If you believe that Drugs played a bigger part in the crimes that the BUG wanted to admit then you are forced to follow a myriad of alleyways that all seem to go no where.
Pic Dawson is cleared by LAPD, and rightly so. Same with Billy Doyle and Tom Harrigan.
But I keep wondering about Bryn Lukashevski and to a lesser extent Dale Fimple (no that's isn't a disease).
You can search for my earlier posts about Bryn.
But if you are a student of the case this guy will bother you. Why does Dennis Wilson finally disown Charlie? Because he hears of the Lotsapoppa shooting. How does he hear of it? From his close personal friend Bryn Lukashevski. How did Bryn know of it. He was there. He was one of Crowe's bodyguards. And a close personal friend of Dennis'.
Do you see what I see? There is a chunk missing, but it is a big chunk. It is like the connection is close but then it slithers away.
Bryn bodyguards a bigtime drug dealer whose house is less than ten blocks away from Mama Cass' where Pic Dawson hangs out and deals. Pic likely deals for Voytek. Mamas and Papas. Beach Boys. Celebrity. Drugs. Debra Tate's underaged nude fotos taken with Pic.
My brain hurts.
Tom O'Neill, the guy who was writing the definitive book on the case (since at LEAST 2001) I think found Bryn and/or Dale. I cannot remember.
But methinks the missing link is through this avenue. Did one of them know Rosemary?
20 comments:
You're thinking too hard. Two groups of young people up to no good got into a confrontation. Drugs were a part of it, as it usually is. It happens everyday in every county. The difference here was that a movie star was involved.
Think long, think wrong. The real bad guy here isn't Charlie Manson, It is Charles Watson, who flipped out on speed and killed whatever moved.
I agree Charlie is not the bad guy.
If I buy your comments we can explain very well Tate.
Now how do we explain LaBianca?
I don't know, is my best answer. They have graduated to killers and the Frenchman is in jail. They are high.....maybe on acid?
It's 1969, remember. Their leader is a Schizophrenic. Not all things follow logic, you know.
Goofed up kids, that's how I look at this. Its a shame, but that is my guess.
There is a clear motivation for these crimes I am sure of it. Two people were not tortured and killed by very young people for no reason. Life just isn't like that.
Wasn't Bryn the one who asked that all his info be deleted from Turner's site?
Well, ColScott thinks that life is not like that. My take is that yes life is like that. I could be wrong but in the abscense of evidence to the otherwise, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.
Some drugged up, middle-class kids influenced by a charasmatic career criminal went up into the hills of LA and murdered some people. They weren't even sure of the reasons. It seemed right that night.
Somebody famous got murdered. That changes the dynamic of things. Instead of keeping their mouths shut and listening to lawyers, they made a mockery of the procedure. And for that, rather than the actual crime, they are still incarcerated.
Tom- your middle paragraph IMO is 100% accurate. 100%
But there was still a reason even if THEY didn't know it.
They were a crime family. They stole. They scammed. They dealt. They falsified credit cards. Along with that, you make enemies.
In that world of alcohol and drugs comes confrontation. Many say I did that but I didn't kill anyone. But there is always a bird like Tex Watson, who gets high and can't control hisself. Susan Atkins
on speed, you do the math.
But I don't know. Maybe it was more than that. I think some kids flipped out.
Since I brought up Susan Atkins, I would like to share one other thought.
If I could turn back the hands of time, and I can't, but if I could, I would like to be young again and I would like to have a couple of beers and share a joint with Susan Atkins.
Some say Susan Atkins is a skank with a mustache. And a buck knife. That is not my call, I'm not in the judging business.
Experts say human beings have been here over 100,000 years. Christians say no, it is only 6,000years, we got a book that says so. It is an argument I don't wish to enter.
In all this time, as a human race, we still don't understand how a woman's mind works. Do you think there is really a mind in there? Or just a bee buzzing around in a jar?
I would like to go back in time and talk to Susan Atkins, before she found Jesus. The your guess is as good as mine, Susan. I would like to know the real Susan Atkins and try to understand how her mind worked.
Maybe I could have made her a better person. Or maybe she would have slit my throat for the $38 dollars in my pocket. You gotta admit, she is excitng.
Dice TomG:
In all this time, as a human race, we still don't understand how a woman's mind works. Do you think there is really a mind in there? Or just a bee buzzing around in a jar?
And are the women that make up the 'we' that doesn't understand not part of the human race too?
Bees buzzing around in a jar ...
Thanks for opening up again, Col.
Jem
A duck swimming around on a pond
Col, on the streets of Compton and the Bronx, very young people, 14 and 15 years old, kill for drugs and turf every day.
People want to make Charles some type of Fagin or something, trying to keep the illusion that young people murder other people all the time.
Should be "the illusion that young people DO NOT murder people all the time".
Also the name JemPud, the photo gives her away. Jemima Puddleduck, who had the misfortune to fall in love with a fox who only wanted to eat her eggs. Beatrix Potter. Please stop watching stupid movies and TV, and learn to appreciate fine literature, for pity sake!
I am almost 100% there that there WAS motive for both nights...
the one loop I cant close that makes me not 100% is the Labiancas.
nobody has been able to tie them to the others, and if Charlie did make them drive around the second night for some time- it makes me more inclined to believe that he had no destination in mind at first... the only other explanation I have heard for this is that he didn't want the others to know... but then you have to believe that he had the absolute power over them to command murder- but he had to worry about who??
Don't forget the Bernie Crowe shooting was precipitated by Tex over a drug burn.
Tex, prior to meeting Charlie was in a partnership dealing in wigs.
I think that is the connection between the Family and Rosemary.
I have nothing but TOTAL respect and admiration for the number of bloggers who feel CM "has no blood on his hands" or that he was not the bad guy - TomG being one of my favorite posters. I wish I could join them, but I just can't get there. Not that I am a HS believer, just that I can't see Manson as an innocent.
Crowe is a slam dunk, Hinman too, wether he told Bobby to "finish the job" or not he swung the sword which makes him legally culpable for the murder, does it not, Col.?
And accepting Charlies insistence that he was not "directing traffic" at Cielo Dr. defies facts, reason and logic.
As far as the LaBiancas, he drove the car there and went in and tied them up. Again, legally culpable for the murders.
Speculating on secondary agendas is a fascinating exercise, but in the end I just keep coming back to the "perfect storm" theory of CM's anti-social rage and paranoia and him just smapping under the financial pressures etc and ordering his zombies to lash out.
Forty-three years and no real hard evidence otherwise, as much as I would love to join the 'CM is not the bad guy' school of thought I just can't pay the tuition.
Leary second to last paragraph is right on my point, and what I cant figure out about the Labiancas...
If he could order " mindless Zombies" why did he drive around for so long before going there?
if he intended to go there all along- why the driving around? Could it be that he really didnt have anywhere specific in mind, and when he got restless he picked a place he was familiar with?
we cant tie him to the labiancas but we know he knew the area...
same thing with Cielo- nobody has been able to tie him to the victims yet- but he knew the place- we know that...
He may have simply got Tex and Katie all worked up, and sent them to places he was familiar with...
I read somewhere most criminals stick to places they know...
This is also why I have issues with the Crowe started the whole thing theory, and he wanted to get everyone's hands dirty..
He sent essentially the same three people both nights, and only two really did any serious damage on both nights...
There were many others he could have included if his aim was to get everyone else involved...
Linda was brand new- and why would he need to involve her?? I have heard she is the only one with a license- but didn't Charlie do most of the driving the second night anyway? Wasn't Linda fairly new, and did you ever read anywhere about any of them having any qualms about driving prior to her arrival?
Not sure that TLB happened because Charlie wanted to cover his own ass for killing Crowe..
But many of you do- so who knows?
Maybe we are forcing a motive that just inst there...
Sens less murders, by hungry, desperate- drugged out young people who felt it was them against the world, and pushed on by an older- conniving career loser- who used the times, and the natural rebellious nature of teenagers to influence there decision making-
but still you had to be an extra dose of animal to do what Katie and Tex did... Cant put all of that on Charlie
AC, yes, kids kill for drugs and turf all the time...SO what were Charlie's kids killing for?
I would bet it was for drugs as well. Remember what happens to Joel Rostau just a few months later...and that's a connection to Jay.
A couple of things to remember which I find interesting: Joan Didion wrote that everyone was horrified, of course, but not surprised...when the LAPD guys get the call from the Hinman detectives while the Tate autposies are going on and before the LaBianca's bodies are even discovered, the LAPD guys dismiss them because they believe it to be drug related...and already have the canadians and Pic Dawson, et al in their minds as suspects. Why? Because everybody else thought so too...
And, Col, I don't know...I just can't see that whatever muscle a guy like Lotsapoppa would need would be the same type that a Beach Boy like Dennis Wilson would, not need, but want. Sanders, that Fug, I think he suffers from something...too much LSD perhaps.
But Leary(and this may have been brought up before), didn't Manson just send them in to the LaBianca's to get a black book?
I've always felt that reason for the 2nd night was Rosemary.
Sharon's baby......Rosemary LaBianca.
Rosemary's Baby.
I was only 13 when I first read HS in 74'. That coincidence jumped right off the pages.
Along with the infamous,"I'm the Devil, here to do the Devil's business".
Or Charlie's, "Do something witchy". instructions.
Rosemary is not a common name.
What are the odds.
Rosemary, I'm the Devil, Do it Witchy and Sharon's Baby.
Did anyone see this movie?
It's like the cops saying there's no link between the murders despite all the similarities.
Did they over look the most obvious link?
St. Circumstance said...
"Could it be that he really didnt have anywhere specific in mind, and when he got restless he picked a place he was familiar with?"
Yes. All the 2nd night's attempts were pretty random and there were reasons why he couldn't be comfortable with the risk factor involved. The sports car incident epitomizes this.
St. Circumstance said...
"we cant tie him to the labiancas but we know he knew the area..."
No, he can't be tied to the LaBiancas but there is a method to the madness. He says he first went up to Harold True's house before going next door. Now, although he says he went to see Harold {in a Vanity Fair interview}, we know that this is bullshit because he knew that Harold had left there around October of '68.
What is generally not known but twice reiterated is that he had wanted to move into the True house. In Harold True's taped interview with Aaron Stovitz, True says this. He repeats this 20 years later in another interview on the phone. Charlie wanted to live in the True house and True said he'd have to check with his house mates as it was no longer up to him, having moved out. So Charlie checked with them and they said no.
What is further not generally known, according to Charlie in that Vanity Fair interview that was up on one of the sites in 2011, Charlie knew the LaBianca house. He knew it well. He claims he used to go in there and have sex because he knew it was empty in the days Harold lived next door. So if you put those two pieces of info together with what he tells George Stimson in "Goodbye Helter Skelter", where he tells George that he went into the LaBianca house and actually had a conversation with Leno, then a very precise and interesting picture starts to emerge.
Could he have gone up to the former True house initially, not to get at or see Harold {because he knew he had moved some 10 months previously} but rather, to do some damage to the former True housemates who had rejected him and not allowed him to move into their pad and finding no one there, directed his attention to the house next door which he also knew ?
It bears thinking about. Knowing now about him having been in the LaBianca house in 1968 and knowing he wanted to live in the house next door and couldn't, there's no way that I can just pretend I don't know this. The conclusion may not be accurate, but the ingredients that make them up are solid, verifiable and fit.
St. Circumstance said...
"same thing with Cielo- nobody has been able to tie him to the victims yet- but he knew the place- we know that..."
He strikes me as a creature of comfort, despite his chat of living on the edge. He knew Cielo, he had reason to feel pissed with Cielo. He knew Waverly, he had reason to feel pissed with Waverly....
Post a Comment