I am sorry you cannot see this photo very well, but I had to get it by doing a "screen capture" from a documentary that was on YouTube. The documentary was one of many on the
Mr. Whitehouse, who was Susan Atkins' husband has a shrine-like collection of photos of her in his home/office. One of the photos, I noticed, is of Susan when she was taken out of Sybil Brand Institute and driven around Beverly Hills to "help" the police. This particular photo was taken of her at 10050 Cielo drive! This is the ONLY known photo of her at the crime scene, which, is rather creepy, if you ask me, because she was smiling. Whitehouse, in the documentary said he liked the photo, because she is smiling and that the police were all around the house and she had the LA county "bracelet" on, also because now when "they" (meaning the authorities) talk about it, they insist that she never helped them. James Whitehouse, I am most sure was deeply in love with Susan Atkins, but displaying a photo of her in handcuffs, smiling at the scene of where she participated in a blood bath is sick, in my opinion. I'm not judging the guy for being in love with her, but come on, man, that's freaking weird!
You can get a little bit better view here:
Not cielo drive
ReplyDeleteNot Cielo Drive!
ReplyDeleteI hope you're right, Cielodrive. This would be just nauseating. But regardless of the photo, was Atkins ever taken to Cielodrive? I've never come across that fact.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete@Cielodrive.com
If the photo of Atkins wasn't taken at Cielo, do you have any idea where it was taken? I thought Bugliosi had arranged for her to go there - oh well, you live and learn.
I can never accept how Tex can smile so broadly after the carnage he caused.
ReplyDeleteThis is the documentary that Ann referenced in her post. Whitehouse starts talking about the picture at around the 34:45 mark :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhvVWahyYuE
Truth On Tate/LaBianca has a discussion on the photo worth reading :
http://truthontatelabianca.com/threads/james-whitehouse-after-susan-atkins-death.6082/
ReplyDelete@ziggyosterberg
Thanks ziggy:)
When I first saw that photo, I quickly thought of the window with all the similar cross bars in the "outlaw" shack. In "Inside the MANSON Gang" we peek in through the window, BUT this photo with Susan looking "out" is very relevant. I always think of what it was like to "look" out as many apparently did - on acid.
ReplyDelete"The way out of a room is NOT through the door - that only leads to another room......" Charles Manson
So maybe the way out of a room is through the "window." Via thought, dreams, hope, etc. etc.
@equinox12314
ReplyDeleteNot sure where the photo was taken. Just know that it wasn't Cielo because there is no window like that there.
@MHN
Court orders were required to take Susan out of jail to "assist" with the investigation. There is no record of her being removed to go to Cielo. She was removed a few times by Caballero, Dec 1 and 3rd. LAPD removed her on the 14th to look for the clothes. Susan was also removed on January 22, but that was by LASO and Hinman related.
equinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"I can never accept how Tex can smile so broadly after the carnage he caused"
As hard as it may be to swallow, I guess he can smile because he's alive and his life goes on. It's not realistic that anyone should spend the rest of their days with depressed gloom all over their face because they did wrong at various points.
Even if you took TLB out of the equation, Charlie brought a certain amount of carnage to peoples' lives. But he's got a catchy and photogenic smile.
Come to think of it, there may well be many Vietnamese, Iraqis, Grenadians, Japanese, Argentinians, Nigerians etc {name your choice} who could and do say {or feel} pretty much the same about us in the USA or the UK or the West in general, "How can you smile knowing you've benefitted from the carnage your people brought to us.....?"
GRIMREAPER got me to thinking again and it kind'a relates to this POST
ReplyDeleteWe are here trying to figure out things concerning the Manson Family Murder Case, BECAUSE we the public were "restrained" from learning of certain things way back then. AND that relates to Manson himself being "restrained" from representing HIMSELF in a Court of Law.
IF his words in Court could have been legally considered FREE speech, then the denial by the Court to let HIM speak is also considered "prior restraint" - which is considered a great big NO, NO when the US Constitution is concerned.
It was recently revealed that the director of the CIA actually helped "cover-up" the John F. Kennedy murder investigation - back then.
Of course, who cares NOW, but "restraining" the TRUTH seems to be the very foundation of FREEDOM and Democracy. NOT so good ?
It's my understanding that this was at Cielo drive. If it's not Cielo, I feel like an moron. Sorry.....
ReplyDeletegrim traveller said...
ReplyDelete"..As hard as it may be to swallow, I guess he can smile because he's alive and his life goes on. It's not realistic that anyone should spend the rest of their days with depressed gloom all over their face because they did wrong at various points."
It may not be realistic on a day to day basis, but we are talking about a person who was having a photograph taken. Under those circumstances, I would reasonably expect him to look contrite, or at least to look straight ahead into the camera, given that he knew that the photographs will be viewed by those outside of the State penitentiary system. As for Charlie, you would have to bring evidence other than the testimony of his co-accused.
ReplyDeleteAustinAnn74 said...
It's my understanding that this was at Cielo drive. If it's not Cielo, I feel like an moron. Sorry.....
@Ann, I too thought that Susan had been taken back to Cielo at some point at the request of Bugliosi. You are NOT a moron, Ann, far from it. It's always good to see posts from you on here. Cheers.
No worries Ann, you're good
ReplyDeleteIn this documentary, James Whitehouse was explaining the photo, "It's nice, because there was police all around the HOUSE, and she's got the LA County bracelet on and I like it now, because now when they talk about it, they insist oh no, she never helped us....I got the picture."
ReplyDeleteNow, over the years, I have read that Susan Atkins did, indeed go back to the crime scene in handcuffs. She was also taken all over the canyons, looking for the spot where they might have dumped the murder weapons & clothes. This photo, I do believe was taken at 10050 Cielo Drive!
It wasn't taken there. I'm sorry, but it wasn't.
ReplyDeleteCielo, where was it taken? Which house is he talking about when James Whitehouse said the police were surrounding the house when she was there? It looks exactly like the windows at Cielo too.
ReplyDeleteThank you cielodrive for the info.
ReplyDeleteAnn - my understanding of Whitehouse's words would have been precisely the same as yours.
Again, I don't know where this was taken. Sybil Brand? No idea. Your screenshot is cropped tightly. When you look at the actual photo you can see that the window pane pattern is not something that matches anything on the Cielo Drive property.
ReplyDeleteIsn't there a plant, like an ivy hanging in the background? I totally feel like a complete idiot posting this ya know.
ReplyDeleteWhy? If we wind up learning something then it's worth it.
ReplyDeleteThe windows look the same as the ones at Cielo.
ReplyDeleteHow about this. Which window in particular do you think this is?
ReplyDeleteequinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"It may not be realistic on a day to day basis, but we are talking about a person who was having a photograph taken. Under those circumstances, I would reasonably expect him to look contrite, or at least to look straight ahead into the camera, given that he knew that the photographs will be viewed by those outside of the State penitentiary system"
But why ? What difference would it make ? Why scowl or look fakely serious if you're having a photo taken with someone who obviously wants to have their picture taken with you ?
Also, it's not really anyone else's concern if people on the outside may see it. It's obviously not a picture taken for general public consumption.
A person may be a convicted murdering scumbag but they are no less a person, subject to pretty much the same highs, lows and whatever else as the rest of us. Sweet or bitter memories aren't necessarily going to change because of one's crimes.
equinox12314 said...
"As for Charlie, you would have to bring evidence other than the testimony of his co-accused"
The boy he sodomized back in '51, the three victims of sexual attacks soon afterwards that played a part in getting him transferred from the Federal reformatory at Petersburg to the one at Chillicothe, the girl he drugged and raped in 1959/60, Gary Hinman whose ear he nearly cut off {by his own admission} and possibly fatally wounded, Shorty Shea, who he cut with a knife {by his own admission}, Bernard Crowe whom he shot and left for dead {by his own admission}, Diane Lake, the teenage girl whom he used to beat up {by his own admission} or as he so eloquently put it "condition her mind with pain", Catherine Share with whom he did likewise, the young boy he "went down on" as the Family watched.......
One doesn't need Pat, Tex or Leslie or the former words of Susan Atkins to accomplish that task.
I'd say he brought a measure of carnage to those lives.
But he should still have gladness and smiles in his life if possible. His situation doesn't grant him much else.
Could that be a patio door rather than a window?
ReplyDeletehttp://i.imgur.com/4CA1qSz.jpg
ReplyDeleteLooks like 5 paines then a larger beam
I don't know how to post a picture. There's a picture of the back of the house and the windows are about 10 to 12 inch squares. It could be Cielo Dr.
ReplyDeleteThis is a better look at this photograph. Thanks Gary.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like the window in a corner where an ivy plant hangs.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThis tumblr page has the original picture :
http://ilovesusanatkins.tumblr.com/post/120622737690/in-1969the-lapd-took-susan-atkins-out-of-sybil
Grim traveller said...
ReplyDelete"But why ? What difference would it make ? Why scowl or look fakely serious if you're having a photo taken with someone who obviously wants to have their picture taken with you ?"
The reason being that his numerous victims were left without the ability to smile or do anything else for that matter.
grim traveller said...
"...It's obviously not a picture taken for general public consumption"
Let us not be unduly naive, members of the Family know that there is a reasonable chance that photographs taken of them will find their way into the public domain on the basis of the subject's notoriety.
grim traveller said...
"I'd say he brought a measure of carnage to those lives."
I had in mind specifically the Tate LaBianca victims where Charlie does not himself inflict any injuries. The definition of 'carnage' in the Oxford Dictionary is 'the killing of a large number of people'. At no point did Manson kill a large number of people. He fell foul of California's conspiracy laws. If you look at the two crimes Charlie was involved in just prior to TLB, namely Hinman and Crowe, Charlie's violence is quite clinical (although inflicting serious wounds) on those occasions.
Nevertheless, Charlie smiling away in photos does not annoy me in the same way as it does with Tex. I suspect that is because every time I look at Tex's grinning mug, I see an eight and a half month pregnant woman who was butchered by his hands.
Thanks Ziggy for those pics. The top one doesn't even look like Susan to me although you can see the plant in the same place behind her. Out the window on the left looks like a eucalyptus tree to me. Then there's what looks like another house on the right. And it all seems to be on a hillside. Someone else said, and I would agree, that it looks more like it could be at Gary Hinman's house.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteOops, sorry Cielo. My bad.
I'm guessing TEX is smiling because the prison quard taking the picture said: Say "cheeeeese" - otherwise shouldn't the DEVIL be happy about HIS handiwork.
ReplyDeleteIt is Cielo Drive. But it's not Atkins. I've never seen her hair in that precise style in any photo of her. So if it's not Atkins, who is it? And if it IS Atkins, who isn't it?
ReplyDeleteSadie May have gone through the looking glass, and on the other side she finds herself in an empty house with bloodstained carpets, no doors, but many windows, through which she dimly sees shadows running and white sheets falling, again and again. She's smiling because it's fun, because she thinks she can step back into the mirror whenever she pleases. But she can't. The mirror is gone; now the darkness through the window, the white sheets on the moonlit lawn, and the blood on the carpet in a silent living room, are the only sights her soul will see until the clock is stopped and the memory of the universe scrubbed clean again.
With respect, this is what Mr Whitehouse should've said. The fool.
ReplyDelete@Mr. Humphrat - I'm inclined to think that it's Spahn, if it's anywhere. The dirty mattress and in particular the kitty - I doubt there would be a kitty at Cielo or Hinman's.
In the TOTLB thread on this picture, it was pointed out that she's holding incense sticks in each hand. I doubt that she'd be doing that if she was brought there by police for some reason.
As far as the wristband, it could be from a Hospital or maybe it was from jail after one of the many times that she and other family members were busted for various things in her pre-confessing to cellmates days.
The story behind this picture is vague and full of holes and highly suspect, imho.
Robert,
ReplyDeleteIn the comment below, are you referring to the scene in "Inside the Manson Gang" where the window with red cross bars is shown and you say, "Here's where the wild orgies took place. Probably a few human sacrifices too."?
Robert Hendrickson said... When I first saw that photo, I quickly thought of the window with all the similar cross bars in the "outlaw" shack. In "Inside the MANSON Gang" we peek in through the window, BUT this photo with Susan looking "out" is very relevant.
Ziggy that makes sense that it's at Spahn the way it looks.
ReplyDeleteThank God. After all this time we've found at last the one single goddamed thing about which there is no debate or controversy. #basicsarcasm
ReplyDeleteThis case. For fu......
ReplyDelete@MHN - You want a debate? Ok. "Hot" or "Not"? :
https://a3-images.myspacecdn.com/images03/29/a16cb9c3a66e4e3896e3c9ae6e6a22e4/300x300.jpg
I say "Hot". The "Spahn Ranch Boys" would agree with me.
Hey Now!
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteFound this website with recent pictures of Dennis Wilson's old house where members of the Manson family lived :
http://14400sunset.com/
Ziggy. I refuse to debate the hotness of females. I will not be a party to the objectification of women's superhot bodies, their smouldering curves and luscious lips. It's not right to sexualise them in this way, with their flowing hair, their endless legs, the way they glisten with sweat while they wash cars in tiny tight-fitting vests and cut-off denim shorts. Just not right. I refuse to go there. Shame on you ziggy.
ReplyDeleteNice pictures of the Wilson house, good find. My God the Family had it good!
thanks again Ziggy for the link to the old Wilson home.
ReplyDeleteThat place is an embarrassment of riches-wow! Looks almost
like it's in Montana with the ranch theme. I'm guessing
it looks almost nothing like it looked back in 68.
Well, obviously the photo through the cross-bars window is NOT from Cielo Drive, UNLESS the Tates were raising chickens in the shack (coup) in the background. Apparently this photo represents a documentary fimmaker's successful attempt at fooling a viewer into "thinking" they are seeing something that is related to "where the orgies took place."
ReplyDeleteAND this type of legal fraud is becoming MORE and MORE prevalant as "real" footage becomes MORE and MORE scarce.
BUT - what is actually more relevant here is the "manner" in which the "filmmaker" uses the exact same technique that a Prosecutor uses to convict a defendant. AND that makes sense, because the filmmaker is either re-convicting the defendant OR he is revealing evidence that raises questions as to the correctness of the conviction.
There is NO greater example of this proceedure in play than the story of Jesus Christ. He was convicted of physically "throwing" the MONEYCHANGERS out of the temple - (assult and battery) crucified (as was punishment of the day) and was also speared (KILLED) by a Roman soldier.
JUST look at what that 2000 year old "story" has turned into.
The ROMANS (Vatican) NOW worship the man they KILLED so long ago - as GOD.
AND most every generation adds some branches to the tree of legends.
Don't you just love a really far-out story.
equinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"The reason being that his numerous victims were left without the ability to smile or do anything else for that matter"
Granted. But does that exclude him from ever being able to smile for a picture ? How does it change anything ? He's apologized. He's tried to change his life around. He's tried to do some jailhouse good. He's tried to be a parent {whatever one may think of conjugal visits}. He's owned up to lies he told at his trial and copped to trying to save his own tail. He's constantly said he's guilty and deserved the death penalty. And what does he get ? "I don't believe you !" And anyone that does {Suzan LaBerge....} gets pilloried all over the shop. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
Like with Charlie, allow the man a smile.
equinox12314 said...
"Let us not be unduly naive, members of the Family know that there is a reasonable chance that photographs taken of them will find their way into the public domain on the basis of the subject's notoriety"
But I am unduly naive because I don't buy that. I simply don't buy that every ex Family member has gone through life over the last 40 years freaking out internally each time a camera has been pointed at them for fear that the picture will end up in the public domain.
That said, that's actually more of a likelihood since the advent of the camera phone.
equinox12314 said...
"The definition of 'carnage' in the Oxford Dictionary is 'the killing of a large number of people'."
I was using it in it's colloquial sense rather than a strict dictionary definition. Certain words have a certain elasticity to them at times.
equinox12314 said...
"Nevertheless, Charlie smiling away in photos does not annoy me in the same way as it does with Tex. I suspect that is because every time I look at Tex's grinning mug, I see an eight and a half month pregnant woman who was butchered by his hand"
That's understandable.
But people smile.
Robert. He wasn't convicted of throwing the money changers out of the Temple. That was the catalyst that convinced the religious authorities he had to be got rid of. He testtified to them that he was, in his own terminology, the Son of Man, who would judge the world. They then went to the Roman authorities with a trumped-up charge that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews, a political charge rather than a religious one.
ReplyDeleteTempting though it is to conflate ancient Romans with modern-day Rome, I'm in agreement with Nietzsche: the ethos of the Vatican represents a profound cultural and psychological shift away from the world as the ancient Romans understood it. The Christian version of Rome eventually uncorked a huge bottle of guilt and flooded the world with it. And without that flood, the likes of Charlie Manson would've had no material to work with. He would've been sat there with a paddle, waiting for a shit creek that might never have come.
Getting ready to board my plane to NY for Mets/Dodgers game tonight. LETS GO METS!!!
ReplyDeleteHave a good flight Matt. What the hell is a Met? Is that the museum in NY? They have their own soccer team? Crazy.
ReplyDeleteI hope Utley doesn't slide into your plane
ReplyDeleteGrimtraveller said...
ReplyDelete"...He's apologized. He's tried to change his life around. He's tried to do some jailhouse good. He's tried to be a parent {whatever one may think of conjugal visits}..."
Whether you believe him to be sincere or not is a matter for each individual. I am not convinced by Tex at all. When I read Tex's autobiography, what came across to me was his readiness to blame everything on Charlie. I am currently reading 'Restless Souls' and am trying to maintain a critical eye as I have a number of reservations about the book. However, I have reached the chapter where Doris Tate is contacted by Steven Trouse regarding Tex's manipulation of the prison system through his ministry. This is best summed up by Mrs Tate's words: "Mr Watson, the night you broke into my daughter's house you said, "I'm the devil here to do the devil's work". As far as I am concerned, Sir, you are still in business".
Grimtraveller said...
"...That said, that's actually more of a likelihood since the advent of the camera phone..."
I don't think they are allowed mobile phones in prison, although many get smuggled in. If you remember, that is how Charlie's friend, Craig Carlisle Hammond, got into big trouble at Corcoran.
Grim traveller said...
"... I was using it in it's colloquial sense rather than a strict dictionary definition. Certain words have a certain elasticity to them at times. "
On this occasion, I would say you are over-stretching the word. If you look at a number of dictionary definitions, the same words appear i.e. slaughter, murder, massacre and butchery. However, I notice that the Urban Dictionary cuts you a bit of slack with contributions including 'chaotic drinking mayhem' or helping yourself to someone else's partner!! If that is the case, my whole life is a carnage.
Let me rephrase the heading for this post:
ReplyDelete"Susan Atkins smiling."
equinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"On this occasion, I would say you are over-stretching the word. If you look at a number of dictionary definitions, the same words appear i.e. slaughter, murder, massacre and butchery. However, I notice that the Urban Dictionary cuts you a bit of slack"
Over stretching ? Yeah, possibly. But when I've seen a football team battered 9-0, I would, in a slang way say something like "wow, it was just carnage." Carnage being a kind of mass destruction. In my mind, I think carnage can be brought to a person's life. This morning on the news, I heard about a group of men that are currently being held for the rape of a 4 year old girl in Delhi. Whether it's that group or some other, carnage has been brought to that girl's life. True, there's a number of other words that I could use too, that step outside of their strict definition but act as a kind of metaphor. In that sense, I think Charlie did bring carnage to certain lives and I'm not even thinking TLB here.
equinox12314 said...
"Whether you believe him to be sincere or not is a matter for each individual. I am not convinced by Tex at all. When I read Tex's autobiography, what came across to me was his readiness to blame everything on Charlie"
See, I didn't get that.
One of the difficulties that the prosecution faced in this case was the paradox of someone committing an offence because of someone else's influence and control while being in control of themselves sufficiently to be deemed guilty.
I've seen it happen often with kids and teens, where one embarks on a certain negative course of action because of someone else, yet, they're not mindless. It is paradoxical because they can say in some instances both "I wouldn't have done it if it wasn't for them" and "I'm responsible because I did it and the final decision came from me." Now, unless you're going to use both statements together every time, then sometimes you are going to emphasize the role of the influencer, other times you'll major on your own part. It depends what you are asked. Charles Watson was a criminal long before he met Charles Manson, as was Susan Atkins. Bobby, Pat and Leslie weren't. At best they were low level {drug taking}.
Whether Tex is reformed or not, I cannot say. I believe he has had a life changing encounter with Christ, but it needs to be remembered that loads of people that also had that never continued with Christ till their dying day. So yeah, the 'now' is crucial, but not half as crucial as the day you pop your clogs.
To a large extent, we can still have a tendency to hold ex Family members where they were as opposed to where they are. It's understandable. But even the worst among us can go through deep seated changes over half a century.
ReplyDelete@grimtraveller
Just as an aside, I believe Bobby was in fact in juvenile hall due to infractions in his home town, so that leaves Pat and Leslie as those with no criminal history.
I think the paradox that you refer to becomes particularly relevant at the parole hearings because at that meeting, the applicant is expected to take full responsibility for their crime, but the parole board invariably brings up the subject of Charlie. It is easy for the parolee to lapse into talking about Charlie's influence over the group.
I agree with what you say about us holding the Family members as they were at 1969. Obviously, these people have matured over time and changed as a result of the prison programmes and education they have participated in. However, the Board is also obliged to look at the risk of them re-offending. In Tex's case, that is debatable. The fact that he claims he has found Christ is to be applauded, but I am not sure the American people would ever accept a seven time murderer being released, no matter what personal changes they have undergone.
Grim. Why is the state of your soul on the day you pop your clogs more consequential than the state of your soul on any other day?
ReplyDeleteAustin Ann that made me laugh into my tea. You're a star.
ReplyDeleteBetween NPR and you guys I learn something new about British speech every day: Pop you Clogs?? Usually what cracks me up is just hearing the way British say the same words we do in such a different way.
ReplyDeleteMatt very exciting going to the game tonight Go Mets!
Mr Humph, I have a dear friend from Brooklyn, and what I really envy her is the fact that she can call someone 'a hottie' and it sounds so cool. She basically says 'haddie' in her mirror-shattering, piano-detuning Brooklyn twang. If I try to say it I pronounce the T's, and I sound like a monumental English shitheel.
ReplyDeleteEsposito and MHN-I agree the top pic does not look like Atkins but the one where she is turned to the camera, even though it's dark and grainy, definitely looks like her to me. Besides she must have given it to Mr. Whitehouse and told him it was her. But did she tell him it was at Cielo? And looking at some of the links has led me to see other pics of her I'd never seen, like one that looks like her eating a meal with other young people in the late 60's, perhaps the Manson group, but I don't recognize anyone.
ReplyDeleteMHN I like the Brooklyn friend story. I don't only mean the accent with the Brits but often just which syllable gets the stress-I love hearing the English, or some of them, say 'controversy.' Where Americans put all the stress on the first syllable, the English make all the syllables about equal or even less emphasis on the first syllable.
Yes, Joesph, it's always those darned Jews, right?
ReplyDeleteSMH
Joseph, I'd love to see your online dating profile. It must be a real hoot. Congratulations on getting your facts absolutely wrong with such medicated vehemence.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIs it possible that the photograph was taken at the guesthouse at Cielo? I was looking at the photo archive over at cielodrive.com. The photograph entitled 'Inside the guesthouse' shows a room whose windows have small square panes.
No need to address that troll. Seriously. I'd ridicule him but there just isn't anything amusing about mental illness.
ReplyDeleteMatt, I for one see no sign of mental illness in equinox's contributions and I've always enjoyed engaging with him. But you're the boss...
ReplyDeleteequinox - the exterior makes it clear it's not any part of Cielo. It looks most like the topography at Hinman's, but even that's just a shot in the dark.
equinox you live in Scotland? i stayed in Barassie Ayr as a teen love Scotland so much
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete@candy and nuts said...
Yes, Candy, I am here in Edinburgh which is, of course, the Capital of Scotland. i am truly amazed to read that you were in Scotland so long ago. We receive many of our American cousins here every year because so many US citizens have a Scottish background, and they come for the Edinburgh International Arts Festival.
Are you able to share with us what brought you over here? It was certainly a long way to travel.
ReplyDeleteMHN said...
"equinox - the exterior makes it clear it's not any part of Cielo. It looks most like the topography at Hinman's, but even that's just a shot in the dark."
MHN, if you look at any interior shot of the Hinman property, and then look at the segment of film where the LASO officers go in, the property looks much too small to offer a view such as that in the photographs featuring Susan Atkins.
MICHAEL said: "He wasn't convicted of throwing the money changers out of the temple.................. Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews, a political charge rather than a religious one."
ReplyDeleteThat very controversial "conflict" affecting the entire world, either directly OR indirectly, even today - IF ever resolved, may actually END man's internal strife forever more.
"I think my job may be about done here.... Taking 2000 years to educate just one soul is too much trouble for an out of work carpenter" J. C.
noxy, agreed. Can anyone state with certainty that she as an LA County bracelet on? I can't see enough detail. Could this picture possibly pre-date her Family days?
ReplyDeleteI don't trust Whitehouse. Frankly he looks far too much like Killer Bob from Twin Peaks:
https://40.media.tumblr.com/6e46d6361f4032ca20329cbac77295fa/tumblr_inline_ntgx2evbyl1sq4bsc_540.jpg
Very true Robert. That conflict is now the main news headline 5 nights a week. Even though we in the West seem determined to pretend something else is behind it all.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteMHN said...
"..I don't trust Whitehouse. Frankly he looks far too much like Killer Bob from Twin Peaks: "
BWAA HA HA.
I disliked Whitehouse after he took a statement from a victim's relative at a parole hearing and abbreviated it on Susan's website to make it look like they were applauding Susan's achievements in prison. In fact, if the statement had been reproduced in its entirety, the relative was saying that yes, Susan has achieved such and such in prison, but its a pity her victim didn't get that opportunity.
equinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"Just as an aside, I believe Bobby was in fact in juvenile hall due to infractions in his home town"
Well, it was because he ran away from home, the second time to his Grannie's house. At the end of the summer he refused to go back home for school so the authorities sent him to a camp for awhile "until I could make a better adjustment."
equinox12314 said...
"I think the paradox that you refer to becomes particularly relevant at the parole hearings because at that meeting, the applicant is expected to take full responsibility for their crime, but the parole board invariably brings up the subject of Charlie. It is easy for the parolee to lapse into talking about Charlie's influence over the group"
That came across strongly in Bobby's 2010 hearing. It's like presiding officer Anderson was there only to tie him in knots at every opportunity. At one point he even told Bobby "this Manson stuff ain't going to go away !"
equinox12314 said...
"Obviously, these people have matured over time and changed as a result of the prison programmes and education they have participated in. However, the Board is also obliged to look at the risk of them re-offending"
True and so they should. Just as true is that they may not pose a re ~ offence risk, especially if they've spent 40 years trying to make good. On the other hand, I've heard paedophiles state that no matter how long they're locked up for, they'll do and say all the right things to secure release, all the while having fantasized about children and when they come out, they'll just go right back into that predatory mode again.
Vile criminals can genuinely change, parole boards can be conned. It's a hard one, hitting the right balance.
equinox12314 said...
"In Tex's case, that is debatable. The fact that he claims he has found Christ is to be applauded, but I am not sure the American people would ever accept a seven time murderer being released, no matter what personal changes they have undergone"
I agree with you.
MHN said...
"Why is the state of your soul on the day you pop your clogs more consequential than the state of your soul on any other day ?"
In a couple of his letters to mixed groups of believers, Paul/Saul of Tarsus compares the christian journey to a race and the New testament has a number of encouragements to finish or complete the journey/race. If a person messes up or quits mid way through, there's always scope for them rejoining that race/journey and completing it. Every believer makes mistakes and possibly wilfully goes against what they believe God deems to be right. And there's always the possibility of forgiveness and having the situation made right. But if you die out of that situation of being in the right place with God, having once been on it and having come off it by your own choice {ultimately}, there's no scope left for things to be put right. Where you're at when you finish is more consequential than where you're at "on any other day", keeping in mind that where you're at when you finish could be the same as where you're at on any other day. Of course, it also means that should you mess up at any given point, so long as you admit it and seek divine forgiveness and smarts to negotiate the rest of the journey, you'll get both.
Grim:
ReplyDelete'But if you die out of that situation of being in the right place with God, having once been on it and having come off it by your own choice {ultimately}, there's no scope left for things to be put right. Where you're at when you finish is more consequential than where you're at "on any other day"'
Yes, I know. But... Why?
What is the theological reasoning behind saying that the state of a human soul at one particular moment outweighs in consequence (and for all eternity) every other moment of our lives put together? You've explained what the belief is adequately well, but I wondered what you thought the theological reasoning was behind that belief. Or is it simply a case of, well Paul wrote it...
ReplyDeleteGrimtraveller said...
"..Well, it was because he ran away from home, the second time to his Grannie's house."
@grimtraveller - I am sure that Bobby was in trouble for damage to property in his home town. I have read so much on this case that I can't remember the precise detail. It was something along the lines of his having damaged shop premises, or set a fire. My overall point was that Pat and Leslie were the only ones who had no previous history with law enforcement at any level.
"Why can't I worship the lord in my own way, like praying like hell on my deathbed?" ~ Homer Simpson
ReplyDeleteequinox my father had a job as a basketball coach for a Scottish national team,,,i visited Edinburgh including the castle had some brilliant fish n chips as well there gorgeous city spent alot of time in troon cumnock,glasgow loved it there so much
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete@candy and nuts
Candy - I am so glad you enjoyed your time here. xxx
"Swear their ain't no heaven and pray there ain't no hell." ~ Blood Sweat & Tears
ReplyDeleteHey MICHAEL: You wanna esplain to everyone WHY Susan and TEX are really "smilling." THEY and Bruce and even Lyndon (the mass murderer) Johnson are ALL going to "Heaven." That's right - THOU even prepareth a table before their enemies. TEX may even do a little "preaching" to Sharon.
ReplyDeleteDon't you just love that "old time religion."
Haha Robert. I suspect Grimtraveller is better placed to answer that one.
ReplyDeleteMHN said...
ReplyDelete"What is the theological reasoning behind saying that the state of a human soul at one particular moment outweighs in consequence (and for all eternity) every other moment of our lives put together ?"
I find 'theology' to be far too impersonal and desiring to wrap things up in neat bundles when life and God are rarely like that. I'm no theologian, though it has it's place at times.
That said, life is a continuum and God is concerned with where we're at with him at any given moment. Things we've done or continue to do can get in the way of where we are with God but one of the major points of Christ coming and dying {if one happens to believe this} was to open the way back to a vibrant relationship with God. Christ warned those that follow him to be watchful and not to start getting sloppy with their lives just because he wouldn't physically be there. If one has been forgiven, that's it, as far as God is concerned, those sins are gone, the slate is wiped clean. It's like a gambler owing the mafia thousands that can't be paid back and because you ask Don Regazzoni for mercy, he concurs and just lets you off. "OK fella, the debt is done, over, wiped clean."
But we're human. The crap in our lives can start to build up again. I guess the reasoning behind how one's final state with the almighty affects eternity is that God is about now with a believer and if a believer quits the race and essentially chooses to remain outside of the relationship with God, whatever they've done in the time since they quit isn't going to be covered by any relationship as it no longer exists. For me, it makes sense to keep short accounts with God, as the old saying goes.
I'd originally made the point about how one finishes in relation to Tex as Equinox and I were commenting about him and I was saying that I believed he had had a life altering encounter with Christ but loads of people have and have, for whatever reason, not continued in that way throughout the rest of their life. Or for periods of it. And some have quit then one day returned.
The concept of being in the 'now' isn't by any means exclusive to Christianity. Blimey, Charles Manson has almost made an industry of it for half a century.
equinox12314 said...
ReplyDelete"Grimtraveller said...
'..Well, it was because he ran away from home, the second time to his Grannie's house.'
@grimtraveller - I am sure that Bobby was in trouble for damage to property in his home town. I have read so much on this case that I can't remember the precise detail"
It's a good thing we don't have to study TLB or "The Manson Family" and do exams. Sometimes there's too much information, too much conflicting information and too many sources !
That said, I'd rather have studied it when I was at school than the stuff I did have to study !
Fiddy 8 said...
ReplyDelete"Why can't I worship the lord in my own way, like praying like hell on my deathbed?"
I used to work with a guy that used to have a similar sentiment. He used to say that when he was old, he'd "get into religion and church". I said to him "you might not get old !"
We were in our 20s at the time.
Robert Hendrickson said...
ReplyDelete"You wanna explain to everyone WHY Susan and TEX are really 'smiling.' THEY and Bruce and even Lyndon (the mass murderer) Johnson are ALL going to 'Heaven.'"
If only it were that simple. Suffice it to say, God knows who is genuine, regardless of what any of us might declare about ourselves. Personally, I think the likes of LBJ, George Dubya, Mr Blair and others who have used God's name in warfare and other governmentally nefarious activities between them have the blood of many on their hands and may be in for a shock. I just hope I'm not in for one too.
"If there's a Rock N Roll Heaven, then you know they got a helluva band!"
ReplyDeleteRighteous Bros.
Mr. Humphrat said...
ReplyDelete"If there's a Rock N Roll Heaven, then you know they got a helluva band!"
Not until Blackmore & Page are on twin leads and Trevor Watts is blowing untamed alto sax !
Oh. So nothing about dying in Christ, being raised to new life as a new creation in Christ, nothing radical, nothing truly transformative? Just having your miserable little sins forgiven? Trying to masturbate less or lie less, or avoid lustful thoughts or whatever. It's about having the slate wiped clean, not about being transformed and transforming the world? I must have read scripture wrong. Maybe too much theology. Or maybe you're right, and Jesus is like a big Oprah in the sky dishing out forgiveness to people who keep coming back for more because they are never truly a new creation, the way St Paul was. The slate wiped clean, again and again. And you think this modern, watered down, de-theologized therapeutic babble was worth His torture, His death, the tearing of the curtain in the Temple, the erupting open of tombs, the gathering of a storm in the sky? So that otherwise normal worldly people can go around telling themselves the big schoolmaster/daddy/therapist in the sky forgives them yet again and again and again?
ReplyDeleteWhat a forlorn little comedy. No wonder Tex is OK with being a Christian but still keeping his mouth shut about murders that might impact his chances of parole. A new creation indeed...
MHN I heard someone once say something like the most devoted, all-in group of people are the people practicing voodoo. The more transformed people are the more rational people will think they are nuts. And the worst place to be is stuck in the middle in your mind. That's where I was for a few years as a young adult. Too painful and self-destructive. If I could have been transformed, fully believing and having a positive impact without harming myself I guess I would have.
ReplyDeleteI asked Mr. Whitehouse where it was taken, but he never replied. I am 95% certain it is the Hinman residence.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at this picture, you can see the leaves of the tree.
ReplyDeletehttp://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0e/69/61/0e69613fd59bbcc8b3b954c14c7da5a2.jpg
Wow interesting thanks D. LaCalandra. Thanks for the photo too, but in the Susan Atkins photo the window is at least 6 frames wide after the jam and the windows in the Hinman photo aren't that wide. But the Hinman residence seems more likely than the Tate residence to me.
ReplyDeleteI apologize if this has been asked and answered before, but Ive just finished a double shift at work so Im fuzzy as hell. My question is can anyone make out what is popping out of her sleeve pocket? Or is it a decal patch? It almost looks like a folded card. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteSusanB said...
ReplyDelete"...My question is can anyone make out what is popping out of her sleeve pocket?"
@SusanB
If you turn the photo sideways, it looks like an I.D. card with someone's photograph on it. If it is an I.D. card, it looks like a man's face on it.
Trust a Scot to spot it! I think you're correct. Thanks for the tip. By the way, I'm half Scottish. My mum's from Glasgow. In 1982/83 I lived for almost a year in Glasgow, visiting family/working and generally lingering. I lived in Sighthill , famous for its tower block flats (since demolished) . My family were amazing people. There were so many differences between my home in Australia and what I experienced in Glasgow. For one thing, it made me realise at a young age how brave my Mum was immigrating all those years ago. I loved Glasgow . My family were awsome. RIP Sighthill flats!
ReplyDeleteGRIMREAPER said: "the blood of many on their hands .... in for a shock..
ReplyDeleteWOW - that about says it ALL. I was brought up with that "Jesus loves everybody, thou shalt NOT Kill" stuff and church every Sunday.
Then one day I got a WELCOME military "draft" notice. So I did some research and discovered LBJ (the US President)wanted ME to KILL some Gooks for him - because they didn't love Jesus. Then the real shock began. I started thinking: How the hell are the Commies going to love Jesus when THEY never even heard of HIM. And If we KILL them first, how are they ever going to "find" Christ.
SHOCK - SHOCK and more SHOCK
Though I didn't quite realize it at the time, my whole world was beginning to open-up AND the TRUTH was about to make ME FREEEEEEEE!
I added the wrong image. There are windows like that on another side of the Hinman house. The image I am going by is a more recent one though. I am not sure if the windows on the house were added later. I doubt it, as it looks as if the house only got new siding.
ReplyDeletehttp://i57.tinypic.com/5mcmcy.jpg
ReplyDeleteMHN said...
ReplyDelete"Oh. So nothing about dying in Christ, being raised to new life as a new creation in Christ, nothing radical, nothing truly transformative?"
Nothing I said runs counter to that. I happened to put it in terms of a race, a journey and a life altering encounter. Those happen to be biblical concepts/analogies.
MHN said...
"Just having your miserable little sins forgiven? Trying to masturbate less or lie less, or avoid lustful thoughts or whatever. It's about having the slate wiped clean, not about being transformed and transforming the world? I must have read scripture wrong"
Those miserable little sins you mention collectively are the reason Christ went through what he did in the first place. There is nothing minimal in God's mind about sin or any of our actions that arise from the state of being in sin. It's God's decision and choice to wipe the slate clean and yes, that is part of it.
MHN said...
"Or maybe you're right, and Jesus is like a big Oprah in the sky dishing out forgiveness to people who keep coming back for more because they are never truly a new creation, the way St Paul was. The slate wiped clean, again and again"
When asked, by the very guys that he selected to go out into the world showing his life through them in the way they lived, how they should approach God in prayer, Christ pointed out they should always ask for forgiveness as they were also to be forgiving. That's not something from the dodgy mind of Tex Watson or grimtraveller or even those that act in such a way because they were never new creations or opted out of being so. That's from Christ. That more than merely implies the reality that believers in Christ, new creations, mess up from time to time and are in need of forgiveness. Paul slipped up. Peter slipped up. The early body of Christ in places like Corinth, Galatia and Ephesus slipped up. Elymas slipped up. A cursory glance at some of those NT letters show people who are addressed as new creations in Christ clearly have slipped up and sinned.
And thus were in need of forgiveness.
MHN said...
"And you think this modern, watered down, de-theologized therapeutic babble was worth His torture, His death, the tearing of the curtain in the Temple, the erupting open of tombs, the gathering of a storm in the sky? So that otherwise normal worldly people can go around telling themselves the big schoolmaster/daddy/therapist in the sky forgives them yet again and again and again?"
The actual watered down, therapeutic babble ? Not in the slightest particular.
I don't dispute for a moment that there are and have been and will continue to be those that display that laxness and play fast & loose with Christ. But that was happening right at the time those NT letters and narratives were being written. It's not an exclusively 20th/21st century problem.
MHN said...
"What a forlorn little comedy. No wonder Tex is OK with being a Christian but still keeping his mouth shut about murders that might impact his chances of parole"
Well, that's a huge assumption on your part. As I stated somewhere earlier, God knows who is genuine and who is not. He's not a flaming idiot over whose eyes the wool can be pulled.
Robert Hendrickson said...
"I was brought up with that 'Jesus loves everybody, thou shalt NOT Kill' stuff and church every Sunday.
Then one day I got a WELCOME military 'draft' notice. So I did some research and discovered LBJ (the US President)wanted ME to KILL some Gooks for him - because they didn't love Jesus"
That however, can't be laid at Christ's door. It doesn't alter a single thing about Christ's love or relevance because a US President sent his country's troops half way across the world on some wild and perilous exploit. LBJ wasn't God.
Oh dear. You think theology likes to reduce complexity to "neat bundles", grim? There's no polite way of saying this: you're 100% wrong.
ReplyDeleteIf you want neat bundles, look no further than contemporary evangelical boilerplate, based on a contemporary reading of (modern English translations of) scripture, divorced from any great understanding of the strands of Judaic theology that formed the basis of everything Jesus and/or Paul did, said, and wrote. Add a little modern psychological chit-chat to taste, stir, and serve.
A neat little bundle indeed.
Ahh - Christ's DOOR, and where might that be ? I'd like to send HIM a letter with a few quesions. IF I wanted to send HIM a $$$ check $$, I can find quite a few "religious" leaders who would accept it for HIM.
ReplyDeletePoint being - YES - we all agree he's quite the "nice" guy and Mr. Devil is the "bad" guy, but exactly how does that relate to life here on earth, in the ONLY world WE know? Like: what does building crystal cathedrals and alters of gold - off the backs of poor folks - have to do with DNA and the complex workings of the human brain ?
AND how does all the above relate to the MANSON case?
I see D Calandra, thanks for the pic.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how well you articulate it, Christianity is philosophical retardation and social cancer that has pretty much corrupted everything and turned society into neurotic wasteland with it's Dualism.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to compare the Manson gang to anything in a religious context, I'd say they were close to a gnostic sect similar to the Canites.
Or the Agori of India.
ReplyDeleteD LaCal said:
ReplyDelete"If I had to compare the Manson gang to anything in a religious context"
You don't! They existed in their own religious context, surely? :)
If I am not mistaken, we match those windows with that window seen in that one 1970 movie the helter-skelter murders. Or it may have been that 1969 movie that Bill Vance was in. It was in one of those movies, the house was behind Spohn ranch near that giant barn.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete@ D LaCalandra - CieloDrive.com has pictures of Gary Hinman's house as it looked back in 1969 : HERE and HERE
Also here is video of the inside of the Hinman house/the murder scene
@Cuntry Trash - "Linda and Abilene" was the name of the movie which Bill Vance appeared in. THIS might be the window that you're referring to. Here's the other picture of Susan in front of the windows for comparison.
ReplyDeleteSusanB said...
Trust a Scot to spot it! I think you're correct. Thanks for the tip. By the way, I'm half Scottish. My mum's from Glasgow.
@Susan, I am amazed to 'meet' you and Candy on a Manson site, as both people who have lived in Scotland! Small world!
It is, indeed. Pleased to know you , too.☺
DeleteMHN said...
ReplyDelete"You think theology likes to reduce complexity to 'neat bundles', grim?"
I didn't say 'reduce.' I didn't mention 'complexity.'
Theology by it's very nature is systematic {which is not in itself a bad thing} and when set in the context of actually knowing and trying to follow God in faith, then yeah, I find 'theology' to be far too impersonal and desiring to wrap things up in neat bundles when life and God are rarely like that.
MHN said...
"There's no polite way of saying this: you're 100% wrong"
It wouldn't be the first time !
MHN said...
"If you want neat bundles, look no further than contemporary evangelical boilerplate, based on a contemporary reading of (modern English translations of) scripture, divorced from any great understanding of the strands of Judaic theology that formed the basis of everything Jesus and/or Paul did, said, and wrote"
Well, I agree with that and have felt this for many years and have had my fair share of hassles as a result. The contemporary evangelical schtick is often clothed in triteness & simplistic shallowness and can be too often devoid of the kind of real substance that produces lasting and testable faith and growth.
Real life isn't often neat.
D. LaCalandra said...
"No matter how well you articulate it, Christianity is philosophical retardation and social cancer that has pretty much corrupted everything and turned society into neurotic wasteland with it's Dualism"
With no help from the rest of the human race before there ever was "Christianity" or in regions where there is basically no "Christianity" or among those who do not in any way subscribe {which would be the majority}.
Methinks thou dost protest too much !
Humbug!
ReplyDeleteAustinAnn, concise and to the point. I love it.
ReplyDeleteGrim, "I find 'theology' to be far too impersonal".
No comment.
I wonder if it could be the house that "hippies" that were friends of Atkins (to use V. Bugliosi's words)were living in. It was on Topanga Canyon Blvd. in Lower Topanga, & Topanga Lane ran in back of it, down an embankment. The foilage really looks like Topanga to me. That's the house she, Grogan, & Linda stopped at the night of the LaBianca murders. Smoked some pot with Susan's friends, then hitched to Spahn. The one friend didn't recall the specific date, but said she "remembered the trio because she was tripping on acid and they looked evil " to her. Might also explain the incense and kitty. If it was when Atkins was taken out - approximately 3 times IIRC from reading it in various books - to try to remember the events, that may have been somewhere they stopped in retracing their steps on those nights. Just my two cents.
ReplyDeleteI've seen pictures of actress Olivia Hussey, where she's dressed in black, in front of the guest bedroom window at Cielo. Taken when she lived there in late '69. She bears an uncanny resemblance to Atkins (if Atkins were pretty and had bathed, that is. And no visible v.d. sores.). The picture isn't of Hussey, though.
Sorry, meant to say Hussey lived there in late '69 - '70. Also, I apologize for all the typos. It's late, & although I'd like to consider going to sleep, all the four-legged creatures in the house have apparently decided to have a party. One just knocked over my water to distract me, & another is busy stealing my snack plate - he thinks I don't notice his paw on the table inching the paper plate away. Typing & sentence structure aren't my current priority...
Delete"Foliage". *!#*!!!
Delete
ReplyDelete@Trilby - Your post made me more curious about the Topanga angle, so I looked around a little bit more and saw that TOTLB had the address of what might be the Topanga house that Susan lived at with Rory White .
Google Streetview of the house (it's the one with the gold lion in the driveway)
It's hard to get a good view of the house with all of the surrounding foliage, but I did find a real estate listing with photos of the house next door, to the right of White's former house. It may be the house that you see to the right, behind the tree in the Susan picture.
This is the listing with photos of the house
Also, for anyone interested : Rory White's website . He has a link on there to his Facebook page, which has a lot more of his photos and one album has pictures of James Whitehouse in it.
Rory seems like a very nice and talented man with an interesting history.
Scrolling through all the posts I have come to the personal conclusion that Cielo is correct, this is not the Tate house, but definitely canyon. Probably Topanga, possibly Hinman's house - and I say that only because of the height, the front windows certainly don't match. The house outside the window is the clue. Can't remember if there are any photos of the house next to Hinman's. Were Did Whitehouse get the idea she's in cuffs? She's so blatantly not.
ReplyDeletethanks for the links to Rory's house Ziggy. That area looks similar in foliage, hillside and casual atmosphere to the Susan Atkins picture to me.
ReplyDeleteTrilby enjoyed your description of your cat party! LOL:
especially....
" another is busy stealing my snack plate - he thinks I don't notice his paw on the table inching the paper plate away."
I love the kitties