Sunday, September 30, 2007

How Sad....the world of JimNY

There are many many sad fringe people associated with this case. That is why the Col FLED after the screening on Friday. Sure I wanted to converse with Hendrickson... but who else would be there?

I am most concerned about one James Robinson from NYC. He is obsessed with Leslie Van Houten. Look at the two videos below. He actually bought her High School yearbook to make those atrocities. He talks about how meeting her changed his life. He scares me.


But who is this guy? He posts in the insane candygramma group. He attacks the Col because the Col does not think Leslie should go free. But is he dangerous or just the usual blowhard?



Again, lest we never forget, the ACTUAL words of Leslie Van Houten...

"I was obsessed with the knife. Once it went in it just kept going in and in and in."

Direct quote. The knife went in over 20 times.

Here's a better video for you to watch. I can't embed it but--- I present the REAL Leslie Van Houten.

Let me know what you know about JimNY. Colscott AT Hotmail.com.

63 comments:

deadwoodhbo said...

personally i dont care about what anyone has to tell but the old man ...oh gee someone produced a film about a bunch of freaking loser kids..now i surjest he make a film about the old man that is if the old man would talk to him ......unlikely

deadwoodhbo said...

oh and leslie was bobbys whoar i hope she rots in jail

deadwoodhbo said...

Col why cant jempud join the group?

ColScott said...

jempud whoever it was violated gods law and man's

galgate said...

As I remember jempud made some rather interesting and well written posts? How did she violate, Col?

deadwoodhbo said...

Dear col we are waiting .........do tell how jem messed up thank you.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Heaven said...

I wonder, is Leslie sorry for her crimes or sorry she's served more than half of her life in prison? Sometimes it's hard to tell.

=)

galgate said...

Jempud's violation ...

i read back through the blog. Presumably jempud can't withdraw postings if she has been banned so it's all there.

The only pattern I can see is that twice she wondered whether LVH might not eventually be a candidate for parole. And made some weird christian plea for compassion.

As Col seems so against LVh being released, may we assume this is the violation of god's law and man's'?

Or maybe the violation is disagreeing with Col?

Just a thought. Don't kick me off too, please, Col.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
galgate said...

Ok, Heaven, thanks. That must be it.

I've just read the link you provided. Banning seems a bit severe for someone who was so obviously well-intentioned and trying to help out by keeping the blog going.

I wouldn't really say it violated god's law and man's. Unless Col really does think he is God?

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pristash said...

Why did the Col flee? Is he actually afraid of face to face confontation?

Heaven said...

He's in California and it's only 8AM there so he's probably still snoozing lol

=)

catscradle77 said...

Does Jempud have a blog? For if people want to read what is said by this person, and it can't post here, why not ask it to create its own blog because you enjoyed its posts?

Just offering a suggestion...

agnostic monk said...

I miss Jempud's posts. I asked her via email a while back if she would apologize and maybe the Col would "parole" her but I guess that is not going to happen.

Anyway, I'm hesitant to get involved in any drama about this JimNY guy but I am wodnering, is that Savage from the old days? I only read a few of his entries in the youtube videos but it sounded like him. I didn't realize his feelings for Leslie ran that deep. I sort of miss his posts too because even though I disagreed with him on a lot and sometimes thought he was just a put on, he did liven the place up occasionally.

You can all rest assured you will never, ever, ever, see anything like that from me about Kasabian. Not ever. I am weird about those I choose to find interesting but I have my limits.

: )

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
agnostic monk said...

ah, I thought it sounded like he. I don't know what to make of it.

Anyway, I'm good heaven but I hate my job today. How are you?

agnostic monk said...

hey deadwood were you being serious about your husband being in the cell next to charlie's cell at corcoran?

I wasn't sure what you meant by the comment about him not caring about some loser family freaks. they all abandoned him eons ago and got on with their lives (with the possible exception of Lynette) so I wouldn't expect him to think too much about them.

But back in 94 Leslie said she was receiving letters from him, saying he wanted her to "come home to the ranch" i.e. help get the group going again.

Heaven said...

I'm doing good, busy but good

=)

Pristash said...

Oh, man, if I could have been there, and I knew JimNY was Savage, then I couldn't wait to meet him! Or hear what he had to say or ask Hendrickson himself. SAVAGE was one entertaining dude, but I don't know anything about candygrammers group or his blog, if he has one...I only have tome for the COL and the search for truth.

Pristash said...

I meant TIME for the COL, not tome.

Sorry.

Pristash said...

Ok, after perusing the best manson site ever, what would Nancy Pitman know that Ronald Hughes would have wanted to suppress by marrying her so she wouldn't have to testify?

Let's go people, enlighten me! Thanks!

deadwoodhbo said...

agnostic monk said...
hey deadwood were you being serious about your husband being in the cell next to charlie's cell at corcoran?

I wasn't sure what you meant by the comment about him not caring about some loser family freaks. they all abandoned him eons ago and got on with their lives (with the possible exception of Lynette) so I wouldn't expect him to think too much about them.

But back in 94 Leslie said she was receiving letters from him, saying he wanted her to "come home to the ranch" i.e. help get the group going again.

12:18 PM, October 02, 2007

you bet i would not lie i promise you frank reichard is my husband and looks after charlie,if anyone cares to ask charlie he will tell you its true........i do like the col blog he doesnt bullshit....i love you frank always becca

agnostic monk said...

well, I would ask Charlie myself but he stopped returning my phone calls, LOL. I can't say I would ever believe anything the man has to say though.

Anyway, I wasn't distrusting what you said about your husband, just asking for clarification. I wasn't sure what you meant exactly by "Charlie doesnt care about any family freaks". The way I interpret that is that Charlie hasn't changed. He never cared about any of them anyway. Con men tend to not care about the people they are using.

Heaven said...

agnostic monk said...
well, I would ask Charlie myself but he stopped returning my phone calls, LOL.

Now that's funny!!!

=)

deadwoodhbo said...

Monk very funny ........has far has red goes that died when he saw a picture of her old......he has a girlfriend nothing to do with the past........very funny it was this is MCI and now its This is gobal tel net i have a collect call from a inmate at a califonia state prison corcoran 1.......white rabbitt charlie does not manson direct tell a bunch of ball ,the lateset photo of charlie on that site is a id picture some co got out..........i am not friends with charlie at all only frank is well plus kenny c and kenny d ......and i do like col site although i think jem should come back she gave the Col whatfor...........let her back

agnostic monk said...

ok, well, while I attempt to decipher that post, the mention of mansondirect got me curious and I headed over to the mansondirect.com website and it seems as though there is a phone call from Charlie to a friend recorded just this past august which you can listen to in mp3 format.

At first it doesn't sound like him at all (probably age) but if you keep listening, it does seem to be him. He still talks the same way, back and forth between speaking in riddles and speaking directly, making sense and then going off on nonsense tangents (or I'm just too stupid to figure it out). Ultimately he doesn't seem to be saying anything new but it is interesting to hear him. He mentions his parole hearings.

Just thought anyone interested might like to know. I don't frequent the ATWA site really at all and I am not promoting it by posting this.

: )

deadwoodhbo said...

agnostic monk said...
ok, well, while I attempt to decipher that post, the mention of mansondirect got me curious and I headed over to the mansondirect.com website and it seems as though there is a phone call from Charlie to a friend recorded just this past august which you can listen to in mp3 format.

At first it doesn't sound like him at all (probably age) but if you keep listening, it does seem to be him. He still talks the same way, back and forth between speaking in riddles and speaking directly, making sense and then going off on nonsense tangents (or I'm just too stupid to figure it out). Ultimately he doesn't seem to be saying anything new but it is interesting to hear him. He mentions his parole hearings.

Just thought anyone interested might like to know. I don't frequent the ATWA site really at all and I am not promoting it by posting this.

: )

10:01 PM, October 03, 2007

that is charlies voice ,the guy who runs manson direct tapes him and then puts it on the net .everything eles on that site is bogus its all lies about manson being treated badly,oh you dont understand my post because you dont talk to charlie i guess on the phone anyway that is why ilike the cols blog hes straight up front,the whole of 4a4-1 thats the prison unit manson is in will tell you manson direct is bogus the latest picture on there of charlie is a id picture stolen by a co and given outside corcoran.......aint life groovey:Pi tell no lie when i tell you my husband frank reichard has been charlies closest friend going on 10 years.just write charlie and ask him

galgate said...

Just listened to http://ia340913.us.archive.org/0/items/
MansonParole_2_2007/cm272007-1.mp3 (yes, I know, a little late)

Who maintains the Atwa site now?

Deadwood: Jem won't be allowed back. As you say she stood up to the Col which was probably not good for her. You don wanna bite the hand that feeds ya. She wrote some good stuff but never contributed anyrhing new.

And she knew how to write too - not bad English if she really is from Argentina like she says, probably better than anyone else here. But it may be BS that she is a latino.

Who cares anyway, thats the Internet. Here today, gone tomorrow..

Pristash said...

Ok, deadwoodhbo or somebody, ask Charlie what Nancy Pitman knows that Hughes wanted suppressed so badly that he would marry her...

catscradle77 said...

Umm..not being an attorney or anything, how would Hughes marrying Pitman stop her from testifying against anyone? Unless Hughes committed a crime? Because from what little I know of the law, the only privilege that would result from that union would be marital.

deadwoodhbo said...

Pristash said...
Ok, deadwoodhbo or somebody, ask Charlie what Nancy Pitman knows that Hughes wanted suppressed so badly that he would marry her...

11:35 AM, October 04, 2007

Hmm charlies not my husband why would he tell me?:P
LET JEMPUD BACK COL :P:P:P:P:P

galgate said...

Col - I think you better had let jempud back or this blog's gonna be talking about nothing else

whatever she did can't have been that bad ..

Heaven said...

catscradle77 said...
Umm..not being an attorney or anything, how would Hughes marrying Pitman stop her from testifying against anyone? Unless Hughes committed a crime? Because from what little I know of the law, the only privilege that would result from that union would be marital.

11:46 AM, October 04, 2007


I was thinking the same thing. Being married to Nancy wouldn't stop her from testifying agianst anyone who isn't her hubby..

=)

catscradle77 said...

And then too, it would only apply to the period that they were married, from what I can tell.

So, that confuses it even more.

Heaven said...

I looked on Brets site and I couldn't find anything about Hughes wanting Nancy to marry him so she couldn't testify...

=)

ColScott said...

Heaven- read the article in news he posted about Hendrickson's new film


Deadwood- Jempud violated the laws of God and man. She can still read here but may not dance with us. Sad yes. But there is no turning back now. The truth needs us.

galgate said...

Hey Col - you say Jempud violated the laws of God and man, well cool, its your blog, no sweat

But out of interest wtf did she do to piss you so much? I'm sure we'd all like to know so we don't do the same thing and get the boot too.

I mean, what do you have to do to violate the laws of god and man - start world war three or something?

Just curious, as I'm sure we all are.

Heaven said...

Galgate, in post #10, I explained what she did to get the boot..

She's gone and probably won't be returning.

Thanks Col, I'll go check that out..

deadwoodhbo said...

oh gee heaven which group you like better cg or this one

deadwoodhbo said...

ColScott said...
Heaven- read the article in news he posted about Hendrickson's new film


Deadwood- Jempud violated the laws of God and man. She can still read here but may not dance with us. Sad yes. But there is no turning back now. The truth needs us.

2:44 PM, October 05, 2007

dam Col all i can say on a friday night is :P:P:P:P

galgate said...

Heaven

Don't want to be rude but you're sounding like a parrot. I heard YOUR theory, twice. Let Col tell me (us) just why and how Jem is a violation to God's and man's law.

Here's what jem wrote when she posted (albeit without permission) on the blog:

xxxxxxxxxx
I guess none of us know what has happened with the good Col, and I guess all of us hope that he is well (even if he does curse us for being interfering busybodies).

And I also guess none of us - especially the Col - want the blog to die, so here's a suggestion that we mere mortals keep a dialogue going in his (hopefully temporary) absence.

So forgive me taking the initiative - and if anyone has anthing of interest to say - or news of the Col - please post here.

And I hope I don't get shot out of the sky for abusing my privileges like this ...

Jem

xxxxxxxxxxxxx


Now it seems clear to me that:

a) Jem was concerned that the Col was unable to post and wanted to keep the blog going

b) she apologized in advance for posting without permission

c) she did this with the very best of intentions and in order to help Col, who had not posted for several weeks

SO, ok, she didn’t have permission, we know that. But was it so bad what she did ? Was it such a terrible thing that Col considers it a violation of God’s law ?

No, it would be an insult to Col’s intelligence to suggest that. I think it was something else, and I want Col to tell us.

Heaven said...

deadwoodhbo said...
oh gee heaven which group you like better cg or this one

6:53 PM, October 05, 2007


I don't really have a preference.

=)

Heaven said...

Galgate,

I understand what you're saying but if Col Scott hasn't answered you by now, he probably isn't going to..

Sometimes the lack of an answer speaks loud and clear...

=)

deadwoodhbo said...

galgate i have to agree with you....i have to speak my mind even if col kicks me of too....i would like to know about jem too.

Heaven said...

I doubt Col Scott will kick you off for asking about Jem..

He doesn't usually do things like that.

I think the worst he'll do is just not answer you... But maybe he'll surprise us..

=)

galgate said...

Heaven

Thanks for answering, but in this case the lack of an answer doesn't speak loud (how could it) or clear. Not at all clear.

I'll suggest an answer for you - if you don't hear from me again and my name disappears off the list you'll know why.

I think Col kicked Jem off because she's the only one on this blog not afraid to speak her mind. This means she sometimes disagreed with Col, and she told him so.

I think the Col was feeling petulant and capricious (words I haven't used since college - got a dictionary handy folks?) and kicked Jem off in a fit of pique. Because he could. Because he is the mighty Col. Like a temperamental two-year-old. And i think he can't invite jem back now because he's too proud.

Cos it sure as hell can't be anything she's done ..

And interestingly your theory isn't too good cos jem went on publishing for quita a while after her 'illegal' post (as I remember) before she was booted (I don't know the exact date cos I can't).

Anyway, that's what I think - and it don't fit in too well with a website that wants to find the truth.

And I guess now I'll get booted off too - but like Deadwoodbho this pisses me off, and I have to speak my mind.

Heaven said...

You're welcome Galgate..

I know that when Jem made her entry to the blog, Col Scott was out of town or away on business so I think that's why she wasn't removed immediately.. He removed her when he got back..

Lots of people have disagreed with the Col and I've never seen him remove someone for it..

I was only trying to answer your question because it was looking like Col wasn't going too. But if you want to have him answer you personally, I more than understand...

I doubt you'll get an answer from him, but ya never know. Like I said, he might surprise us..

Have a good weekend!

=)

agnostic monk said...

galgate, I have to respectfully disagree with you. Heaven is correct. The Col does not kick people off for merely disagreeing with him or speaking their mind.

Example: The Col and I have very different opinions about Linda Kasabian. His being extremely cynical and negative, believes she lied and was all kinds of evil, has called her some really foul names (well, he also once said that his opinion about her changes from time to time but I've yet to see any other opinion expressed).

My opinion - which is the correct opinion, LOL : ) - is more forgiving, more trusting of her truthfulness at trial, and more convinced that she was very different from the people who actually killed. I have never been afraid to tell him this and never felt like I was not welcome to do so. Our respective opinions about Charlie differ as well, though there are far more nuances there.

Anyone who has been around here for any length of time can confirm this.

If what you say about the Col's standards for who stays and who goes was true, I would have been kicked to the curb long ago.

But here I am, saying Happy Saturday to all...

agnostic monk said...

p.s. I think he simply didn't appreciate it when Jem took over the role of blog captain. I know that her intentions were good, and I REALLY wish she were still here, but I don't think we are looking at a censorian conspiracy.

I don't believe The Col wants everyone to agree with him unquestioningly.

ColScott said...

SO, ok, she didn’t have permission, we know that. But was it so bad what she did ? Was it such a terrible thing that Col considers it a violation of God’s law ?

1- I don't answer to you, thanks
2- Yes, it was terrible, terrible enough that she can no longer have access to The Promised Land.

Now find a more useful question.

agnostic monk said...

I have a more useful, totally unrelated question that has been bugging me for a while (for no real reason other than my own curiosity and currently being too busy to read through the books and online records).

I am trying to compile a list of all the Family members, both core and peripheral (using that term broadly), who testified for the prosecution during the TLB trial.

I have...

Juan Flynn
Linda Kasabian
Snake Lake
Barbara Hoyt
Brooks Poston
Paul Watkins
Danny DeCarlo
Stephanie Schram

Who am I missing? Anyone? I don't recall if Al Springer testified, or if anyone else did. I don't think Kitty did even though she was the first informant and was weirdly ping-ponging.

deadwoodhbo said...

ColScott said...
SO, ok, she didn’t have permission, we know that. But was it so bad what she did ? Was it such a terrible thing that Col considers it a violation of God’s law ?

1- I don't answer to you, thanks
2- Yes, it was terrible, terrible enough that she can no longer have access to The Promised Land.

Now find a more useful question.

4:42 PM, October 06, 2007

wow fortune comes with a price....i never said you had to answer to me ..........ok touchy subjectnow i know........next time you talk to bobby ask him if he remembers coyote from the ranch ,now i will go stand in the corner and be quite:P:P:P:P:P.

Heaven said...

I think that's all of them Monk...

=)

deadwoodhbo said...

Dam i was going to be quite till i read about Linda Kasabian in monks post ,she went to the ranch because her husband was an asshole or was he though , now i think on it she deserved every smack she got.....she back stabed charlie real good ,that acclaimed miss i can so no wrong was has guilty has the others....snitch bitch.

Deb said...

Monk, Al Springer did testify and although she testified for the defence, so did Gypsy.

Deb

Heaven said...

I don't know how technical Monk is looking to get but Gypsy didn't testify during guilt portion of the Tate/LaBianca trial. The defense rested without calling any witnesses..

She testified during the penalty phase.. Or I should say, she lied during the penalty phase lol

=)

agnostic monk said...

deadwoodhbo said...
>>>>snitch bitch.

Yeah, I know deadwood. You're not alone. A lot of people seem to feel that way. Oh well.

By the way I don't think snitching in a situation like this is necessarily a bad thing, and I don't think she backstabbed Charlie, I think he made his own bed.

p.s. I don't think the Col was talking to you, I think he was talking to galgate.

agnostic monk said...

I was just distinguishing between prosecution and defense witnesses regardless of the trial phase. I know all those family girls got up during the penalty phase and lied their asses off to save Charlie.

What I find so humorous about THAT is how they all had slightly different stories. You'd think with all that passion to save Charlie from the gas they could have at least concocted a consistent story. It makes me wonder if there wasn't a subconscious desire to thwart the plan. But I'm probably reading into it too much.

Anyway, thanks for your feedback Deb and Heaven. I dont remember anything about Springer's testimony, I'll have to go back and do some reviewing.

Heaven said...

agnostic monk said...
By the way I don't think snitching in a situation like this is necessarily a bad thing, and I don't think she backstabbed Charlie, I think he made his own bed.



I agree with you Monk.. Snitching in this situation wasn't a bad thing. People were being slaughtered. Had Manson not placed himself at the LaBianca's, maybe his outcome would have been different.

agnostic monk said...

yup, and don't get me wrong, heaven, the dummy should have snitched A LOT sooner, like the moment she saw poor steven parent get clocked in the head 4 times. But I guess better late than never.

I'll bet she will wish until her dying day that she could go back in time and make very different choices.

As far as Manson, it is just his dumb luck that he chose someone to go along on those nights that ultimately refused to buy into his xed-out, shaved head bullshit.

agnostic monk said...

hey Deadwood, I have heard the name Coyote before somewhere, what was his name on the ranch, and where is he these days?