Never ceases to amaze me how this story goes on and on. And did Debra Tate have a meeting with the LA DA regarding Davis? Was he involved with her sister's murder? Not as far as I've heard.
And one more thing (channeling Columbo). It also never ceases to amaze me that Watson still gets third banana billing in the massacres with Manson getting top billing and the women second. They all deserved their sentences, but every time the murders are mentioned in the media, Watson, the carnage king, if mentioned at all, is an afterthought. It's like the good-old-boy from Texas still gets shielded.
Just goes to show that truth and justice are NOT absolute. Sequiera, Deb Tate, et all are playing politics. And, its just plain wrong. There is something significant there and as ONeill points out so eloquently, we are currently being, and have probably always been, lied to.
mrgroove, that is what I don't understand. As a matter of fact, "People Magazine" recently had a cover with Sharon Tate's picture on it, and the caption reads "Murdered By Manson." Listen, I think they are all guilty, and they are all in the right place, but they need to quit saying Manson murdered Sharon Tate. It's stupid, and ridiculous. A lot of people don't even know who Tex Watson is. I've asked before, and the majority of people I asked had no idea.
Exactly AustinAnn. Just about every TV clip or story on the murders does that. Tex who? After all, he is merely the guy who almost single-handedly overpowered every victim and made the overwhelming majority of wounds, both fatal and non-fatal.
I'm resigned to the fact that the mainstream narrative will probably never change. It is, sadly, about supporting the same, tired old narrative. That a crazy-eyed charismatic "hippy" guru convinced some wide-eyed, young hippy girls to invade some affluent looking homes, and butcher the inhabitants as per his instructions, to invoke some sort of White Album inspired race war. So as a result, since Tex's involvement doesn't fit neatly into the usual narrative, he gets marginalized at best or completely ignored when the murders get brought up.
I don't know the trial well enough to have an opinion whether Bugliosi proved his case against Manson, but my gut and based on everything I've read and heard, says Manson was fully responsible before anyone else for what happened during all the family related murders, and that he built a level of paranoia at the Ranch based a great deal around his Helter Skelter rap without which those murders don't happen.
Seems like there's a different answer depending on who is asking. They screwed over their source and Sequeira abruptly retires. Something is stinky in Stinkyville.
This is weird. The girls have admitted to actually stabbing the victims, so it couldn't be that. They've always admitted to it. Hell, Leslie Van Houten, to this day says that she believed it was because of Helter Skelter. Maybe there is something about Bruce Davis on the tapes that would force the Governor to release him. This is weird. I was wondering why Sequeira wasn't at Bruce's last parole hearing. Hmmmm. Very interesting.
I think if the tapes could reveal a grave error of justice or police proceedings that would be a motive from keeping it from the public eye. Also, suppose it can solve other crimes and maybe present other guilty people. But then, it's been so many decades past that these possible unsolved crimes could be already prescribed. So why not reveal these tapes contents? The legal system is not perfect, people are not perfect, nothing is perfect. It would all be taken for the sake of truth.
Off topic now Interesting how many things from the sixties keep surfacing after all these years. Now The Doors have a "new" backstage footage released called Feast of Friends. Although my Doors years had passed, I can't wait to get my copy! :)
Correcting - there's no prescription (statue of limitations) for murder in the US but is there for accesory or accomplice of murder? Or, If another murder/murderer comes out, how are they going to build a case and trial? Would they call possible witnesses after all these years? I don't know. Seems they want to keep it quiet, status quo.
Patty doesn't think there will be another trial but the content of the tapes could influence parole decisions for Bruce, Leslie and possibly Pat. Tex the Third Banana (Groove,that's hilarious) will rot in there as he should.
It looks like O'Neill had no hope at this point that the DA's office would honor its word and let him hear the tapes. I don't blame him for spilling all that he knows. Let's hope he gets to at some point.
The LAPD can no longer lie "On the Record". This is why they will only say "Off the Record" there is nothing on the tapes. They can lie off the record because it is not on the record and they can't be held accountable.
They will simply not go on the record about what is on the tapes and the LA Press will not go after them.
Both the LAPD and the LA DA have done much to keep those tapes away from the public, the victim's survivors and the convicted along with their attorneys.
I still wonder why LAPD is/was so hell bent on obtaining the tapes for themselves to the exclusion of other jurisdictions. Reports have said that there could have been a dozen or more murders but the odds are that if there were that many more murders the majority would have been outside of LAPD's jurisdiction. Now they won't share the tapes with anyone.
It seems to me that the LAPD and LA DA both had an agenda to obtain those tapes and it had nothing to do with solving more murders. It sounds more like they are trying to cover their butts because of improprieties with the arrests and convictions of the Family. Regardless, the LA DA's office actions since getting the tapes are suspect.
Col Scott, I will check with my mom to see if I am either mentally impaired and/or constipated and get back to you. In the meantime, is it OK to still participate?
William, Rose Mary Woods, (Chat's spelled it right, I didn't the first time around) was Richard Nixon's secretary who "accidently" erased tapes crucial to the Watergate investigation.
Here is how it could work. LAPD Cops "release" Tex Watson tapes. Tex Watson SUES based on "copyright" issue(s.)
HE is the creator and thus owner of the arrangement of words - HE speaks on the tapes .
I think it was about $40,000 Watson / Boyd received for the "book." BUT there are 20 HOURS of tapes.
IF the "book" used 20% of the tapes - well, YOU do the math. A willing buyer paid a willing seller $40,000 for use of 20%, thus the remaining 80% is worth, at least, $160,000. The minimum VALUE is "established" by LAW.
Even for any of the tapes to be USED "legally" in a PUBLIC "court of law" Watson must give HIS permission.
It seems, at taxpayer's expense, the cops simply BOUGHT themselves a boatload of LEGAL troubles.
Of course, when America becomes a full-blown Socialist Nation, all copyrights will belong to the "government." and the above mentioned issue will become moot.
Sequira is a deceitful idiot for so many reasons, but the one mentioned in O'Neill's expose is exhibit A:
That those tapes can not help him in the slightest bit to keep anyone from being paroled because they're not part of the original court proceedings. If the information was not included in witness testimony during any one of the trials, subsequent parole hearings, or a direct consequence of their personal actions while in prison, it is inadmissible at the parole hearings.
2nd, there is no way in hell that the Governor's people would to listen to the tapes in order to bias their decision on Davis' parole for the same reason - they're not allowed to consider anything that is not already in evidence, etc, and if they did or if Davis' attorney (Michael Beckman) caught wind that they did there'd be a lawsuit as well as a court hearing over it a new parole hearing immediately granted, and the Governor would be called to the mat by the press.
I'm betting that Sequira left the DA's office to avoid a scandal cuz the dude makes Bugliosi look like a choir boy in his unethical (maybe even) illegal tactics.
It blows the mind, does it not, that Payne would have had the tapes all those years and not listened to them just out of curiosity. I would love to see someone press her on that.
Can someone illuminate exactly how O'Neil sees the case differently than Bugliosi's HS account?
Can we sic Deb on the identity of the "other detective"?
I was enthralled by one of the last 'revelations' in this article - that Watson insisted Boyd not give the tapes to his new lawyer. That's just to fishy to swallow.
Is it possible that the LAPD's Gestapo-like suppression of the tapes has less to do with the murders than other type info on the tapes - like celebrity sex stuff. Could Angela Lansbury have joined Doris Day in a threesome with Charlie? Kidding of course. But there's gotta be a reason for all this suppression.
It may not be what's on the tapes, BUT what's NOT on the them, that is damning. IE: If in 20 hours of tape the "Chief Assassin" TEX Watson describes - for HIS attorney - exactly WHY he went to do the Tate/LaBianca Massacres - Bugliosi's explanation of Helter Skelter, by comparison - may be exposed as"fraudulant." If, for instance, there is NO mention of Black Muslims, as in Paul Watkin's testimony, the LAPD has a problem.
The Manson Case - AKA The Crime of the Century may NEVER end.
It hasn't always been the way though. In Bugliosi's book, among other interesting statements, he describes Watson as "the chief Tate~La Bianca killer" and says that on the stand he admitted shooting or stabbing six of the seven victims and later copped to the stabbing of Sharon Tate having originally denied it which means his hands were dirty on every one of the victims~ hardly third billing ! In fact, Bugliosi goes to great lengths to portray Watson as being totally responsible for his actions {"I tore to shreds his story that he was simply an unthinking zombie programmed by Charles Manson" / "Charles Manson was not a pied piper who suddenly appeared on a basketball court at Texas State, handed Charles Watson a tab of LSD, then led him into a life of crime."} Members of the media {both mainstream and underground} were lionizing and demonizing Charles Manson long before the trials, much less "Helter Skelter."
"mrgroove said;It also never ceases to amaze me that Watson still gets third banana billing in the massacres with Manson getting top billing and the women second. They all deserved their sentences, but every time the murders are mentioned in the media, Watson, the carnage king, if mentioned at all, is an afterthought. It's like the good-old-boy from Texas still gets shielded."
It hasn't always been the way though. In Bugliosi's book, among other interesting statements, he describes Watson as "the chief Tate~La Bianca killer" and says that on the stand he admitted shooting or stabbing six of the seven victims and later copped to the stabbing of Sharon Tate having originally denied it which means his hands were dirty on every one of the victims~ hardly third billing ! In fact, Bugliosi goes to great lengths to portray Watson as being totally responsible for his actions {"I tore to shreds his story that he was simply an unthinking zombie programmed by Charles Manson" / "Charles Manson was not a pied piper who suddenly appeared on a basketball court at Texas State, handed Charles Watson a tab of LSD, then led him into a life of crime."} Members of the media {both mainstream and underground} were lionizing and demonizing Charles Manson long before the trials, much less "Helter Skelter."
WOOT
ReplyDeleteNever ceases to amaze me how this story goes on and on. And did Debra Tate have a meeting with the LA DA regarding Davis? Was he involved with her sister's murder? Not as far as I've heard.
ReplyDeleteAnd one more thing (channeling Columbo). It also never ceases to amaze me that Watson still gets third banana billing in the massacres with Manson getting top billing and the women second. They all deserved their sentences, but every time the murders are mentioned in the media, Watson, the carnage king, if mentioned at all, is an afterthought. It's like the good-old-boy from Texas still gets shielded.
ReplyDeleteJust goes to show that truth and justice are NOT absolute. Sequiera, Deb Tate, et all are playing politics. And, its just plain wrong. There is something significant there and as ONeill points out so eloquently, we are currently being, and have probably always been, lied to.
ReplyDeletemrgroove, that is what I don't understand. As a matter of fact, "People Magazine" recently had a cover with Sharon Tate's picture on it, and the caption reads "Murdered By Manson." Listen, I think they are all guilty, and they are all in the right place, but they need to quit saying Manson murdered Sharon Tate. It's stupid, and ridiculous. A lot of people don't even know who Tex Watson is. I've asked before, and the majority of people I asked had no idea.
ReplyDeleteWay to go Tom!
ReplyDeleteExactly AustinAnn. Just about every TV clip or story on the murders does that. Tex who? After all, he is merely the guy who almost single-handedly overpowered every victim and made the overwhelming majority of wounds, both fatal and non-fatal.
ReplyDeleteI'm resigned to the fact that the mainstream narrative will probably never change. It is, sadly, about supporting the same, tired old narrative. That a crazy-eyed charismatic "hippy" guru convinced some wide-eyed, young hippy girls to invade some affluent looking homes, and butcher the inhabitants as per his instructions, to invoke some sort of White Album inspired race war. So as a result, since Tex's involvement doesn't fit neatly into the usual narrative, he gets marginalized at best or completely ignored when the murders get brought up.
The freaking Beatles get more blame than Watson.
Ho-hum.
I don't know the trial well enough to have an opinion whether Bugliosi proved his case against Manson, but my gut and based on everything I've read and heard, says Manson was fully responsible before anyone else for what happened during all the family related murders, and that he built a level of paranoia at the Ranch based a great deal around his Helter Skelter rap without which those murders don't happen.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I too would love to know what's on them thar tapes yes I would.
ReplyDeleteSeems like there's a different answer depending on who is asking. They screwed over their source and Sequeira abruptly retires. Something is stinky in Stinkyville.
ReplyDeleteThis is weird. The girls have admitted to actually stabbing the victims, so it couldn't be that. They've always admitted to it. Hell, Leslie Van Houten, to this day says that she believed it was because of Helter Skelter. Maybe there is something about Bruce Davis on the tapes that would force the Governor to release him. This is weird. I was wondering why Sequeira wasn't at Bruce's last parole hearing. Hmmmm. Very interesting.
ReplyDeleteI think if the tapes could reveal a grave error of justice or police proceedings that would be a motive from keeping it from the public eye. Also, suppose it can solve other crimes and maybe present other guilty people. But then, it's been so many decades past that these possible unsolved crimes could be already prescribed.
ReplyDeleteSo why not reveal these tapes contents? The legal system is not perfect, people are not perfect, nothing is perfect. It would all be taken for the sake of truth.
Off topic now
Interesting how many things from the sixties keep surfacing after all these years. Now The Doors have a "new" backstage footage released called Feast of Friends.
Although my Doors years had passed, I can't wait to get my copy! :)
This was a great article there's definitely something there in those tape's Question is will we ever know what's on them ?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCorrecting - there's no prescription (statue of limitations) for murder in the US but is there for accesory or accomplice of murder? Or,
ReplyDeleteIf another murder/murderer comes out, how are they going to build a case and trial? Would they call possible witnesses after all these years? I don't know. Seems they want to keep it quiet, status quo.
Patty doesn't think there will be another trial but the content of the tapes could influence parole decisions for Bruce, Leslie and possibly Pat. Tex the Third Banana (Groove,that's hilarious) will rot in there as he should.
ReplyDeletePatty. I believe you hit the nail on the head. It's most likely about parole implications.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm glad the banana thing gave you a chuckle.
It looks like O'Neill had no hope at this point that the DA's office would honor its word and let him hear the tapes. I don't blame him for spilling all that he knows. Let's hope he gets to at some point.
ReplyDeleteThe LAPD can no longer lie "On the Record". This is why they will only say "Off the Record" there is nothing on the tapes. They can lie off the record because it is not on the record and they can't be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteThey will simply not go on the record about what is on the tapes and the LA Press will not go after them.
Both the LAPD and the LA DA have done much to keep those tapes away from the public, the victim's survivors and the convicted along with their attorneys.
ReplyDeleteI still wonder why LAPD is/was so hell bent on obtaining the tapes for themselves to the exclusion of other jurisdictions. Reports have said that there could have been a dozen or more murders but the odds are that if there were that many more murders the majority would have been outside of LAPD's jurisdiction. Now they won't share the tapes with anyone.
It seems to me that the LAPD and LA DA both had an agenda to obtain those tapes and it had nothing to do with solving more murders. It sounds more like they are trying to cover their butts because of improprieties with the arrests and convictions of the Family. Regardless, the LA DA's office actions since getting the tapes are suspect.
Deb, what do you want to bet that they eventually are released but portions will be missing. Remind you of anything?
ReplyDeleteIs Mr Humphrat constipated, retarded or both?
ReplyDeleteSuze, LOL, who will be the new Rosemary Woods? Surely if something gets "accidently" deleted some poor hapless underling will be blamed!
ReplyDeleteCol, the R-word is not permitted. Please return to recess.
ReplyDeleteMatt-
ReplyDeleteyou need remedial reading, Deb said the word "Rosemary" not me.
anyway it appears that the Tapes may show that the Bug was full of hooey! Shocking!
http://tatelabianca.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-tapes-go-round-and-round.html
DebS said...
ReplyDeleteSuze, LOL, who will be the new Rosemary Woods? Surely if something gets "accidently" deleted some poor hapless underling will be blamed!
Rose Mary Woods (Rosemary) was born in Sebring, OH.
(you can't make this stuff up!)
Sorry I'm lost Rosemary Woods ?
ReplyDeleteRosemary Wodehouse
"Rosemary's Baby "
Col Scott,
ReplyDeleteI will check with my mom to see if I am either mentally impaired and/or constipated and get back to you. In the meantime, is it OK to still participate?
OK, my mom said I used the bathroom last Thursday and my IQ is 76 so we're all good over here.
ReplyDeleteWilliam, Rose Mary Woods, (Chat's spelled it right, I didn't the first time around) was Richard Nixon's secretary who "accidently" erased tapes crucial to the Watergate investigation.
ReplyDeleteHere is how it could work. LAPD Cops "release" Tex Watson tapes. Tex Watson SUES based on "copyright" issue(s.)
ReplyDeleteHE is the creator and thus owner of the arrangement of words - HE speaks on the tapes .
I think it was about $40,000 Watson / Boyd received for the "book." BUT there are 20 HOURS of tapes.
IF the "book" used 20% of the tapes - well, YOU do the math. A willing buyer paid a willing seller $40,000 for use of 20%, thus the remaining 80% is worth, at least, $160,000. The minimum VALUE is "established" by LAW.
Even for any of the tapes to be USED "legally" in a PUBLIC "court of law" Watson must give HIS permission.
It seems, at taxpayer's expense, the cops simply BOUGHT themselves a boatload of LEGAL troubles.
Of course, when America becomes a full-blown Socialist Nation, all copyrights will belong to the "government." and the above mentioned issue will become moot.
Sequira is a deceitful idiot for so many reasons, but the one mentioned in O'Neill's expose is exhibit A:
ReplyDeleteThat those tapes can not help him in the slightest bit to keep anyone from being paroled because they're not part of the original court proceedings. If the information was not included in witness testimony during any one of the trials, subsequent parole hearings, or a direct consequence of their personal actions while in prison, it is inadmissible at the parole hearings.
2nd, there is no way in hell that the Governor's people would to listen to the tapes in order to bias their decision on Davis' parole for the same reason - they're not allowed to consider anything that is not already in evidence, etc, and if they did or if Davis' attorney (Michael Beckman) caught wind that they did there'd be a lawsuit as well as a court hearing over it a new parole hearing immediately granted, and the Governor would be called to the mat by the press.
I'm betting that Sequira left the DA's office to avoid a scandal cuz the dude makes Bugliosi look like a choir boy in his unethical (maybe even) illegal tactics.
It blows the mind, does it not, that Payne would have had the tapes all those years and not listened to them just out of curiosity. I would love to see someone press her on that.
ReplyDeleteCan someone illuminate exactly how O'Neil sees the case differently than Bugliosi's HS account?
Can we sic Deb on the identity of the "other detective"?
I was enthralled by one of the last 'revelations' in this article - that Watson insisted Boyd not give the tapes to his new lawyer. That's just to fishy to swallow.
Is it possible that the LAPD's Gestapo-like suppression of the tapes has less to do with the murders than other type info on the tapes - like celebrity sex stuff. Could Angela Lansbury have joined Doris Day in a threesome with Charlie?
Kidding of course. But there's gotta be a reason for all this suppression.
OMG !
ReplyDeleteIt may not be what's on the tapes, BUT what's NOT on the them, that is damning. IE: If in 20 hours of tape the "Chief Assassin" TEX Watson describes - for HIS attorney - exactly WHY he went to do the Tate/LaBianca Massacres - Bugliosi's explanation of Helter Skelter, by comparison - may be exposed as"fraudulant." If, for instance, there is NO mention of Black Muslims, as in Paul Watkin's testimony, the LAPD has a problem.
The Manson Case - AKA The Crime of the Century may NEVER end.
Thanks Debs
ReplyDeleteMr. Hendrickson might be right. That would be a blow. Finally the real motive for TLB. But then, well, maybe it will come out in a hundred years...
ReplyDelete@ Leary-7 : ,, Could Angela Lansbury have joined Doris Day in a threesome with Charlie?,, LOL !!!
ReplyDeleteDamn, Robert, that's as cogent and solid a thesis as I've ever read on this board. Muchos gracias.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIt hasn't always been the way though. In Bugliosi's book, among other interesting statements, he describes Watson as "the chief Tate~La Bianca killer" and says that on the stand he admitted shooting or stabbing six of the seven victims and later copped to the stabbing of Sharon Tate having originally denied it which means his hands were dirty on every one of the victims~ hardly third billing !
In fact, Bugliosi goes to great lengths to portray Watson as being totally responsible for his actions {"I tore to shreds his story that he was simply an unthinking zombie programmed by Charles Manson" / "Charles Manson was not a pied piper who suddenly appeared on a basketball court at Texas State, handed Charles Watson a tab of LSD, then led him into a life of crime."} Members of the media {both mainstream and underground} were lionizing and demonizing Charles Manson long before the trials, much less "Helter Skelter."
"mrgroove said;It also never ceases to amaze me that Watson still gets third banana billing in the massacres with Manson getting top billing and the women second. They all deserved their sentences, but every time the murders are mentioned in the media, Watson, the carnage king, if mentioned at all, is an afterthought. It's like the good-old-boy from Texas still gets shielded."
ReplyDeleteIt hasn't always been the way though. In Bugliosi's book, among other interesting statements, he describes Watson as "the chief Tate~La Bianca killer" and says that on the stand he admitted shooting or stabbing six of the seven victims and later copped to the stabbing of Sharon Tate having originally denied it which means his hands were dirty on every one of the victims~ hardly third billing !
In fact, Bugliosi goes to great lengths to portray Watson as being totally responsible for his actions {"I tore to shreds his story that he was simply an unthinking zombie programmed by Charles Manson" / "Charles Manson was not a pied piper who suddenly appeared on a basketball court at Texas State, handed Charles Watson a tab of LSD, then led him into a life of crime."} Members of the media {both mainstream and underground} were lionizing and demonizing Charles Manson long before the trials, much less "Helter Skelter."