She died, tragically young and Bill Nelson POSTED the death certificate on his site along with her address, the home where her children still lived. Nice.
Nelson never recovered from a fight he picked with Sandra. He published photos of the house where she and St. George lived. He attacked her site, ATWA. He accused her of crime by calling the local police. Like a righteous fool, he kept at her. Then one day she fired a bazooka back.
All of us Manson scholars were blown away the day it was revealed that devout Christian, holier than thou Bill Nelson had pled nolo contendre ten years before to molesting two twelve year old girls. But it was true; Sandy posted the complaint and the court papers and all the disgusting details were revealed.
He tried to claim his pastors and family all knew it was a fraud, but if it were untrue, he never would have copped a plea.
He stumbled around for a year or two after the bazooka and then took the site down.
I understand John Aes Nihil acquired most of his research and is in negotiations to acquire more.
He had lifelong diabetes and died of pancreatic cancer back in October according to my sources.
Bill Nelson reminds me once again of Ken Anger. So much potential, but he was such an asshole he kind of wasted it all.
Hopefully he was right in his beliefs and he is partying with Jesus right now, while asking him what the motives really were.
Bye Bye Nellie.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Once upon a time, from the late Sixties through the early Seventies, Kenneth Anger was actually the West Coast Andy Warhol. He had patrons throwing money at him. He was making short film after short film, all very pretty and visionary, all incoherent. He was banging as many men as he possibly could. Mick Jagger was a friend, so was Keith Richards. Donald Cammell had him on the set of Performance so that he could learn how to expand his work to feature length. Ken had it going on, yes he did.
His relationship with Bobby Beausoleil goes back to his days in San Fran, where he met the beautiful, swings both ways Bobby, and put him in his films. Bobby, or Bummer Bob as the locals called him, was making a living, sort of, in soft core films like Ramrodder. The two meshed immediately. Soon Bobby was playing Lucifer (uh, okay) in Ken's Invocation of My Demon Brother short film.
The legend, spread by Ken, is that during the making of Scorpio Rising Bobby stole the print and tried to blackmail Ken to get it back. This is poppycock. Ken had used the money given him by his patrons for other things and had to account for the lack of a movie some way. Bobby was already on trial and the solution appeared. Ken likes to embellish the legend by saying he put a spell on Bobby, causing his car to break down outside Spahn so he would meet and become involved with Manson and the girls, but since this is not how it happened, we can see that Ken is again full of shit. Bobby first met some of the girls, and later met Charlie.
Despite his so called issues with Bob, Ken would later participate with Bobby in a Lucifer Rising soundtrack (another film he did with Bobby) from prison.
Last I heard from Ken two years ago he was living in a crowded one bedroom apartment in Silver Lake and almost getting evicted, annoyed that the girls down the hall made so much noise.
People have asked me what happened to Ken. It is simple. Ken is, was and likely will be forever, an ASSHOLE. If you can't meet him, read the bio ANGER. He sounds like an asshole. Or hang with him off and on for three years like I did. Hey it is just my opinion, but when, the day after 9-11 you are sending mail hoping the terrorists take out the Statue of Liberty, then you are an asshole. Sorry.
The guy started out as a child star opposite Bette Davis, became very successful and famous, and when he dies will only warrant a footnote, and THAT based on his Hollywood Babylon books that are 50% lies.
Pretty damn sad.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
It is starting to look like the State of California is gonna fry Tookie Williams. I don't know that they should be frying anybody since they can't even balance a budget, but it isn't up to me. Maybe Arnie will cut him some slack, who knows, but if he didn't kill four innocent people for $200 bucks, then starting the Crips is kind of a good enough reason to fry someone anyway.
I am starting to hear one refrain though... usually from the vast ignoramous population out there.
"Why is Charles Manson still alive then?"
You can sound intelligent just by replying "He didn't kill anybody."
Of course, you can explain in more detail that his sentence and all of his followers' sentences were overturned as "cruel and unusual" by the Supreme Court of the State of California that refuses to overturn Tookie.
Or you could just say "What the hell has that got to do with anything?"
Monday, December 05, 2005
There have been simultaneous threads on the Mark Turner new board and the KTS site about the sexuality of victim Steve Parent. Since I am the guy who essentially "outed" Steve years ago after an casual comment in a discussion with Aaron Stovitz, I have been asked to weigh in here again from the many Col followers.
I do NOT wish to engage in a big debate, especially with morons who cannot read properly. READ this post twice before responding to see if you follow it. When I first raised the news Karen Montecillo, a friend of victim Steve, went nuts on me. She liked to claim to be his girlfriend, but he didn't like girls.
Steve was a young man who was murdered for no reason.
Steve did nothing to deserve to be murdered.
Steven was attracted to men. There is NOTHING wrong with that.
The police report clearly confirmed that he had sadistic, homosexual tendencies.
Garrettson also was attracted to men.
Steve did NOT show up in the middle of the night to sell a stranger a clock radio.
He most likely went for a tryst.
This is all brought out in the initial police research.
Before someone asks why it matters- it does not NOW- it mattered then because they were looking into ANY motive they could find.
Acknowledging that Steve was gay is in no way a slight against Steve unless you are homophobic.
If you are homophobic you are an asshole.
Covering up Steve's tendencies is like covering up the fact that Sharon was basically done with Roman- it is bullshit and unnecessary.
If you are like the Col, you want all the truth. No more official BUG BS.
So Steve liked men- good for him, I hope he enjoyed it, RIP Steve.
(and to the turd known as OOGLER over at KTS- besides the inanity of your posts and your generally low IQ level, I never make up ANYTHING. You insult the family of one of the victims by your very name. You are a sad individual indeed.)
Monday, November 28, 2005
I know there are hundreds of bands that start every year in every corner of the surburban nightmare that America has become. Usually kids looking to get famous, rich or laid, they flame out rather quickly and are never seen again, the band remembered only as an idle fancy of an errant youth as breeding and bill paying become priorities.
In my ongoing discussions with Bobby Beausoleil it always comes back to the MUSIC. Sure he fucked his life, okay fine, yes he has been in hardcore jail for almost 35 years, okay that Aryan Brotherhood wasn't exactly accurate, and he loves his daughter and his wife...but did you hear his CD? He is all about the music. I guess that is what keeps him sane in an insane place. The Col spent several weeks in a maximum security prison in the early nineties (as a guest) and believe you me it SUCKS ASS.
So today's post is a reflection- what must it have been like to hear one of the three performances of THE MILKY WAY? They played the Longhorn Saloon at Spahn three times in early 1969. Bobby on guitar with Charlie on bass, Clem on drums and the girls singing along. The first time it was only ranch hands, the next two times it was paying guests. There was beer, there was singing, there was leching, with everyone involved about to make history in ways they never intended to.
Can you imagine what one of those evenings must have been like?
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Looking over all the responses from last week's posting, you know what I thought would suck if I were Leslie? For two plus YEARS I was free in between all the mistrials and hung juries. I had a job. I had an apartment. It LOOKED like I was gonna walk. In between all the abuse and dykes and filth in prison, I had managed to survive. I was free at last.
How bad must it suck now to realize that IF she gets out (most students of the case, both the Col followers, the KTS Clan and the Turnerites seem to feel she will... the Col is not so sure) it will be when she is so damn old she won't even care.
But it didn't look that way 28 years ago...nope. Les had every reason to think this was all gonna go away. She could go make herself look hot and hit the talkshow circuit, find some nut and get married.
How bad must her reality suck after all that?
Saturday, November 12, 2005
This is taken from KTS without Bret's permission, but since Leslie is once again angling for release the Col gets tons of emails asking why she should get it when she had the death penalty. Visit Bret's site, the best on the web, by clicking to the right. Now, Bret, explain why Leslie is different LEGALLY to the nice people......
Leslie Van Houten is not a death penalty reversal. Her original
sentence was trown out all together. She had something totally
different from the others. She was given a new trial and that is the
sentence that stuck. Not the death penalty. She recieved a 7-to-life
She is not just a good candidate for parole. She is a EXCELLENT
candidate for parole. Parole was part of her sentence and the law
should be fulfilled in her case. She has worked steadfastly for 30
years for her parole and done everything that the Board has ever
asked her to do. Her participation was minimal and she contributed
more as an ader and abetter and an accessory to murder. I have
studied her case very thouroghly and I have all her parole hearings
She posseses a personal charm and is very elegant and articulate.
She has been in prison for 35 years and that has to count for
something. She was 19 at the time of the murders. 35 years is a
life time. She along with Pat and Susan are the only women in
California today who have been in prison for more than 30 years.
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Random thoughts from the World of Charlie....
The Message Board at GoRightly's Page is kaput. If this is permanent, then a major piece of online TLB study has finally bit the dust. After Clark Ronson's original board was exposed as a place of mendacity, many intrepid pilgrims, the Col included, travelled far and wide to join GoGo and wait for his book. His book turned out to be a self-published mess, but there were fun times on that board for a while.
As if hearing a cry in the wilderness, Mark Turner has started a new Forum.
The Col has been on it a few times without incident. That said, the problem with Turner in the past is two-fold. He is anti-Family to the point of illogic. And he never tolerated dissent. If he can be as open with his forum as, say, the mighty Col, then we welcome him and his forum.
There has been pure comedy going on over at Yahoo Groups WhiteRabbittCult.
The Fool Known as Larry Melton (birth name Joseph Garriolla according to his hand written "manuscript", tried to remove the Col from the group for mocking him and ended up banning himself. What a maroon! Check out the opening page- someone called blackrabbitt took over and penned a nice mocking poem for Larry.
We will have a look at this book on the blog soon.
Then foolio started WhiteRabbittCult2 and no one followed him! Fart on, Tanya!
Anyway, it's always fun in Charlie's World. Party on!
Saturday, October 29, 2005
So what did we learn from all of that?
Quite a lot of stuff you don't see elsewhere.
Clem has a wife and a kid.
Hoyt likely fled on her own.
He copped a plea for Ouisch.
And, by just being straightforward and a "nice boy", as well as selling out the group (and ultimately blaming Charlie like the Man wanted) he got out.
Never to be heard from again.
Steve Grogan, Carry On. Thanks for a special week!
Friday, October 28, 2005
My biggest complaint with Tex isn't that he slaughtered nine complete strangers- it' s that he blames an ex-con loser named Manson for what he did.
My biggest complaint with Sadie isn't that she slaughtered a pregnant lady and danced in her blood- it's that she blames Charlie while thanking Jesus who she once thought were one and the same.
Why I respect Bobby Beausoleil is because he does NOT blame Charlie for Hinman- even though if Charlie had not swung his sword like a freaking retard Gary never would have almost lost an ear and this shit wouldn't have happened.
So I wondered where Clem stood. This excerpt from 1978 Parole Hearing (thanks yet again to "Unstoppable') confirms that Clem pussied out and blamed the short guru.
INMATE GROGAN: First, it was 10 years ago. I’m a completely different person to this point. I was young, 16 years old, you know. I was vulnerable to any hustler that would want to hustle me, really, because of my lack of street experience, my lack of just being out in the world, period. I probably would have gone for anything hook, line, and sinker, any salesman or hustler that wanted to hustle me, because they caught me at that age, that point of vulnerability. I was manipulated very easily. My defenses for what he had for me were, you know, almost nonexistent. It was two years after I was already incarcerated that I realized the games that he had run on me, psychological games. It was over my head, out of my awareness. It was just, you know – and now that I have been around hustlers and all types of people in the criminal line of existence there is no way I could let anybody hustle me into anything, into believing a certain philosophy.
HEARING REPRESENTATIVE VINEYARD: Well, according to the most recent report, staff is still describing you in terms of your passivity and your dependency. Whether or not this is still at that same degree it was 10 years ago can be debated, and probably isn’t, as you say. But whether or not it has reached a place – what could you offer as a demonstration of the fact that you have become your own man in the past 10 years that this kind of influence couldn’t be exerted over you again?
INMATE GROGAN: Well, I think the records state that if I’m so dependent as they suggested, I would most likely be in one of these gangs or cliques and my dependency would be on the group itself. But overt these years I haven’t joined any cliques or have any desire to join any cliques.
MS. SAMUELSON: There is a letter in fact in the file to indicate that there was a reference that he was a member of one of the white groups, and that was corrected to show that there is no such affiliation. That’s also in the file. I’m sorry; I just wanted to bring that up.
INMATE GROGAN: The fact that – I think my record states that I’m more or less a loner. It’s like I don’t hang around with a lot of groups of people. I have managed to complete a trade by myself with no help from nobody. I managed to come to the point from a fair guitar player to take off the state competition in the music field. And that was – nobody helped me do that. That was all my own effort. I managed to put together a nice portfolio of artwork. I managed to become fairly versatile with art at this point.
I wondered REALLY why Shorty had to go. Sure, he was cramping Charlie's style and raging on and on to get the Family chucked off by George. But George was tapping the Squeaky vein, he wasn't listening to Shea. So why risk shit by killing Shorty and bringing him to Now? This is Clem's version (thanks Unstoppable) from 1978. Seems to me hitting on the women was a pretty realistice reason...not.
INMATE GROGAN: Well, it was like a growing hostility. They didn’t like him. Charlie didn’t like him because he was – he was always drinking, and he thought he was a slob. He was, you know – was always talking about messing with the girls that were there. And it was like, you know – it was kind of subtle at first, the way, you know, he voiced his dislike and disapproval of the man. Like he would bring it up in conversation at dinner when we all sat around and ate. Over a period it grew worse until – and then we were raided by the police where everything we had was taken, that we had bought legitimately. All our tools and cars and all the possessions that we had accumulated. And plus the children were taken, too. Everybody was arrested on the ranch. In fact the only person left was George Spahn, and he was blind. And they had Carl’s brother come in and watch him so he would have someone to take care of him.
PRESIDING MEMBER BROWN: Why were you arrested?
INMATE GROGAN: I was under the – because Mr. Shea had told the police that we had a stolen car ring. Okay? Well, we spent three days in jail, and we were released. And we didn’t get back none of our property. The pink slips were confiscated – along with our property – to four or five dune buggies that we couldn’t get back from them: the children put into foster homes. And what it really did is made everybody really upset at this guy, because I was led to believe that he was doing it to get us evicted off the ranch, to get us thrown off the ranch. And that was the only place we had to stay at the time. And it was through his actions that he caused us this trouble. I think it’s – you know – excuse me. It goes – you know, it goes – it’s kind of hard for me to talk about this because there are a lot of emotions that I have experienced, guilt and stuff, you know, what I did. But there was, you know, a feeling almost of hatred toward the guy because of what he made us go through, the children and stuff. Like we had held the children in really almost the highest position. They were home delivered and breast fed. It was like – our feeling for the children was really the highest thing we felt. This was mostly the whole reason we was all together, to put the children in a good environment, free from social indoctrinations and stuff, try to raise them as natural as we could. And then to have someone come along and form a false story and have them put in foster homes, it was really a blow to the women and men that were at the place at the time.
Thursday, October 27, 2005
BUG talked about Clem's indecent exposure charge ... whatever. This is Grogan's version- from the 1978 hearing that did not release him. I don't buy it but it is as good a story as any. I've never seen this much info on it before. Enjoy. (transcribed by "Unstoppable')
The incident in
INMATE GROGAN: I was coming back from the Spahn Ranch where I was working before and I was going to my parents’ house. This happened on the same block as my parents’ house. I came back and I wanted to get some money because I had a traffic ticket that I had to pay off. My brother was living there and he offered to pay the traffic ticket. So there was nobody home. As I was leaving there was some neighborhood kids that were on the lawn and I was playing with them and the pants I was wearing had the crotch ripped out of them from riding on the horses and things at the ranch. So when I was playing with the kids on the lawn I guess one of the mothers had viewed it from one of the windows and had called the police thinking that I was exposing myself to their children. As a result of that, I was arrested.
MR. FOLEY: In fact, you were referred to a hospital for a period of time?
INMATE GROGAN: Yes. They referred it to, I think, it was
MR. FOLEY: Also, one other thing crossed my mind. This ranch that you were living on, the Spahn Ranch, were you residing there prior to Charles Manson’s arrival on the ranch?
INMATE GROGAN: I was there when I was about 15 years old and lived in the back. They had a back ranch-house that I lived in and I worked odd jobs, guiding tours for writers and cleaning up the ranch and stuff. They’d give me food and clothing. The rent was free. It wasn’t really nothing to pay for rent. It was just an old shack. It had no electricity or hot water or anything. Just a place to rest.
MR. FOLEY: The next entry on your record is the auto theft, grand theft auto. Could you explain that? That’s in December of 1969.
INMATE GROGAN: I recall being arrested for grand theft auto because I had rented a truck. It was a half-ton truck, I think. I took it to the desert and it got stuck in the desert. At that time I was arrested by
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Okay this is all about Hoyt (the same Babara that that Manson and the 60s group leader had never heard of LOL). You should be familiar with her. If not go here. Now what always bothered me about this was that BUG turns this into a big freaking deal in his novel. Like they tried to kill her and Ruth (Ouisch) got away with it all. Except- why did she leave to go to Hawaii in the first place? Why did Ruth never even get arraigned? And if this was attempted murder, like BUG argues, then why only charge misdemeanors? Clem's version of events actually makes REAL SENSE. See if you agree. (Thanks again Unstoppable. From the 1981 hearing)
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: About this incident helping somebody to go to
INMATE GROGAN: What happened in that incident, one girl named Barbara Hoyt was scheduled to testify in the Charles Manson trial. She came to the ranch where I was living at the time in
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: This is when you were on bail?
INMATE GROGAN: Right. And indicated to the girls and that came to me through hearsay from the girls that she didn’t want to testify that she wanted to, you know, go someplace and hide till the trial was over. So, I guess the girls suggested that they go to
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: On a stolen credit card or something?
INMATE GROGAN: I don’t know how they got it. I think the friend bought it on a credit card, his personal credit card. I think. I’m not sure.
Anyways, they secured the means of going to
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: As a conspiracy?
INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. And can I add something to that?
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Yes.
INMATE GROGAN: We were planning to take the case to trial because the evidence was really shaky on it. There was no evidence, as far as my participation was concerned, but due to the fact I was already in for murder trial, I thought it be best interest to go in with Ruth Moorehouse. Ruth Moorehouse, she was pregnant at the time.
So we all agreed those were charged with conspiracy plead nolo contendere to a misdemeanor, if they would let her out on her own recognizance to have her child in the streets. Because we didn’t want her to have her child in the county jail and have it taken from her at the early part of delivery. So the District Attorney agreed that would be acceptable to him, and that’s how the disposition was handled.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: And then later on you were convicted of the murder?
INMATE GROGAN: Right.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Right. I’d like to thank you very much for providing that information. I know it’s pretty well covered in the pages I mentioned, pages 32 to 41 in the hearing of 1979.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Did you know that Clem was married? And had a son? The son would be 27 today. Son of Scramblehead? Jesus sounds like an AIP exploitation film. Anyway, this is from 1981 and Clem is asked whether he still accepts Charlie as his personal savior. This is his final answer. Thanks again to "Unstoppable"- now get reading and learning.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: At a certain point after you’ve gotten married, your wife needed to change her unlisted phone number and indication because of threats from Manson family. Would you elaborate upon that, because this was sometime after you were incarcerated? Charlie Manson was incarcerated. Who was the threat coming from? What was it all about?
INMATE GROGAN: Well, after couple years being in prison, after reflecting clear in my head, all the cobwebs, what I call the drug residue, I just started thinking. I came to myself. Man, I started thinking, well, what am I doing with these people? Man, why am I still even letting them write to me?
So cut them loose. In the meantime, I had met, you know, met my wife and we visited over a year. I visited with her for a year because I wanted to see where she was at in her head, as far as for a wife, good wife, my children. It was more like a testing period. I let her go through to see if she would stick by me. Of course, there was no guarantee of that. It seemed that after a year of going through these hardships of prison life, visiting, coming back and seeing you, on the basis that she had left, you know, call it quits or she would stick by me.
So consequently after a year and a half, I decided we should get married. And some of the girls that were involved in Charlie’s in
These are not quotes, just summations of the feelings. So I told her to change her address, move out of there. I wondered how they know where she lived.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Pardon?
INMATE GROGAN: I was wondering how they know where she lived.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: At the time you got married, were you prepared as far as the consequences that that might be the reaction from the people that were still out?
INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. It was – I had those reactions to them during that relationship. We had told her, you know, relatively the same thing, leave me alone. You have no business with me, and I kind of half ass respected that from those people. Because in their eyes, here I am in the past involved. I am in effect getting out of the group. To them there’s no getting out. Because it’s – it’s kind of difficult to explain, I guess, the attachment they had to each person that was involved with them over the years and they didn’t want to let go of it.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Okay. Maybe –
INMATE GROGAN: It’s like we’re supposed to be bonded together for life, you know, for eternity. Almost to a, like a vow, you know, to that. That was their viewpoint of my involvement with them and I didn’t see it that way. And they was highly upset that I would leave them and just told them to get the heck away.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: I think you indicated that at the time of the killing, correct me if I’m incorrect, that Manson said to mutilate the body and that you surmised that it was a means of bringing the group more under his control, because the group was beginning to shift away from him; is that correct?
INMATE GROGAN: Yeah. At the time – it wasn’t really at the time of the murders. It was after the murder, sometime after. The murder that he told me that, you know, circulate that story if anybody asks.
MR. ROBINSON: Just for clarification, he didn’t tell you to mutilate the body?
INMATE GORGAN: He told me to say that we had mutilated the body.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Okay. Of the people that were involved in the Manson family, do other people have – at the time that the incident took place, people were very close to one another in terms of the psychodrawn path? At this point is there a spread in terms of individuals?
INMATE GROGAN: Yes. There’s a – there’s a –
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Where people are at in terms of their relationship with Manson or –
INMATE GROGAN: I was the only one that was, you know, saying – taking a good look at where they’re at. It took me a couple years because oriented myself in prison and then still work sifting though the distortion of the thinking I had. But, yeah, I think they were desperate to hold what they had, what little clique of a group they had left.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Are some of them still pretty close to him in terms to the extent that you can be?
INMATE GROGAN: My contact with them over the years has been nill. I imagine probably couple of the girls are still with them, but that’s about it as far as I’m concerned.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Okay. I don’t have any other questions.
Monday, October 24, 2005
This is from his October 20, 1981 Parole Hearing. In it he gives the most detailed description of Shorty's murder I have heard. It contradicts things that Hoyt has said- but I never believed her anyway. Thanks to "Unstoppable " for the transcription. It is good reading.
INMATE GROGAN: Okay, I’ll start with the report that you read is pretty accurate insomuch as it describes everything that happened.
Few inconsistencies in the sense that, if I understood right, you said we enticed the victim to the car. I don’t know if it was understood how I explained it last time that he was taking us down to an auto mechanic place to change some auto parts in. So actually we were like hitching a ride with him.
I don’t know – is enticing the same thing?
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Well, no, not exactly.
MR. ROBINSON: Well, let me put it to you this way: It begins for you, you’re waking up in the morning, right? If you could start at it from that point and just sort of discuss it. I know you discussed it so many times.
INMATE GROGAN: Well, that morning I was awakened by Charles Manson and still, you know, half asleep, told me to get to the car and handed me like a pipe wrench. Told me to hit Shorty in the back of the head as soon as
At that point
I still haven’t got over, you know, the emotional part. You know, so sometimes it’s kind of hard to, you know, overcome the atrocity that I did.
BOARD MEMBER TONG: Would you like some water?
INMATE GROGAN: Yeah, if I could.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: So Charles Manson was in the back seat with you?
INMATE GROGAN: No. No one was in the back seat.
INMATE GROGAN: Thank you.
INMATE GROGAN: I was sitting behind the driver.
MR. ROBINSON: In the back seat.
INMATE GROGAN: Then we pulled off the road.
In the meantime, I was supposed to hit this guy in the back of the head. And like I never, you know, hit anybody or hurt anybody like that before, and it was hard, you know. I kept hesitating in my mind, you know, looking at the cars on the highway hoping maybe cause of traffic I wouldn’t have to hit him because it was just 10 feet off the lane.
MR. ROBINSON: Take your time.
INMATE GROGAN: Well, the blow stunned him but it didn’t knock him out. And he jumped to the passenger side of the seat. That was, the car door was already open and exited through there.
MR. ROBINSON: Steve, let me interrupt you. One of the things that was read in the statement was that the blow knocked him out of the vehicle. I remember that was discussed last year, and as you just said, he left the vehicle after being hit, right? He went out which side?
INMATE GROGAN: Right side.
MR. ROBINSON: The passenger side, all right.
INMATE GROGAN: The blow knocked him forward so he hit the steering wheel and surprised him and jumped out the side and I had to reach over the seat and get in the driver’s seat to stop the car, because the way it was parked there was an embankment, you know, like cul de sac ditch. And the car ran – drove into the ditch. So, meantime I’m jumping over the seat trying to put the brakes on, put the car in gear, stop the motor, he had already been stabbed.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Who did that?
INMATE GROGAN: I imagine
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: They were in a different car?
INMATE GROGAN: I actually didn’t even see a car drive up. I just noticed to my right he came up. He might have gone through some back trails and in time – he must have been in another car.
HEARING REPRESENTATIVE EPPERLY: Was it
INMATE GROGAN: Right. And I came upon the victim in a semi unconscious state. And I was handed a knife and told to stab him, and I stabbed him twice in the chest. And some others were told the same.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Did Manson stab him too?
INMATE GROGAN: I don’t know. He might have slashed him. I don’t recall if he stabbed him.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: So you stabbed him and
INMATE GROGAN: I think Bruce might have stabbed him in the arm.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: Then what happened?
INMATE GROGAN: Well, at that point, couple minutes after that he was dead and I was told to take him, drag him into some bushes that were further from the highway, cover him up till night, come back at night and bury him. And the others left so I came back at night and buried him.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: You came back yourself and buried him? How deep was the grave?
INMATE GROGAN: It was pretty shallow. It was just enough to cover his body. But in reference to the deep grave, over the years it was seven years or eight years and there had been rainstorms and mud slides in that area. And I think that’s what – they had trouble finding him when I initially drew a map. I had to go down with them, escort, and show them the direct vicinity. I couldn’t even remember the exact spot because, you know, landscape had changed.
PRESIDING MEMBER ROOS: How about all this talk, it was groovy to kill him, and all that kind of business?
INMATE GROGAN: Well, I was told that if anybody was to ask what happened that those were the statements I was to give them in order to – at that point in time, at the ranch there was a lot of, seems like there was a little bit of dissention and philosophy that was promulgated there. There was always – fear or love would pull people together from breaking apart. And I think it was, you know, meant to understood that this statement would bring more fear to the people rather than just stab the guy the way we did.
So one of the things I have done that I don't believe anyone online has ever done is study in depth Steve "Clem" Grogan's Parole Hearing Transcripts for 1978, 1979, 1980 and the Jackpot one, 1981. There is a LOT of stuff that is not commonly known buried within. Especially if you accept that by this point Steve was coherent AND honest, since he wanted to get his ass out of prison.
So the next week of posts is dedicated to that 15 year old boy who lived in a back house of the ranch; who fucked pretty much every one of the ladies on the ranch; who had a very good and powerful singing voice; and who played retarded so well that even the BUG thought he was.
Welcome to Scramblehead Week!
Thursday, October 20, 2005
I've been busy starting a big project and working away at uncovering forgotton pieces of information on TLB.
I am so sorry for not posting in over a week. Much new stuff will come your way.
Lots of retards started a White Rabbitt group. Check here to laugh and mock.
There's a Manson play being mentioned on Bret's site.
KTS really hasn't had much new or bad lately.
So let's ruminate on a thought I had....
Three people, one a tough jock, and two young girls enter your house. Two of the three are on speed.
Now it is a different time and place and the house has guests all the time. So you see them walking around and you go with it. Then you realize, uh oh, this is bad. But you don't want to believe the worst so you still go with it. And hey, if you're Abby and Voytek, you are high too.
But when do you wake up and go, shit I am gonna die, and we fucking outnumber these dirtbags?
I mean Tex ANNOUNCED he was the Devil when he walked in.
I continue to think TEX at least knew one or more of the main victims.
Otherwise, if I'm Voytek or Jay I ain't letting these freaks tie me up, I am kneeing Tex in the balls.
It feels to me that going along with three skeevy strangers who just show up at your house is like opening the door when a Crocodile knocks.
Does anyone else think like this?
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Okay now let’s make this clear- I am neither pro Manson nor anti Manson. Each side keeps wanting to adopt the
What do I think about Manson? I think he is happy where he is. He didn’t kill anyone. He never had a chance for a fair trial. But then he never tried really either. He wanted to be famous. He is. He was a two bit conman who is miles away from being “the most dangerous man alive. He played a role, he was happy to do so, and now he’s back home. I’m more upset at the people like the Bug that played him, not because CHARLIE regrets it but because any bending of the truth affects justice and affects you and me.
So again- slowly- I am pro reality. Nothing more.
Which brings up today’s post. What the hell is Squeaky doing?
Let’s follow what I believe is the truth first of all- and few people will actually disagree with any of it.
1- Squeaky was closest to Charlie.
2- Squeaky basically balled only Charlie (and Spahn I guess).
3- Supposedly Charlie was able to control Squeaky’s fits via sex.
4- Squeaky is a kind and gentle soul.
5- Squeaky’s mind never really process the Tate LaBianca horror. And because Charlie had little to do with it, she couldn’t understand what the fuss was all about.
6- When she saw her soul mate and many friends going to jail she wished she were part of the group. Even though she is not a killer like Sadie or
7- Post trial, she fights to keep the Family alive. Desperately so. But it disperses. Only she and Sandy keep the faith.
8- Rumor has it that the girls or Charlie are like, if she is so loyal why isn’t she in here.
9- Squeaky pulls a gun that she clearly does NOT intend to shoot on the President. She can never coherently explain why.
10- Squeaky goes to jail. With the glaring exception of a 1988 escape she is a model prisoner.
So what the hell is she thinking? It seems like she did it to get back on the front page. To remind the world about the “plight” of Charlie and the girls. To keep the candle alive.
She never does again after leaving for prison. She almost never does interviews. She doesn’t hold seminars. It’s weird. Like you throw your life away for your cause and then inexplicably DROP your cause.
And now she is up for Parole. And it doesn’t seem she wants it.
But if she were still fighting for the cause, don’t you see a world where she gets out and does her OWN book? Where she is on Today and Oprah with footage of the cute old her and she is still pounding the word of Charlie?
You know that would happen. She would be famous and everywhere for at least a year.
I don’t get it. What is Squeaky thinking?