Sunday, July 05, 2009

Yana Kites


So this is something none of us knew- Linda went so far as to fuck up dumb Sadie. Nice lady.

From LA MAG
-----

FLYING KITES

Manson Family member Susan Atkins, aka Sadie Mae Glutz, broke the case when she told fellow jail inmates at the Sybil Brand Institute the details of the Tate and LaBianca murders. Initially the prosecution intended to call Atkins as its star witness, but the deal fell apart. The explanation typically given for the collapse is twofold. First, Atkins provided an account of the crime to the Los Angeles Times, thereby polluting the jury pool. Second, she fell back under the sway of Manson. Both stories are true. However, there was also something else

GARY FLEISCHMAN, Linda Kasabian’s lawyer. Now 75, he practices in Northern California. Linda Kasabian had seen them committing mayhem at the Tate house. She had driven the killers to the LaBianca residence, but she hadn’t done anything. Still, she was technically guilty of first-degree murder. I said to her, “You’re broke. You’re pregnant, and you were there. You must become a prosecution witness.” The prosecution already had Sadie. I call her Sadie, but her name is Susan Atkins. She was an active participant in the murders and was going to testify against Manson. I told Linda, “Sadie is flaky, and they’re gonna sell her out before it’s done. They promised her no death penalty, but they will screw her over. She killed people. We have to help this process along.” I told Linda, “You start passing Sadie kites.” A “kite” is a letter that goes into the prison system. I said, “Hand her a kite and talk Charlie-talk to her.” Linda knew exactly what I meant. Charlie Manson always spoke in these sort of backward riddles. So I told Linda, hand Sadie some kites that say, “Your lawyer is the D.A., the D.A. is your lawyer, the D.A. is Charlie, Charlie is selling you out, and you’re being sold.” So Linda starts passing these kites to dumb Susan Atkins. This goes on for a couple of months, and Susan clams up. She ain’t gonna say anything else to help the prosecution. They have to find somebody else to testify.

One day Aaron Stovitz, the head of the trial division, called me. He said, “I want to talk to you.” I said, “I’m going to get my hair cut at the barbershop at the Beverly Wilshire hotel. Come on over.” So he drives out, and he makes me an offer. A very strange confluence of events had occurred. They needed Linda Kasabian, and she needed them. They gave her total immunity. They couldn’t make their case without this girl.

Linda Kasabian wasn’t scared of Charles Manson at all. She wasn’t built that way. She was a flower child. The Family started bugging me to get her not to testify, pestering me. Lynette Fromme, you know, Squeaky, was sent by Manson to see me. She would come and sit in my office. One day I threw her out physically. She only weighed about 90 pounds. She looked like a rat. Another woman, Catherine Share, who was even weirder, would also show up. She played the violin. I just saw her on television—she looks like a matron today, very pretty lady. Squeaky and Share kept showing up. So finally one night we went to the jail to see Linda, and they confronted her. They said, “You should be one with us.” And Linda answered, “I am one with myself, and that’s all.” That was the end of that.

16 comments:

blipcrotch said...

Interesting. There may have been stronger influences on Susan than Linda's kites. Such as Charlie.

agnostic monk said...

Good! I like Linda more and more all the time. But I agree with blipcrotch. I doubt Susan was paying much attention to anything Linda was saying when there was Charlie to contend with.

ColScott said...

I think the thing to draw attention to is that BUG would have us believe that Linda didn't want immunity, she just wanted to do the right thing. Which always sounded like bullshit and now clearly is.

agnostic monk said...

I hear ya, Col. You and I have always had a somewhat different read of LK. I've always maintained her situation was more complicated than black/white. I like to balance what one person says against what another person says without one necessarily negating the other.

Pristash said...

"They couldn't make their case without this girl."

Interesting.

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

IF Charles had so much influence over Susan, howcome she was using amphetamines behind his back?

Skyhook said...

A.C. Fisher Aldah said:
IF Charles had so much influence over Susan, howcome she was using amphetamines behind his back?

If Manson had little influence over Atkins, how come she felt required to go "behind his back"?

spookycatz said...

I think we need to keep it real here. Yeah, the Bug is slime, no arguement from me on that. Linda however...come on, if you were looking at a possible death sentence would you hesitate to take Sadie out of the picture?

Brian Davis said...

Col thanks again !

This is the kind of stuff I love to find out and read about in regards to the case(s).

I have a feeling in the years to come, more little details will be revealed.

Great and interesting post Col !

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Totally off topic: Wondering if any of you case scholars have the names of the prosecution team that worked with Bugliosi on the Manson trial. Yeah, yeah, I'm sure they're in the books, but I'm lazy, and youse guys prolly have it memorized. I'm looking for a dude whose name sounded like "Hollow Peter". No, not making this up.

agnostic monk said...

hi AC, you're thinking of Charles Hollopeter who wasn't on the prosecution team but I think might have been Manson's attorney for a time before being replaced by Irving Kanarek. He was also involved in some other Los Angeles cases that happened to involve Kanarek and the late Johnie Cochran of OJ fame.

Bugliosi's team: Kay, Stovitz, and probably a bunch of others I don't know

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Dang it. My bad.

Thank you, Agnostic, I looked up Mr. Hollopeter and found out some information, which put together with what I already knew, made a lot of sense. Appreciate the info.

Mr. Hollopeter apparently offered Charles a deal, which the defense attorney had previously negotiated with the prosecution. If Charles would narc on whoever else was involved in the Unfortunate Incidents, specifically the person(s) who ordered the murders, then Charles would be given a mere 18-month sentence for his part in the crime. Charles, believing himself to be innocent, told Mr. Hollopeter to stuff it. And promtly fired him.

My dear husband has a different theory: if Charles had revealed the name(s) of the person(s) who requested enforcement, then Charles's life wouldn't have been worth a plug nickle, because after 18 brief months, the individual(s) in question would've killed Charles for divulging his / their identity. These types of business people have long memories. Or so I'm told. Of course, that idea didn't occur to me, since I am a law-abiding citizen. Anyway. Knowing this to be true, Charles opted for life in prison, not realizing that he'd be demonized by the press into international infamy. He apparently thought that he'd merely spend the rest of his life as a comfy, anonymous prisoner / musician / environmental philosopher. But that couldn't possibly be true, because Charles is innocent, and my husband, though handsome and wonderful, is a cynical person.

Mr. Bugliosi will likely deny the deal with his last breath, because if he made such an arrangement with the defense attorney, it really does blow his entire Helter-Skelter, dangerous cult leader brainwashing people into killing for him, mind-control argument. Or the theory of musical envy as a motive. Or the random spree kill notion. Or the occult-whatever. It brings the crime's motive back to drugs and porn, or gambling, money issues, which is what people get in trouble with paid enforcers about. But that solution would be so much less dramatic, and sell fewer books and movies.

But Mr. Bugliosi certainly had that power, didn't he? There he was, cutting deals with Sadie and Yana, who was actually present at the scene of the crime, making her much more of a candidate for conspiracy to commit than Charles, who was, well, somewhere else. Mr. Bugliosi must've been furious that Charles wouldn't rat on the person who ordered the hit, which would've given him a nice splashy organized crime trial to make headlines with. Cuz, well, in this instance, fiction was stranger than truth.

Incidentally, Mr. Hollopeter apparently had a fondness for the glory holes in the doors of the courthouse men's bathroom, which is irrelevant, but none the less histerically funny to a sophomoric individual such as myself. Him and Peter Falk. Must be the trench coat. Or the name Peter. Hee hee. Snicker.

Pristash said...

AC,

As the little huy from Laugh In would say, "wary intewesting..."

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Speaking of Linda:

Manson Family member interviewed for special
Tue Jul 28, 2009 5:47am EDT By James Hibberd

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Charles Manson's lookout driver will tell her story to viewers for the first time in decades in a History special on the Manson Family murders.

For the 40th anniversary of the shocking Hollywood murder spree, the network has scheduled the two-hour "Manson" on September 7. It features an extensive interview with Linda Kasabian, who stood guard while her fellow cult members murdered actress Sharon Tate and others.

The star witness for Manson's prosecution, the reclusive Kasabian hasn't been extensively interviewed since "A Current Affair" ran a special on the 20th anniversary of the murders in 1989.

The special recounts the nine months leading up to what Manson dubbed Helter Skelter, a two-night murder spree that he and his LSD-addled followers thought would incite a race war.

spookycatz said...

By the way...LSD does not make people kill. It's difficult to concentrate on and had Sadie, Tex and Katie been high on LSD that night, Sharon Tate would still be alive, as would Gibby and Voytek. They fought hard. I don't think anyone stoned on acid could have won that fight.