Why the LaBiancas? That's this week's question.
Unlike the previous night, Charlie goes with everyone. Enters the house. Talks to and meets the victims. Ties them up/
Unlike the previous night, the group drive around town seemingly not having a victim in mind.
If you believe Kasabian, Charlie almost shoots several people.
THEN the group change direction (perhaps they did have a goal in mind) and they end up at the house NEXT DOOR to Harold True, where some of them had partied before.
I've been to both houses. They are pretty random and ordinary, not all that special.
I've heard a theory that Charlie was denied at True's like he had been at Melcher's and was sending a message. Don't make sense.
We've all heard that the girls had gone on garbage runs at the Gateway Market owned by Leno.
We've all heard the stories of black books and the mob. Contract killings.
But ask yourself this. Charlie WALKED into their house, like Tex walked into Voytek's abode.
I think Charlie knew Leno. He knew Tex would kill him. He wanted Tex to think it was random, hence the driving.
But I wish I knew HOW he knew Leno.
357 comments:
1 – 200 of 357 Newer› Newest»Sure we all heard this but it makes ZERO sense................
I disagree about Tex just walking into the Tates..
Tex broke in....
What about this little black book? Any word on it?
Alice LaBianca said it did exist and she turned it over to the police.. It was never seen or heard about again...
If that's true, wouldn't it be a piece of important evidence? Why would the cops just make it disappear?
Unless.............
col is it true that leno owed the mafia money he used to gamble at hollywood park, and santa anita
Okay Heaven he broke in... and then everyone walked around waving hellos for a while...
Col,
We don't know that Abigail really waved at Susan.. She said she did, but Susan seems to lie about everything. It's hard to believe anything she says about that night...
I don't think she even knows the truth anymore...
I don't recall anything about Tex making hello's with Jay, Abigail or Sharon.. Only "hello" I remember slid outta Susan's mouth...
But hey, that's just me...
=)
Audio,
The wig shop is my take too.. I'm wondering if Rosemary and Tex had met before....
Monk,
Your last post cracked me up lol
Could Linda be at fault for the war in Iraq too?
=)
Damn that Linda!! Good thing I never voted for her!
Monk,
My daughter is STILL pissy... I'm tired of listening to her bitch and moan about how hard she has it... Wonder if it's too late to put her up for adoption..
=)
Two questions:
How late was Susan getting to her parents home?
How would the News stand man alert Manson that the Labiancas' were on their way home?
I'm coming down with a rotten cold... Would I be able to pin this on Linda?
=)
Cats,
If I remember the story correctly, Frank stayed on at Lake Isabella with his friend, Jim Saffie....
The returned back to LA sometime in the evening of August 10th.. Jim dropped Frank off around 8:30...
Frank went to the hamburder stand and called Suzan, she and her boyfriend arrived at about 9:30... From there they drove over to their parents house...
My question is, why didn't Frank have a key to get in? They had to use a key that Rosemary left in her car that was in the garage...
If Frank did have a key, but didn't dare to go in, why?
I know that Suzan and Rosemary didn't get a long at all. Rosemary was always bailing Suzan out of trouble...
Suzan's boyfriend, Joe Dorgan, had spent time out at Spahn...
When they arrived at the LaBainca's house, I wonder why Joe made Suzan wait in the kitchen?
Did Joe have some suspicion as to what they were going to find?
Gypsy once said that Susan and Clem had "creepy-crawled" their house... Leno wrote to his daughter once and said someone had been inside because furniture had been moved around.. At times, they found the dogs outside when they were supposed to be in..
So, it's really anyone's guess... But I don't think the LaBianca's were the random hit Manson wanted it to appear...
Susan had nothing to do with Stephen Parent or Jay Sebring's deaths?!! What? She may not have physically inflicted death on them, but she had something to do with it. She was there, she participated, she did not get help. All lead to her involvement. Nothing to do with their murders is an atrocious statement.
Yes, I am sure Susan has suffered a great deal. Yes she was a young girl at the time of the crimes, but what she did was not kid stuff. It was all done by her on choice. Her sentence was death, she should count it a blessing that she is still alive. I don't care if she is locked up. She is married, fed, has health care, and a roof over her head. There is not much more she should have.
What sane person commits murder? And better yet, what sane person tastes a dying pregnant womans blood?
look all im saying is if leno was gambleing and owed the mafia money whats in that black book could
be betting and other things
ahhh but Savage
I don't believe Charlie controlled ANYONE
shoresendz,
Good points. But I think if they just wanted to rob the La Bianca's they could have done it.when they were at the lake.
I really think what ever was to go down .. The La Bianca's were to be murdered. Charlie knew that was going to happen ..when he went with Tex and the girls that night.
I think maybe Suzan & her boyfriend helped set it up. Suzan knew her little brother was going to be gone.
I believe Susan was charged in the deaths of Rosemary and Leno because she is in the car, knew it was going to happen, and went along anyway.
Had she not been in the car, I doubt they would have charged her. Maybe with conspiracy, I dunno...
As for her changing... It's anyone's guess if that's real or just a show put on to gain sympathy. Maybe she has changed. It's been 37 years and one hearing aid later.
Changed doesn't mean she's served her time. 4.6 years for 8 deaths, in my opinion, doesn't cut it.
I still come back to the fact that she made her choices...
She was sent to death, she should be happy that was never carried out.
Colonel:
This might not mean anything at all but I was watching part of Robert Hendrickson's documentary Manson last night. It was made in 1970 or so. When Hendrickson was talking to Brenda, Sandy Good and Lynn Fromme, the film intercuts with shots of a Gateway grocery store and then to the girls going through the garbage looking for produce that is still good to eat.
The film switches over to Paul Watkins and some other guy who then say that sometimes the girls had to sleep with the manager or someone else with store authority in order to be able to go through the garbage.
Just a thought but since the film specifically focuses on a Gateway store and not a Safeway or whatever grocery store maybe the girls or Manson met LaBianca this way?
PS. I think Linda gave me my sore throat and cold - augh
Savage hon,
I see you talking about the "Susan of today"..
The "Susan of today" does not erase the horrible things she took part in. The fact that "she's changed" does not bring people back from the dead.
Susan is being punished for her crimes. Prison wasn't meant to be easy. She already has it better than she was supposed too. She was supposed to be executed but wasn't..
Think about all the years that Col Tate and Doris suffered without Sharon and her baby. Think about all the holidays and birthdays that they never got to share with her.
Think about Abigail's mother, who is still alive today and is still paying for the acts of the killers.
Susan changing is great, but let's seriously ask ourselves. How many choices did Susan have.. Two really..
To change and possibly get paroled, or, to cause as many problems as she can and never be paroled.
A lot of prisoners change, but changing isn't going to excuse what they did.
I'm sure Tookie Williams changed, but he still had to pay for his crime.
Susan owns society and her victims, a debt. That debt must be paid.
If she had killed your mother, father, sister, brother, child, or even yourself, wouldn't you want your death to be worth more than 4.6 years?
Think about it.
I recall reading where Manson had driven around that night, peeking in windows, looking for his next victims. But if he found pictures of children, he'd move on to the next house. According to him, he didn't want to start killing children just yet, but the time might come later when they'd have too.
So after a while of driving and not finding any victims, Manson drove on to the LaBianca's..
That doesn't make it sound like they were the intended victims, at first anyway. Could Manson have picked them later cause he couldn't find anyone else?
heaven,
That doesn't make it sound like they were the intended victims, at first anyway. Could Manson have picked them later cause he couldn't find anyone else?
Yes Manson could have picked them ..after he found no one home.
But I really think some how ..Manson knew Leno.
In reading The Labianca Homicide report... Suzan was a suspect in the fraudulent use of a credit card in January, 1968 . with her boy friend Joe.
If Charlie went to rob the place..he would have taken the guns and coins..Yes Leslie took some change..but nothing to what was in the house.
Rosemary Wallet and credit cards were stolen.
So if Charlie went to rob ..what was in he wanted . The Black book ?
Cat,
Yes It says that in the book The Family Tat Bruce was selling coins . Police report says nothing appeared to be ransacked in the house.
Rosemary & Leno had 3 dogs who were know to bark at strangers ..but no neighbors heard anything.
Rifles and handguns were in the home and not touched ..also a gallon jug of coins not touched
Charlie was in to guns..but they did not take them.
heaven,
4.6 years for a life is nothing. None of the killers are going to change
Cat, That is very true. It does not sound like Leno kids were around much. to know much about what was missing.
I also wonder why Suzan did not work for Leno or her mother.In a supermarket they always need help ..doing something.
They say Manson like to disapper sometimes.Maybe he met Leno on these travels.
It amazes me the number of people who feel Susan deserves to be paroled.
Why does she deserve it? Because she's a Christian? Because she's behaved herself in prison. Well, with the exception of stabbing her husband.
If you do the math, 37 years divided by 7 lives comes out to 4.6 years served for EACH murder. But if you count baby Paul, that's 8 murders. So, divide 37 by 8 and it's only 5.2 years served for EACH murder.
Same applies to Tex and to Patricia..
So some of you actually believe that 5.2 years is a debt that's been repaid? What if it was your loved one, or even yourself that was slaughtered in a most gruesome fashion? Wouldn't you want your life to be worth more?
I've seen so many people use the "Well, she's served more time that others that have committed murder."
I wonder if those people have stopped to realize that those "other people", were not convicted of 7 murders.
Whether you agree with her conviction or not is irrelevant. She was found guilty of killing 7 people, whom she claims she didn't know. So, 7 people who never did anything to her...
Now you take Bobby, convicted of 1 murder, he's done 37 years for one murder. If anyone deserves parole (based on lives taken) it's Bobby.
Susan is where she needs to be.. When she can raise 8 people from their graves, then she should be paroled.. Until then, I hope the bed she's made for herself, keeps her warm. Remember, when Susan did all this she was doing what was right to her, she had no guilt or remorse. It was even funny to her. Wonder if she's still laughing now?
Changed? Of course she says she's changed. Maybe she has, but she can change and stay right where she is, enjoying those degrees that we taxpayers paid for.
My opinion..
=)
Heaven,
My opinion is about the same as yours. I do count baby Paul.
What is so chilling about Susan to me.. is she stood there ..as she says.. I am not sure I believe she did nothing and held a pregnant women..while she watched Tex stab away ..with Susan taunting Sharon the whole time..how she deserved to die .and she did not care ..if she was pregnant or not.
Then she drank her blood and danced in it. She wrote in blood a. she laughed many times about the whole deal. she showed no remorse.
Susan was a mother .. she could have ran to the neighbors at any time. She got in the car the next night.. she just rode along .Yea right.
I sure Susan changed ..she needs a act to get parole. She got degrees we paid for.
Now you take Bobby, convicted of 1 murder, he's done 37 years for one murder. If anyone deserves parole (based on lives taken) it's Bobby.
When you think about like heaven puts it ..Bobby is the only one ..who has really served any time. 37 years. to 5.2years.
Also Bobby was only involved in one murder..not 3 different ones like Susan. Not that one murder is alright.
3 different murders ..you think she would have learned from the 1st one.But no Susan just keeps going on those rides..Susan is the only one ..that was at all 3 murders.
Savage dear,
You keep saying she didn't kill anyone, but yet, she was convicted of 7 murders. Just because she didn't plunge the knife in herself, does NOT make her innocent. You keep forgetting that...
She was there, she helped and she enjoyed it. Helping makes her just as guilty as the rest. You can say she killed no one, but holding people down so they can be murderered, counts...
It doesn't matter what YOU think, it's how the law worked. She went on trial for 7 murders and was found guilty. End of story.
Besides, you don't know that Susan never killed anyone.. Her saying she didn't is hardly proof. Face it, Susan lies...
To quote the late Johnny Cochran, "It if don't fit, you must acquit".
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. So it's impossible to kill someone with a glove that doesn't quite fit?
Sorry, still not proofreading lol
Murdered rather
=)
Savage, I think you and I have agreed to disagree on this topic....
Savage,
Susan told another inmate called Casper at the time of her arrest for Gary Hinman murder ..that the glasses left at the Tate murders were to spend confusion.which today we know is true.
But Susan thought it was funny maybe someone else could get blamed for the murders because of the glasses.
She also claimed that she did not have the nerve to cut the baby out of Sharon body..Because she only liked to kill.
What do you think a defense atty. can do to help a womem who confessed to everyone she met.. she did it..and how she enjoyed it.
A women who sat in court and laughted and thought everything was a joke..Who is laughing now?
3 different murders savage.
You tell me what is her story why she kept going to murders. She needed air.
You will never change my mind Susan is a cold blooded killer..if you want to believe her that is your choice.
Lemme just sum it up by saying....
If the conviction against Susan was as unlawful as you say, then she should have appealed.. She didn't...
If it was as unlawful as you say, she's be out already, she isn't...
If everything was as incompetent as you say, then she should ask for a new trial, she hasn't.. Maybe she's afraid this time she'll actually go to the gas chamber.
Maybe it's only unlawful to you...
Susan knows what she's done..
The parole board has laws it has to follow.. Even if they grant her parole.. Arnold can still say no...
Again, she should have thought about this before she became involved.
But still, we gutta agree to disagree. We're never going to agree with each other on this one.. And ya know what? We don't have too... Whether we agree or not, Susan is still going to remain in prison...
=)
There is a movie on Tex's Born again web site. Abounding Love.
Called Forgiven The Charles Watson story .its with Suzan ..Rosemary daughter forgiving him.
I find it hard to believe Suzan forgave Tex.
Maybe she just took a good look and realized her sympathys were in the wrong place...
OR, maybe she realized he's never getting out so they'll never be together...
Maybe she just took a good look and realized her sympathys were in the wrong place...
OR, maybe she realized he's never getting out so they'll never be together
I was wondering that my self
I kinda think Suzan had a thing for Tex... Maybe some wishful thinking on her part.. But it's hard to get some when he can't put out... Time to move on to someone who can
=)
Anyone know what Suzan is doing these days ?
Heaven ,I always thought maybe Suzan had the thing for Tex too.
Who knows she may have know him from her boyfriend Joe.
Monk,
I love you.. You have such a great way with words...
Another thing to remember is, the girls didn't want any defense. Manson called all the shots, if he was going down, they were going down..
If they were so worried about all the incompetence, they should have allowed their lawyers to put on a defense..
Susan is now reaping what she sowed. Maybe she should have thought about all this when it was important to do so.
Now she just looks like a pathetic old woman, trying to convince everyone that she's changed.
The only thing that has changed with Susan is her story...
She'll get no sympathy from me...
SWEET BLOND GINGER IS BACK SHE WANTS EVERYONE TO KNOW SHES NOT BRANDI AND THAT TANYA SET HER UP, SO GIVE HER A CHANCE
Rich,
If conspiracy doesn't make Susan a killer, then she should have fought harder at her trial..
So, by your standards, it's ok to break into houses and stab people, ohhhh say, in the leg, but it's ok as long as they aren't fatal?
Just curious because you seem to be making light of Susan's involvement
Some people think Tex should be released. I'm not one of them...
=)
If someone does "plunge the knife in" yes that is a killer
Oh but Susan did plunge a knife into Voyteck, several times...
Because she didn't actually kill him, that makes it ok..
It was only luck that she didn't inflict one of the fatal wounds. There's a few main arteries in the leg that, if punctured, you can bleed to death, quickly..
Well, I don't make the laws hon.. Whether you agree with them or not is totally up to you. She is where she is... Nothing we say here is going to change it...
=)
Rich hon,
You said, and I quote
"If someone does "plunge the knife in" yes that is a killer"
Susan did plunge the knife in.... Maybe she didn't kill him, but she sure didn't stop any deaths either...
I only gave your words back to ya..
=)
The girls had every chance to put on a defense, they blew it...
They laughed, giggled, winked and smirked all thru the trial and the sentencing. It's really hard to feel sorry for people who bring things onto themselves.
If Susan feels she's being held longer than she should or that she didn't get a fair trial, how come she isn't asking for a new one...
Has it been too long or does she fear that if she does have another trial, this time she might actually go to the gas chamber?
=)
The term "hon" isn't meant to be belittling.. It's what I call everyone that I'm speaking to.. It's meant to be affectionate. But if it offends you, I won't call you hon...
When I say "laws" I mean whatever it is that the parole board goes by. I'm sure there's laws and guidelines they have to follow.. I studied law, but there only 10 billion different things in it. Hard to know all of em lol
From what I understand, making it very difficult was their goal..
Manson called the shots.. They followed his every word.. Look where it got them..
Most of them still blame everything on him..
Rich,
You're still missing my point.. If the system was flawed, incompetent or just screwed up, why didn't they ever ask for new trials..
They put on no defense, I'm sure they could have gotten new trials had they asked... Maybe not, but it might have been worth a shot to try...
I personally think that by the time they realized that their actions came with consequences, they didn't want to risk the gas chamber that they had escaped once...
But that's just me...
Rich,
Sweetie pie doesn't offend me. It's a minor thing..
I said if hon bothers you, I won't use it when I'm speaking to you.
Is that ok or should we keep going back and forth on it lol
=)
Thank you Monk lol
=)
Yup, me too.. Oh well..
I don't think manslaughter applies either. Here's the definition..
Dictionary
man·slaugh·ter (măn'slô'tÉ™r)
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another without express or implied intent to do injury.
I think we know that Susan's intent with stabbing Voyteck in the leg was to cause injury.
Manslaughter is more "accidental".. Susan wasn't stabbing Voyteck by accident...
Here are the different versions of manslaughter.
http://www.answers.com/topic/manslaughter?method=6
My personal favorite reads..
Manslaughter is a distinct crime and is not considered a lesser degree of murder.
Here's another
Premeditation or deliberation, however, are elements of murder and not of manslaughter. Some states have abandoned the use of adjectives to describe different forms of the offense and, instead, simply divide the offense into varying degrees.
Here's the punishment for it
Punishment
The penalty for manslaughter is imprisonment. The precise term of years depends upon the applicable statute. Usually the sentence that is imposed for voluntary manslaughter is greater than that given for involuntary manslaughter. In most states, a more serious penalty is imposed for criminally negligent manslaughter than for unlawful-act manslaughter.
Rich,
You say shame, I say bravo!
=)
I think if any of them deserves parole, it's Bobby...
=)
If it helps at all, here are some of the reasons Susan was denied at her last hearing.
unreasonable risk of danger to society or a threat to public safety
gravity of the offense
offense was carried out in an especially cruel and callous manner
The offense was carried out in a dispassionate and calculated manner in that all the facts in this case suggest premeditation to an extent.
The murder of the first victim, Mr. Hinman, on July 25th, 1969, did not deter you from later committing additional offenses.
unstable social history and prior criminal arrests, which includes arrests
one conviction for possession of marijuana and you have arrests for receiving stolen property, possession of a concealed weapon, reproducing driver's license, possession of dangerous drugs, use by a minor, grand theft
Inmate Atkins does admit responsibility and she offers what appears to be credible expressions of insight and remorse. Complete assurance of her acceptance of responsibility, insight and remorse will probably always be clouded somewhat by the factual disputes that stem from her earlier versions of the crime
need further therapy in order to develop insight into the commitment offense and the underlying cause of the offense
http://www.internet.is/bret/atkins-2005-parole-transcript.htm
Rich, I far am I am concerned Susan got a break .When they abolished the DP.
Inmate Atkins does admit responsibility and she offers what appears to be credible expressions of insight and remorse. Complete assurance of her acceptance of responsibility, insight and remorse will probably always be clouded somewhat by the factual disputes that stem from her earlier versions of the crime
Like the parole board told Susan.. her remorse will always be clouded by factual disputes.
Susan can not tell the truth for nothing .
In 1969 she like to brag ..how she killed.
Today Miss Cry Baby changed her mind cause she wants out.so she will say anything.
I believe if Susan gets out ..you will hear she does some type of crime again .she is that kind.
I think the crimes committed by these people is what we can't get over. No matter how big or small the part was, the crimes were far too heinous.
Savage, I hear your passion for Susan and for her release, but I don't agree. I think she is where she should be and will continue to be.
Not to sound flip, but blah blah blah with what the law should be/or is. There is theory and there's reality. Ms SA, this bit of reality bites. To bad
Savage,
I was thinking last night and there is a part of me that does feel sorry for these kids. I don't feel sorry they're in prison, but I feel sorry for the events that put them there. This is going to be kinda long, so bare with me...
Susan was a criminal before she met Manson. Regardless of how "small" her crimes were, they were crimes nonetheless..
Some of these kids came from decent homes, granted, most of them didn't.. I guess I just don't see how they allowed themselves to be dominated by a man like Manson...
He isn't exactly gifted in the looks department...
Manson preached love, oneness, together, family, love of brother... But when the shit hit the fan, he threw these kids to the wolves. Manson didn't know what love really is..
I do agree with Bugliosi, he used these kids. I do believe that Helter Skelter was all in there, not the motive for the crimes, but I believe it was how he brainwashed everyone.
Leslie and Patricia both had potential to be something, but they threw it all away. To me, that's sad.
Leslie went through 3 different attorneys during her trial. If Manson didn't like one of them, he'd make the girls get rid of him...
Leslie was smart, she realized that it was because of Manson that she got screwed out of a fair trial. Although, it was only not fair based on her actions. So she asked for a re-trial.. In the end, she was convicted. It's not as thought she was going to be found innocent. She was there and participated...
Manson didn't care about his defense, so he convinced the girls not to care about theirs either. And they did everything he told them...
I'm rather surprised that they didn't all seek separate trials.. Had they done that, and had Susan just told the truth about her involvement, maybe the charges on her would have only been conspiracy.
But you need to remember that these girls had their day in court, and they blew it.. Susan, at the trial, was still bragging about how she stabbed Sharon Tate..
How was the jury to know she didn't, she was telling everyone she did. Some of those people testified to the things Susan told them. It wasn't until years later that Susan began changing her story, and it's been changing ever since.... How can anyone really believe anything she says...
I see Susan now and I don't feel sorry for her situation. I was too young when the murders happened to remember the events, but I did find all the newspapers in my parents attic.. I read every single one of them..
Susan portrayed herself as an evil monster, and she portrayed it well. The prosecution isn't the reason she didn't get a fair trial.. She is...
Patricia is the only one I truly feel sorry for, I believe she is the only one who has true remorse for her actions. Unlike Susan, Patricia knows that saying she has remorse will never buy her ticket to freedom. She accepts her punishment..
I understand why you feel the way you do about Susan, even Doris Tate said Susan was a very convincing actress, I believe she's still acting today...
I realize that time changes everyone. 37 years is a very long time to sit and mull over the things you've done and the mistakes you made. But the mistakes are Susan's, not ours.
I personally think that the parole board is just in their decisions not to release her. They get hundreds and hundreds of letters from members of society asking them not to release her. They have weeping and sobbing family members begging them not to let her out...
Life I've said before, Susan is living with her choices. She had the chance to step up and tell the truth, but chose not too. So why should I or anyone, feel sorry for her?
Anyway, I just thought I'd take the time and explain why I feel the way I do... Sorry it was so long winded lol
=)
Savage,
Why is it ..you never think the parole board is picking on Patricia & Tex.If Susan done enought time.so have Pat & Tex.
Just so everyone understands me ..I am not for them getting out..but hey if Susan walks so should they. If we go by The Savage system.
I will always believe Susan stabbed Sharon Tate.. why because she told everyone ..she had contact with she did it. Now the story has changed.. she did nothing . Mrs Tate also believed Susan did it.
The next time you visit Susan.. explain to her.. Most of the public would like the real story.
Maybe if she started to own up to her part..people would have more feeling for her.
You say her husband helped her. But Savage I do not know anything about Atty Whitehouse..he could be a good man.
But what kind of marriage does Susan & him have ? It is not a real marriage. She not there for him in good times and bad times. She has no idea what a real marriage is..she has been locked up 37 years.
I am one of those people who sends letters to keep her locked up.
Why because she never stops with the acting.
Like heaven says look at Patricia..she does not rub people like Susan..she also has not played the born again game or the get married game.
If you talk to a total stranger.. most of time if the name Susan Adkins comes up.. they say yes she stabbed & killed Sharon Tate ..why do they say that ? Because that is what she said ..over and over.
Heaven remarkable post! I agree with everything you said.
Satori, I am not as well versed on this subject as others, but I will give you my opinion, because you asked for members opinion. Ok, with all of the drugs being used by the family I feel it left them open to ideas and left proper judgement by the wayside. I believe they were brainwashed to an extent. That extent being outside society was the "Piggies" and piggies were bad. That is the extent of the control.
Savage,
I agree with most of your last post..
But I see things a bit differently. Yes Susan had a very difficult life, yes she was molested.. Yes, she didn't have a mother when she needed one...
But ya know what, every one of those same exact things also apply to me. I had a horrible childhood, me and my brothers were beaten, and abused in every way possible..
I never had a mother at all. I was also molested by my brother, I was only 3 years old when it began, he was 13...
But, the difference between Susan and I is, I didn't let these bad things control my life.
I too feel in with a "bad crowd".. And I could have gone into a life of crime, but I didn't... It's a choice... I made a choice to be better than my past. To rise above it and try to live a decent life...
But it's not just me, lots of abused and neglected children go on to lead productive lives.
Susan decided on a different route. She chose her path..
Now I agree that Manson pulled the stings, that I'll give ya 100%.. BUT, these kids allowed their strings to be pulled. Manson didn't take them from themselves, they gave themselves to him.. Why I'll never know.. But they did..
There were no bars around the ranch, people came and went all the time.. Even Tex and Linda got out right after the murders.
Susan didn't fear Manson, she loved him. She assumed he loved her back.. But Manson doesn't know how to love. All he knows is hate, rage and destruction.
Like I said in my earlier post, Susan went and told anyone who'd listen that she personally stabbed Sharon Tate, as Sharon begged out for the life of her baby. Susan even bragged, saying how Sharon sounded like an IBM machine, that she got sick of listening to it and stabbed her. That she climaxed as Sharon screamed, that she tasted Sharon's blood..
That makes Susan sound like a heartless, unfeeling, horrible monster.
Now, think about the jury hearing that. The jury didn't know it wasn't true.. If I had been on that jury and heard all that, I would have convicted her too.
She had a chance to say it wasn't true during the sentencing, but she kept right on with it...
Hard life or not, she hung herself.. And now, because her story has changed so much, no one believes a word she says.
Susan did this to herself, for whatever reasons she had, this was by her own mouth.
Now because Susan said she didn't kill anyone, we're supposed to believe her?
She should have told that story when people were still listening...
Sometimes locking people up is the biggest favor you can do for them. Susan's life behind bars has been 1000 times more productive than what it was on the outside. Least in prison she can do something good with the life God gave her...
Deserves parole? That's only a matter of opinion and you are most welcome to yours...
=)
60skid,
I write to the parole board too. I don't bother writing for Manson's hearings.. He's never getting out anyway..
I really don't think that Susan will get out anyway, but I still write them..
Some people think Leslie will get out, but I don't believe that either.. Now that Leno and Rosemary's relatives are going, I don't see Leslie going anywhere...
But I would like to see Bobby paroled. I never used to feel that way, but since I've been reading more about his case, I feel if anyone deserves it, he does...
=)
Susan wasn't even a girl when she was part of the murders. She was 21, a grown woman...
=)
Heaven,
But I would like to see Bobby paroled. I never used to feel that way, but since I've been reading more about his case, I feel if anyone deserves it, he does...
I never felt Bobby should get out either.but since coming to this blog and going back reading over stuff. And thinking ..Like the Col says. I now feel Bobby should get parole also.
I agree I do not think Manson will ever get out ethier.
I think also what hurt Leslie was the ex con ex husband ..with the stolen women's prison guard uniform in his possession.
Stephen Kay was for her parole before the ex husband did that. Also The La Bianca"s going to the parole hearings...hurts Leslie.
I also want to say heaven you are a role model for women who have suffered abuses .. you made something of you life.
Thank you 60skid, that is very sweet of you to say....
I don't know how much I actually made of it...
I had dreams of becoming a lawyer, but I became a mom and devoted my life to them...
I'll just be so thankful when these awful teenage years are behind me LOL
But I am thankful I never took the criminal road. I'm glad that I'm here to have a family. Susan could have had that too, if she'd made better choices...
=)
What do folks think about Susan's reply to questions at her '85 parole hearing if the Hinman murder was a drug burn (the transcript is the most recent posting at Brett's site)? She says she didn't hear Bobby say one word indicating a drug burn.
One of them is lying. Why would she lie about that? Is it possible that not one word was said about a drug burn, money, motorcylce gang pissed off?
Heaven, Raising a family is the greatest thing a person can do and it will be the most important thing you will do. You are young and you can still become a Lawyer, if you really want it.
Over coming adverse situations as a child is a major accomplishment. Susan had the same choices and she consistantly made bad choices. She could have made other choices. There are always more than one choice to any situation.
IF she's telling the truth (and that's a huge if) maybe she didn't know bout any drug burn...
Most sources say (if you believe them) that Manson thought Gary came into a big chunk of change, and he wanted it... They say that they tortured Gary trying to get him to give up the money.. Bobby called Manson and told him that if he had any money, he'd have given it up by now...
Gary had actually been good to the members of the family... I honestly don't think Bobby wanted to kill him...
So, either Susan's lying or she wasn't aware of a drug burn...
Maybe I over used the word choice in my last post LOL.
Deb B
I just read that parole hearing too . Yes one is lying. You know who my guess is.
I have also read Susan was the real killer of Hidman or she told a cell mate she was.
In her last parole hearing ..she kept correcting how you said BeauSoleil. it seem to be important to her you said his name right.
Why does Susan lie about everything .Why would you tell everyone you killed people .then 30 years later change your story.
Because you want parole.
Dr.
You post was right and I agree about raising a family. that is the No 1 thing you can do if you have children .
60skid,
You got it, because she wants parole...
=)
Salem,
I understand that...
I used a wrong choice of words...
Susan had her day in court, a chance to tell the truth and she decided not too.
I keep meaning to point something out but I keep forgetting...
Susan didn't start recanting her story until 1991... She had already been in prison 22 years...
I wonder if the 22 years had anything to do with her changing her story. Cause we sure know it wasn't her becoming a Christian that did it....
What Susan was suing Gov Davis was that he was opposing parole for all murderers.. She asked for 1 million in damages. Her case was thrown out..
But, I don't recall her ever asking for a new trial...
I think Linda Kassabian made me say "choice" too many times!!
Does any one think maybe Susan is trying to play the lead roll in The Linda Kassabian story ?
It worked for Linda so try it 22
years later for your self
Dr I know Linda made you say choice.
Linda is the reason I can not feel sorry for Susan.
If you have a problem safe bet Linda caused it.
Salem , I love your picture.
Heaven I believe it is Linda fault you are not a lawyer yet LOL
My take on the whole Linda story is that was Manson's thing... I think he told the girls to try and pin it on Linda to take the blame off him..
He had these girls so wrapped, they did everything he told them to do..
If I remember correctly, Manson used to meet with the girls and tell them what he wanted done.. He told them that he had to get out of prison so he could continue working on "helter skelter".. So, they concocted the whole "Linda did it all" thing, so save their beloved leader...
That's what I say Manson threw these kids away. He was playing the saving-my-own-ass game...
That's what also surprises me about Lynette and Sandra... Why would they still care about a man who only loved himself..
In 37 years, what could he possibly have done for Lynette and Sandra to keep them so devoted?
In another point... Why are murderers on trial allowed to meet with one another in closed sessions? Had these girls been kept away from Manson during the trial, some of the outcomes might have been different...
I remember Leslie being offended that Manson still denies his involvement, even to this day.
I believe Patricia. Nothing was ever done without the expressed permission of Manson.
UGH... Prooofreading is fundamental lol
linda was no innocent little hippy chick liked the bug made her look like
linda knew what she was doing
Monk,
I'll be honest with you... Linda had a lot of balls to testify against these people. I'm rather surprised she even survived the trial.
It's said that Gypsy is writing a book... Seems she's been writing it now for quite a few years...
I wish Patricia would put out a book. I'll bet it would be the most truthful version printed...
PS.. I sent you an email last night... Didga get it?
=)
Patricia should remember, she doodled "Healter Skelter" while she was sitting at the trial.. Mis spelling and all...
Maybe she's trying to block it out now... I feel the most sorry for her.. They say Leslie was the most likely to be led by Manson. I greatly disagree. I think it would have been Patricia...
Leslie was beautiful, and she knew it.. She'd been told all her life... Patricia was at the shallow end of the gene pool...
All the men wanted to have sex with Leslie, that's why Manson moved her to the front lines, to entice men to join the family. No one but Manson would have sex with Patricia...
Being young had nothing to do with it, there's only two years difference between Leslie and Patricia.. If age was the reason people killed for Manson, then Diane Lake would have been there. She was the youngest of them all...
I agree with Heaven ..Patricia was one of the ones most led by Charlie.
She was not very good looking and had that hair all over her body.
She left her job.. her car and
last paycheck to join with Manson
He used her looks to control her. In some ways I think her looks are still working againist her today.
People still think of Leslie as cute and lots of people think Susan was cute. Both women still play that up to this day.
Patricia does admit doing the murders ..unlike Leslie and now Susan.
I think Patricia is a reserved women ..and is remorseful.
She never married or played Born Again to help her get parole.
Audio,
I completely agree with you. What Patricia did was terrible and I don't advocate for her parole.
I will NEVER be on the side of the killers and forget the victims. It saddens me to see so many people here and elsewhere rally for the release of these people.
It's almost as though they care more about the injustices they feel are being done towards the killers than the horrible slaughter of the victims...
I personally hope they keep Susan locked up until the day she dies.
For 22 years she carried her story on how much she enjoyed killing Sharon... I hope her "lies" were worth it...
60skid,
I agree with you too...
Did you happen to see one of the TV specials that had Manson looking at a television interview with Patricia, some 30 + years after the crime...
The person talking to him asked what he thought and he replied "she got old on me"..
Does Manson think he's young? He's aged worse than any of them.. But being 10 to 15 years older then them, he would...
Ya know, if we give Susan a few more years, I betcha she'll say that none of them were ever there and the victims all committed suicide.
explain this in mexico there is a pro wresler named charly manson doing a manson gimmick, why is mexican wrestling makeing a big deal about charlie
http://www.thecubsfan.com/lucha/index.php?title=Charly_Manson
Heaven ,
It's almost as though they care more about the injustices they feel are being done towards the killers than the horrible slaughter of the victims.
I was thinking the same thing. I notice not too many want to see Tex or Patricia get out.
I always feel every one defends Leslie amd Susan on their looks. Not to many people complain for Patricia.
I read a interview that Patricia & Leslie are still friends ..but neither one wants any thing to do with Susan.. Wonder WHY ? LOL
Yes I seen where Manson said Patricia got old on him ..I thought .. yea look at you.
Ya know, if we give Susan a few more years, I betcha she'll say that none of them were ever there and the victims all committed suicide.
Yes your right .. she will try that one next.
People get so mad at me ..because I want to see the killers stay locked up.
How any one buys all of Susan ..ever changing stories and lie's .I will never understand.
LOL!! Elf LOL
I like that lol
Yes, thank you. I couldn't remember who was doing the interview. I have it on VHS, but haven't watched it in a while....
He also said in that same interview, when she confornted him with the women's claims that he used them as semi-prostitutes to lure men into the group, "Isn't that what women's for?"
I could almost feel Diane Sawyer having to restrain herself from reaching out and smacking the shit out of the little demented elf.I
I wish Diane would have smacked the shit out of elf boy .. TV highlight for ever.
I like the new nick name Elf Boy
if there were lots of guys having sex with her, how is it that she managed not to get pregnant?
Divine Intervention perhaps...
Savage, not all the girls had babies, There were only 3 born during the "family" days...
Thankfully, pregnancies just weren't happening.
This is why i find it within myself not to be so unforgiving of Susan. Manson used these girls and he prayed on their fears.
I agree with you completely that he used them. But, they allowed themselves to be used.
Some people didn't want to be controlled by him and they left...
Susan had the same option.
Go read some of her parole hearings, especially the ones from the 80's.. Ya know, before she began recanting her story.
She stayed because she enjoyed the lifestyle. Being degraded didn't seem to offend her.
Savage,
You can tell me over and over, how good Susan. But I am not buying it.
She was so controled by Manson .. you say..The family diet was all Vegetarian .. Susan would sneak away and go have a steak.If she was so under Manson spell .she would have never done that.
Like the col says in a earlier blog. All of them blame Charlie.No one of them blames their self.
You say Susan was Brianwashed .. Well now I am brianwashed ..22 years of hearing Susan tell the world she did it.I now believe it.
Just once before I die..I want to hear the true story.. from Susan.
there is a pro wresler named charly manson
http://www.thecubsfan.com/lucha/index.php?title=Charly_Manson
Savage,
Go back and read the 10 million books on this case...
Sandy, Mary and Susan were the only girls to give birth during the the time family was together..
Kitty had her baby after the arrests, Linda had her baby during the trial, Ruth Ann had her baby after the arrests..
Giving birth after the trials is not while the family was together. By that time the family was scattered everywhere.
Linda came to the family already pregnant. The father was her husband Robert. She gave birth to her son in March. She she got pregnant in June 1969, she didn't arrive to the ranch until July.. She was already pregnant and has said the father was her husband. Go look it up. It's only in all those 10 million books lol
There were only 3 children born while the family was together.
Yes Savage,
Manson has fathered every child on this planet.. And Linda is the case of all death and destruction everywhere lol
Oh, and your thing about Linda telling Manson she didn't know who the father was.. That was in the Helter Skelter TV remake, that was so inaccurate it was almost funny. Don't use that stupid pathetic movie as your basis for facts..
If you thought Bugliosi's book was bad, his TV remake was even worse.
Lets clear something else up..
Kitty did not get pregnant during her stay with the family. She was never really even a member of the family. She was just Bobbys girlfriend. Manson didn't like her and he didn't trust her. Bobby wasn't a member either, some people think he was, but he wasn't.. If you doubt me, ask Col Scott.
Kitty was just part of the package deal... Most of the girls didn't care for Kitty either. They were probably jealous cause Bobby was HOT!
Leslie was one of Bobby's girls, that's how she met Manson, through Bobby.. So.. that clears up Kitty..
Now Ouiche, Ruth Ann didn't have any children while the family was together (before the murders, before the arrests). She didn't get pregnant until April 1970, gave birth in December 1970. The killers were in prison and other family members were scattered. The baby you see her holding in the picture, wasn't hers.
The Manson family trial began June 15th 1970
The Hoyt/Hawaii/LSD thing happened in September 9 1970. She was pregnant yes, but it didn't happened until 4 months after the arrests... So I'm pretty sure Manson didn't father that one...
=)
Savage,
If you thought Bugliosi's book was bad, his TV remake was even worse.
Yes you agree the Bug book was made up ..and his TV Remake was a joke.
I think Bugliosi took the path of least resistance when it came to his case against the killers..
He had all these people giving him the Helter Skelter motive, so he took it and went...
The second Helter Skelter movie was terrible.. Totally inaccurate.. Manson whispered every time he talked.. Even the costumes were bogus...
After being stabbed 16 times, some directly to the heart, I highly doubt Sharon shared any words with Susan before she died. I think Sharon was already dead, or damn close, when Tex gave her 8 more stab wounds to the back...
The movie was more of a fairytale than the book..
Savage,
For someone who says he knows so much about this case, you don't seem to know even simple facts...
Ruth Ann gave birth in December 1970, so please don't tell me she was pregnant for more than a year...
She was "with the group".... the handful that remained.. They spend their days out on the sidewalk outside the courthouse. But the family had already began to fall apart.
The baby was not concieved nor born during the time the whole family was together.
Again, only 3 babies were actually born to the family...
Go look it up...
Also, how is that that Tex was able to give Kristin 4 kids but couldn't get one done when free love was the order of the day at Spahn?
Don't know, don't care...
For all we know, Kristin sought help elsewhere.. I doubt it, but anythings possible...
Susan had a baby.. ZezoZose Zadfrack or whatever ta hell his name was
Mary had Manson's son Pooh Bear
Sandy had Sunstone Hawk.. Does he still go by that name?
It's actually a really nice name.. Better than the one Manson gave Susan's kid...
During the days of the family, there was a total of 8 children at the ranch.. Dennis Rice had 4, Sandy's son, Linda's daughter Tanya, Susan's son, Pooh Bear..
That's all there was, there wasn't anymore
=)
Savage, Susan claims her baby was from a non family member.
Susan says she got pregnant before she even met Manson.. I think the guys name was Bob or Robert..
She said that Manson was upset that he wasn't the father...
She also says she was the second woman to give birth during the days with the family
Savage,
I have seen many other people ask why more babies weren't born to the family, even Bugliosi wondered..
No one knows why... That's why I said divine intervention perhaps..
Could have been all the VD too.. No one knows, but I'm glad that more children weren't born into all of that..
Leslie might not have ever been able to make more kids.. Before she met Manson she had had an abortion.. I don't know how safe they were back in the mid 60's... She might have been fine.. I dunno...
=)
4Sharon,
I think that is an excellent idea...
=)
Salem,
Does anyone still call Sandy's son Sunstone Hawk?
=)
Sorry Savage, I'm not clueless about this case...
Salem said...
There were definetly more than just 3.
steve and gypsy had a son Phenoex.(sp)error
Salem,
That was after the arrests, during the trial. Her son was born January 5th 1971..
Manson was arrested in October 1969.. I've never known any woman to carry a child for 15 months.
=)
After the first raid on August 16th, there were no more children at the ranch. They had all been taken by Child Welfare Services..
So, there were no more babies born into the "family"..
The other babies born to the members of the family were after the arrests, during the trial and after a lot of people had moved on...
One thing I do find interesting about Sandra...
In an August 30 1990 interview, Sandy says she was at the ranch when Tex and them took for to go slaughter the Tate victims..
When asked how come she didn't go that night, she said it wasn't her "destiny" to go with that that night, because she was pregnant..
But police records say she was in jail with Mary Brunner for stealing credit cards...
Has Sandy forgotten where she was?
Savage,
How can you really call it "the family" when after the arrests, people were scattered here, there and everywhere?
Yes, a few remained behind, but Manson and the others were gone...
Gypsy gave birth in 1971.. It was hardly a "family" anymore...
You had asked with all the sex that Leslie was having, how come she didn't get pregnant. I told you that not all the girls had become pregnant..
Then you tossed in names of girls who had become pregnant after the family had pretty much disolved...
So, if you're looking for me to say that the family had this insane amount of kids living at the ranch, I can't. Because only 8 children ever lived there...
Savage,
Maybe if I word it another way....
Between 1968 and October 1969, only 3 babies were born into the family..
Manson was arrested in October 1969, and he was never released again..
Most of the people who kept a vigil out on the sidewalk, were the girls..
A few men stayed, but very very few. After the verdicts, everyone went in their own direction.. There really was no more "family".
I'm sure some of them stayed in touch and even hung out together. But with their beloved leader on death row, the family as they knew it, ceased to exist.
Most of Manson's followers were female, there was never an over abundance of men. Manson tried to get other men to join, but very few ever did.. A lot of the sex at the ranch wouldn't have made girls pregnant, if you catch my drift lol
=)
*sigh*
Savage,
As I said, Ruth Ann didn't get pregnant until April 1970. By that time, Manson and the others were in jail.
You're not reading, you're waiting to speak...
3 babies born into the actual "family" is very accurate...
Most didn't consider it a family anymore with Manson, Tex, Bobby, and the girls gone..And left..
Like I said before if you actually bother to read what I write.. There was never a lot of men in the family anyway.
I know Paul Watkins was still around..
Danny DeCarlo was gone... Bobby was in jail, Manson was in jail, Tex was in jail..
Bruce Davis was around for a while, then turned himself in...
Clem was around then he was arrested...
I'm wondering though, why does everything have to be an argument with you? Why is it if someone disagrees with you, they're "clueless"..
Sorry to disappoint you, but most of us here are not clueless, we just don't worship Susan.
Audio,
Manson didn't father Susan's baby...
=)
Savage,
Ruth Ann was, at that time, still very much devoted to Manson.. But devotion couldn't keep the family together. Eventually everyone went their seperate ways.
I think you just misunderstood everything I was trying to say, or maybe I wasn't explaining it right.
Most people involved have said that the family fell apart when Manson got arrested.
It doesn't matter if there were 3 children, 8 children or 100 children there. What difference does it really make?
This was what you said in your original post regarding the children born into the family.
All of the manson girls had kids with the exception of squeaky
I tried to show you that no, not ALL the girls had kids. In fact, very few of them had children.
Here's a list of girls that didn't have children, at ANY time, during the Manson Family era.. This is only a list of people who were known to have lived at the ranch. I'm not counting those that were not regulars. People came and went all the time....
Patricia Krenwinkle
Leslie Van Houten
Stephanie Schram
Diane Lake
Lynette Fromme
Susan Bartell
Barbara Hoyt
Nancy Pitman
Catherine Gillies
Ella Jo Bailey
Madaline Cottage
Barbara Rosenberg
Here's the list of women who did have children before they joined the family, during their time with the family, or after the family broke up
Susan Atkins
Sandra Good
Mary Brunner
Linda Kasabian
Ruth Ann Morehouse
Catherine Share
Kitty was not a member of Manson's family. But if you feel like including her, go for it...
My point in this is you said that ALL the girls, except Lynette, had kids and that is simply not true.
New people come here everyday to read this blog, new people who are just discovering the case. It's only right that they read the facts and not gross over exaggerations.
In the big scheme of things, with all the sex these people had, there were not very many children conceived.
And that my dear, is a fact...
You can try to pick all my posts apart and argue every single thing I say, but the facts are what they are and you can't change them.
We don't even know who fathered Ruth Ann's baby, do we? Not a guess as to who was the father, the actual father.. We know that was one child that was not Manson's...
=)
Monk,
I totally agree with you about the usefulness of his book. There is a ton of information in there that's not part of the Helter Skelter theory...
One question though. How did this thread get so completely off track?
Isn't this thread about the LaBianca's? How did it get into the "Free Susan, Manson fathered the world," thread that it has become?
Salem,
They're all killers...
Did Leslie stop and take Rosemary's pulse before she stabbed her?
Leslie THINKS she was dead. Even to this day, she says she can't be sure she was. Go read her parole hearings..
But Bobby isn't convicted of two counts of murder. He's only convicted of one.
Salem said...
Ruth Ann gave birth in December 1970, so please don't tell me she was pregnant for more than a year...
she got pregnant March of 1969.
1:41 PM
Salem,
PLEASE tell me your math skills are better than that...
She gave birth in December 1970. How in the hell did she get pregnant in March 1969?
How many women do you know who carry babies 21 months?
On December 18 1970, the LA grand jury indicted Moorehouse, Grogan, Fromme, Share, and Rice on charges of conspiracy to prevent and dissuade a witness (Hoyt) from attending a trial. Moorehouse was released on her own recognizance because she was nearly nine months pregnant.
http://www.charliemanson.com/timeline-1970-1979.htm
Yup, this comes from Marks site cause it's the first one to come up in the search engine..
Notice the very first entry, notice the date...
Here's another
"When Ouisch was finally arrested for her crime in December 1970, she was released on her own recognizance because she was nearly full-term in her pregnancy"
http://charliesfamily.tripod.com/ouisch.html
Salem said...
Has Sandy forgotten where she was?
NO Heaven
she refers to this day at BEING AT THE RANCH*
It was the happiest time of her life. She doesnt mean ( on body) was there, in a physical sense..She was there in SOUL.
Oh ok, I gotcha..
Geez Audio,
Relax....
Damn, this is why I hate posting on these forums. Everyone misunderstand everything thats said..
I never said all the books were right.. Some of them aren't.
I never said if it wasn't written down that it wasn't a fact...
But the "fact" is (in this topic) that there were only 8 children at the ranch when it was raided August 16th 1969..
Savage said ALL the girls had babies, that's not true. I correct him...
The reason I know new people come to this blog is because my email is in my profile and these new people have emailed me.. New emails from new people arrive in my inbox on a daily basis. Would you like to see them?
Not everuone who reads this blog, posts to it. I know this cause KTS is filled with people who read it, but refuse to post to it.
Manson couldn't have fathered Susan's baby. Susan found out she was pregnant right after she met him. Susan could be lying. It's not like lying is out of charactor for her. But the odds of Manson being the father are slim to none...
OJ has nothing to do with this case....
If no one can post without someone looking to fight and argue every word they say, what's the point in being here at all?
ok how about thisif the family was falling a part
durning the trial why was squeaky and sandy recruiting dr george peters and the girls at naturalism to join them at spahn and out side the court house
Salem ,
Savage, Susan claims her baby was from a non family member.
to 60's kid
SUSAN LIED. Also she says she's never seen her son.....NOT true.
NEVER trust what susan says.
Oh I know she seen her son..I also know Susan lies about every thing
It's ok Audio
It just seems like I constantly have to be on the defensive in here...
I have all the trial transcripts and all the police reports. That's how I can distinguish facts from rumors and hearsay.
When Spahn was raided in August, 8 children were taken by the Child Welfare Service. Linda got Tanya back... Susan's baby was adopted.
I can't sit here and not correct someone when they are grossly over exaggerating things. The fact is, that not all the girls had babies, and not all the babies belonged to Manson... All the girls wanted Manson to be the father of their baby, but wishing doesn't make it so. There were more girls who didn't have babies then those that did.
Savage was quoting Linda's character about not knowing who fathered her baby was from a very bad, inaccurate movie..
Linda knew who fathered her child, she was pregnant when she met Gypsy. The father was her husband.
Why Bugliosi had that in the movie, I'll never know.. But it's not true...
A lot of people email me asking questions about the case. I answer them to the best of my ability. If I don't know the answer, I look it up from the 6 billion things I have about the case.
The biggest thing that I wanted to see documented was Voyteck raping Linda. That in not in any book, trial transcript, parole hearing or website, or police report. In fact, it doesn't exist.
I'm sorry, but something that big, would be written down somewhere. That's not a little thing. If that was a motive for the murders, it would be documented somewhere...
I don't go by a lot of the books written about the case, but I will say this, I'd believe a law abiding author before I'd believe a convicted murderer.
Some of the authors spent time with the family and with the family of the victims, gathering the information for their books..
I suspect some of the killers and former Manson family members would claim the books are all lies. Anything that doesn't paint them as innocent people, to them, is lies...
But before someone goes saying that there "was definitely more than 3 babies born" might want to go check their facts, because I will correct them...
Col Scott and I have one thing in common, we both want the facts...
Not rumors, not speculation, not gossip or hearsay, facts..
I've known Col Scott for quite a while now and I know how he feels about things being said that aren't true...
My correcting Savage wasn't meant to be mean or harsh, it's simply how I am... Cause I know later that I'll get 4 or 5 emails from people who read over here that more babies were born than what really were.
You'd be surprised how many people read these entires but don't post...
Debating an issue is fine, expressing your opinion is fine. But (in my opinion) do not express your opinion as fact. Say that it's your opinion. New people discover this case every day. I know this because I approve 3, 4 sometimes 5 people a week in KTS and most all of them are just learning about the case.
This case is very VERY fascinating. I don't know all there is to know, I admit that. But I do know enough to be dangerous.
But I'll be honest, it's getting to the point where I no longer feel comfortable posting here and I don't want to feel that way. I enjoy debating, not arguing. I hope others feel the same.
Yes Salem,
I agree, enough said about the baby issue...
Rich,
I agree with you too, perhaps I am not being clear. But a keyboard holds no expression or tone of voice. So a lot is lost in the transition.
But I do notice that questions are passed over in favor of bickering. I'm probably guity of it too...
Does anyone know who fathered Ruth Ann's child and does Sandys son still go by Sunstone Hawk...
=)
Will I do agree with this statement
Susan Atkin's is a borderline sociopath. If you look up borderline personality disorder it fits her to a tee. There is no successful treatment or cure for this disorder."
Amen because that is what Susan is sociopath
I admire and respect each and everyone here, including you Rich, even though I suspect you don't like me very much lol
But that's ok, you don't have to like me.. I'll still respect you anyway....
Salem,
Cappy is in the list as not having a baby. I don't use the aliases of the family members, I use their real names. She's Catherine Gillies to me.
I don't see any record of her ever having a child during the Manson days... But if I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me...
I refer to the "family" as being 1967 to 1969, that's when they were all together, living as one family. Doing drugs, having orgys and murdering people.
I don't consider them a family after the arrests. Most of the members have also said that the family began to fall apart after the arrests and during the trial...
Heaven,
I really enjoy this blog.Part of the reason is reading Monk and Your posts.
I am not real good with written expression,like you 2 are.
I enjoy the exchange of everyone posts also.
I even enjoy Savage although we do not agree much.
I agree its is important to state facts as facts.
This case is very VERY fascinating
So Heaven you are needed here ..as is Audio.Salem ..Monk.. Savage.. and everyone else.
Thank you 4Sharon...
I know that I can be a stickler for facts, it's just how I am..
It's kinda funny that a few actually believe what the family members tell them over what the court records and police reports say. I just think it's because they'd (the family) would disagree with anyone who doesn't portray them as peaceful, innocent, and harmless. I don't know which family members that people here are talking with.
Most of the former Manson family has put the whole thing behind them, renounced Manson, changed their name and are now living somewhere in the mid-west.
So who is everyone consulting that could possibly still be around, besides Susan?
My next question is, are you consulting them online?
Bringing me to my third question, are you sure it's actually them?
Anyone online can say they're anyone, how can you be positive of who you're talking too?
=)
Thank you 60skid,
I personally would like to learn more about what I'm not 100% sure on, which is the LaBianca's....
personally would like to learn more about what I'm not 100% sure on, which is the LaBianca's....
I know The La Bianca's is a total mystery in some ways.
4 Sharon this case is like Kennedy's ..I could tell you just what I was doing when I first heard about the murders.
Every night at dinner ..my dad would go on and on about the trial.
4Sharon,
I'll tell you my secret...
It's a gift, seriously. I have the ability to read something and memorize it..
That's how I remember most of what I know...
I don't mind sharing my knowledge and the things I've learned with others. I've learned a lot myself along the way....
=)
I wonder if the father of Ruth Ann's baby was Edward Heuvelhorst...
Anyone else?
I'm kinda curious about this....
I can explain my position on Bobby, but I warn you, you might not understand...
It wasn't until I started doing that on Susan that I realized that Bobby was only convicted of taking one life. I mean I knew, but the realization kicked in.
Now I know how you feel, that Susan didn't take any lives. But she IS convicted of taking 7. She clung to her story about killing Sharon for 22 years. Makes me think there might be some truth in it.
But that's neither here nor there...
Bobby's conviction is for 1 life.. So if we're going on convictions for lives taken, Bobby is convicted of taken the least amount.
Even Leslie, at her last parole hearing, said she wasn't sure if Rosemary was dead or alive when she began stabbing her. So, it IS possible that Rosemary was alive..
We'll never know one way or the other.
So, basing parole on just convictions, I say Bobby has served 37 years, it's ok to parole him...
BUT... (this is where it could get confusing lol) if we base everything on just the crimes and not consider the number of convictions.. I'm on the fence about Bobby.
I don't think he wanted to kill Gary, I think Manson (and Bobby himself) put him in a very bad position. Gary had been good to the family and was a friend to Gary, and that part bothers me.. He killed his friend.
So, even if he didn't want to kill him, he still did..
So in that case, I leave the decision up to the parole board. If they decide he's served enough time and release him, I have no problem with it.
I think that as far as the murderers go, Bobby is the most "rehabilitated", whatever the word may mean. It seems to mean something different to everyone...
I don't view Susan as a "changed" woman. I view Susan as a liar and a manipulator.
As for Leslie, she just recently started saying that she didn't know if Rosemary was alive or dead... I also take in the fact that Leslie was very anxious to "prove" herself to Manson. She was pissed off that she wasn't asked to go to the Tate house.
I don't buy the "she was the youngest so she was the most easily led" bullshit either. If being young was the blame, then Diane Lake would have been there, she was the youngest of all of them.
Leslie not only participated in the murder itself, she also helped write things in blood, wiped up the fingerprints, changed into some of Rosemary's clothes and burned them when she got back to the ranch. My opinion on Leslie, she's where she belongs.
Bobby has never wavered from his story.. He has said he killed him, accepted responsibility for it and accepts his punishment without starting bullshit lawsuits against the Gov...
I will never share you views about Susan, I simply don't see what you see. But in the case of Bobby, I agree with Col Scott. He has served more time for taking one life than any other prisoner. He can't change the fact that he was associated with Manson, so it's not right to keep him locked up because of who he knew...
I personally do not feel that Susan deserves a parole date.. Like I said, she clung to her tale for 22 years, then one day POOF.. Oh yeah, I just remembered, I never killed anyone...
I believe that at the Hinman trial, Susan said that she smothered Gary with a pillow after Bobby stabbed him. Then 22 years later she wants to take it back...
I'm sorry, but Susan is her own worst enemy....
I hope all this made sense lol
=)
In regards to OJ...
He was found not guilty.. I know, I know, I believe he either killed them himself or had someone do it for him. Either way, I think he's guity..
But like it or not, he IS a free man.
No one seems to be able to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that OJ did it.
But this blog isn't about OJ.. It's about the Tate/LaBianca murders.
There are a lot of murderers who got away with it and are walking around free. But, by that same token, there have been a lot of innocent people put to death for crimes they didn't commit...
Our Justice system is greatly flawed.
Savage,
Regarding the harsness of Susan's surroundings...
Susan is in prison, she's being punished for her crimes, not rewarded. Prison life was never meant to be easy. Everyone knows how bad life in in there. That's why people make the choice not to do things that'll put them there.
Susan doesn't have time to eat? She doesn't look like she's missed too many meals to me...
Susan looks well fed and pretty healthy whenever I see her.
Are they supposed to go around to each cell with a menu and served these ladies breakfast in bed?
Susan had her freedom, look what she did with it...
No one ever said prison was a day spa where they pamper you. It's punishment for crimes THEY committed.
Susan has more given to her in prison then I'll ever have..
The taxpapers don't pay for my room and board, or my food, clothes, medical expenses, dental expenses, or those lovely college degrees that Susan has earned. They even paid for her hearing aid... All of her therapists are also paid for
If you read through Susan's parole hearings, the amount of schooling she gets goes on and on and on and on... A BA for this, a BA for that... All paid for by Mr & Mrs Taxpayer.
Life may not be easy, but Susan has made more out of her life in prison than she ever did on the outside.
My opinion...
=)
Savage,
What you can not understand is from my point of view. Is Susan keep up saying she killed for 22 years.
Changing her story later ..just makes her look bad.
Yes there is lots of othe killers walking free..But if a jury let them go..that is the jurdical system.That does not mean any one likes it.
another thing that bugs me is you say it so unfair to Susan to stay in jail.. what about Tex and Patricia.. if we let Susan out that told every one who would listen ..she did it.. then what about them ..why are you picking on them. That is unfair.
Just so every one does not think ..I am for Tex and Patricia getting out ..I am not .but if I go by savage's system .. then they should all get out. including Charlie .
Please stop saying she did not do any thing..it is well documented ..she did. Also you keep saying she just played it up..Explain why she keep saying she killed people and how great it was. No one in their right mind would do that.
You are forgetting what got them all in jail.. Susan telling everyone.
ok how about thisif the family was falling a part
durning the trial why was squeaky and sandy recruiting dr george peters and the girls at naturalism to join them at spahn and out side the court house
Salem,
To me (and only to me) what Leslie did was worse that Bobby..
I'll explain...
Leslie was pissed that no one asked her to go to the Tate house. She knew people had been slaughtered, including a pregnant woman, and was mad she wasn't invited..
She was anxious to prove her loyalty to Manson...
She knew the LaBianca's were going to die, she totally admits to it...
But she wanted to go. I highlight the word wanted because no one forced her. She went of her own free will.
Ok, they get there.. Still knowing that they were going to kill these people.. Leslie and Pat take Rosemary into another room..
Leslie personally put the pillowcase of Rosemary's head, she personally tied the lampcord around her neck, and she personally held her down while Patricia stabbed her. THAT, is murder. She aided another human being in the act of ending someone's life...
Now, Rosemary wasn't going down without a fight. I think this freaked Leslie out. Realizing Rosemary had already been stabbed umpteen times and came up swinging is enough to freak anyone out..
Well, anyone who hadn't seen what happened the night before in the Tate house...
Leslie went and got Tex, Rosemary was just too much for these two helpless girls to kill. They needed backup...
I think at this point, it became too much for Leslie. She wanted Tex to "finish her off"...
But, Leslie being the programmed robot that she was, allowed Tex to FORCE her to stab her..
Now, during this time, Rosemary had crawled two feet with a severed spine. Dead people don't crawl...
Possibly by the time Leslie got there, Rosemary was in the process of dying, but Leslie cannot be sure that Rosemary was indeed dead.
Even the coroner couldn't determine her exact time of death.
It is by no means proven that Leslie "only stabbed a dead woman". But let's just sake for the sake of argument that Rosemary was dead. It's ok to stab dead people 16 times because someone made you do it?
What did Leslie have to fear? She was one of Bobby's girls anyway. She didn't have any children back at the ranch to worry about.
After she stabbed Rosemary 16 times, she with her two buddies, ate food from the LaBianca's refrigerator, took a shower, wiped down the fingerprints, wrote stuff in their blood, stole Rosemary's clothes. Later she burned the cloths back at the ranch..
So, we have pre-meditated murder, conspiracy to Leno's death, aiding and abetting them in cleaning the prints and leaving writings in blood.
Leslie is no innocent little sweetheart, she up in the mess up to her eyeballs.
Bobby on the other hand didn't go to Gary's house with the intention of killing him. He went there to get money out of him.
Leslie went to the LaBianca's with the intention to kill them...
Leslie still minimizes her involvement, Bobby doesn't.
There are different circumstances surrounding the actions of each of these people..
Now, I don't feel any of them should be paroled. They're all killers, every single one of them.. But, I'd be ok with them releasing Bobby.
Bobby has learned the word "rehabilitation" far better than any of the others. That is my opinion. No one has to agree with me. But that's how I see things....
=)
Elvisgump,
I like your ID by the way...
I don't know a ton about parole hearings, but I do know that they have a lot to consider.
The severity of the crime, how the crime was carried out... How well the prisoner has progressed in prison. How they remorseful are they. What their plans are if they get parole. Any and how many infractions they've received... Psychological reports...
There's a lot, I think, that goes into it...
Bugliosi prosecuted, but the defense was very very weak because of their clients. Not all of it can be blamed on Bugliosi.. He tried his case, the other side didn't defend...
=)
Salem said
I agree Rich.
Heaven seems to have taken the board and we are all stoooooopid.
oh well.
Salem,
That is absolutely NOT true and it's a very mean thing to even say.
I don't think anyone here is stupid, not even close. I'm surprised you'd even say such a thing.
Salem said...
heaven says
Leslie was pissed that no one asked her to go to the Tate house. She knew people had been slaughtered, including a pregnant woman, and was mad she wasn't invited..
THAT IS NOT TRUE!
Salem,
It is true. She said so in her 2004 parole hearing..
Here it is..
"PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Let me ask you. Prior to this occurring, as you know we had the Tate killings; what's referred to as the Tate killings. And when Susan and Patricia came back you had -- they told you what happened. And the record indicates that you in -- that you had stated to them that you, you know, you felt bad that you didn't get to go with them."
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: "Yes."
http://www.internet.is/bret/van.houten.2004.parole.transcript.htm
So, how is what I said not true..
OOPS..
Wait, there's more
Here's the whole thing...
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: Let me ask you. Prior to this occurring, as you know we had the Tate killings; what's referred to as the Tate killings. And when Susan and Patricia came back you had -- they told you what happened. And the. record indicates that you in -- that you had stated to them that you, you know, you felt bad that you didn't get to go with them.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER ANGELE: That you wanted to get involved in the next -- in the next.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes.
http://www.internet.is/bret/van.houten.2004.parole.transcript.htm
What we have here, as a group, is a forum to speak freely. Not agreeing makes things interesting, and I think quite natural. There is no need to make accusations of a takeover because you don't agree with someone.
Salem said...
ty Heaven
You're welcome, but why are you thanking me? lol
Just in case anyone is interested, here is Leslie's 1993 Parole hearing. Again it discusses her not going along to the Tate house and how she felt about it..
I'm copying and pasting so the typos aren't mine lol
-------------------------------
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: -- and then Ms.
Krenwinkle then left.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: Okay. All
right. What happened when they returned?
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: The next day, I -- I'm a
little cloudy on this part. I -- because I don't know
from my direct memory. I'm either going on things I testified to in the past or whatever. I saw it on the
news with Pat and I had walked with Pat. Pat and I were
very close at the time. And she said that they were
very young and it seemed wrong and not right. And I
felt, at that time, that because she had gone and I felt
that what we were doing was a mission that needed to be
done; I felt that if they went again, that I wanted to
go. I wanted to go and be a good soldier and surrender
myself for what I believed in.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: So it didn't
have -- watching this on the news -- because I remember
the --
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yes.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: I remember it.
Gosh, it just seemed to terrifying and so awful and you
had ail these people brutally murdered. That didn't
have an affect on you?
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: No. At that -- at that
point, I was -- I was a shell a per -- you know, I saw
it. It wasn't real. I don't think the impact of really
what the murdering was, hit me until we were in the
LaBianca home. It was like abstract concepts until that
time. I -- and there had been lots of talk prior to
that, by Manson.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: Uh-huh.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: On, I think desensitizing us
to people.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: As I recall in
the news that was being done on that, there were bodies
that were shown covered up and stuff like that.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: Yeah.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: And these were
just totally innocent victims. That just had no -- had
no affect? So then when did you know that they were
going to go again the next night?
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: I remember late evening, I
think I was on the boardwalk and Charles, again, I --
I'm telling you how I remember this part 25 years later.
Parts of the crime are very clear to me, that will never
leave me; other parts, I'm not -- I'm not trying to be
evasive. They just aren't that clear.
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: Uh-hum.
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: But that evening, urn, I
believe that Tex and the others were getting close and
Charlie came up to me and asked me, did I believe enough
that I could go with them and that I could kill. Was I
crazy enough to believe in him and I said, "Yes."
PRESIDING COMMISSIONER BENTLEY: Okay. Did
you -- had you asked to go prior to that or indicated
to --
INMATE VAN HOUTEN: No. But everything in my
personality, you know, body language, I made it very
clear I wanted to go.
http://www.internet.is/bret/leslie%2093%20parole.htm
Just so everyone knows, I'm not trying to take over anything. I'm simply posting just like everyone else.
I feel I have something useful to bring. Information that maybe not everyone knows or has thought about.
I admit I'm a stickler for facts. But that's just how I am about the case. It comes from listening to others who are convinced Sharon was killed because she was pregnant with Manson's baby and he didn't want it.
Or that Jay and Sharon's pools of blood came from the killers clothing, it rolled off as they walked out.
Or that Rosie Tate is the child Sharon was pregnant with at the time of her death. Jay Sebring managed to crawl over to Sharon, cut Rosie out of her stomach and hand her over to Frank Sinatra, crawl back to his original position, and die...
Maybe that's why I'm more interested in the facts. Because of all the bullshit rumors.
It doesn't mean that I'm not willing to listen to another person's opinion or their theories.
There is SO much to this case that none of us will ever know. It's mind boggling...
For months I only lurked on this board. I read what others were saying but I never posted to it.
If my posting now is offending people, I can always go back to just lurking. It's never my intention to offend anyone.
Heaven, I hope you know that I don't think your'e trying to takeover. My last post was in your defense. Did it not come across that way? Don't lurk, I have learned many facts from you and would like to continue to learn from you.
Dr Dodopariti,
No, I didn't take what you said against me, I know who you were talking too...
I posted what I did in case anyone else also thought I was trying to "take over"...
I have studied this case inside out, backwards to front since 1985.. I have learned a lot along the way. I'm more than happy to share what I've learned with others. So, I'm glad that I can bring something useful to anyone who's interested in reading it...
=)
I also started out here lurking. My desire was to understand this case and to understand why I am so interested. been posting since maybe August (I don't remember) my post have really added nothing to the conversation. I know this, but I like to read and make a dumb comment here and there. What would be sad to me is if people stopped posting. Then we would have to blame Linda K. Do we really want that???? (wink)
LOL Good one lol
I had a tree limb all into my driveway last night, I blame it on Linda lol
Dr Dodopariti,
Don't ever feel you don't contribute because you do. We all do. Look at it this way, because of the conversations we're having now and all that you've learned, you already have information to use on future topics...
For me personally, I just don't agree that Susan should be paroled, nor do I feel we should all feel sorry for her because prison life isn't as easy as she'd like it to be. But others don't agree with me that Bobby should be paroled. So, I guess we're all even lol
We each have our beliefs and our opinions, there is nothing at all wrong with that.
=)
What would be sad to me is if people stopped posting. Then we would have to blame Linda K. Do we really want that???? (wink)
No ..I think every one should post there feelings No every one is always going to agree
sandra and squeaky were receuiting dr george peters and his girls in naturalism to join them and make the family strong again durning the trial in 71
A thought occurred to me not too long ago....
Has anyone thought that it was really odd that Susan waited 22 years before she began recanting her story?
She sat on the stand during her trial and said she stabbed Sharon, she held a pillow over Gary's face, smothering him as he lay dying.. You all know the story...
So, I'm kinda wondering something....
Why do you supposed Tex never corrected her until years later when he wrote his book?
Tex also says he's the one who carved the word "war" in Leno's stomach, but yet, Patricia claims she did it.. So who really did it...
Tex is taking the blame for everything... Which is good, but is it true..
Or.....
Is Tex using it as a means to get paroled... Meaning, is he hoping that if he accepts all the blame, maybe for things that the girls did, that maybe (just maybe) the parole board will think he's accepted responsibility, and release him?
Could it be at all possible, just possible, that Tex contacted Susan and told her to start saying she didn't do it?
22 years is a long time to continue a lie as big as the one she was telling.... Then out of the blue, POOF, I didn't do any of it....
Could it be possible that Susan did stab Sharon, but Tex has maybe somehow convinced her to start taking it all back?
This is something I've been wondering about and I'm looking for other opinions....
heaven,
22 years is a long time to continue a lie as big as the one she was telling.... Then out of the blue, POOF, I didn't do any of it....
Could it be possible that Susan did stab Sharon, but Tex has maybe somehow convinced her to start taking it all back?
No I do not think so I think her Atty husband taugh her to tell the NEW STORY.
Tex's deal is 1 or 2 things ..Thinks he will get parole or it is a better story for his Born again thing.
I really feel Tex and Susan did the stabbing of Sharon.
Just my opinion ..
Salem,
I guess Susan think she is in a 5 star hotel.
No haircolor ..I had not heard that one... No time to eat . Oh well she should have thought about that one ..when she did her killing ..then her bragging.
Savage .. Susan needs haircolor and food ..
I just wonder how much more Susan gets out of the system ..with having a Atty husband. I bet it works for her.
Something about the waiting 22 years just seems so strange to me...
IF,(that's a big if) she didn't kill Sharon.. Why wait so long to say you didn't?
She risked the gas chamber for a lie? Come on...
Damn near every source (if you chose to believe them) say that all three of them stabbed Sharon...
What if there is some truth to it?
Susan's original plea was not guilty, then she later changed it to guilty.. Ok, maybe Manson had a hand in that..
But 22 years later, Susan had.....
Discovered Jesus
Become a Christian
Renounced Manson
Had years of therapy
Escaped the gas chamber
Was completely off drugs
Gotten married....
And not one time along the way did she ever come forward about not killing anyone...
Dunno bout anyone else, but this kid ain't buying it.. Something's fishy in Denmark.. No pun intended lol
Tex, has said he was completely straight that night, that he wasn't on any drugs.. But Susan says that she and Tex had been hitting the speed they had stashed away...
So, who's lying?
If you read the testimony of Tex, you'll be left scratching your head...
He claimed that he walked right in the front door, not one word about the cut screen (that the police found) that the door was unlocked and he walked right in..
He further claims he had no idea where Linda was, he never saw her once he left the car...
He also says that he "emptied his gun" into Jay...
He says he (Tex) was running all around the couch, making funny noises. That Susan said "watch out", he turned and "emptied his gun" into Jay... That he didn't know how many times he had shot Jay...
Jay was only shot once...
He then says, Patricia began stabbing Jay so he ran over to join in...
Correct me if I'm like losing my mind here, but wasn't Patricia busy with Abigail?
He goes on to say that he kept stabbing Jay, until Susan yelled for help with Voyteck..
So, what was Susan and Abigail doing?
He says that he jumped on Voyteck and stabbed the hell out of him, ALONG WITH SUSAN.. Keep that in mind.. He and Susan were stabbing him together as a team...
No mention of trying to shoot him and his gun jamming...
Then, Patricia came over and told Tex she needed help with Abigail.. Leaving Susan on the lawn, stabbing Voyteck all by her lonesome..
So... Who was watching Sharon? This would make Sharon completely alone in the house, all the killers were occupied...
He denies ever having a rope with him...
He says that no one was tied up...
And that he never put a rope around the necks of Sharon and Abigail...
Which completely contradicts the autopsy report.
He also claims that he only stabbed men, which contradicts the fact that he stabbed Abigail..
No one begged for their life....
No dogs barking...
No music was playing
So, Tex makes absolutely no mention whatsoever about Stabbing Sharon. In fact, his trial testimony leaves it that no one stabbed Sharon. No mention of Susan or Patricia ever touching her.
No mention of Sharon at all.
Then, years later, just before his first parole hearing, ole Tex writes himself a book....
In that book he says,
He checked the doors and windows, all locked
He send Linda to check..
He slit the screen and went in..
He did bring a rope
He tied up Voytecks hands
He put the rope around Jays neck. When he started to tie the rope around Sharon's neck, Jay became upset...
He says he's the only one who stabbed Sharon....
Ok... Something doesn't jive at all..
His testimony directly contradicts his book and vice versa...
Audio,
lol! I think Clairol should donate their products to these poor women. Susan would look smashing in a deep, rich, dark brown hair color and black eyeliner...it would SO bring out her evil eyes!
Oh I agree LOl I also agree She needs to be in for life ..and that is 2 short for me.
OOPS, excuse me..
This..
So, what was Susan and Abigail doing?
Was supposed to say Sharon and Abigail.
Now,
If you read the 2004 parole hearing of Patricia Krenwinkle...
She says she also stabbed Leno Labianca..
She says it was she who wrote all the words in blood at the Labianca home..
But Tex says he and Leslie did too...
That's 2004.. No memtion of anyone stabbing Sharon at the Tate house...
1993 parole hearing, Patricia Krenwinkle...
She claims that when Tex came over to stab Abigail, Tex sent her to the guesthouse. Susan was busy not stabbing Voyteck... Although Patricia says she saw Susan doing it.
Patricia says she never stabbed anyone else, just Abigail..
So, if no one stabbed Sharon, why was she stabbed to death?
She says she into to the guesthouse, looked around a little, found no one there and left...
She says that by the time she came back to the main house, Sharon was already dead...
So, who's hand killed Sharon? Cause no one there did it...
LOL Audio,
That was a good one!!
=)
Alrighty,
Here's where I am on things..
Susan stabbed Voyteck more than just in the leg, both Tex and Patricia saw her stabbing the hell out of him. I believe she was the one who probably inflicted most of his stab wounds. Lida also testified to coming up to the house and seeing Susan stab Voyteck..
Three people say she did..
I am now back to believing Susan did stab Sharon...
Sorry Savage, I know you don't believe it, but I do...
Tex risked the gas chamber for that VD infested little hippie that he says Manson kicked out of the family a few times...
It doesn't jive...
I understand loyalty, but EVERYONE told a different version of events.. At the trials and now at parole hearings..
Susan's recanting is staged. My opinion...
Someones story isn't adding up...
Hmmmm, could be anyones guess who it is...
I've always felt that Patricia told the most truthful account of the story. She seems to be the most remorseful and more accepting of her involvement than the others...
60skid,
You could be right, maybe it wasn't Tex, maybe it was Susan's husband..
She married him in 1987 and began recanting her story in 91...
Salem said...
She seems to be the most remorseful and more accepting of her involvement than the others...
I AGREE WITH THAT.
only one statement she made.sruck me odd.
* IF there IS a GOD why does he keep me here?*
that was from a a parole hearing i think , i cant recall now.
I just thought to mself, it's NOT GOD keeping you there, youre there for crimes you commited.
Salem,
I couldn't agree more. Patricia is where she needs to be
=)
Heaven,
I will go to my grave believing that Susan helped kill Sharon Tate.
I really believe Susan husband coached her on her new story.
Everyone feels so sorry for Susan being in jail..so ruff.. no time to eat..no hair color..no parole.
The parole officers are not
stupid ..they can see she changes her story.
Like all her marriages ..they are jokes.. what kind of marrige is it in prison.You really think her atty husband is True Blue..yea right.
Atty Whitehouse thought if he got Susan off ..it would get him big cases.
The Col said on a earlier blog .. they all need to stop blaming Charlie Manson ..that true.
But a least til 2009 .Susan will not be checking out of the Hotel California ..Boy her hair will be really gray by then.. she may waste alway ..by then
Audio,
lol.If you are losing your mind then so am I. The details of this case will definately drive a person nuts! Look what happened to that eBay guy ...he put all his files up for aution cause the case drove him nuts...
I agree it will drive you nutts ..this case
Ok, a Writ is something you file with the courts, and a judge reads it over...
A judge will look over her writ, then decide if Susan has been unfairly denied. If he decides she hasn't, then it's Hi Ho Hi Ho Back To Prison She Goes...
Her attorney filing a Writ by no means guarantees her release. A judge can still deny her and she goes back to prison...
Another thing about her writ, a judge is going to review all of Susan's parole transcripts and he/she is going to see how much Susan has changed her story. I don't see how that will help her cause.
The judge will also see her bad psych reports.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the victims families will also be heard from..
Basically, it'll be like any other parole hearing, except this time it will go before a judge, and that judge will decide on whether or not Susan gets paroled.
Like I said, it's not a guarantee.
Did you know that Tookie Williams filed a writ.. His was denied.. Look where he ended up...
Leslie's attorney once filed a writ. She was denied parole...
So if Leslie got denied after filing a writ, I don't think Susan should hold out much hope. She does have 5 more convictions agianst her than Leslie...
Post a Comment