1- To find George Denny and get permission to reprint his booklet The Vincent Bugliosi Story.
2- To Maintain valuable discussion on the comments.
3- To decide once and for all what I am going to do with all this research.
4- To finish organizing the ebay Collection and seeing if there is anything more valuable.
5- To resume my chats with Bobby Beausoleil.
And to continue to bring you the best site for discussing TLB on the internet.
20 comments:
COL dice: 3- To decide once and for all what I am going to do with all this research.
I guess it's a bit like family history - if you get bogged down in anecdote, speculation and non-verifiable sources you get stuck.
An academic would tell you to use academic rigour, to distinguish clearly between primary and secondary sources and apply the principles of critical evaluation.
In your case, perhaps to go to the beginning and start with a linked timeline and database. Start with what you know for sure (if anything is sure) and where within this framework there is disagreement enter alternate versions in parallel, clearly marked as different versions.
Close study will reveal patterns and inconsistencies which you will need to interpret, but you will need to put aside all preconceptions and unsubstantiated assumptions if you are to get value from the material.
Major problems include the politicisation of the case, the money many have tried to make out of it and the time that has passed. For these and other reasons it is hard to know whose version of events to trust, but I would think fringe family members who have not spoken publicly would be a good avenue to explore, if you can locate them, especially if they are not making anything out of the interview.
But you probably know all this.
One other matter: you asked recently whether Bill Nelson really had spoken to Cathy Gillies 'in the desert'. Cathy (Cappy) is the kind of person that would be valuable if she was prepared to speak - she was core family without being hard core (and therefore was never away for long doing time) and may well have been privvy to what was going on before, during and after TBL. Obvious questions: can you find her, and will she speak?
And now, back to work. Happy New Year to all
Jem
Excellent comment jempud!
Col.,
I was thinking and again this is just a suggestion but I was thinking that you should do this book or whatever from a Tex angle because that really hasn't been done with the exception of his book and Bill Nelson's book (which I could be wrong but I assume didn't sell well)because you have to have a new schtick to sell it or the Bobby angle might work as well but most of the general public doesn't know who Gary Hinman was unfortunately.
I actually think anything I do, book film or doc, can only be done from one angle- are you ready?
MARY.
Think about it.
Salem said: "Cappy isnt gonna talk."
How do you know this?
Col.
That's a cool idea but for sure you would have to have both Mary and Bobby talk to you and possibly even Kitty for it to work.
Maybe the ideas of 'research' on the one hand and an 'angle' on the other are mutually exclusive. Research is by definition dispassionate and objective, whereas an angle implies a previous point of view.
Not for me to secondguess what Col wants to do, but he did use the word 'research'. I would however surmise that he, like me, would most of all like to track down that elusive chimera of the 'truth' - if that is an attainable aim.
Whatever, I've learned a lot from this blog and am grateful for the chance to be here.
Jem
Salem said:"Cappy/Silver and Mary are NOT gonna talk , pure and simple, maybe on their on terms," Well yes... but how do you know? Why are you so sure?
Diane (if I may)
I can understand that people are wary of talking, especially when all the world and his dog is out to exploit them. But as people get older they often come to terms with things and want to set the record straight. Maybe not today, and maybe not for publication in a blog, but I wouldn't be so dogmatic about what people will and won't do at some point.
No doubt we shall see, if we live long enough.
Unless there's something you know to the contrary?
Jem
Sorry Jempud... of course I meant research with an unbiased eye (but is that really ever possible rhetorically speaking?). However speaking as a part time University student (gag - I hate writing essays) you have to have a thesis (or an angle)in mind when you are researching whatever. Of course your thesis can be full of crap but you find that out as you go along :)
I could see why Mary wouldn't talk... it could be dangerous for her.. they can always re-charge with something I would imagine - maybe I am wrong. As for Cappy or Silver, I wouldn't have a clue.
I am recalling when the Colonel said it all has to go back to Gary Hinman and his murder. The more I think about that the more I believe he has something. I'm at the point where I believe they never had any intention of killing Gary at all but it snowballed on them... maybe I'm wrong and once the door was open what did they have to lose by killing more people?
Deb dice: I'm at the point where I believe they never had any intention of killing Gary at all but it snowballed on them... (my italics and bold)
Thanks for responding, Deb. No criticism of you implied, but I think we often fall into the trap of seeing decisions and actions of people around CM and his 'Family' (did he recruit or was he a magnet) as being collective.
Although CM undoubtedly did exert influence on those around him - to an extent hard to define - individual members did also have individual faculties that governed their thoughts and actions. It's easy to refer to 'they' and 'them' as if CM and his companions always sang instinctively from the same carol sheet (see quote above) but there is plenty of evidence of dissent and disagreement among family members too.
Yes, things in the Hinman case probably did snowball once started, but there seems to be emerging evidence to suggest that the TBL murders may have been orchestrated and that (some of) the later victims were not random: also that there were other motives for the TBL murders, more mundane than the standard Bugliosi line.
As for the Hinman case, if one person lost it and got out of control there may also have been the question of 'face', of feelings of 'loyalty' or 'fear' which made it hard for others present to not follow and/or support. Or simply the sheepish, eager to please, follow my leader attitude of the easily led, quite possibly under the influences of drugs and the strong will of a persuasive, charismatic leader figure who would 'approve' of what they did.
And now off to work.
Jem
ColScott said...
I actually think anything I do, book film or doc, can only be done from one angle- are you ready?
MARY.
Think about it.
12:17 PM, January 02, 2007
After thinking about it, I ask why?
Why Mary ?
Because she was there at the beginning ... ? Seems a good place to start.
But the great Col may have other reasons
Jem
Hey Dok,
I may be wrong but I think the Colonel thinks that Mary is the key because she never told the same story twice and she managed to stay out of jail for Hinman. Also there was the posting last year where on the stand Mary insinuated that her testimony would be faulty because she was under duress when interrogated by the LASO about the Hinman murder.
Cheers
Here’s a thought. I was wondering why George Spahn had given the name ‘Capistrano’ to Cathy Gillies. I got thinking ..
San Juan de Capistrano is where the swallows come back to, right ? And Cappy’s family were kinda local to the area. Does that mean Cathy was always/regularly coming back ? And, back to whom/where/where from?
Any ideas?
Jem
Hey Dok, the posting I was talking about was September 20, 2006.
Cheers
Deb
Thanks guys for the imput about my question. I would like to see the story done from Pat K's point of view. She was there from the beginning, there at both the Tate and Labianca murders and was a hard core member. Also, I believe her to be the most honest.
Salem said...
I find it hard that Pat would tell the truth, at parole hearings she still blames Charlie and GOD for her prison stay.
12:27 PM, January 06, 2007
>>She blames God? I'm not trying to discredit what you are saying, it's just that I have never got that from the transcripts. Can you direct me to where in the transcripts she blames God, so I can check it out?
Thanks,
Dok
Salem dice:
It was one doc on tv maybe a parole hearing, when they ( the women ) are talking about prison. Pat says, If there were a GOD I wouldnt be in here.
With respect, this sounds more a case of denying the existence of God than blaming him/her !
It's what they call the 'second conditional': if I had a million dollars … (but I don't); If I were President … (but I'm not); ergo 'If there were a GOD … (but there isn't).
At least that's my take
Jem
As for blaming Charlie, I suppose one line of reasoning is the third conditional: "If I hadn't met Charlie …" (but I did).
I'm beginning to sound like a teacher :-)
But it's interesting to speculate in terms of all the family members -how would their lives have been if they hadn't met Charlie?
Kinda quiet around here lately
Jem
Post a Comment