Tuesday, October 15, 2013

TLB Discussion Group #1/// Free Gift #1

Topic- Paul Watkins

As the man who most supported the Helter Skelter Motive that BUG made up. did Paul believe anything he actually said?

Remember, after making sure Charlie spent his life in jail, Paul went back and tried to take OVER The Family.

The Inbred TLB site recently pointed to some CDS that Paul and Brooks made- supposedly long forgotten tapes.

The Col bought them so you don't have to.  As a defrocked Roman Catholic Priest I can tell you that any copyright claim would be brilliant to fight since the guy says he found the tapes in the garbage or some shit.


Take a listen. And explain to me if Charlie was such a devil, how come Little Paul recorded TWO Manson songs years after the trials.



Panamint Patty said...

Little Paul is an interesting dude. He was the most talkative about Helter Skelter being part of an actual religion. When he went on Larry King to talk about cults, he used a lot of the same terminology Patty heard her professors use while studying at UCSB. That department in the 1980s (and possibly today?) was one of the foremost Religious Studies programs in the nation. It is an extremely liberal campus where his ghost writer, Guillermo Soledad taught English, and where Snake went to school after her "deprogramming."

Panamint Patty said...

Paul's paradigm and his dogma was spiritually oriented and as a teenage runaway, he enjoyed being part of a "family." He saw things in a very specific frame of reference which has come to be accepted as "what really happened."

Anonymous said...

Defrocked Roman Catholic Priest and disbarred Attorney, you've had some career.
Next you should try being the Leader of a 3rd world Nation to top off your resume.

SJ said...

Yeah there are all those pictures of Paul & the family at the trial, they look like best buds. I think he was still meeting up with Clem in the 80s as well. There is also that tape he made for Nick Bougas where he supposedly said Bugliosi coached him on what to say about Helter Skelter.

Suze said...

ColScott asks: Take a listen. And explain to me if Charlie was such a devil, how come Little Paul recorded TWO Manson songs years after the trials.


Because he blew Charlie & liked it?

Panamint Patty said...

Well, we all ate that HS bullshit up at first: hook, line and sinker! Thats the story Patty heard as a child, and thats the story she knew until about 4 years ago. It makes no sense that Paul was still hangin' with the Fam and so was Kitty after they both supposedly "renounced" Charlie. But, no one ever talked about that part, and there was no internet yet. Can you imagine having to sell a cockamamie story like that in today's day and age? "Yeah. it's true. we all believed there was a chocolate river, we never balled unless Charlie said to, and we always fed the dogs and birds and squirrels and donkeys before we ate."

Panamint Patty said...

"Honest Injun!"

brownrice said...

Little Paul seems to have been a fairly charismatic character with a definite gift of the gab… a bit of an opportunist though, I'd be thinking.

Because he was so young when he hooked up with Charlie, he would have felt pretty much in his shadow. At the same time I bet he watched him like a hawk and no doubt learnt a trick or two in the process… not least of which would be to always tell people what they want to hear.

Once Charlie was out of the way, I'm sure Paul would've tried his best to fill the little guy's shoes. He makes it abundantly clear in his book that he was well up for all the sex, drugs & rock'n'roll he could get (and who can blame him?)… but he also says that the whole scene had turned into a vampire kill-cult by then.

Which begs the question entirely as to why he went back.

You're absolutely right, Col that Paul was the "man who most supported the Helter Skelter motive"… him… & Danny DeCarlo & Gregg Jakobson. As always, the old "who benefits?" is the question.

Thanks for the present, Col… not only does Little Paul sing a couple of Charlie's songs but he also sounds a lot like him.

Matt said...

As much as I like Paul Watkins, he was a bit of an opportunist. As brownrice aptly points out, he joined the Family for the "sex, drugs & rock'n'roll he could get (and who can blame him?)". And as Suze so poignantly reminds us, he was willing to play the game even to the point of fellating Manson, so long as it kept him in good enough graces to continue the drugs & sex ride.

When the shitstorm was about to hit, he and Brooks took a better deal and joined Paul Crockett on his mining expeditions, but not before Paul tapping a Family girl or two at Barker's on the way out.

When the Trial began he waffled back and forth between a witness for the prosecution (which he nearly paid for with his life) and trying to insert himself as Family leader - who can forget the epic photo with other Family in the Hall of Justice with him wearing the red velour shirt?

Then when Bugliosi's Helter Skelter motive was front and center, Paul was right there with the lights & cameras. Later, he penned his own book that portrayed him as Manson's right-hand man, likely hoping it would result in the type of riches that BUG received. No such luck.

There were lots of young men who showed up and wanted to ride the hedonism train at Spahn. In most cases they were too transparent and were sent packing. Paul played the game well. He was also gifted at luring young girls which made him valuable.

The Charles Manson written tunes on this album were likely another shot in the dark that someone would discover them and their association with The Most Dangerous Man Alive might still be a ticket to a big payday. No such luck...

ColScott said...


SJ said...

Sounds like the same crappy guitar playing as The Family Jams LP.

leary7 said...

I am always going to be in the minority here because of a basic belief that even though a character or characters in a story are flawed (Watkins, Bug, Donkey Dan etc etc) doesn't automatically make the story flawed. And while brownrice has always been my favorite poster is was more that Little Paul, Jakobson and De Carlo talking about HS.
And NO, I am neither a HS proponent of defender. I simply as a sort of creative umbrella for all of Charlie's rages. By August of '69 Manson was seriously bent with megalomania and full of rage for everyone - rich pigs, blank panthers, bikers, everyone. He was a time bomb. And the Col and RH and everyone here can debate exactly what was the detonator the set him off...but one thing is for sure - fewer and fewer folk give a shit and once Charlie is underground the number will dwindle to squat.

St. Circumstance said...

Leary for once and last- I agree with everything you said...

Every single bit of it.

Leary who are you really I will always wonder???

when we met you were going overseas to teach underprivileged Asian kids or something?

Then you were battling a serious disease- which you seem to have beaten. You have 3 advanced degrees and all the while have been a steadfast deadhead???

You may take over the Beer commercial for that guy because you may really be the most interesting guy alive lol

sorry for all the grief dude- rock on...

as for me- just another guy who was born in Spring of 67 in New York, growing up in the suburbs surrounded by an ivy league environment in my teenage years, only to fall in love with California and make an effort to move out to So Cal in my early twenties to search for the movie life... lol

It didn't happen for me, so I went back East and became the guy I am today. Not too bad in my opinion.

For some who grew up just like me it did though...

Lets all hope we do some positive things with what we have. not gloat and defend the negative all the time, and remember that this search your on is second to the respect you should have for those who were victims of the Crime you examine.

Defending and helping Bobby who is a killer, and attacking Debra who was the family member of a victim is sort of warped in my opinion.

But hey Col- you keep deciding for the entire community what is right,wrong,fair and foul. As long as you and the " true TLB Scholars" as you have personally designated them , all agree-

what do you need any dissenting voices for????

For you Col Sanders a special favorite quote of mine from Bob Weir....

"You must really consider the circus
It just might be your kind of zoo
I can't think of a place that's more perfect
For a person as perfect as you.

And it's not like Im leaving you lonely
Cause I wouldn't know where to begin
Well I know you wake up here only
When the snakes come marching in.

You imagine me sipping champagne from your boot
For taste of your elegant pride
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe
But at least Im enjoying the ride"


La-de-la said...

Beautiful post St. C.

(any original recipe wings left in that bucket?)

leary7 said...

I consider a zoo the most therapeutic place on earth - something about the interaction of the animal and human spirit. If you're ever up in Calgary, check theirs out, though the recently had a devastating flood.

I know I have changed horses a few times in the last few years Saint - all because of health issues. I have been stuck in St Paul for two years now due to the blessed fact that they have by far the best health care in the country here. Plus there are over 5,000 Burmese refugees here so I still get to teach.
But I share this only because I find it funny. I am wheelchair bound to due severe nueropothy in my feet and legs....and because of a botched operation on my kidney I have no bladder control and so now have to wear adult diapers. And lastly they are treating my skin cancer with a new aggressive cream that results in massive scabs and blisters so I am pretty much rapped in gauze.
I swear I look like something out of a 1940' horror movie.
When life sucks this much, you just gotta go Three Stooges and see the absurdity of it all.

La-de-la said...


While I don't agree about zoos, I have enjoyed reading you for the past few years. You have made me laugh many times and had me cheering "Right On!"

I send positive vibes your way and wish you well.

I learned long ago that you have to have a better sense of humor than Murphy!!

Dooger said...

After getting these recordings, it's also obvious that a lot of his songs were inspired by Manson.

ColScott said...

St haven't you left the playground already son?

brownrice said...

leary7 said:
"but one thing is for sure - fewer and fewer folk give a shit "

Hiya Leary... not so sure about that really.

Like some, I've been following this case since it happened and have always been rather dubious about the official account. For many decades, hardly anyone seemed to question it. In the last decade though there's been a definite upsurge in the numbers of people looking into this for more than the usual gore groupie motivations. Probably this is due to the internet.

Whatever the case, one only has to look at the number of newbies that keep turning up on the various blogs & forums to realise that interest has grown rather than diminished in the last 40 or so years.

Bummer about your health, mate... keep laughing... it's one of the few things that really helps.

Anonymous said...

Life is hard and THAT IS the point of it.
Pity the ones that never had the chance to experience it.
Famous Quote
Me- 2013

leary7 said...

I don't know brownrice, there will always be interest in Manson just as there will always be interest in Lizzie Borden and JFK and Al Capone and any and all of America's extensive crime history.

But I sense the interest in Manson now is "shallow" - by that I mean people check it out with internet curiosity, know who the killers were, know that Charlie was a master manipulator and now see all the sexy girls have grown old and matronly. The story just doesn't have the juice it once did except for us 60's nostalgic folk.
None of the proposed movies seem to be getting made, Guinn's book sold squat, and despite promises of books from Stephanie, Lynn and Gypsy we haven't heard zilch.

The thing is, despite being seen as such, I have never been a HS proponent or defender. I simple regard it as an effective tool by a desperate and 'ethnic-less' prosecutor. Or a smart one. You choose.

Lots of theories get talked about on these boards - copy cat, mafia, drug burn etc etc.
The only one I have spent time contemplating is what I call the SEX one. Ask yourself what is the one thing Spahn, Cielo and Waverly had in common. Sex. Supposedly there was some serious kink happening at Cielo, movies and all. And Waverly??? I still think that 2 million Rosemary had stashed away hasn't been completely explained. No disrespect, but it seemed to be well known that Rosemary was bi-sexual and had quite the carnal appetite. I always thought she might have been some sort of high end madam. And wasn't there the story of a black book Charlie took from Waverly. A madam's black book???
Who knows how much interaction there was between the Family and Hollywood elite. Could America have handled footage of Charlie backdooring Murphy Brown. Or of Cary Grant going down on the Face of Evil. Maybe that would explain the Mafia presence. Or the police incompetence. Maybe the Hollywood 'powers that be' really did have something to fear from the Family. And it was all on film.

Of course sex can't explain Hinman or Shorty but they were separate situations.

I like the sex theory, It's more fun than drug burns or copy cat. Rosemary as a 60's Hollywood madam running a sex ring out of her dress shop and using Charlie's girls....now that would make a good story.

Panamint Patty said...

Dude! You're a walking libido! Good for you. Patty feels that everybody in the 60s had plenty of sex: its something that everybody has, and its free. Money, though? Not so much. People are willing to kill each other over it. After good sex people just want to have a cigarette, then go to sleep.

starship said...

Yes, but after bad sex....

Panamint Patty said...

Try again!

Panamint Patty said...

And again, and again

Suze said...

When sex is good, it's great. When it's not so good, it's still ok.

starship said...

Gee, so I'm the only one who wants to brutally kill someone with a knife after bad sex? Golly.

Just kidding. But if the bad sex is my fault then I just want to kill myself...

leary7 said...

I appreciate the humor, but obviously we are not talking about sex per se...we are talking about reputations. And in Hollywood reputations are worth millions in box office dollars, especially back in the 60's. If there were films and black books and such, why isn't it possible. Actually, I don't believe in it myself, but it does make a much more interesting fictional narrative.

You got me all wrong Patty. Personally I have been out to pasture for a long time now. I just think sex is underrated as far as motive is concerned. Someone once told me that there are two main reasons for divorce - sex and money. And sex is the larger one.

Panamint Patty said...

OK, Patty gets you now Leary. Have a good day xx

leary7 said...

I'm sorry, but I am just to damn lazy to go back and check all the old threads to find out the answer to these questions.
1. Has Rosemary's money ever been completely explained.
2. I remember reading about a supposed "black book" Charlie to from the LaBianca's, but then I read it was a cop that had it and so on. What is the bottom line on the black book?
3. Is there any update or definitive conclusion to all the rumors about sex films in relation to both the Family and also some with supposed movie stars?
Just asking,

brownrice said...

1. Rosemary's alleged fortune has never been explained but it's never really been proven or authenticated either... despite the best efforts of quite a few good researchers.

2. Charlie mentions the black book in at least one (possibly more) interviews. The story about the detective having it originated (I'm pretty sure) with Bill Nelson.

3. The rumours about the sex films are still just that... rumours.

Which is not to say of course that these things aren't true... just that none of 'em have been proven. Just like many another part of this case.

Personally, I've always felt that Charlie & the girls' alleged popularity as party guests in the mid to upper levels of the Hollywood showbiz circuit played a large part in the confusion created around this case... but I think drugs played a pretty big part as well. Like Patty said, people don't usually kill for sex.

Panamint Patty said...

Patty is curious to know if Leno's bank did much business in Bermuda? What was it...Bank of Hollywood? Also, assuming Rosemary's accounts were there, how many transactions did she normally make and with whom? These records are likely long gone, but it would be cool if someone mails them to Cielo one day. :)

brownrice said...

Given that Leno's bank is described in various sources as a "mafia bank", it's probably a pretty good chance they dealt with the bermuda banking system… probably with Castle Bank & Trust…


… as did the Brotherhood & Tricky Dick Nixon. The brotherhood's involvement was largely due to Billy Mellon Hitchcock's connections. Nixon's contacts were probably the same as "Mr Billy's"… i.e. the CIA.and/or the mafia .

Panamint Patty said...

Yeah...Castle. Patty wonders about that. And she wonders if Mr. Billy came out on top after the great shakedown of 69.

leary7 said...

mucho thanks for the response brownrice. It still just doesn't seem right with 42 years of research we can't get definitive answers on Rosemary's money, the black book or the alleged sex films.
And though you and Patty are two of my favorite folk on these blogs, I still don't get your assertion that people don't kill for sex. Maybe I should explain that when I say sex, I mean sex and all it sub headings - sexual obsessions, inadaquacies, peversions, jealousies, etc etc.
All I am saying is think about this - the Beach Boys were BIG money earners not just for themselves but for their record company and others. What if there were films of Dennis Wilson in orgies and even in some gay stuff with Little Paulie or such. You don't think the record company would go to hell and back to squelch something like that. Or the movie company of Cary Grant or Steve McQueen or Candice Bergen.
Someone blogged that it was the 60's, it was Cal, everyone was doing it - sex was no big deal. Yeah, but is still didn't play in Peoria, as they say.
I just respectfully disagree with that conclusion - i.e. that people don't usually kill for sex.

brownrice said...

Leary7 said: "You don't think the record company would go to hell and back to squelch something like that. Or the movie company..."

Absolutely… but I see that as more likely to come into play after the murders rather than causing 'em.

bobby said...

Brownrice, That is a very good point. I can't see where the motive for murder would be about sex capades cover up but, I could see where creating & pushing for various motives would be given by people associated with the victums & perps.

starship said...

Remember Bob Crane of Hogan's Heroes? I think he was killed over sex.

Also, maybe:


bobby said...

Remember Bob Crane of Hogan's Heroes? I think he was killed over sex.

Yes, In a hotel room beaten to death. wasnt there some good evidence against a gay buddy but he never got convicted ? have to look that one up.

leary7 said...

Of course I know it is a ridiculous theory, but if you ask the question what Spahn, Cielo and Waverly all had in common then it glimmers just a little bit. Spahn was free sex central. Rumors had Cielo being kink city. And it is documented that Rosemary had both a large and varied sex life. Could she not have been a secret dominixtrix or madam. Could the dress shop not have been a front. Everybody looks at the drugs as the tie that binds. I just think if someone like Don DeLillo did a Manson book (like his treatment of Oswald in 'Libra') he just might focus on the sex angle more than the drugs...if only because it is more interesting to most folk.

Panamint Patty said...

Leary you are absolutely right...that's what it might have been. Patty is reading "Coreyography" right now: Corey Feldman's memories of Corey Haim and the abuses they suffered at the hands of a circle of 1980s Hollywood pedophiles. People are into some kinky shit. Some of it may be "acceptable," some of it absolutely not. Patty thinks Liam Neeson did a good job bringing this point home in Kinsey. But for as many dangerous sexual deviations out there, there are just as many not so dangerous ones. Like, somebody who likes to grease up in a ball pit full of hard boiled eggs isnt hurting anybody.

drugs are different. Most people like one or more of them, legal or not. And they cost money, honey. and theyre generally more dangerous than sex unless youre David Carradine. Its a numbers game.

Panamint Patty said...

PS: Leary, pls email Patty some time. No this is not a booty call.

Karl Sandfort said...

HS is BS. Amen. But...

If you look at the mayhem as a simple graph over time you see a line sloping upward, with milestones at certain key points, peaking with TL, and tapering off with other incidents post-TL. I think that while the beast was there before CM and after CM, it was CM who jumped on its back and controlled it for a while. I can only guess, of course, but I think most of it can be explained by CM experiencing power for the first time in his pathetic life.

leary7 said...

wow, the beast and a graph. Not sure exactly what you are talking about KS, but it was entertaining.

Be glad to email you Patty. I will have to figure out how, maybe just send it to Matt and have him forward it. Wait, maybe your email address is on the homepage.

Here's one that has stayed with me. Charlie wasn't stupid. And he knew he had the Crowe thing and possibly the Himman thing hanging over his head which would send him back to the slammer for life. In fact, isn't that what he specifically said to Sadie when she returned from Cielo - "you've just put me back in jail you stupid bitch" or something to that effect.
Well, so here he is on the second night driving around for hours with seven people in the small car (imagine bottling that odor) and he drops off his first hit squad at Waverly and takes his second trio to that actor's apt...and then he takes off. Ostensibly from what I remember reading he just drives himself back to Spahn.
The image of Tex, Katie and Lulu sitting on the bench at the bus stop after carving up the LaBiancas will always blow my mind.
Point is....why would Charlie leave his hit squads "out there" to fend for themselves and vunerable to detection. Unless maybe he had someplace to go, or someone to see and something to drop off, say a little black book.
So much of TLB makes little sense, but Manson leaving his killers out there with no means of fleeing the crime scene in a reasonable manner just always struck me as beyond stupid for someone seemingly so intent on survival.

Tom Schulte said...

Thank you for sharing. I enjoyed the comments thread very much and would now like to hear the recording. However, when I follow the "Free Gift #1" link it takes me to an empty Dropbox folder. Does it work for others

Matt said...

No, Tom. Looks like the contents have since been removed.

christopher butche said...

Leary I like your point about Manson leaving the hit squads with no transport.

What if Hit-Squad 2 had been successful? With the LaBiancas we have all manner of theories from Mafia to sex sellers, but what about that actor fella who wasn't killed?

It seems to be generally accepted he was some random that Kasabian hooked up with randomly.

Or was he the red herring to distract from the real motive at the LaBiancas, or were the LaBiancas the red herring to distract from the motive at Tate?

Panamint Patty said...

Patty thinks red herring, along with pointing a gun at random passing cars.

Dooger said...

Here's something: I sorta met someone from Tecopa area way back when. Said when they first started playing live they tried to use the Manson infamy to garner interest in the band and it blew up in their face. People stopped supporting them, got scared off.

Peter Moran said...

It isn't necessary for you to believe in Helter Skelter, it isn't necessary that Manson believe in Helter Skelter, it isn't necessary that Paul, of Brooks, or Al Springer, or Danny DeCarlo believe in Helter Skelter.

What does matter is that the girls believed in it. They certainly talked like they believed in it. Whether Tex believed in it is an open question, perhaps the only open question, and maybe the tapes would answer that definitively.

Regardless, I think Manson believed it was a useful tool to manipulate and encourage the others. Every cult I know of uses some kind of doomsday scenario for the same purpose. So, it may not be HIS motive for directing/suggesting/ hinting-at murder, but people lie in order to get other people to act on those lies for all sorts of reasons including committing robbery and murder. I believe Manson used Helter Skelter to retain control over and increase the alienation of the family. Clem, Watson and Tex have indicated that the core family members were starting to drift apart. The murders just took Helter Skelter to the ultimate next step. Nobody could deny that shit wasn't "coming down fast" after that.

I don't think Manson had some grand plan to use Helter Skelter to convince people to murder when he came up with the idea. I think it's important to understand that the murders weren't the end result, they were just one more step. The end result was continued loyalty from the family.

My impression is that Manson lived about one step ahead of the law, but that's about it. In a time before CSI this probably wasn't very difficult. Killing somebody and getting away with their shit is the easy part. But I think even Manson saw the writing on the wall, particularly after Gary Hinman, that it was only a matter of time. Under those circumstances, desperate times called for desperate measures.

I wouldn't fault Bugliosi for using the Helter Skelter motive even if he knew it was somewhat disingenuous - Charlie served it up to him on a plate with watercress around it and I think that there is little doubt that Manson was the head of the snake, not Tex.