Sexy Sadie, Who is that Man? Oh....

Heather Matarazzo, actress, with her big and husky Girlfriend plays Sexy Sadie, she who would lay down with any man....
Sure, okay....

Follow The UnMade Films

Brad Wyman has a film called THE MANSON GIRLS. It was the world's shittiest script. It featured BRENDA/Nancy Pitman as the main character. They wanted to use Lindsay Lohan as Brenda. It has yet to be made after four years.

Scott Kosar has a film called THE FAMILY. It tells the whole story through the eyes of Dianne Lake. This script was so misguided and poorly written that blog members made me stop reviewing the script because there was no point. This script is being produced by the Gotham Group, a management company for Animators , who don't know how to produce movies. So this ain't happening. An Australian Cable TV actor is scheduled to play Manson. Kosar announced this film 8 years ago after his tepid remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

And NOW---

PARK CITY, UTAH January 26, 2011, 12:42 pm ET

A new movie directed by Susanna Lo will focus on the female followers of cult leader Charles Manson.

Production on "Manson Girls" will begin this spring, Lo announced Monday at the Sundance Film Festival. Lo wrote the screenplay for the film, which will examine the lives of eight young women who were followers of Manson.

The cast includes Taryn Manning, Heather Matarazzo, Tania Raymonde and Monica Keena.

Manson and three women followers were convicted in Los Angeles in 1971 of murder and conspiracy in the 1969 slayings of seven people, including actress Sharon Tate.

Lo said she became interested in the story when she realized she was living across the street from the house once occupied by Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, who were killed the next night.

She decided the most interesting element of the story was what made the girls fall under Manson's spell.

"I wanted to tell their early story when they were teenagers to before the Tate-LaBianca murders. That was much more fascinating to me. Why and how. How could this tiny, strange man from prison and almost a derelict completely attract all of these fantastic girls?" Lo said.

"I thought that was a very innovative way to tell the story," said Raymonde, who will play Manson follower Leslie Van Houten. "I thought that it wasn't exploitative at all ... and it wasn't putting any focus on Manson because I think one of the most interesting aspects is you never see him in the film."

Keena was so intent on playing Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme that she studied her intensely before her audition and now knows "everything about her."

"It gives you a chance to have some sort of empathy toward them that you might not have had before," Keena said. "I'm not saying you should forgive them, but there's a method to their madness, let's say."

Songs from the 1960s will help drive the story. Guy Allison of the Doobie Brothers will compose the music for the film.

Manson is serving a life sentence in a California prison. He has a devoted fan base, which concerns Manning.

----------and the Col explains it all for you

1- Director has never had a film that anyone has ever seen, including her mom
2- No producer mentioned. No money source. No studio. Because there isn't any.
3- One fat lesbian actress (Heather) one actress who never had a career (Taryn) and one actress who used to be hot (Keena) with NO ONE
4- Lots of attention seeking at Sundance. "Look at me" means "I need funding."

The definitive movie will be made someday. These cheap imitations? Meh.

Kansas....?

40th Anniversary of Charles Manson conviction remembered in Wichita Falls

Continue reading on Examiner.com: 40th Anniversary of Charles Manson conviction remembered in Wichita Falls - Wichita Falls Law Enforcement




Forty years ago today prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi stood in a charged Los Angeles courtroom as the jury returned a verdict of guilty against Charles Manson for his involvement in a murder spree.

Bugliosi said in a Wichita Falls speech not long ago that the seven people would never have been murdered by the small band of people were it not for Manson.

Several Wichita Falls lawyers and other residents who heard Bugliosi's intriguing speech remembered the famed prosecutor referring to Manson as having so much influence over the actions of his followers that they were like robots he sent out to murder people.

Bugliosi also said during part of his Wichita Falls speech at the University Club that, "He would have killed as many people as he could have. That was his religion. His followers killed with relish."

The killing machine that Manson directed stabbed pregnant actress Sharon Tate to death along with four other people in the mansion she shared with director Roman Polanski.

The very next day Manson ordered his "band of robots" to murder affluent businessman Leno LaBianca and his wife Rosemary in their Los Angeles home.

Bugliosi also said that the Manson murders would never have occurred if the California prison system had followed Manson's request. When Charles Manson was in prison on other charges before the murders, he asked California officials to keep him locked up in prison. His request was denied, and he was released against his will.

Most Wichita Falls attorneys agree with Bugliosi that Manson will probably never be released from prison again.

Only last week Manson disciple Patricia Krenwinkle went before the parole board and requested her freedom at age 63.

The California parole board denied her request saying the crime was too serious.

Another disciple Susan Atkins died from cancer in prison after the parole board denied her request for mercy.

Evidence showed Susan Atkins stabbed Sharon Tate to death while the helpless actress begged for mercy.

"She asked me to spare her," Atkins said. "I told her I didn't have any mercy for her."

The parole board returned the favor by denying Atkins mercy.

Leslie Van Houten was involved with stabbing victim Rosemary LaBianca 16 times the next night. The former homecoming queen has been denied parole 19 times.

Manson was convicted on January 25, 1971.


Continue reading on Examiner.com: 40th Anniversary of Charles Manson conviction remembered in Wichita Falls - Wichita Falls Law Enforcement | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-wichita-falls/40th-anniversary-of-charles-manson-conviction-remembered-wichita-falls?render=print#print#ixzz1CC7lkhGQ

Peace in The Waking World

Dear Friends and Loved Ones,

Our earlier message, in which we provided the address for the California parole board and the name of its chairman, was intended for those among you who might be inclined to write a letter protesting the manner in which my parole hearing last month was conducted. I would not presume to suggest that you write such a letter. We provided the information simply by way of opening an avenue for expressing directly to the chief of parole hearings the disappointment, frustration, critical opinions, indignation, dismay, etc., regarding the hearing that many of you have expressed in writing to me.

Some of you have written to ask for guidance in writing a letter to the parole board. To that I would say, simply, write whatever is on your heart to say . . . or not, as the case may be. Nothing you say to that agency in a letter can do me harm, so, if you write one, be fearless.

I can certainly relate to the frustration and dismay many of you have expressed. To be confronted, after all these years, by such obstinate refusal to examine with honesty and integrity the evidence of my 41 years prison history, and the progression to the mature understanding of my responsibility that it represents, makes the hearing I recently experienced almost completely incomprehensible. The level of prejudice was beyond the pale. That the presiding commissioner would prevent me (twice, in two consecutive hearings) from making a closing statement that would demonstrate my having come to terms with the full magnitude of my responsibility to the man whose life I took and everyone affected by my actions, 41 years ago, makes a mockery of the very definition of a parole hearing.

A transcript of the hearing would be helpful in conveying to you a better sense of what happened. Unfortunately, the hearing record won’t be made available until after the decision in the hearing becomes final. By that time the outside chance that letters might have some influence on the final decision will have passed. The best I can offer is my assurance that what I have related to you is accurate.

There were no holes in the presentation that was prepared for the hearing. This included a comprehensive history of educational, vocational, and insight development programs I’ve availed myself of, all of the work that I’ve done over the years, as well as personal creative endeavors, and long-term involvement in youth outreach. The numerous letters of support from family, friends, citizens of the world community, and corrections officials, included solid employment offers and affirmed residences in two states. There were no new misconducts, and in fact a disciplinary report that had been an issue in the previous hearing had since been expunged from my record in the interest of justice. Since the previous hearing I had even added a couple of new college courses to my resume.

All of this was lost on the presiding commissioner and his assistant. They were obviously more interested in using my hearing to take a remote swipe at Manson, with references to crimes I was in no way involved in, and could not have been involved in, than in giving me a fair hearing on the merits of my own case history.

So, yes, there are some significant reasons for all of us to feel some frustration and dismay at this juncture.

Don’t hesitate to put you views and feelings into writing, if you are inclined to do so. Here, again, is the address:

CDCR – Board of Parole Hearings
ATTN: Robert Doyle, Chairman
P.O. Box 4036
Sacramento, CA 95812-4036

The problem with California’s parole board, it seems to me, is that over the past couple of decades it has increasingly become insulated in the state’s political morass. It won’t hurt the people involved in that agency to be reminded by private citizens – including you citizens in other countries – of the principles they were appointed to uphold.

I was a bit surprised by the resounding response to the reservations I had expressed in my earlier message, in regards to writing my book. Many of you wrote words of encouragement, for which I am grateful. Be assured that I am empowered with fresh resolve to devote my energies to whittling away until the book has fully taken shape, without getting hung up in where the chips may fall. There is a story that must be told and (as more than one of you said) there isn’t anyone else who can do it. Doing what is the right thing to do with dedication to the highest principle naturally means letting go of concerns about perceptions or possible outcomes. Damn the torpedoes!

Peace in the waking world, peace in dreams, peace in the deepest level of being.

Bobby

Making Up Lies for Attention

A Letter From Barbara Hoyt
copyright 2000 by
Barbara Hoyt

Dear Board of Prison Terms:

My name is Barbara Hoyt. I was a prosecution witness in the many Manson trials, including the Shorty Shea murder trials. I testified against Bruce Davis, Steve Grogan, and Charles Manson.

I have now 30 years later watched the parole hearings for Bruce Davis and read the transcripts for Steve Grogan, provided to me by Bill Nelson. Both of them have grossly misrepresented the facts to you. About a week or two after the Aug. 16, 69 sheriff’s raid at Sphan's ranch, in the afternoon, I was sitting on a rock in the parking area in front of the boardwalk. Near me were Brenda, Gypsy, and Squeeky. One of them said, as Shorty walked towards George Sphan's house, "there goes Shorty snooping around again" and another one answered her " yea well, he'll be taken care of."

One night not long after, I went to go to sleep in one of the trailers at the back of the ranch overlooking the creek bed below. At about 10 o’clock at night, just as I laid my head on the pillow, I heard a long, loud, blood curdling scream, which came from about 50-75 feet away from me from up stream. Then it was quiet for a minute or so, and then the screams came again, and again, again, again,....They seemed to go on forever.

I recognized the screams of Shorty's voice. I can still hear those screams today, exactly as I heard them that night. I have absolutely no doubt that Shorty was being murdered at that time.

Early the next morning, I asked Gypsy, who was in the Rock City Cafe at the ranch house end of the board walk if she had heard Shorty screaming last night, and she told me very sternly that Shorty had gone to San Francisco. Later that morning Charlie was bragging to Danny DeCarlo about how "Shorty committing suicide with a little help from us." Charlie went on to say " I stabbed him and Shorty asked, "Why Charlie? Why?" and I told him this is why! And I stabbed him again, that he was real hard to kill when we brought him to NOW. That we all kept stabbing him until Clem cut his head off!. And we cut him up into 9 pieces and buried him around the ranch."

He asked Danny "if lye or lime would get rid of the body." I was only a couple of feet away from Danny at the time and Charlie knew that I was there.

I didn't see the murder even thought I did try to look out that window and obviously I don't know exactly how they killed Shorty but his death must have been very painful to make him scream as he did. But I do know that Shorty was killed at about 10 o’clock at night, under a full moon, and not in the afternoon as the killers are telling you. I also know that the murder occurred about 50+ feet up stream from the ranch and not the mile or so down Santa Susanna Pass road again as the killers are telling you.

Bruce has told you that he was afraid of the family, and that he was afraid of Tex. This is a blatant lie, because Bruce was older and vying for a leadership role in the family, or at least a second in command to Charlie.

He was the only other male to have worn Charlie’s embroidered vest. He lectured like Charlie when Charlie was not there. Other members in the family killed more people for Charlie but knowing that the family was committing murders, Bruce wanted to lead them.

I am well aware that the body of Shorty Shea was recovered intact and was not dismembered as Charlie had claimed. And that his body was located about where they claimed to have killed him. They may have buried him there but it is not where he was killed.

I am against Bruce Davis getting a parole date for 3 reasons:

1. Because he wanted to be a family leader even though he knew the family was committing murder {i.e. Gary Hinman} and not just to follow Charlie.
2. He is lying even to this day about the time and place of the murder.
3. I believe he is lying about fearing Tex, people in the family were more afraid of Bruce than Tex.

I find it curious that even as he professes to be a Christian today that he is still lying to you.

Thank you for considering my letter and I request my address not be revealed to the inmate or to his attorney (who would give him that information) Bruce M. Davis parole Hearing 2-2-2000 at CMC.

Respectfully yours,

Barbara Hoyt

Talking Turkey

Look, it's obvious, they AIN'T GETTING OUT ever. The Bug wrote in the back of the novel that the girls would get out in 25 years. But even with the BUG approving of Susan's release, hopping out the door on one leg like some sort of refugee from Watership Down, it didn't happen. And you know why, really? Because nobody CARES anymore. Does that sound oxymoronic? It actually isn't. Follow the bouncing Colonel.

The Family started 44 fucking years ago. The murders were 41 years ago, the trials were 40 years ago. That's 179 in Panda Years. I mean it was forever ago. These killers were YOUNG ass back there and they are living forever. But it was also a different world. If you got in your DeLorean and went back there you wouldn't last a day. Might as well go back to 1066. Kids today don't remember Reagan. Palin shows up and you compare her to McCarthy and people are like "ummm what?" It's like the guy who was in the Tower of London dungeon for decades (I'm making this up but you'll follow it.) because the King put him there for jaywalking. It's like three Kings later, no one knows why he's there, but they ain't gonna be the ones to let him out just in case THEY catch shit. They don't CARE enough to even deal with it.

According to the law they all should be out. No, idiot about to yell at me, that doesn't mean they belong out or I want them out. The law says they are entitled to Parole. The brilliant Catch 22 that has sprung up is "You want out, which means you aren't sorry so we won't let you out. Only by agreeing to stay here to we believe you are sorry." Like in Life of Brian - "I'm not the Messiah...only the true Messiah denies his divinity." They can't win. One does wonder why they show up.

But if Sadie didn't get out, what chance do the rest of them have? Katie killed more people and though she didn't dance in a pregnant woman's blood volume doesn't get you a discount. Leslie had a meeting with JimNY which is enough to keep her locked up for life, with daily horsewhippings. Charlie's happy being the bad man. Bobby would like to be out but that whole story is so confused who knows. Bruce is the Zodiac Killer and probably killed John Lennon psychically....

Sorry I came undone. They are never getting out NOT because of who they killed but because whoever lets them out lets out a Mansonite. And this will never do. So aside from some special face time in which Debra can weep and rewrite history, the hearings are a parade.

What I would LOVE is for one of them to say next time, "You are right I don't deserve to be out, I skip the hearing" and then for their lawyer to say- "Aha, they are sorry, let them out." But that would be too easy....

-----------------
How do you become a member and get to post comments here? Ask.

-----------------

One commenter recently asked me what I meant by the BUG perjury. That person should go read the rest of the blog going back years now.

1- The BUG didn't need to present a motive to win the case. He had the actual killers cold with real evidence. He didn't have Charlie because, well he didn't kill anybody. So he concocted a motive and sold it to the jury. Any person with a brain can see that today. It's obvious. And Aaron Stovitz told me himself.
2- The BUG testified under oath that he didn't bring the LA TIMES with the Nixon headline into the courtroom. He did.
3- The BUG wrote a book which is self-serving and full of clear lies.

He also stalked his milkman for allegedly fucking his wife and beat up his mistress.

Fuck the Bug.

----------------------

I will review the MANSON NOW book. Suffice it to say it has nothing new to add.

Not Sure About the Nephew Weeping about the Uncle He Never met, but anyway....

Charlie Manson follower Krenwinkel denied parole

By LINDA DEUTSCH
AP Special Correspondent

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/20/v-print/2024644/manson-follower-faces-parole-hearing.html#ixzz1BdlLnWrS

In a decision suggesting that the brutal Sharon Tate murders are unforgivable, a parole board panel refused to consider releasing Patricia Krenwinkel, who told the board she killed for the love of Charles Manson.

The two-member panel made clear Thursday that it was the horror of the killings, one of the most notorious of the 20th century, that led them to reject the bid for parole in spite of Krenwinkel's efforts to change her life.

They said that the murders of seven people in an extremely atrocious manner had impacted the entire world as evidenced by letters which came in from around the globe urging that she be kept behind bars.

"These crimes remain relevant," said parole commissioner Susan Melanson. "The public is in fear."

Melanson and Deputy Commissioner Steven Hernandez issued their decision after a four-hour hearing and more than an hour of deliberations at which Krenwinkel wept, apologized for her murderous deeds and said she was ashamed of her actions.

Members of victims' families also cried and recalled their suffering after the murders and called for her to be kept behind bars. Melanson said the notoriety of the crimes and their viciousness weighed heavily in the decision.

"This is a crime children grow up hearing about," she said, and noted that Krenwinkel failed to understand the worldwide impact.

"The panel concludes that she is not suitable for parole and would present an unreasonable danger if released," she said. She referred to seven victims who were brutally murdered over two nights in a crime which she said could be classified as a hate crime because of overtones of wanting to foment a race war.

"This was a depraved act by a group of individuals who find it difficult to explain their actions," she said.

The panel had the option to deny parole for up to 15 years. Melanson said they felt that was unnecessary and commended Krenwinkle for making progress in her life behind bars, participating in self-help programs and other positive contributions.

"While we want to commend you for the positive, you are unsuitable for parole and require an additional seven years of incarceration," she said.

Krenwinkel was told she could request a parole hearing earlier if her situation changes.

Krenwinkel, who has been imprisoned longer than any other woman in California, told the parole board earlier Thursday that she threw away everything good in herself and became a "monster" after she met Manson.

In reference to Krenwinkel's claim that she was seeking approval from Manson when she killed, Melanson said "The panel finds it hard to believe a person can participate in this level of crimes and can't identify anything but 'I wanted him to love me.'"

Krenwinkel, one of Manson's two surviving female followers, has maintained a clean prison record in her four decades behind bars, but her chances for release appeared slim following parole rejections in other Manson cases.

During her hearing, the 63-year-old was soft-spoken and contrite in response to board members' questions, describing the downward spiral of her life after she met Manson.

"Everything that was good and decent in me I threw away," she said.

It was her father, she said, who helped her realize during his visits to her in prison, "what had happened, and the monster I became."

She said she tells those she counsels in prison, "I am someone you would never have wanted to be, and here are the steps you can take to never go to the dark places I have been."

Krenwinkel's claim that she is rehabilitated was met by anger and opposition from Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Sequeira and families of the victims, who argued for Krenwinkel's continued incarceration.

"If she truly had remorse, she wouldn't come to these parole hearings, and would say, 'I accept the punishment,'" Sequeira said.

Debra Tate, sister of Sharon Tate, then tearfully recounted the pain her family endured from the killings. She denounced Krenwinkel for never having written a letter of apology to the families.

"I want to believe the human condition is capable of change," Tate said. "I believe in the possibility of reform. But I know what I am looking at, and I don't see it here."

She told the board through tears that, "Whatever decision you make I will live with. But every time I sit in this chair I have to think, what will happen if they come out? What will society do?"

Anthony Di Maria, the nephew of Jay Sebring, who was killed along with Tate, cried throughout his words to the board, and said the parole hearings "send us back to hell, year after year."

"I wish I had forgiveness to give," Di Maria said.

Krenwinkel was convicted along with Manson and two other female followers in seven 1969 murders, considered among the most notorious crimes of the 20th century.

None of those convicted has ever been paroled and one of them, Susan Atkins, died in prison last year after being denied compassionate release when she was terminally ill with cancer.

Leslie Van Houten, 61, the youngest of the women convicted, was long thought to be the most likely to win eventual release. But she was denied a parole date last summer by officials who said she had not gained sufficient insight into her crimes.

Parole boards have repeatedly cited the callousness, viciousness and calculation of the murders committed by members of the Manson Family.

Krenwinkel admitted during her trial that she chased down and stabbed heiress Abigail Folger at the Tate home on Aug. 9, 1969, and participated in the stabbing deaths of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca the following night. Both homes were defaced with bloody scrawlings. She was convicted along with Manson, Van Houten and Atkins. Another defendant, Charles "Tex" Watson was convicted in a separate trial.

All were sentenced to death but their sentences were commuted to life when the U.S. Supreme Court briefly outlawed the death penalty in 1972.

In her 40 years at the California Institution for Women, Krenwinkel has earned a bachelor's degree and participated in numerous self help programs as well as teaching illiterate prisoners how to read. In recent years, she has been involved in a program to train service dogs for the disabled.

She said she has made arrangements for the possibility that she could be released, and would change her name and leave the state.

Krenwinkel's lawyer, Keith Wattley, argued at the hearing that the law says if someone is serving life with the possibility of parole, they must be given parole unless they are deemed to be currently dangerous, which he said she is not.

Asked to make her own final case to the board, Krenwinkel wept profusely, wiping her eyes with a tissue, and said, "I'm just haunted each and every day by the unending suffering of the victims, the enormity and degree of suffering I've caused."

Her voice rising in the silent room, she nearly shouted, "I'm so ashamed of my actions. The victims had so much life left to live."

Cult leader Manson, now 75, refused to appear at his most recent parole hearings where he was denied a release date. His multiple disciplinary violations and refusals to participate in rehabilitation activities make it likely that he will never be released.

At times he has said that he does not want his freedom and considers prison his home.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/20/v-print/2024644/manson-follower-faces-parole-hearing.html#ixzz1BdkyR0JE

Linda Deutsch, Master of the Obvious

Charles Manson follower Patricia Krenwinkel has slim chance at parole

Linda Deutsch

CORONA, Calif. - A follower of Charles Manson who has been imprisoned longer than any other woman in California is facing a parole hearing on her conviction in the Sharon Tate killings.

Grey-haired Patricia Krenwinkel, one of Manson's two surviving female followers, has maintained a clean prison record in her four decades behind bars, but her chances for release appear slim following the parole officials' rejections in other Manson cases.

Krenwinkel, 63, was convicted along with Manson and two other female followers in seven 1969 murders, considered among the most notorious crimes of the 20th Century.

None of those convicted has ever been paroled and one of them, Susan Atkins, died in prison last year after being denied compassionate

In this photo taken Tuesday Jan. 18, 2011, released by the California Institution for Women showing Patricia Krenwinkel, one of two surviving women followers of Charles Manson involved in the Sharon Tate killings. Krenwinkel, faces a parole hearing Thursday Jan. 20,2011. After four decades behind bars, she is the longest incarcerated woman in the California prison system. (AP Photo/California Institution for Women)

release when she was terminally ill with cancer.

Leslie Van Houten, 61, the youngest of the women convicted, was long thought to be the most likely to win eventual release. But she was denied a parole date last summer by officials who said she had not gained sufficient insight into her crimes.

Parole boards have repeatedly cited the callousness, viciousness and calculation of the seven murders committed by members of the Manson Family.

Krenwinkel admitted during her trial that she chased down and stabbed heiress Abigail Folger at the Tate home on Aug. 9, 1969 and participated in the stabbing deaths of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca the following night. Both homes were defaced with bloody scrawlings. She was convicted along with Manson, Van Houten and Atkins. Another defendant, Charles "Tex" Watson was convicted in a separate trial.

All were sentenced to death but their sentences were commuted to life when the U.S. Supreme Court briefly outlawed the death penalty in 1972.

In her 40 years at the California Institution for Women, Krenwinkel has earned a bachelor's degree and participated in numerous self help programs as well as teaching illiterate prisoners how to read. In recent years, she has been involved in a program to train service dogs for the disabled.

She has had a discipline-free record in prison. But so have a number of other Manson followers who have been refused parole. Last year, a number of them came before parole panels but were turned away.

Manson follower Bruce Davis was able to win a parole date only to have it revoked by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger who said that his release would be a danger to society. The 67-year-old Davis was convicted of the 1969 murder of musician Gary Hinman but had no involvement in the Tate-LaBianca killings.

Robert Beausoleil, 63, also convicted in the Hinman murder, was denied parole last year and told to come back to the board in five years.

Cult leader Manson, 75, refused to appear at his most recent parole hearings where he was denied a release date. His multiple disciplinary violations and refusals to participate in rehabilitation activities make it likely that he will never be released. At times he has said that he does not want his freedom and considers prison his home.

Happy New Fear!

Because Fear Makes us More Aware, LOL.

I am trying to figure out why posts aren't posting when they should. But anyway....

People keep writing me about the evilliz blog. She's a bit loony but a nice enough loon. She seems focused on finding pictures of TLB Players since the case times...right up to modern times. That amount of work makes the Col's nut sack shrivel up in tears. I like the pictures of TJ, don't get me wrong. And the pictures of Ruth Ann, should they be real, are fascinating to look at. But the point of this, the ONLY Official TLB Blog, is to try to get to he truth of the crimes. A truth that has been lost thanks to the lies and perjury of Vinnie T. BUGliosi, the great lover of Latin music. If photos of modern day people are helpful, I will surely run them here. Steve Grogan, aka Adam Gabriel definitely knows more than he told. He still has yet to be charged for the LaBianca killings. He has a conviction for exposing himself to children. He is seen in the Hendrickson documentary endangering some kids. He disappears for years. Fine. When it comes out that he is in a band that plays children's parties, that IS news and relevant and we will discuss it here.

This has nothing to do with psycho Monkeyboy or two bit lawyers without actual offices. Ruth Ann likely could add many details to the story of the Family; she doesn't know shit about the murders. She's lived her life as far as I can tell well. If Liz or anyone wants to out her, I neither approve nor disapprove. I'm just not gonna do it. Nancy Pitman the same. As far as I know she didn't kill anyone and isn't still on the run. She likely did go back the first night to the Tate House, but this isn't a crime. She got lucky with a LOT of shit, especially the Stockton murders, but she paid her time. If Evil Liz wants to obsess about her, hey, I don't even know who Liz IS, not my problem. Also not my interest.

Cat's site is now the gold standard since Bret died. Her site is The Times of London. We're the New York Times. Liz is People magazine. All three have their place in the world.