Friday, December 26, 2008

Denial !

Bobby gets the worse denial I have ever heard. A denial of hope.

I hope he sues these guys against the wall.


Friday, December 19, 2008


Hmmm Tom O'Neill is in the damn credits babbling about more bodies- he is now the new Debra huh..... Dostie can't accept that he had an EPIC FAIL- he found nothing at Barker and now he is roaming Spahn- is Gresham next, lol... Gypsy is on on second and she lies about being 17- she was 25 I think....Hoyt says they pretended to be "mountain folk"- what the fuck is that? Dostie is an expert on Helter Skelter - because he read it twice!...OMG O'Neill after ten years of research actually claims there are 24 murders they cannot pin on the Family- what a croc! There goes hopes for that book...Hughes wasn't murdered, sorry Kay...narrator lists 2 real victims, one likely victim and one non victim and then says there are many more- but no there aren't....more Dostie comedy...babbling about missing men- nonsense....sweaty O'Neill thinks the imaginay victims were snitches...Fat Hoyt says "Crossed Them" when she WAS "them"....Debra says "Hey Me!"....more Dostie frolics....Dostie gets excited to dig- in the footsteps of Larry Melton!...He fails then cries about limitatons....Sheriff speaks reason....Dostie goes to another Ranch....I wonder if he church know Paul is digging up their land- he has no jurisdiction here- just wants attention....I actually nod off during this crap....Dostie starts to look like Nelson to me...They fail again but cry about it again....Narrator claims there are more questions but there aren't....

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Debra the Whale Flips Again

If you believe the evil Mark Turner whose site seldom gets updated anymore (and most of which is now inferior to the Bret site) Debra JUST found out that Bobby was having a parole hearing in a few days. Of course, Bret's site reported this weeks ago. It seems she wants the public, or at least some internet dicks, to write emails in a hurry saying he shouldn't be let go.

I mean what the fuck man?! Did Bobby do something to Sharon Tate that I missed? He was in a jail when TLB happened. Where does she get off stating this? Bitch was disinherited by her family and disowned because she was a lying psycho. She still refuses to bury her father's ashes as per his wishes. I think she takes them out and talks to them or some shit. From what I hear, Dad never forgave her when he learned she used to run around naked at the age of 16 with ~~~~, the drug dealing ~~~ in her sister's ~~~~. Is that why she was disowned? Why do Patti's kids never converse with their own Aunt? Doris and Patti never interfered in the parole hearings of people that didn't attack them. I used to goad crazy Jimmy about Leslie, but if one takes TLB as one event, well then Leslie was part of TLB. She just was. Bobby wasn't.

Now I'm not deluded. I wrote a letter of support for Bobby once. I like the guy. But I think he's probably screwed as a "Mansonite". I hope he gets out. But it isn't likely. So what is with this Debra shit anyway? More attention whoring?

Let me clarify some of this rant for a second. She can do whatever she wants. But I ask why? Why not focus on the right people? You lose the moral high ground when you attack EVERYONE. Not that she ever had any high ground to begin with.

I would be thrilled if Bobby got paroled. But there's zero chance. Go ahead Mark, write your letter.

What could it possibly say anyway? "Hi I run a site called If Bobby Beausoleil gets out he might come after me for some of the shit I wrote about him. Please keep him locked up. I am 1/3547th Hinman by marriage. Thank you." I mean sheeeit!

[just in case anyone cares, the preceding is my constitutionally protected fucking opinion. Maybe everything above is just bullshit. Take it seriously. Or not. But ever since Adam Gabriel's lawyer-by-night threatened to sue me for the truth back in June, I gots to be careful. People can't read very well.]

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

The Col Still Reads

Sooo.... I am continually amazed by things people claimed back then with a straight face that were taken as true. In some cases they are still considered true, even if no human would ever seriously believe them. I am talking about Juan Flynn's assertion that he knew about the killings but it was okay. Uh huh.

Also today we see Melcher get away with easy questions... and most of the press seems to believe Charlie thought he still lived there. It explains Tate a lot more readily than believing the BUG's novel.

Finally we have the NY TIMES from the day of the Bruce Davis surrender, the first youtube I ever posted. It claims that Nancy was married to Bruce. I don't recall that. Anyone know if this is true?

Monday, November 17, 2008

What the Col Has Been Reading

Thoughts: An article from somebody who was there describes Charlie as 5 feet 7. ...ANOTHER killing that we never hear anything more on... Pugh, Zero, Merrick- this would not happen in 2008 .... I know people who know Rudy and I don't think he's considered credible.

(Click on article to read)

Tuesday, November 11, 2008


Hi there.

It's been almost a month. I haven't posted. Why?

There hasn't been much to report and I have been busy. It's that simple.

Now we have a new president. And Bobby is gonna have an even tougher time getting parole- if he ever had a chance to begin with. And gays that were married aren't. Nice world we live in.

So anyway, have you noticed that it is 8 months almost and Susan Atkins still breathes? Too bad she didn't get out, huh?

Paul Watkins would now be a grandfather if he were still alive. Congrats to his daughter.

Anyone notice that Bret came back? Thank the Lord.

The Col is back. I'll stay around more this time. Thanks.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Reflections of The Way Things Used To Be

I was thinking the other day, and I thought to self, "Where does it all go off the track?" I mean at some point the TLB investigation was about solving murders and catching the culprits, not a referendum on the politics of the 1960s. Sure, the relative fame of the Tate Victims played no small part in the derailing, but they were jet setters, not really famous. A hairdresser and an actress who was thinking about giving up what was left of her small career. An heiress. Fame and money and glamor affected things, yes. But what else factored into the derailing? BUG used it for personal aggrandizement, but he had to have something to use in the first place. What?

My thoughts wandered back to something so basic, at least in today's world, that it took more than a moment to digest. Remember, there were three cases inside of a month where there was writing in blood at the crime scene. The victim's blood. Hinman in Malibu, Tate in Beverly Hills and LaBianca in Los Feliz. If this happened today the cases would be linked in less than thirty seconds. But in 1969, they weren't linked until confessions appeared MONTHS after the crime. That's weird to me. Yes all three were in different jurisdictions... but that's weird to me too, because could the killers have known that? Do you know which law enforcement arm shares which jurisdiction? Cause I sure don't.

I still believe that the key to the case lies with LaBianca motivation. Hinman was for money or drugs with a personal connection thrown in. Tate seems like drugs with a lot of wrong place wrong time. LaBianca was NOT "because True lived next door." It is too pointed, too specific. They had JUST gotten back home. Was the daughter or son in on it? It would be strange that the connection cannot be proved if so...there is always a leak. Was it drugs? It wasn't random, but 40 years later we still don't know what the connection IS.

So then the three cases essentially become Bug's. And HE cannot find the connection. So he makes up the race war shit. And we go off the track.

So is that where it happens? LaBianca? Let's look at speculation.

1- Mafia connections- if so, then how does it connect to Tate? Answer- it doesn't.
2- Bikers- The connections are there, but so what?
3- Drugs- There has been speculation that Leno was into them, that Suzan was into them, that Rosemary was into them. Okay. No proof. But let's say they were. So how does that trace back to Chatsworth? I don't see it.

Why did Tex Watson kill Leno and Rosemary LaBianca? What did they have to do with Frykowski?

That's where I think the answer lies.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Debra's Work

Thanks Bret for this interview- I was in Mexico on the Beach and missed this Bitch talking.


1- Why does she outright lie about how she heard about Sharon's murder? "Wayne" has nothing to do with it.

2- Is NBC willing to buy her Bullshit wholesale? DEBRA- you MOM and DAD disinherited you. Stop speaking for them.

This isn't TOO bad- but it is more of the attention grabbing Debra that we have had as of late.

Bye the way, Monkeyboy, she is talking about Steven Kay who enlisted Doris to fight the release of that murdering whole Leslie Van Houten!

Saturday, October 04, 2008

There is Now Joy In Mudville

Bret, the owner of the best damned website on the Manson story, has surfaced.

If you read the postings of the super idiot known as JimNy, you would think he was dead - indeed Jim seemed hopeful that that was the case.

Those of us who care about the case, truly care about getting to the truth (no, not Tom O'Neill) were greatly concerned- where was Bret? Myself, Heaven and Cats, the major online truth seekers (along with the evil Mark Turner) had no idea. No emails replied to. Site down. Phone off.

Here was a guy who in half the time had done three times as much as Bill Nelson without the bullshit Christianity or pedophilia- he had created a site that was filled with so much truth it was invaluable.

Worse yet, some weeks before he disappeared, both he and the Col had been confronted by a "lawyer" ( I may be disbarred in 48 states but I always had people who answered my phone correctly) who was very upset that Bret had revealed the present day identity of convicted murderer and hard core Family member Steve Grogan. Of course her points were ludicrous- what was she going to do, file a case for definition of character? Did she think that released killers have a constitutional right to anonymity? The lawyer was laughed off, but then Bret went POOF and so who knew, right?

The Col, with his unlimited resources and supermodel wife, decided to spend some of his unlimited funds and hire a detective firm in Iceland. There we got the report that just came through from a Lars Lasterston who I take it is a modern day Columbo. Here is an excerpt-

" Bret "Last Name Redacted" filed a police report with the ReykjavikPolice Research Department on June 11, 2008. Complaintant listed his occupation as horse fancier and seal furrier and made special note of his avocation as "Charles Manson Case Researcher and Expert." He mentioned that on 8 June his home office had been "creepy crawled" by persons or persons unknown and his computer system hacked. Witness defined the term as "someone breaking into your house and moving things around, including the canned fish." On 10 June same persons again broke in and reorganized the house to the way it had been before the first breakdown, except for the canned kippers. Police promised to investigate. On 16 June a patrol car made its way to the residence and found the house empty and locked. Complaintant had told his supervisor that he was "being followed by a Moonshadow" and then resigned.

Research from this office indicated multiple suspects:

James XXXX - Internet buffoon who uses the alias "Savage" as well as "Monkey Boy", suspect has an unhealthy obsession with the murderous harlot known as Leslie Van Houten, convicted USA Felon who stabbed a woman to death for shits and giggles. James/Jimmy runs a seldom read blog in which he acknowledged Bret's disappearance and took great glee from it.

Adam Gabriel, also known as Steve Grogan also known as Clem also known as Scramblehead- convicted killer and indecent exposurer who was intimately involved in the many crimes of the Charles Manson Family, including the brutal murder of ranch hand Shorty Shea. Paroled in 1985 after working with police. Expert on creepy crawling and house painting. Assessed by one USA judge as "little more than an animal" or something.

James Whitehouse- lawyer for murderous strumpet Susan Atkins and her husband, trailer park liver and bad hairstyle wearer, failed recently in abortive attempt to free his wife by lying about her medical condition. Known to be livid with Bret for not supporting her release and for not attending the tenth annual Charles Ronson Board reunion.

Darren Faitfull- aka ColScott, aka Light Fingers Louie, aka Alli Ben Satchbone- disbarred attorney from Torrance California who runs the ONLY Official Tate LaBianca Murders Blog on the worldwide web, the only truthful site since the vanishment of Bret. YES suspect has hired this firm to hide Bret but in my experience that could be a bone to throw us off the track"


" Final Conclusion- None of the initial suspects were indicated based on over 1100 hours of manwork. Speaking of manwork, William Garretson and his homosexual liasion with Steven Parent, while likely, had nothing to do with this case. Newly revealed suspect JOHN AESNIHIL, sixties acid casualty, yellow van owner, bon vivant and manager of Steve Railsback has confessed after being hit with several phone books repeatedly around the face and neck. Apparently Bret had custody of several beta tapes that Aesnihil wanted back. Suspect left a message on the machine that investigators overlooked stating "This happened before when I loaned shit to Nelson and his cow wife donated it to UCLA even though it was mine. Never again! I am the AesNihil and I have come to do the Aesnihil's business!!" Suspect stated the creepy crawling was "to send a message - and to get an invitation to his house for kippers." AesNihil, well known for selling things he doesn't own and for blowing Robert Beausoleil's most recent chance for parole through an exhibit at the Clair Obscura Gallery (since closed) in LA. Case closed- AesNihil returned to LA in an undisclosed location, sure to fight extradition as fervently as Watson. Releasing new version of film called Suddenly Last Summer."

So I was shocked to see that I was a suspect- I LOVE BRET. I am not surprised about John- the flashbacks have gotten worse lately- when we last actually spoke he screamed "Ish burples Stren Tenegres" and I think he meant it. I will try to get that film he is doing and see if it provides any clues.

Is any of the above true or not? Who knows- I have never even been to that cold wasteland of a country. This is an opinion site anyway.

I do know that Bret will be back online later in the week. And idiots like Monkeyboy and the other haters can go fuck themselves.

Thursday, October 02, 2008


So anyone notice that it has been six quick months since Susan Atkins, murderess, tried to get out of jail, claiming that she would be dead in six months?

Ask Him Why He Let His Kids Be Abused!

Manson follower to speak in Vallejo

Former Family member gives lecture tours about his past and finding God

A former member of the violent Charles Manson cult is coming to Vallejo, and a local church pastor said he couldn't be more pleased.

A generation ago, Dennis Rice decided to throw his lot in with convicted killer and cult leader Manson. Older now, and evidently much wiser, Rice spends his time traveling to prisons worldwide telling his story of redemption. The former Manson Family member will tell his story at Vallejo's "The Door" - Christian Fellowship Church on Oct. 12, and the public is invited, Pastor Stuart Reblin said Tuesday.

During the free presentations in Vallejo, at 11 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Rice, who now lives in Tempe, Ariz., said in a phone interview Tuesday that he will recount how he spent seven years in prison for trying to break Manson out, and how he later found God. He said he runs the nonprofit Free Indeed Ministries. His Web site is

Rice will make a stop in Vallejo during a lecture tour of Bay Area correctional facilities including San Quentin and county facilities in Oakland and Martinez, Reblin said.

"I've never heard him before, but I've heard he shares his life story with the Manson gang and his life before he became a Christian," Reblin said. "I understand he communicates a very positive testimony of new life, and the ability of a person's life to change."

Rice says he was a loose cannon in 1960s Los Angeles when the Tate-LaBianca murders rocked the country in 1969.

"I was a jack-of-all- trades, when I wasn't stealing,"


he said of his life before Manson.

Deciding "nothing short of the Second Coming of Christ or a revolution were necessary to solve America's problems," Rice went to visit Manson in jail. Based on that visit, he and his four children, age 2 to 10, moved in with "Manson Family" members who weren't already behind bars.

"We played music in the evenings and ate dinner together, and the ladies would go out Dumpster diving during the days to bring back food," Rice said. "And we planned for the day Charlie would be released."


What: A free presentation by former Manson Family member Dennis Rice.

When: 11 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Oct. 12.

Where: 'The Door' - Christian Fellowship Church, 315 Henry St., Vallejo.

Information: 208-6914.

There was a shared vision of the future, he said.

"Charlie and the others were convicted of the murders and sentenced to die," Rice said. "In order to save them we held up an Army surplus store to obtain enough guns to break them out of jail."

That didn't work out

as planned, and Rice spent the next seven years in prison, where he "was introduced to the real Jesus Christ," he said.

For the past 25 years, Rice has shared his life-altering experience with inmates nationwide about "the One who has come to set them free," he says.

"It was a cathartic moment, when I realized that Charlie wasn't

Jesus Christ, that I had based my whole life on something that was wrong and not true," he said.

Pastor Reblin said that having someone with as bizarre a tale as Rice's speak to his

congregation is an important learning opportunity.

"There's an odd fascination in our society with the criminal lifestyle," Reblin said. "Despite the glorification that goes on, there's a huge price to pay personally and societally, and (Rice) discusses the deception in that. And at a time when so many are searching for answers, we are very fortunate to have him coming to Vallejo."

E-mail Rachel Raskin-Zrihen at or call 553-6824.

Leslie amd Bruce Given Da Smackdown!

Calif. initiative would mandate victims' rights

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

(10-01) 15:50 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --

After Patricia Wenskunas was assaulted by her personal trainer in 2002, she felt victimized a second time when prosecutors negotiated a plea agreement with her attacker without her knowledge.

Angered to action, she formed Crime Survivors Inc. after rallying 50 people outside the Orange County courthouse in what turned out to be a successful effort to oppose the plea deal. She doesn't want other crime victims to feel as helpless as she did before the rally.

"Criminals are read their rights. Victims are told, 'Just go on with your life,'" said Wenskunas, 39, who owns a catering business.

She is among the supporters of Proposition 9 on the Nov. 4 ballot, which seeks to place rights for crime victims in the state Constitution. Supporters say criminals are often coddled while victims are left to fend for themselves.

Opponents say the proposal would tip the scales of justice too far, potentially violating defendants' rights and conflicting with federal court rulings.

That initiative follows voter approval of the "Victims' Bill of Rights" in 1982. That measure wrote numerous victims' rights into law but not into the Constitution. It gave victims the right to be told when criminals are nearing release, to be notified of criminal proceedings and to participate in sentencing and parole hearings.

Proposition 9 goes further.

Prosecutors would be required to consult with victims on what charges to file, judges would have to consider victims' safety when setting bail, and victim restitution would get priority over fines and fees.

Victims could refuse to be interviewed or provide evidence, testimony or confidential information to defendants.

Under the initiative, criminals denied parole from their life sentences might not get another hearing for 15 years, and parolees could be sent back to prison without legal representation.

"What we're asking is equal justice," said Harriet Salarno of Auburn, president of Crime Victims United of California. "We're not taking anything away from the criminal. We're just asking the same rights be afforded to us in the Constitution."

Salarno formed Crime Victims United of California after her daughter, Catina, was murdered by a former boyfriend in 1979.

Jakada Imani also knows what it feels like to be victimized by violent crime, but says Proposition 9 goes too far.

He had two brothers wounded by gunfire in recent years. One brother was struck in the head by a stray bullet in Sacramento. The other was hit when Oakland gang members opened fire on a family gathering, killing his brother's best friend.

"This initiative can start to blur the line between accused and guilty," said Imani, executive director of the Oakland-based Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which promotes alternatives to incarceration. "It tips over into politicizing victims and crime."

The measure could conflict with certain federal laws and court rulings.

It would reverse the state's agreement to provide attorneys to all ex-convicts facing revocation of their parole, an agreement struck in the settlement of a federal class-action lawsuit. Proposition 9 would require the state to provide attorneys only for parolees who can't afford to hire an attorney and can't represent themselves because they lack sufficient education or are mentally incapacitated.

It also would amend the state Constitution to prohibit releasing inmates early as part of a mandate to ease crowding in prisons or county jails. The Legislature and county boards of supervisors would be required to provide enough money to house inmates for their full sentences.

That runs counter to federal court orders capping the number of inmates who can be housed in 20 jails throughout the state. Twelve more counties have a self-imposed cap.

There is no cap on the state prison population, but a special panel of three federal judges could impose one after a trial scheduled for November.

Supporters and opponents of Proposition 9 agree that federal law or court decisions would supersede the state Constitution. Supporters said the initiative would allow alternatives to being jailed, such as home detention or using tracking devices.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office projected that keeping inmates in jail or prison longer under Proposition 9 could cost the state and counties hundreds of millions of dollars a year. It estimated the state could save tens of millions of dollars annually by reducing parole hearings.

Currently, inmates serving life sentences are entitled to a hearing every one- to five years. The proposition would permit hearings every three- to 15 years. Inmates could petition for a quicker hearing if they present evidence of rehabilitation.

The proposition, which proponents dubbed "Marsy's Law," has a troubled history.

It's named for Marsy Nicholas, a 21-year-old University of California, Santa Barbara student who was murdered by her boyfriend in 1983. Marsy's mother was shocked to run into her daughter's killer days later at a grocery store, after he was released on bail without the family's knowledge. He eventually was convicted and died in prison.

The incident prompted Marsy's brother, Broadcom co-founder Henry T. Nicholas III, to spend $4.8 million to get Proposition 9 on the ballot.

But the billionaire was indicted in June on federal securities fraud and drug charges, alleging he spiked the drinks of business associates with Ecstasy and maintained a drug warehouse. He has pleaded not guilty.

In a further oddity, two imprisoned followers of 1960s cult leader Charles Manson challenged the official ballot arguments used by Proposition 9 supporters.

Bruce Davis and Leslie Van Houten, who have been denied parole repeatedly, objected to being named as examples of inmates who force taxpayers to "spend millions of dollars on hearings for dangerous criminals that have virtually no chance of release."

They argued they would have been freed long ago had it not been for their association with Manson and that their parole hearings cost taxpayers little. A Sacramento County judge dismissed their challenge in August.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

DENIAL- Pwned!

Parole denied for Manson follower Bruce Davis

The Associated Press

SACRAMENTO—A state prison panel has denied parole for a follower of cult leader Charles Manson.

Bruce Davis is serving two life sentences for two 1969 slayings. The state Board of Parole Hearings rejected Davis' release in a 9-0 decision Monday after a hearing at California State Prison, Solano.

State corrections officials say it was the 24th time his release has been rejected.

Davis was convicted of helping kill musician Gary Hinman in his Topanga Canyon home. He later helped murder former stuntman Donald "Shorty" Shea. The stuntman lived in Manson's commune at the Spahn movie ranch in Chatsworth.

The 65-year-old Davis has since married and fathered a daughter. He earned a doctorate in theology in prison and now ministers to other inmates.

His attorney, Michael Beckman, says his client is no longer a danger to society.

Monday, September 08, 2008

Ronald Hughes Drowned

I know I told you all that I concluded recently that Ronald Hughes was NOT murdered and was in fact drowned in a flash flood. Bug made that murder shit up. Here is a footnote where one of the last people alive sued BUG claiming he was maligned. He lost. The notes lead me to believe even more so that it was a tragic accident.

The allegations read as follows: "In publishing Helter-Skelter and in publishing the aforesaid portions pertaining to Plaintiff, which are more particularly set out in paragraph 13 above, Defendants, and each of them, deliberately, willfully, maliciously and with reckless disregard for the truth and Plaintiff's reputation, omitted the following facts: [¶] a) Shortly after James Forsher and Lauren Elder were forced to abandon her Volkswagen and hike out of Sepse [sic] Hot Springs, they were picked up by two independent witnesses and driven to Los Angeles: [¶] b) That these two independent witnesses were later questioned by police and verified the fact that they picked up James Forsher and Lauren Elder and the time at which they were picked up; [¶] c) That each of these two independent witnesses was polygraphed by the police and was shown to have been telling the truth; [¶] d) That the time at which these two independent witnesses attested to having picked up James Forsher and Lauren Elder was prior to the time three other independent witnesses, who were later polygraphed and shown to be telling the truth, reported that they talked to Ronald Hughes; [¶] e) That the rainstorm which occurred during the weekend of Hughes' disappearance was the biggest of that year in Southern California; [¶] f) That several people had previously died in flash floods occurring in the area where Hughes dispeared [sic]; [¶] g) That subsequent to Hughes' disappearance James Forsher and Lauren Elder were questioned by the police very throughly [sic] for long periods of time on more than one occasion and details of their stories were carefully checked by police. [¶] h) That James Forsher and Lauren Elder were neighbors of Ronald Hughes who drive [sic] him up to Sespe Hot Springs at his urging. [¶] i) That James Forsher and Lauren Elder had no connection whatsoever with Charles Manson, the Tate-La Bianca killers or the Manson 'Family.'"

Friday, September 05, 2008

Massive Lying Hypocrite

One-time Manson follower now following Son of Man

The Daily Sentinel

Monday, July 14, 2008

A man who tried to break cult leader and murderer Charles Manson out of jail now reaches into prisons in hopes of saving souls.

Dennis Rice, who served seven years in prison as a result of his ill-starred effort to free Manson, speaks at 7:30 tonight and Wednesday night at The Door Christian Fellowship Church, 1141 N. 25th St., in Grand Junction.

Rice, who became a member of Manson’s infamous family, said he came to believe Manson’s hallmark murders of the riotous 1960s represented nothing less than the Second Coming.

“A lot of the things he said made sense to me,” Rice said of his encounters, first with the news of Manson’s arrest and jailing and then with Manson himself, whom Rice visited in jail before joining his family.

Manson is incarcerated in California for nine murders. He was sentenced to death for the August 1969 fatal stabbings of five people in the home of actress Sharon Tate and the murders the next day of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. Two other killings also are blamed on Manson, whose death sentence was commuted. He is eligible for parole in 2012.

Manson’s appeal, Rice said, lay in his ability to read the times and take advantage of them.

“He was the king of the rebels,” and his well-known photo from Life Magazine remains an “icon for evil,” Rice said.

Even so, getting to see Manson in jail wasn’t difficult and Rice said he quickly was sold on the message of revolution and setting the country straight, Rice said.

Rice took his four children, then ages 2 to 10, and joined the Manson family, and soon was part of the plot to spring the family’s eponymous leader. Rice and others were captured on Aug. 21, 1971, after a shootout at an Army surplus store in California.

The shootout marked the breakup of the Manson family, which scattered.

Rice’s children eventually were taken into state custody, then reunited in Arizona, where he rejoined them after serving his prison sentence.

During most of his incarceration, Rice remained a loyal member of the Manson family, until he was converted by the writings of another Manson acolyte, Charles “Tex” Watson, who remains in prison.

Other Christians had approached him behind bars, but it wasn’t until he read of Watson’s Christian testimony in a prison evangelical magazine that he began to consider the idea he might have been wrong about Manson and about Christianity.

“One of the hardest things was just admitting that I was wrong,” he said.

Once released, he moved to Arizona and began attending a church.

Even so, it wasn’t until 10 years later that he asked his children if they would oppose him offering public testimony.

“We knew God was real when saw him change our dad,” he remembers them saying.

His children are now engaged in ministry and churches, he said.

Since then, Rice launched Free Indeed Ministries, a nonprofit Christian organization based in Tempe, Ariz., and has a Web site,

He speaks at about 150 prisons per year and will speak to inmates at the Rifle and Delta prisons on Wednesday and Thursday respectively.

Manson, said Rice, almost certainly is aware of what his family members are doing.

As to Manson’s true beliefs, Rice said it seems now that he “just tapped into what was going on,” but he was no different from other people in one important way.

“I just think he was deceived,” Rice said. “Just like I was when I was my own God.

“Now I see others as more important than me. That is a miracle.”


No mention of making his four kids live in holes they dug themselves at the ranch or the abuse they suffered while he went and played cops and robbers and left them at the Family. Jesus fucking hates you, Dennis, he told me so.

Thursday, September 04, 2008

The Manson Girls Filmic Train Wreck

This isn't ever gonna not suck...
Anyway I got a special request to look for this scene so here it is- as inaccurate as possible.


After the sentences were read out in court, Sandra,

Squeaky, Michael and myself just pulled up stakes...


An establishing shot.


… and set up shop in Stockton, where we did

what we always did… We set out on a life of

crime and pretended we’d live forever in perfect

bliss… We manufactured speed… We robbed…

We stole… And sometimes we killed…


Brenda, Michael and a MALE and FEMALE COUPLE with a BABY are sitting at the table cutting SPEED. The woman has some very distinctive TATTOOS ON HER HAND.


We lived the criminal’s fantasy and when reality

impinged on our little world of criminal make

believe, we’d take drugs so we could continue the

fiction that the life we were living would never end…


But of course, just below the surface we all knew

how it was going to end... Even if we weren’t

able to admit it to ourselves…


A POLICE CAR rolls down the highway.


A single COP sits behind the wheel, when he passes something OFF CAMERA that gets his attention.

COP’S POV – as he passes a deserted construction area off the side of the highway, where an old CHEVY SEDAN without any lights on is stirring up dust around an enormous, 30 TON EARTH MOVER with SOMEONE SITTING IN THE OPERATOR’S SEAT.


The Cop slows down in preparation for making a U-Turn.


Brenda sits in the operator’s seat of the EARTH MOVER, fiddles around with the controls, while her latest boyfriend, Michael Montfort, stands below looking impatient.



I thought you said you knew how to work this



This one’s kind’a big, okay?!

INSERT ON CONTROLS – as Brenda pushes a button, making THE ENGINE TURN OVER and START UP..



Okay, okay! Let’s get this thing moving!


Just hold on, goddamnit! I’m doing the best I can!


Just hurry the fuck up!

Brenda pulls one of thirty levers.

WIDER – as the SHOVEL lurches upward.


Now dig that fuckin’ hole!


Okay, okay!!!

Suddenly the entire area is lit up by intensely bright light.

ANOTHER ANGLE – Brenda and Michael are illuminated by a bunch of COP LIGHTS.

Two COPS put Michael in handcuffs.

ANOTHER ANGLE – as a handcuffed Brenda is brought around to the rear of the Chevy as another COP pops the trunk.

INSERT ON TRUNK – the BODIES of TWO MEN are stuffed into the trunk.


Looks like they were killed with a shotgun...



(to Brenda)

What, you were just gonna bury these guys on

the side of the road?

COP 2 O.S.

Call an ambulance! This one’s still alive!

ANOTHER ANGLE – as a barely breathing MAN is pulled from the trunk and laid on the ground.


Brenda and Michael Montfort sit at the kitchen table with their hands cuffed behind their backs, while COPS move in and out all over the place.



Got something here!


A bunch of COPS have set up lights and are digging in the dirt.

ANGLE ON DIRT – as a WOMAN’S HAND with the same DISTINCTIVE TATTOOS as the woman seen cutting speed with Brenda and Michael is uncovered.


We’ve got a body down here... Looks pretty



Altogether, because of a technicality, I ended

up serving a little over three years for being an

accessory after the fact to four murders, while

Michael got life...

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Long on Ego

Metropolitan News-Enterprise

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Page 7


Younger Ousts Stovitz as Manson Prosecutor After Comment to Reporter


Seventieth in a Series

Evelle J. Younger made innumerable personnel decisions during his tenure as district attorney, but one, just one, spawned controversy...and the call he made is still the subject of Monday morning quarter-backing.

As Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Trott, then a deputy in the office, recalls it:

“Evelle had high standards, which explains why he removed Aaron Stovitz from the Manson case for talking too much to the media about the People’s case after Aaron had been told not to try his case in the media.”

Stovitz, who was head of the trials division of the office downtown, had been chosen to prosecute Charles Manson and his cult followers for the brutal murders of actress Sharon Tate and three house guests and a groundskeeper, and for the unrelated slayings of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. Public interest in the case was intense, and Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Charles H. Older imposed a gag order.

Nonetheless, Stovitz granted an interview to the Rolling Stone magazine in March of 1970. Stovitz’s justification was that he had talked off-the-record. In contravention of that proviso, the magazine published the remarks in its June issue, attributing them to Stovitz. The defendants moved for a mistrial based on the interview, and the motion was denied.

(The Court of Appeal, in the 1976 opinion that upheld the conviction of Manson and two of the accomplices, found that Stovitz, though sincere in his belief that he was merely engaging in a private conversation that was supposed to be confidential, did breach the gag order…but held that it was harmless inasmuch as what he provided was “only a droplet in the sea of publicity.”)

Vincent Bugliosi, who was brought in as second banana to Stovitz, recounts in his 1974 book, “Helter Skelter”:

“After the Rolling Stone interview, Younger had told Aaron: ‘No more interviews.’ Being somewhat easygoing by nature, Aaron had trouble complying with the edict. Once, when Younger was in San Francisco, he’d turned on the radio to hear Aaron commenting on some aspect of the day’s courtroom proceedings. Though Aaron’s comments were not in violation of the gag order, on his return to L.A. Younger warned Aaron: ‘One more interview and you’re off the case.’ ”

A one-line comment to a reporter in the hallway outside the courtroom—characterized by Bugliosi in his book as “a passing remark” hardly amounting to an utterance in the course of an “interview”—led to Stovitz’s ouster from the case on Sept. 4, 1970.

The Associated Press account of that action says:

The veteran prosecutor who mapped the state’s case against four defendants in the Sharon Tate murder trial has been pulled off the case, reportedly because of his statements to the news media.

The district attorney suddenly removed Chief Prosecutor Aaron H. Stovitz in midtrial Friday saying he was needed for administrative duties.

Sources said Dist. Atty. Evelle Younger had been upset about out-of-court statements by the two prosecutors.

Stovitz, 45, chief of the district attorney’s trials division, had been on the case, assisted by Vincent Bugliosi, since the actress and six others were found slain in August 1969.

Charles M. Manson 35, leader of a hippie-style clan, and three women followers have been on trial since July, charged with murder-conspiracy.

Stovitz often traded jokes with reporters in corridors outside court.

Early this week he was quoted by some newsmen as saying that testimony by defendant Susan Atkins about her health was “a performance worthy of a Sarah Bernhardt.” Miss Atkins told the judge she had stomach pains and was too ill to continue. A doctor said she was in good health.

Stovitz said later this comment, made in the corridor, was off the record.

A source in the district attorney’s office said Younger has received criticism from the legal profession about comments by prosecutors. The judge has issued an order barring principals in the trial from discussing it publicly.


Younger said Stovitz has “a very important position on our executive staff. He’s been away from this responsibility too long….We think the change will be beneficial all around….I will have no further comment.”

Stovitz, at the time, did not talk with the press about his expulsion. The Herald-Examiner’s issue of Sept. 5, 1970, says:

“The 46-year-old Stovitz obviously was emotionally upset by his removal from the case and left his office two hours early.

“He declined to comment on the reasons for his being taken out of the trial, saying only:

“ ‘I’m sorry but there is nothing I can tell you.’”

He did, however, discuss it six years later with Laurinda Keys, then a staff writer for the Pasadena Star News. (I knew Laurinda before she forayed to the Star News; she was a reporter for the Daily Journal, where this column appeared from 1972-77. She went on to become, for a good number of years, a globe-trotting reporter for the Associated Press.)

Her June 13, 1976 Star News article relates:

“Stovitz said that about three weeks before he was removed from the case he and Bugliosi had a conference with Younger.

“ ‘Younger told us that he wanted no more press statements and that if we violated that order we were going to be taken off the case. We religiously abided by that during the trial.’

“But one day, defendant Susan Atkins requested a delay in the trial because she had a stomachache. A doctor examined her and said her only problem was that she was constipated and refused to take a laxative, Stovitz said.

“A hearing in which Miss Atkins cried and begged for a continuance was out of the presence of the jury but most of the press were present. After the judge refused to grant the delay, Stovitz said he walked out of the courtroom and a UPI reporter who had missed the hearing asked him what had happened.

“ ‘Oh, she gave a performance worthy of a Sarah Bernhardt,’ was Slovitz’s offhand reply. The reply went out on the UPI wires.”

Hmmm. Strange that the 1970 AP story doesn’t mention that Stovitz’s courtroom corridor remark had been to a reporter for UPI…AP’s then-viable competitor. Strange also that Bugliosi’s account doesn’t reflect Younger’s apparent displeasure with him, as well as Stovitz, for talking with the press.

Stovitz, 84, now terms his hallway remark “innocuous.” He tells me he’s “really not bitter” about his removal from the case, but adds that “it was a disappointment.”

Had he remained, he reflects, he, not Bugliosi, would have written books and gained fame.

“At first I felt resentful,” Stovitz says, but adds that he was later able to convince himself, “Look, I’ve still got my job, my family,” and, in the long run, it didn’t matter.

It remains that his career may well have suffered as a result of his reassignment. Stovitz ran unsuccessfully for the Los Angeles Superior Court in 1976 and 1978. In recent years, he served as an as-needed commissioner. On the other hand, if he had led the successful prosecution of Manson et al., this would have been no assurance of advancement. Bugliosi ran for district attorney in 1972 and lost.

Stovitz continues to express a view he’s shared with reporters in the past as to the reason Younger cracked down on him and Bugliosi. Younger was a candidate for attorney general in need of coverage, and wasn’t deriving much press attention from his weekly news summaries of the Manson case. Reporters swarmed about the deputies.

Younger’s son, retired Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Eric Younger, says his late father “liked Aaron.” But, he points out, the district attorney gave Stovitz an instruction to refrain from talking with the press and “Aaron didn’t do it.” Eric Younger, now a private judge, says this was perceived as “direct insubordination, a challenge kind of thing.”

Veteran criminal defense lawyer Joe Ingber reflects that “Evelle Younger was a man who ran the office like a military organization.” Was Younger—a brigadier general in the Air Force Reserve—so consumed by a quest to maintain military-like office discipline that he may have jeopardized the outcome in the Manson case by yanking Stovitz off it?

Expressing the view that removing Stovitz was “unwise” and a “tactical error” is Robert H. Philibosian, the county’s 38th district attorney, serving from 1982-84. But Younger’s action, he opines, did not put the outcome at risk, explaining: “The case was a very strong case.”

This was one of the most watched prosecutions the office had ever handled, on a par with the earlier cases involving the McNamara Brothers (L.A. Times dynamiters) and Aimee Semple McPherson (radio evangelist charged with faking her kidnapping). Yet, Younger, after ejecting Stovitz from the case, entrusted the lead role not to a seasoned prosecutor but to Bugliosi, a lawyer short on experience and long, quite long, on ego. Stovitz was licensed to practice in 1950; Bugliosi in 1964, less than six years before becoming chief Manson prosecutor.

Former Los Angeles County Public Defender Wilbur Littlefield terms Bugliosi as having been, up to that point, “just the guy carrying the files.” In like vein, Philibosian says that Bugliosi “was the brief-case carrier for Stovitz”…but explains Younger’s decision to put him in charge by noting that outside of Stovitz, he was “the only guy who knew anything about the case.”

Now assisting Bugliosi were Deputy District Attorneys Donald Musich, a lawyer since 1963, and Steven Kay, sworn in as a lawyer only four years before. This was not a prosecutorial “dream team.”

The Sept. 4 AP account quotes Paul Fitzgerald, attorney for co-defendant Patricia Krenwinkel, as rejoicing at the dismissal of Stovitz from the case, exclaiming: “What a break.”

Could there have been a defense verdict, given the evidence? Our retired general manager, John Babigian, once aptly described litigation as a “crap shoot.” Whatever slight chance there was of acquittals in the Manson case was no doubt enhanced by virtue of Stovitz—seasoned, likeable, trusted by juries—being removed. Whether that chance was of such significance as to have rendered it unwise for Younger to overlook what he saw as a last-straw instance of direct disobedience remains a matter on which views will differ.

DEPUTY DRAWS SUSPENSION—Another personnel decision by Younger which drew press attention, but did not generate controversy, was the 10-day suspension, without pay, imposed on Deputy District Attorney Harold Prukop. The lawyer had been the Democratic candidate in a run-off with Republican incumbent Floyd Wakefield in an Assembly race. Wakefield’s campaign made use of a routine letter Younger had sent commending him for his votes on law enforcement matters. Prukop requested a letter from Younger clarifying that he wasn’t endorsing the legislator from South Gate. Younger complied, saying in the letter that he was making no endorsement in the race—but adding that he did commend Wakefield’s voting record on issues relating to law enforcement. That last part was left out when the Prukop campaign reproduced the letter in campaign literature. (Prukop lost the race.)

In a missive to the deputy advising him of the suspension, Younger said that in disseminating an altered letter, he created “the clear impression that I was denouncing Mr. Wakefield and indirectly supporting you, which was not true.”

Prukop was disciplined under a portion of an office manual which said that an employee involved in politics “should be keenly aware of the responsibility not to bring embarrassment to the department of the district attorney.”

That does seem like a rather vague standard. It’s no longer in effect.

Friday, August 15, 2008

General Col Scott

- Bret's site vanished ten days ago. Bret where are you? Did Clem go to Iceland? Lol.

- I just saw a new crappy book called HOLLYWOOD BABYLON and it does not involve famous crustmeister and peripheral Manson case factoid Kenneth Anger. Did he get screwed yet again? Why do people wrong you all the time Kenneth? Why? Look in your heart and see!

- The best selling fiction novel HELTER SKELTER by the famous mistress beating lawyer Vincent T. Bugliosi is now available in a deluxe edition for $125 from The Easton Press. Because.

- Monkey Boy Jim appears to have shut down his site, thereby quadrupling Leslie's chances at parole. Still, four times zero is still zero.

- It has been five months since we were told Susan Atkins has less than six months to live. She is still breathing our air.

- Legs Mcneil, famous Manson researcher, may have ACTUALLY found . MAY.

- Tom O'Neill's book, the one that will blow the case wide open with the revelations of Karate Dave's special commando training at Spahn (see that last ridiculous Discovery documentary) will not be out in 2008 according to well placed sources at Creative Artists Agency. With luck, the book, that began as a special article about the 30th anniversary of TLB will be out by the 40th.

- Debra Tate still does not honor her family's wishes and retains Paul Tate's ashes in some unknown space.

- We did not post anything for the anniversary this year. Didn't feel like it.

- I understand that that Manson Girls movie is still trying to be financed. Because awful scripts directed by untalented directors always do well in the marketplace.

Saturday, August 02, 2008

What If ?

The art of storytelling, be they novels, movies or comic books, is always asking "what if?"

These are some of my favorite "What Ifs?"

What are yours?

(Note- I am not putting down massive unlikelihoods like "What if Tex had a conscience?" Or "What if Charlie wasn't born to a prostitute?" Or even "What If Debra Tate had not been disowned?" Just tiny things that, if they happened might have made a difference.")

1- What if Willam Garretson was not horny late that night in August? [Steven would have gone home to bed and not been killed. There would have been no shooting at the gate. Garretson might actually have come out to investigate the noise- and been killed.]

2- What if Linda Kasabian had been an actual human and left a message the morning after the Tate killings, with the police that simply said "People at Spahn Ranch did it- look closely." [Shorty and Leno and Rosemary would still be alive. Charlie would never have been put in jail.]

3- What if Gary Hinman had not been home when Bobby knocked at the door? [Would any of this shit have happened?]

4- What if Aaron Stovitz resisted talking to the press? [No BUG, no Helter Skelter bullshit, Charlie walks, shorter trial.]

5- What if Sharon had stayed over with Jay at his place? [The case attracts minimal attention and maybe is never even solved.]

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Sadie Doesn't Stop

Manson follower's latest compassionate release request denied

Download story podcast

10:00 PM PDT on Tuesday, July 22, 2008
The Press-Enterprise

A Los Angeles County judge has turned down the latest bid by former Charles Manson follower Susan Atkins to get a compassionate prison release before she dies from brain cancer while under guard at a Riverside-area hospital.

The state parole board declined last week to urge a discharge for Atkins, 60. Her attorney had filed a petition with the judge seeking the same relief.

Atkins was convicted of killing eight people during a bloody murder spree in the summer of 1969.

Story continues below

One of her victims was actress Sharon Tate, 8 ½ months pregnant, who begged Atkins to spare the life of her child before Atkins stabbed her to death.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza cited the parole board's decision in issuing his one-page denial on Monday.

"This court is without authority to grant a compassionate release unless there is a positive recommendation by the secretary (of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation) or Board of Parole Hearings," Espinoza wrote.

Calls seeking comment from Atkins' attorney Eric Lampel were not returned Tuesday. Calls also were not returned from Atkins' husband James W. Whitehouse, who has acted as her attorney as well.

"We are in agreement with the judge's decision," LA County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Sequeira said Tuesday. Sequeira testified on behalf of his office against compassionate release for Atkins at last week's Sacramento hearing.

Atkins, who spent decades incarcerated at the California Institution for Women in Chino, was hospitalized March 18 and was receiving care at the Riverside County Regional Medical Center in Moreno Valley, Lampel said last week.

Atkins' medical care has reportedly cost the state $1.15 million. Additionally, guarding her has cost $308,000, according to the state Department of Corrections.

Atkins has been denied parole 13 times since her first hearing in 1976. Her most recent hearing was in 2005.

Atkins was one of the top members of the murderous "Family" led by Manson in Southern California.

She is serving a life sentence on her murder convictions linked to the cult of young men and women who followed Manson's orders to commit mayhem that Manson called "Helter Skelter," after a Beatles song.

Atkins has long claimed she reformed during her years in prison.


The Col has some thoughts----

1- The very fact that Sadie keeps doing EVERYTHING possible for an early release shows me at least that she doesn't deserve one.
2- I wonder how much of this is a lie- that once she got out she would be "AHA, now I am free" and then live to 75.
3- Why does the press repeat things like the expenses when one, they don't sound true to me and two, they don't matter anyway? I meanif they mattered we could say "It costs $xxx to keep Charlie in jail, let his old ass out."

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Denial not just in Egypt Anymore

Parole panel denies compassionate release for Manson follower Susan Atkins

She has served 37 years for killing actress Sharon Tate and others in 1969. Now doctors give her only months to live.
By Hector Becerra and Andrew Blankstein
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

July 16, 2008

SACRAMENTO -- — A state parole panel today unanimously denied "compassionate release" for terminally-ill Manson follower Susan Atkins after hearing emotional testimony both for and against her release.

The 12-member State Board of Parole Hearing, as is customary, did not release any explanation for its decision.

Atkins, 60, played a central role in the 1969 slayings of pregnant actress Sharon Tate and others in a bloody two-night rampage in the Los Angeles area. She has served 37 years in prison, longer than any other female prisoner, officials said.

Now ill with brain cancer and with one leg amputated and the other paralyzed, Atkins has only months to live, doctors have said.

The petition for Atkins' release had ignited debate about when mercy is appropriate, particularly considering the grisly crimes for which she was convicted. With the rejection by the panel, the process is effectively over, making it highly likely that she will die in custody.

Those backing her release argued unsuccessfully that the cost of keeping Atkins in prison, which is estimated at $1.4 million for medical care and security just since March, should be a factor in favor of releasing her because it would save the state substantial amounts of money.

At the hearing today, Atkins supporters spoke first to the 12-member State Board of Parole Hearing.

"She has without a doubt, she has paid her debt to society," said her niece Sharisse Atkins, 17. "You see her as a part of the Manson family I see her as a part of our family. I hope you can find it in your heart to do the right thing."

Her supporters drew attention at the hearing to former Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi's support for Atkins release. In an e-mail this week to Atkins' attorney, Bugliosi wrote that it was wrong to say "just because Susan Atkins showed no mercy to her victims, we therefore are duty-bound to follow her inhumanity and show no mercy to her."

Opponents of Atkins' release disagreed. They spoke today of their memories of learning of the murders and the effects of the killings on their families.

Tate, the wife of film director Roman Polanski, was 8 1/2 months pregnant when she and four others were killed at her hilltop home in Benedict Canyon. The actress, who was stabbed to death, had begged Atkins for her for her life.

"She asked me to let her baby live," Atkins told parole officials in 1993. "I told her I didn't have mercy for her."

At today's hearing, Pam Turner, Tate's cousin, sobbed, recalling being a child "so sick with grief that I wished I too could die."

Turner said she remembers the actress' mother "howling like a wounded animal" after hearing the news of the murders.

"My aunt's pain was palpable. She once put her hands on my pregnant belly and she cried," said Turner, alluding to the fact Tate had begged for the life of her unborn child. "She didn't say what she was crying about, but I knew."

Anthony DiMaria, whose uncle, Jay Sebring, was killed at the Tate's home, brought up news reports that Atkins' husband had called it "ridiculous" to spend so much money guarding his wife, who cannot even sit up in bed.

"To sum up these murders in terms of cost efficiency trivializes the victims' lives, and the lifelong impact on the victims' families," DiMaria said.

"There's discussion of dying with dignity.... the notion of dying with dignity is not determined by circumstance, but determined by choice," he told the panel. "Mrs. Atkins should die with dignity while serving out her sentence. My uncle died with dignity in the worst possible situation."

In addition to the testimony today, the board received about 100 letters, most opposing her release.

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley was among those opposing the release, saying Atkins' "horrific crimes alone warrant a denial of her request."

Suzan Hubbard, director of California's adult prisons, had previously expressed her opposition.

Orange County Dist. Atty. Tony Rackauckas also wrote the director of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation saying Atkins should remain behind bars and away from Orange County, where her husband lives.

The hearing today before the state Board of Parole Hearings is the third in a four-step process that allows inmates to seek compassionate release.

She cleared the initial steps when officials at her prison in Chino found that her case met the criteria for compassionate release review, a determination seconded by officials at corrections headquarters in Sacramento.

In addition to testimony, the board received information including Atkins' medical records, recommendations from state corrections officials and her criminal history as well as information related to her behavior while in prison and an assessment of whether her release would pose a risk to the public.

Even if the panel had decided to recommend compassionate release, Atkins would have awaited a final determination by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge.