February 16, 2000
It seems that in Los Angeles you can't even escape the "LAPD SCANDAL" long enough to have a quiet dinner and take in a movie. We're up to victim's blood splattering on police station walls and carpets, so God, What's next?
This entire event is unfolding just like the Manson Case did 30 years ago. The only difference is murder is now spelled phonetically S C A N D A L.
That police brutality is news to only one black man in these United States (the Chief of police) speaks dramatically to the question of cover up and or conspiracy. And that the mayor and members of the LA City Council would undoubtedly refuse to take polygraph tests only raises more suspicion of complicity.
If you are watching the sinful crumbling of the once great city named Los Angeles, you can see that the standard setup for the little guy to take the fall is already in progress.
But if you, like us, wish to see the actual responsible parties take their due, perhaps you would agree that there is only ONE solution. This is to take the 9 million dollars Bernie Fife wants to con L.A. out of and give it to, none other than, Vincent Bugliosi. Appoint Mr. Bugliosi as Special Prosecutor, just like the famed Kenneth Starr was.
Please understand, we do not endorse or recommend Mr. Bugliosi, as a particular person, nor are we affiliated with him in any way, but we acknowledge that he is quite possibly the ONLY man alive qualified to get the necessary complicity convictions of the higher ups. He has proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that he can accomplish such a feat as evidenced by his record in the Mason Case.
The parallels between the "Manson Case" and the "LAPD Scandal", what with idiots doing the bidding of their leaders are almost exacting and trust us on this one, ONLY a Bugliosi will bet justified conspiracy convictions. It's time we all stop accepting the practice of letting the little guy take the fall.
As for all the deranged cops that have gotten off for so long on the LAPD time honored exercise of Nazi-bation, we suspect most of those little cowards will run and hide at just the thought of Mr. "B" riding into town. And those that don't run will surely prove just how mentally defective they really are.
If you wish to comment on the above opinion, tell us your thoughts and if you are about to be a fall guy, tell us what you know and we'll publish it, only if you so request.
------------------------------------
Hendrickson: "Because Mr "B" has claimed that HE ONLY uses an old typewriter and does NOT even own a computer, this may be the ONLY email of its kind."
BUGLIOSI RESPONDS
Whoever you are, you are obviously a conspiracy theorist and an idiot. Your "pigeon English" and failure to construct a logical line of reasoning clearly indicates that you have no credibility - or education, for that matter - and should simply be ignored. Your disjointed ranting goes nowhere and would undoubtedly fail to go any further even if you had the slightest grasp of proper grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling.
Nevertheless, here's where your reasoning is flawed. First, polygraph tests are so unreliable that they are barred from being introduced into evidence in a court of law. Yet, you want to hold them - or someone's unwillingness to submit to them - up as proof positive evidence. This makes no more sense than O.J. Simpson's defense. It's nothing more than a bunch of garbage without any foundation in reality. The fact of the matter is that you need credible, reliable evidence to back up your claims. In the absence of such, you have nothing more than the ability to raise eyebrows in the audience at a Jerry Springer Show taping.
Next, you completely contradict yourself. First you say this matter should be if away from the control of "Bernie Fife" - in reality the name is Barney Fife, just another incident in which your obvious and blatant stupidity rears its ugly head - and place it in the hands of ‘none other than" Vincent Bugliosi. Shortly thereafter, you say you "do not endorse or recommend Mr. Bugliosi, (sic) as a particular person..." That makes no more sense than the rest of your utterly stupid blithering. That is a complete and total contradiction. It makes as much sense as saying, "This is black, though it is not really black at all, but really white and completely white at that."
Third, what the hell does convicting Charles Manson of the Tate-LaBianca murders have to do with your "SCANDAL". That was a murder trial, not a scandal. The only thing remotely scandalous was the fact that these crimes were very high profile - due to the victims chosen - and the particularly gruesome way in which they were carried out. Furthermore, the challenging part of that case was convincing a jury that Manson was convinced that the Beatles were speaking to him through their music, that Helter Skelter was his way of igniting a race war that would ultimately leave Manson himself in charge of the world, and that Manson exerted control over a bunch of hippies to the extent of controlling even their sex lives. Is that what you're claiming, that this alleged "SCANDAL" involves a musical group communicating with its perpetrator(s), that the ultimate goal is igniting a race war to empower the perpetrator(s), and that it involves controlling every last detail of these people's lives? From your ineloquent ravings, it sounds more like an internal matter to be handled within an organization.
Finally you claim resolution of this matter might show "how mentally defective (these people) are." Sir, I suggest your website merely shows how mentally defective you and anyone who would buy into your ridiculous rhetoric and far-fetched notions are.
It's been said that , a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." If that's true, then I'm afraid you, sir, are extremely dangerous.
------------------------------------
HENDRICKSON RESPONSE
Dear Mr. Bugliosi:
Because you appear to comprehend the complicated world of the English language, would you be so kind as to explain to us, in layman's terms, the meaning of the following?
1) "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right.... to have the assistance of Counsel for his defense."
2) "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Also, because you were deeply involved in the decision making process, with respect to "The Court Trial of the Century", could you explain the LEGAL grounds upon which Charles Manson was denied his Constitutional Right to represent himself with "the assistance of counsel"?
We humbly await your reply.
P.S. Please don't misinterpret our motives. We really don't give a damn whether MANSON is innocent, guilty, another messiah or just a mass murderer, but if the sacred Constitution upon which the glorious United States was founded has been reduced to a mere piece of' Ebay memorabilia, then we would like to inform our many listeners worldwide, that America just isn't what its forefathers had in mind.
By the way, it was uneducated Blacks, Mexicans and poor White folk that spilled their blood on battlefields so that YOU could attend the college of your choice. We certainly hope to help break that bad habit.
And while we have your attention, we have a most serious question, With respect to the LAPD SCANDAL if police officers have become such good actors that not even educated "officers of' the Court" can detect their false testimony, how can ordinary jury folk or "moon rocks" as one famous prosecutor describes them, be expected to make JUST decisions?
We, unlike the traditional media, are offering you a worldwide forum in which to express yourself UNEDITED and UNCENSORED and we admire your passion.
By the way again, in the third paragraph of' your letter, you make a comment with regard to our "utterly stupid blithering" in the context "This is black, though it is not really black at all, but really white and completely white at that."
Welcome to the 21st Century Mr. Bugliosi, the dinosaurs are gone and it's a NEW age. The following is a full-page advertisement taken from a recent national publication.
Now, pretend you are a detective and see how many inconsistencies or gray areas you can find in this NEW media ploy to raise money for low-income lawyers.
92 comments:
Is there a way we can see a copy of the, "... full-page advertisement taken from a recent national publication"?
How did we verify this?
The Battle for the Ages lol
Amusing that Bugs doesn't appear to know who he's responding to? As bugs participated in the Manson Documentary I would have thought they had a cordial relationship...
By the way - by using the phrase judicial genius or something to that affect when introducing him and allowing him a wider audience to preach the shelter Skelter motive in an Acadamy Award Nominated film - wouldn't YOU lol Mr H be as responsible as anyone for spreading the myth of HS? :)
what I wouldn't give to moderate the debate between the ultimate straight man prosecutor versus the modern day hippy Yoda.
No nonsense versus no sense makes sense
Now that would make a blog post ;)
That's the point, I guess. He obviously knew Robert H but pretended not to. He said he didn't have a computer, but here's an email from him to RH.
The poor milkman.
Vince was very upset that I posted his email with his email address.
HE threatened to sue me if I did NOT remove it, so I blacked it out.
The funny thing is, I was serious, and I thought HE was the only one capable of bringing the "bad" cops to justice. Of course the "bad" cops had a very brutal thing going on in the LAPD, so even Bugliosi would NEVER mess with THEM.
This email, of course, controverts HIS claim that HE only uses an old typewriter and NOT a computer. Sometimes an idiot can bring out the best in the worst of us.
Lol I read this so early I didn't catch that.
The first buzz of the day is always the strongest :)
Robert, how did you conclude that this was from Vince? You said he threatened to sue you. Did he do that in person or by phone? I'm just curious because Vince was famously non technical and it only takes seconds to create a fake email address to pose as someone else. I can't tell you how many people contact me pretending to be someone they're not. Anyway, I'm just curious if you were able to get Vince in person to acknowledge that he was the sender?
Whoever taught VB his "attack the messenger" style really over did it.
The Bug became known for sending snotty emails to authors, researchers, etc. especially regarding his JFK book So he did pick up the technology eventually. Or he browbeat some poor underling into responding for him.
Good point CieloDrive. Does it sound like ANY emails you got?
I think HIS being very upset about my posting HIS email address,
makes me think it is authentic. A troll would have enjoyed having
folks respond to the HIM thinking it's the Prosecutor. BUT hey, in
this Cyber world, nobody KNOWS for sure who they are communicating with.
BTW, That Hatami episode actually reveals just what
Vince was all about. "Smoke and Mirrors" as the saying goes in the legal world.
Even I fell for it, in MY book I even talk about how Hatami signed Sharon's Death
Warrant with that March Incident. AND boy have I gotten a reaction from that.
Again, thank YOU and all the folks that provide a new perspective on so many aspects
of this case. When I made the film, I had tunnel vision, which was necessary to get the
movie done against all odds. NOW I can reflect and consider many thoughts.
Mr. Hendrickson I thought that Judge Older decided that Charlie could not represent himself and that Messrs. Bugliosi and Stovitz were okay with CM representing himself. This was written in HS but I imagine there are Court transcripts out there that say the same thing that maybe Cielo Drive might have?
Vera
I saw some dried roadkill this morning. It was over by the In and Out Burger on Orange near Hollywood High. I think it was a ferret that had been repeatedly run over, still had some blood stains but was pretty dried out. It reminded me of your lonely, ignored, uglyass snatch.
Thinking of you,
Col
Ha-ha Vera said she was as never coming back. Liar! You love us
The demonstrative jealousy of the dynamic duo would be amusing if it weren't so sad.
@ R.Hendrickson. You never publiced anything like this when Bugliosi was still alive ?? Has this anything to do with it ?? I mean is there a purpos you do this AFTER his death ??
Owhhhh and @Patty, I do too love ya all, its like an adiction without all the Bad things ... Ya Know ??
@ CollScott, You know in these circumstances , half rotten half dried out , They SMELL Delicious... Ha Ha HA LOL !!
Ms Harlow:
Bugliosi said "The Judge [Keene} concluded, and I think justifiably so, that 'Mr. Manson' is incapable of representing himself."
Mr. Bellz: The letter has been POSTED on MY website www.exclusivefilmnet.com since the day I received it. Only HIS email address has been blacked out, because HE claimed my posting that was an invasion of HIS privacy.
I think the ST may have gotten it right: Nonsense vs NO sense = makes sense.
There needs to be a blog post on this pronto!
https://www.instagram.com/straightsatans/
I talked to the film maker. Much to the dismay of Austin Ann, the story that Bobby and Manson has been telling turns out, is absolutely true and has been corroborated by ex-members! Not that I and other didn't already know that.
Archives go ahead and say more... Drugs?
I love how Hendrickson says he doesn't care if Manson is innocent or guilty- the precious "Constitution" matters more? NOT putting the right people behind bars for murders matters more than what slave-owner George Washington wrote in 1776????? BLAME THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS WHO DECIDED to rest the case because they were so obviously guilty. Van Houten admitted it to her attorney only 4 months after the murders- go to CieloDrive.com to hear her confess on tape to her lawyer.
MansonArchives, good call. Some cool photos and the documentary on the link.
There is mention of a forthcoming documentary which makes mention of the familiar Beausoleil bad drug motive but no 'proof' as yet on the site.
I didn't know DeCarlo lost the club their 1% status or that Robert Reinhart was Bobby D. During.
Manson Family Archives - Thanks very much for this link lol-
I love these old vintage videos so much. As a guy who wasn't old enough to get to experience these times- I love to watch anything filmed back then to see what things really looked like. Books and print can only do so much even with an imagination like mine..
This is very cool and I am going to not going to be able to get the theme song out of my head forever lol.... " The Harley between my legs" dadaddada dadaddada :)
I watched the entire 30 minutes plus and was enthralled, but no mention of the Straight Satans,Manson, Or Bobby/Gary?
Also clicked on the links below the video link and although one of pics of George has a start link- the video just shows some kid yelling at someone in the other room. George never speaks himself?
Is there another one coming? I couldn't find anyone saying anything about Gary or Bobby o nthis page and I clicked every link I saw?
If there is video of someone who was in the Satans saying that the Mesc deal really went down- that would be a really big deal to me...
By the way, Im way too much of a puss to ever have been a biker. Watching them rip the clothes of a girl and take turns pouring wine on her ass and licking it is funny as hell, but I couldn't date someone who does that lol
plus I would have gotten my ass kicked alot
Manson Family Archives said...
There needs to be a blog post on this pronto!
https://www.instagram.com/straightsatans/
I talked to the film maker. Much to the dismay of Austin Ann, the story that Bobby and Manson has been telling turns out, is absolutely true and has been corroborated by ex-members! Not that I and other didn't already know that
As I pointed out to you in much detail, even supposing Bobby's story is true, it makes absolutely no difference to the eventual outcome nor the fact that Bobby killed Gary Hinman {and he did not "kill him over drugs"} and that Susan, Charlie and Bruce {and indeed Mary who got immunity from prosecution} were all conspirators by the code laid down by California state. I think that law leaves much to be desired but Charlie & Bobby can't really cry over their incarceration on Hinman.
By the way, that Straight Satans photo montage is really good. The film by Titus Moody that people kept saying was cheesy is actually quite revealing for 1965. I don't know if the music was put on later or whether it formed part of the current soundtrack, but if it was from 1965, it's quite a window into how popular music was shifting from song oriented to the jam oriented sounds that became a major element of psychedelia and nascent progressive rock.
Robert Hendrickson said...
Bugliosi said "The Judge [Keene} concluded, and I think justifiably so, that 'Mr. Manson' is incapable of representing himself."
Well, from where the judge stood, revoking Charlie's pro~per was justifiable. But that's a very noncommittal statement from Bugliosi. He puts the onus on the judge rather than saying "I agree with him" {although he may have said that later which will leave me with egg on my face !}. When you look at one of Charlie's motions for a wholesale review/dumping of the judicial system, you can see why the judge had no patience with him and said he can't represent himself.
But more importantly, when Kanarek was hovering on the scene, Bugliosi stated in court that the prosecution had no objection to Charlie representing himself with a lawyer of his choice to assist him. He wanted Charlie testifying on the stand and knew he'd do that if he were his own lawyer. He was also worried that lack of pro~per would be grounds for a future appeal.
I've long held that the judge should have simply warned Charlie to stop the daft motions, concentrate on his case and left him as his own lawyer though I understand why he didn't. I think Bugliosi knew Charlie could do an interesting job because he'd been calling most of the shots behind the scenes anyway, as your book shows.
I see Christopher is right.. there must be another coming soon..
I await with great anticipation ;)
I didn't know DeCarlo lost the club their 1% status or that Robert Reinhart was Bobby D. During.
I didnt see anything about that either?? Oh well- I will let the buzz settle and go look at it again later... I wanna watch the video again anyway lol
" The wind in my hair, and THE HARLEY BETWEEN MY LEGS" dadaddada dadaddada :)
St Circumstance said...
I watched the entire 30 minutes plus and was enthralled, but no mention of the Straight Satans,Manson, Or Bobby/Gary?
Also clicked on the links below the video link
Is there another one coming? I couldn't find anyone saying anything about Gary or Bobby on this page and I clicked every link I saw?
I got the impression from some of the blurb and from MFA that the film is in the making.
I was quite surprised to see Black and Indian looking bikers in that film.
By the way, I'm way too much of a puss to ever have been a biker
I loved bikes as a kid and always wanted one. The first one I ever rode, I ended up crashing into a graveyard; the first thing I saw as I recovered and looked up was a headstone. That spooked me for a moment. Then I realized the engine was on my foot {I was wearing flip flops} and my foot was burned. My neck was stiff for ages and I didn't dare tell my parents what had happened so I suffered in silence which was daft as my Mum was a nurse.
I prefer cars !
Lol
The drug burn story has been corroborated by at least 3 former members. 86 George who gave Charlie the sword was tracked down and opens up about the entire thing. It appears more indepth details about Hinman's van is revealed too. Beausoleil has agreed to do an interview for it and Gypsy who dated a SS is going to be interviewed as well.
"Danny DeCarlo- the one who testified against Beausoleil, Manson, and Bruce Davis in the Hinman, and Tate trials. He was the star witness, who helped prosecuting attorney Vincent Bugliosi create the "Helter Skelter" race war theory in order to deter the jury away from his involvement in the Hinman murder. To save his ass, and the Straight Satans, he testified that Beausoleil, Manson, and Bruce Davis killed Gary Hinman BC he wouldn't give them a "$20,000 inheritance" that they wanted to use to finance their "race war." The real story is that Bobby Beausoleil found out that it was the 10th anniversary of the Straight Satans, and he knew that his friend Gary Hinman had a stash of mescaline. So he middle manned a deal getting Decarlo 1,000 hits of mescaline for $1,000. The drugs ended up making the club sick, so Decarlo and a few Satans went up to the ranch, beat Beausoleil up and said "get us our fucking money back." He told them that he didn't have the money, and that he bought the drugs from Gary Hinman, so DeCarlo drove him to Hinmans house and dropped him off. Bobby ended up killing Hinman. Decarlo subsequently walked away a free man, and literally disappeared into thin air. Beausoleil has been in jail for 46 years, and has had 17 parole hearings, at which he's told the same story every time. Nobody has been able to corroborate his story, until now. But more on that later. (His testimony also have the club "snitch jackets" which destroyed their credibility within then 1% community. This was the beginning of the end for the club)
On the right is Straight Satan Bobby D. During this arrest he used the alias of Robert Reinhardt. Remember the Satans who stabbed the guy 79 times and threw him in the canal? This was him. His whereabouts are also unknown."
Yup, Reinhardt stabbed a guy 79 times. You can understand why nobody wanted to implicate SS.
Grim, youtube Black Angels (1970) to see a whole gang of black bikers. Something to do with Merrick and partially filmed at Spahn if memory serves correctly.
St, check the comments. That's where the mention of SS being snitch jackets were posted. Also a mention of Manson having a trike that never ran and not many SS cared for his company.
I do tend to agree with Manson that DeCarlo was up at Saphn hiding out from his wife.
Grim, if true another important aspect is that Manson did not order a hit on Hinman to be carried out by Atkins, Brunner and Beausoleil. Whilst I can conceive of Manson upon arriving acting in self defence when faced with a gun toting Hinman, I have a problem with the time between the phone call and Manson arriving with Davis. Could Hinman have held a gun on three people for around half an hour without phoning for back up himself?
MR.Roberts....:
I can sense YOUR frustration, as I also understand that the once "precious" Constitution once actually stood for something. BUT it all began to change when LBJ got the US Congress
to forgo THEIR power ( via the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution )to declare WAR and let the President decide, on HIS own, who and when to ATTACK with the FULL force of the most powerful military on earth.
AND for a decade AFTER the Vietnam War, there would be NO mention of that holocaust in public school books.
AND now, after all these years, a "Communist" just like the ones WE fought in Vietnam may very well become the next President of the United States.
Go figure out how significant one Charles Manson and the VICTIMS of TLB will be then?
Thanks Christipher. I am very interested and anxious to see this video and if true that several SS back up the Himman story it will change my mind about something I felt strongly about for a long time.
I have asked why there has never been one biker who verified this story in all thes years. If there is- I will stand corrected....
There has always been an issue as to whether Charles Manson actually foresaw some kind of actual Battle of Armageddon or whether HE was just trying to ignite some kind of Black and White race WAR.
So today, my crazy way of "thinking" realized something significant, based upon several things I have known about, and "pieces" of a puzzle recently falling into some kind of sensible order.
I have been working of architectural plans for a small house and months ago the building department rejected my plans because many elements of the NEW Green Code were missing.
Hell, I didn't even know there was a GREEN Code. The new Code includes not only insulation type requirements, but also space requirements for disabled persons.
Of course, I have been bitching like crazy, because why should I have to prepare my house for disabled folks.
Well, can anyone guess WHY the STATE would be requiring new construction to make way for disabled folks? HINT, HINT - The "Habitat for Humanity" organization is already building houses for our disabled veterans - dismembered in the Middle -East WAR.
So is it possible, the government is "preparing" for some kind of Armageddon with ISIS ?
Actually Bobby changes his story often. The drug burn is just a ploy to distance himself from Manson so he might have a chance of being paroled.
Jody, there are times like now that I wish Blogger had a Like Button.
Jody I have agreed with that since I first learned about Bobby.
But what if there really is proof otherwise?
That's all I'm saying
I guess people have shit in their ears or something.
So what was Hinman about? Needing money to go down in a hole to find milk and honey?
Many of us knew Bobby wasn't lying. Bobby wouldn't lie to his close friends and supporters.
It's been CORROBORATED NOW. No "if" about it.
Everything I have to say about Hinman is in the essay I wrote on it. The documentary will proof once and for all that Manson and Beausoleil are the only ones who have told some truth. I think people are simply butt hurt over the idea that Manson might have been more honest than the heroes who prosecuted him.
86 George.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BAlSKbgpjYb/
Manson Family Archives said...
The drug burn story has been corroborated by at least 3 former members
And this changes things how ? None of them told Bobby to kill Gary Hinman. None of them were there when he killed Gary Hinman.
I've been open to the idea of Bobby's tale having much truth to it for ages. I admit, there are parts that I'm highly sceptical of too, but I'm up for giving him the benefit of the doubt. But I'll say it again, no matter how you play it, it does not change i] Bobby killing Hinman and admitting it.
ii] Charlie administering a blow with a sword that the ME deemed as "possibly fatal." In other words, he could have died had he not received proper medical care. What stopped him dying of that wound was Bobby's fatal one.
iii] Susan Atkins wiping the house down of prints and being around for all the damaging and fatal blows.
iv] Bruce giving Bobby his gun and driving off in one of Gary's cars.
According to the state law, they were guilty then and still are. We may have problems with that law, I certainly think it's too absolute, but it was the law then.
It's a good back story but has no real relevance to who killed whom and who was part of the conspiracy. Charlie does not need to have not ordered Hinman's death for him to have gone down for the murder; that whack with the sword is ultimately what did for him.
The blurb you've included about Danny DeCarlo is riddled with inaccuracies and reminds me of what Ruby Pearl's obituary said about her in connection with seeing guns & knives in Charlie's dune buggy, calling the sheriff and him being taken into custody. Did he testify that Manson and Davis killed Hinman ? Genuine question there. To say he helped VB create the HS race war theory defies credibility or any kind of sense. Funnily enough, you went to great lengths to emphasize the opposite in a previous thread when you said "DeCarlo and Springer said nothing about Helter Skelter." Which is it ?
DeCarlo was hardly the star witness in TLB. This star witness bit gets confusing, one minute it's Kasabian. Then it's Watkins. Now it's DeCarlo. And the trial in which DeCarlo was a main witness, the one against Bobby, VB wasn't the prosecutor in at trial. He was taken off it.
As for helping create HS to deter the jury away from his involvement in the Hinman murder, that doesn't even make sense. Bobby was prepared to put the hat on Charlie, why not put DeCarlo in it ? Especially if it were true. Neither Susan Atkins nor Mary Brunner ever mentioned being driven to Hinman's by Danny and Bruce has admitted he drove the troupe there himself. Are we to believe that Bruce is so magnanimous that he has been prepared to spend almost half a century in jail when it should have been DeCarlo ? And how was DeCarlo saving the Satans' arses ? If Bobby's story is true, they wanted their money back from Bobby because they gave it to Bobby. And how could DeCarlo and a few Satans go up to the ranch to give Bob the beats ? He was already living there. And has Bobby told this story at 17 parole hearings ? And one thing that occurs to me, would Charlie and indeed the rest of the Family have stood for Danny landing Bobby in the shit like that if indeed he did ? Charlie and Bruce would have known of his involvement given that they too were involved. Yet we are to believe they all continued happily eating together with DeCarlo despite what he'd done ? And rather than sort him out they planned to go butcher some people to make it look like a copycat was running amuck ?
In common with much of the dancing that takes place in order to try and discredit HS, Bugliosi and LE, far more incredulous and convoluted stuff needs to have taken place than a psychedelic scene that, when all is taken into account, not only is completely in step with the times and evidence, is also plausible.
Grim is pretty good lol
It's probably not the mystery of the 20th century that many 21st bloggers try to make it out to be, but more than likely, just fucked up kids in the 60's acting like, give me a moment to find the exact words, acting like fucked up kids in the 60's.
The good people aren't always so good. And the bad people aren't always so bad. Where am I wrong in all this?
Your not Tom. But what these fucked up kids of the 60's did was a little worse than usual no?
Grim is right. Bobby is where he belongs no matter the reason for killing Gary. Bobby had changed his story a few times by his own admission
But still lol. If the drug burn is true it's interesting to me. It opens other doors.
But as Grim said. Whatever the real reason. The right people still paid for the crimes
Thank you Matt.
I am Tom, by the way. I'd like to ast you all a question.
What happens to a decent human being who got caught up into drugs, idealology and confusion in their youth?
Should they sit in a cell for 40 years? Are they terrible people not worthy of your Christian salvation?
If a person has matured and poses no threat to the public, is is it worth anyone's interest to incarcerate them?
What is our greatest gift in life? I say it is compassion. Second would be understanding.
Hello Tom. You make a great point. I only ask if these were decent human beings. There were many caught up in the times who made mistakes. Many
I draw my own personal line at those who crossed the line to the tune of a hundred stab wounds. Killing a begging pregnant woman. That about does it for me.
I agree that eventually even they deserve forgiveness
I disagree they deserve freedom. They were allowed to avoid the death penalty. They forfeit the right to be trusted among us forever
I wouldn't have executed any of them. Not even Tex. I do t believe in killing for any reason
That for me is compassionate enough
For me, compassion is always the overriding principle. I can't believe that people who comment on these blogs can't remember a time when they were young, fucked up, and trying to believe in something, and just got it wrong, can't identify with young girls in the 60's who saw something horribly wrong in their world and reacted to it.
How do you keep peaceful elderly inmates incarcerated in overcrowded institutions? It boggles my mind and frankly I can't understand how it is a topic for debate.
I would have kept the names of any Straight Satans off the record too, even if they were testifying. Not with the girls like Sandy and Squeaky on the streets.
Who gives a shit what Mary and Susan said? Susan said they killed Hinman because she tried to have sex with him, but could only get off on violence and it got too out of hand and he was killed. That's the kind of shit she said.
Don't give me what Bruce has said. Bruce made the foolish mistake of naming Larry Baily as being present during Hinman and look at the stink they caused over that.
Mary said whatever she had to say.
Nobody really knows what they said off record in private either. I doubt the prosecutor and LA would indict two of their star witnesses.
The changes in Bobby's story were most likely him just trying to tell the truth. But obviously nobody wants to hear that, not the board, not the public.
Manson should have been accessory before the fact. Not first degree murder and DeCarlo should have done time.
Bobby would have been cut loose sooner if not for this bullshit "race war" motive, if the case was presented in the proper light. IT DOES make a difference. When you got a vicious gang breathing down your neck, one who stabbed a guy almost 80 times for having a tattoo, you can resort to some desperate measures.
If it doesn't make a difference, why do people get so crazy over the idea some of the victims were dope dealers? Because it's society's judgement that those who deal mean less. Nobody really cries when a dope dealer is shot. The media and the prosecutors would have a harder time getting their convictions and selling papers without the dualism they based the case on.
Manson Family Archives said...
I guess people have shit in their ears or something
As opposed to it flying out of other places ?
Bobby wouldn't lie to his close friends and supporters
Like his family that he admits to lying to ?
It's been CORROBORATED NOW. No "if" about it
There are loads of things in this case that have been corroborated and have stood the test of time for nearly half a century. But you don't accept those. So perhaps we all suffer from selective acceptance of corroboration....
The documentary will proof once and for all that Manson and Beausoleil are the only ones who have told some truth
Using your own standard that you utilize whenever there is "proof" that you don't want to accept, the documentary will prove only what you want it to. In the same way you shovel nothing but doubt on the likes of Ella Jo or Danny D and give reasons for it, one could easily do the same when it comes to bikers who were pissed at Danny D for losing the Satans their prized 1%er status.
As I keep saying, representatives on just about every side of the TLB saga are tainted in one way or another.
I think people are simply butt hurt over the idea that Manson might have been more honest than the heroes who prosecuted him
Firstly, Vincent Bugliosi is no hero. He was a lawyer that worked both sides of the fence. He did a good prosecutorial job in TLB. A plumber that fixes your leaky taps is hardly a hero. Secondly, while Charlie speaks some truth and much insightful sense, he also has lied his blaggers off. His own trial testimony shows that in his words regarding the arrest of "Robert Beausoleil." He has shown that down the line, for example telling Vanity Fair in 2011 that on the night of the LaBianca deaths he went to see Harold True when he knew Harold had left the house some 10 months previously. There are few heroes in this saga.
Robert Hendrickson said...
There has always been an issue as to whether Charles Manson actually foresaw some kind of actual Battle of Armageddon or whether HE was just trying to ignite some kind of Black and White race WAR
It's both. The battle he foresaw gave rise to speeding it up so it would happen imminently.
christopher butche said...
youtube Black Angels (1970) to see a whole gang of black bikers. Something to do with Merrick and partially filmed at Spahn
In Robert's book, I remember Laurence Merrick talking to some of the women about that film. It never twigged that it involved, well, Black 'angels' ! It was filmed at a nearby ranch though Merrick had wanted to use Spahn. As the film dates were 1st to 9th August, Robert points out that if it had been done at Spahn, the Family would've been too busy being extras to go out murdering.
Personally I would have released all of them around the 25 year mark. Tex possibly 35 and Manson 15 years.
However, were I an elected official I would keep them in forever owing to the notoriety of the case.
Lt Calley helped kill over 300 (including babies) and served 18 months or so, and a few more years confined on a very large army base. I mention him because the verdicts came in on the same day.
Well, it isn't what you would do personally. It's what the law of California is and is suppose to be. And if it were followed to the letter of the law, almost all of these offenders would have been released, gone on with their lives, and never been heard from again.
But because of their notoriety, and I am not saying that doesn't play into the outcome of things, they got the maximum of penalties, without ever a fair chance to rehabilitate or
be evaluated with their actual role in the crime.
Manson Family Archives said...
Who gives a shit what Mary and Susan said?
What Mary said helped land Bobby in the gas chamber.
Susan said they killed Hinman because she tried to have sex with him, but could only get off on violence and it got too out of hand and he was killed. That's the kind of shit she said
Yeah, to RoseAnne Walker, her prison mate. She later gave the reason why she lied in jail about sex with Hinman, murdering Sharon Tate and tasting her blood and some guy blowing his brains out as he ejaculated in her. Why are her reasons to be rejected but Bobby's reasons for lying and changing his stories to be accepted ? Oh yeah, because you have a preconceived notion that you must follow through on, even to the extent of disregarding the words of Bruce, Mary and Susan who were there.
Don't give me what Bruce has said
But I will. His own words partly have kept him inside for 40+ years. He says he drove the others to Hinman's.
The changes in Bobby's story were most likely him just trying to tell the truth. But obviously nobody wants to hear that
Well here's an irony. A man changes his story three times but nobody wants to hear that. Members of his troupe change their stories, but you don't want to hear that. You're no different to the people you criticize. You do exactly the same things and respond in the same way that you criticize them for doing.
By the way, how do you try to tell the truth by lying twice ?
Manson Family Archives said...
Bobby would have been cut loose sooner if not for this bullshit "race war" motive, if the case was presented in the proper light
Bobby would probably have been paroled sooner had he not been connected with Charlie, of that I have no doubt. In that I agree. But it really is on him that the case wasn't presented in what you call the proper light. How many of the Family came out during either of his trials to help him or speak up for him ? When he put the hat on Charlie in his second trial, he presented himself as a liar to the very people, the only people that had a chance to save him, the jury. That follows on his record ad infinitum. I wouldn't be surprised if various parole boarders have appraised themselves of his words in John Gilmour's 1971 book, "The Garbage People", a book which really does not show him in a good light in terms of being a penitent young man who made one mistake and wasn't enmeshed in the criminal mindset beforehand. George Stimson in a fairly recent thread made the observation of Bobby's cocky attitude in the first 10 or so years of incarceration and some of his infractions while inside have simply added to the picture. So yeah, the Manson connection hasn't helped him and nor has the attitude of some parole boarders but it's not a case of the holy innocents here, he hasn't always helped himself either.
IT DOES make a difference. When you got a vicious gang breathing down your neck, one who stabbed a guy almost 80 times for having a tattoo, you can resort to some desperate measures
How could the gang be breathing down his neck when according to his story the vehicles were supposed to be the bargaining chips that made good ? Not to mention, he was in jail. As for the 80 stab killing, was that common knowledge to the Family ? Did it even happen while they were still out ? Funny thing, the Family stood up to the Satans the night before the Spahn raid. Despite all the threats they issued.
If it doesn't make a difference, why do people get so crazy over the idea some of the victims were dope dealers?
Simply because it hasn't been definitively established that they were. Drug users, yes. Dealers ? The jury is still out on that one. For example it is incontrovertible that Charles Watson was a drug dealer. It is definitively established that Linda Kasabian brought a huge bag of LSD with the Melton $5000 ~ but nothing thereafter to connect her with dealing.
Some of us try not to state as definitive what has not been established as so. What can't be established we state as belief or supposition and we don't insult those that disagree with our suppositions or beliefs.
TomG said...
For me, compassion is always the overriding principle
I agree. But systems don't seem to have that built in. Sometimes people's compassion can help alter soulless situations. Other times, city hall wins out.
TomG said...
I am Tom, by the way
I think Jody was thanking Matt for his "like button" comment !
I'd like to ask you all a question.
What happens to a decent human being who got caught up into drugs, idealology and confusion in their youth?
Should they sit in a cell for 40 years? Are they terrible people not worthy of your Christian salvation?
That is dependent on so many variables that could furnish a number of different answers. It's usually an interesting debate.
If a person has matured and poses no threat to the public, is is it worth anyone's interest to incarcerate them?
Matured, remorseful, old, no threat, wants to spend their last few years doing right, then no.
What is our greatest gift in life? I say it is compassion. Second would be understanding
I'd say it was love because efforted understanding is a necessary component of love.
Dennis, you seem awfully critical of things that don't necessarily support your opinions. Do you think you are at all critical of the people that make statements that do support your line of thinking?
Sure I am. Of course I am critical of things and people that don't support my opinions. Who isn't? I don't even consider most of what I think to be opinion, but rather the simple truth and fact. That's called conviction. It's not an opinion to me that Hinman was killed over a dope deal involving the Straight Satans. That's what happened. At this point, it's the equivalent of telling me the sky is orange when I know it's blue.
People are mixed up in their minds. They spend endless hours debating over if Hinman was a dealer or not, then once it starts to look as if he was, suddenly it doesn't matter. It mattered enough for them to argue that he wasn't though. Suddenly, the truth doesn't "change anything". Despite being members of various groups dedicated to the subject with "truth" in the title. If it doesn't change anything, then perhaps they should just cozy up with their copy of Helter Skelter and call it a day.
Hinman being a dealer or not, isn't even the issue. People are so hung up on that, because they're afraid of the lines being blurred between victim and killer and it has zero to do with anything but what THEY think. Just look at how angry some get by the mere suggestion. As if it's a big insult. They don't want to believe Hinman was selling dope, because of their own prejudice against those who do and it terrifies them Bugliosi and the other prosecutors weren't the white knights they want to believe they were.
TomG.. I hear ya.. But I don't think they need to be free. Ya, I remember what it is like to be young and making mistakes. But murder is not a normal part of youth and I think they need to stay where they are.
I don't know Dennis, regardless of what people believe, from where I sit it still seems like it's based more on supposition than fact. And whether it's something you agree or disagree with, you have to question the context of everything. We deal with fragments of information and it's often difficult to get a clear picture without letting our minds fill in the blanks. Be careful over committing.
Don't forget the sunset, they sky is plenty orange and blue then.
I could not more strongly disagree with the comments put forth here. The spirit of the day, and not this litigious of this fact or that alleged fact, is what I'd like to call attention to.
Did every moment in your life, did you have complete control of your actions, and there probable outcomes?
Or did you have a couple of bobbles? shitfaced, drunk. That's not me. But I guess it is in the record books.
I think birds make mistakes. And I don't think putting birds in a prison cell for 40 years erases mistakes or heals anyone.
Lets say:
Himnan was a dope dealer who sold Bobby dope that made the SS sick.
The SS demanded their money back.
Bobby went to get it from Hinman, who claimed he didn't have it and was tortured, maimed, and killed rather than turning it over.
What happened to the money?
Welp, they gangsters. They don't follow the rules! Who knew in 1969 that people rebelled? Not me. Birds nowadays will go to a Donald Trump rally because he builds stuff and will make Mexico pay for it. That's where we are.
Grim,
This is the first I remember seeing where Linda bought a huge bag of LSD with the Melton $5,000. I've got a few books, can you source that inforation so I can refresh my memory?
Okay. So you all talk around me. That the point I bring up that your society incarcerates people for decades is not your subject to deal with. Fuck them losers.
Go back to your phones and ignore misery from a fellow human being. Or the mindset that let's it go on.
It's not somebody else's girl that they got back there. It's my girl that they got back there.
Listen to me carefully, because I don't want you to misunderstand me. My ho is coming out the door and your all gonna like it.
Tom- If you care that much I hope they let LULU go. I dont care that much any longer. I agree that she isn't going to hurt anyone and at this point if they let her out after 40 years, it wouldn't cause me to any anger or resentment.
Of course, I wont shed any tears either if they dont, and I don't think they will. If Sadie couldn't go home in her condition, I wouldn't hold out too much hope for any of the others.
I agree with a lot of your rationale except in one area. They are NOT like alot of other kids or young people of the 60's or any other time.
Making mistakes of youth is forgivable to a certain extent. Even killing someone when your young can be forgiven in a couple of extreme incidents. Accidents do happen. Maybe a DUI where someone causes a death as a teenager for example. Playing with mathces and starting a fire... a fistfight where someone hits there head and serious injury results.
All of these are things that happen to lots of young kids who are stupid and making mistakes our of age and lack of life experience. And all of these can be understood and forgiven with time. Stealing CD's and candy from stores, hijacking golf carts, letting the air out of school bus tires- this is the kind of trouble most kids I knew growing up with go in... I get it some violence and bad mistakes happen to some as well. But not like what they did. nothing normal at all about that...
To me- it is a completely different act and person when you do the vicious, violent type of carnage that those 5 did on those 2 nights. There are some things which simply cross the line in THIS society and we have to send a message to all members of THIS society that if you go that far- your making the choice to go to the point of no return....
Its fair to the victims families, its an important message for other criminals, and it does make me fell better personally knowing that when we identify people who are capable of climbing in my window and stabbing me 50 times- we make sure they are locked up so the dont :)
Now as for LULU:
I have watched and read everyone of Leslie's Parole hearings and television interviews. I read her prison essay ( Imafibbon- quite good actually) I read Faiths book about her long strange prison journey.. I know about as much about LULU as there is to know. I think she is not a very bright person at all. Witty and charming at times, but basically not much going on upstairs. Its clear in a few of her interviews- she just doesn't get it. As well, she was really young at the time. I dont believe she had any clue what the implications of what she was doing were long term. I also dont think she had any major role in the bigger picture. You never hear anyone argue that LULU was behind the real motive, or calling any of the shots. It is also fact that she had the least actual physical participation ,and it may or may not have possible been after the fact. LULU was indeed free awhile in between trials and acted like she could handle it quite nicely. Based on all of this- I do think that as more and more years pass- their could be some argument for compassion in this one specific case...
But then again- she is the only one on record ASKING TO PARTICIPATE...
so if she does die in jail like Sadie- I cant argue with that either...
It is a tough call- because I do have compassion and seeing an old broken down women, plead for some final dignity at the end of her life is hard for me. Even if she denied that to others herself. I want to be better than LULU- not like her
:)
pardon the typos- I gotta get spell and grammar check on here for these early morning buzz comments lol
not good form to call someone else not intelligent when you cant even understand my writing :)
TomG, I once read something, let's accept it as true, that jail only works as a punishment for four years, after that the jailed become institutionalised.
So perhaps, using early Alcatraz as a model, no talking, lights out at 9pm, no books or radio. Just four years looking at a wall.
Then perhaps some sort of Dirty Dozen scenario. Imagine the Manson Family on a suicide mission behind enemy lines to earn their freedom.
Well you know what St Circumstance, your a good guy and all that, your thoughtful, your a little bit wordy, but that's okay too.
The hardest part for me, is to keep it together, when its all coming apart.
I know folks left alone, with no one egging them on, are pretty good people.
Tom that's the hardest part for me too. But I hope you do hang in there brother. It's all we can do. Keep moving forward
:)
Movin' forward. As David Bowie once said There's a Starman waiting in the sky, he's told us not to blow it, cause He's knows it all worthwhile
I love how everyone here "intelligently" discusses such a complex subject.
Makes you think there may be hope for the future.
BUT for ME, the other night a watched Oliver Stone's "Platoon" again.
AND yes, it ALL does make sense, IF everything is put in the proper context.
In the NEXT real WAR, my grandchildren (boys & girls) will be eligible to join
the madness that we call "progressive."
Kind'a ironic - NONE of the Manson Family died in the Vietnam WAR - or did they ?
To answer your question Robert, no, this doesn't read like anything I've received. That said, it's hard for me to compare one to another. There's some strange folks out there that have a lot of time on their hands to play games.
orwhut said...
This is the first I remember seeing where Linda bought a huge bag of LSD with the Melton $5,000. I've got a few books, can you source that information so I can refresh my memory?
I thought I'd read that somewhere. It turns out to have been a small pouch of LSD that her husband had buried for safekeeping then given to her the day after she'd left him. It was due to Bob K and Charles Melton being out of the way {they met up at the beach} that Linda knew that Melton's trailer with the cash was unoccupied at that time. The general account of how she came to steal the $5000 and retrieve the acid can be found here at post 6, four transcript pages down.
Don't mind me. I'm a mess. For which I apologize.
I didn't bother nobody. They bothered my ho's. I'm suppose to be a good guy about it?
TomG, your what? Your ho's? Er, um, ok . you lost me there.
This thread is why I daydream of a Manson funeral where all the interesting characters that have exercised their passions here might be brought together under one roof. Imagine the nuclear opinion energy in that room! this thread is like a game of bumper pool bouncing off of a half dozen separate topics - you got Tom defending his ho, Grim applying good ol English logic as always, the Saint buzzing and hugging away, Robert riddling and howling at some imaginary moon, Matt needling where needed, the Col doing his best Don Rickles and so on.
The hell with a documentary on bikers...someone put these characters around a table in a Montana saloon and roll the camera. And let's get Red and Blue to be their waitresses.
Shit, I left out all the women, didn't I? My bad, Cielo and Patty and others must be there for the women are always more reasonable and enjoyable to look at.
Hear that Cielo? Yer a girl...
Grim,
Thanks for clearing that up. You have my respect.
My questions to others about things that don't sound quite right aren't always answered.
LEARY - After I stopped laughing, I thought of the metaphysical GROUP I associated with back in the 60's. It helped prepare me for the Manson Family. Of course, being in the US Army helped also. NOW with Trump, Hillary or Bernie ALL being military REJECTS, I can only image what being in a ZOO feels like.
Anyone who calls out for the release of murders, expressly these blood-thirsty fiends, should be court-ordered to live in the same house with them.
Btw, I have slept in general population prison dorms with convicted murders and my advise to you is... get a good nights sleep and do it with one eye open.
i like cheese
OMG "SpellCaster" has hit upon a relevant issue here.
Long ago I had the opportunity to know a man from Chile where "Spells" are cast quite often. HIS wife cast a "spell" on HIM and HE could NOT get out of bed for 3 days.
What I learned was that IF the SpellCaster and the 'victim' BOTH believe in the ability to cast spells, it WORKS.
So when Bugliosi said Manson made HIS watch stop, HE really did just that.
A "SPELL" is a very personal THING between the caster and the victim. There is usually some kind of love / hate relationship between the two.
Most folks would be surprised at the mutual admiration that existed between "Mr. B" and Charlie Manson.
Robert,
I'll have to remember about spells when I need an excuse to stay in bed. I might try it today.
Robert,
The following line from your comment above reminds me of the "agreement thing" that Little Paul learned about from Paul Crocket. I've often wondered whether that was the same type of "agreement" that Juan Flynn mentions in one of your movies. Can you tell me?
Robert said: "What I learned was that IF the SpellCaster and the 'victim' BOTH believe in the ability to cast spells, it WORKS."
Robert Hendrickson said...
IF the SpellCaster and the 'victim' BOTH believe in the ability to cast spells, it WORKS
One sees this in many African societies on an almost daily basis. Actually, if one looks hard enough, it's all over the place, in many Western societies too.
So when Bugliosi said Manson made HIS watch stop, HE really did just that
He never actually said that. He said the watch stopped and he couldn't remember it stopping before {which doesn't mean it never had}. He then noticed Charlie looking at him, grinning. He concludes that it was a coincidence.
I understand the subtext that Bugliosi brought in regard to Manson and his powers but anything "magical" or unexplainable, he was always dismissive of. He tended to emphasize what was demonstrable, stuff like smacking around, separating kids from parents, drugs, uninhibited and varied sex as a means to get one to erase the previous boundaries....and it's interesting, because for years people have wondered how he was able to exert such control over people. It's not hard. You see it at every level of society and virtually every age. It needs, above and beyond all things, a certain openness and willingness on the part of the person that is in the subordinate role, even if they don't realize it.
Most folks would be surprised at the mutual admiration that existed between "Mr. B" and Charlie Manson
I think it permeates almost everything that either has said about the other for almost half a century. In Michael White's "Crucified ~ the railroading of Charles Manson" he reproduces a series of letters that Charlie wrote to Irving Kanarek in the mid 70s and in more than one of them, Charlie asks impatiently for a copy of "the DA's book" which kind of made me grin for a moment.
I was thinking this morning that those two in many ways gave this case some serious gravitas. They were both the same age and despite their different routes to LA and despite being on polar opposite sides of the law, they were actually very similar and very aware of their egos, despite both appearing at times to sublimate them to the bigger picture. I get the impression that in their various worlds, they both saw the bigger picture as needing them far more than the other way around.
GRIM, your comments are like a breath of fresh air.
NOW, please give me your opinion on this: Recently on the TV show 60 minutes they raised the issue of "Cyber Criminals", including those who "hack" into others intellectual materials (property) and USE it for THEIR gain.
The primary Cyber Criminal talked about was China and its military. Apparently THEY are "using" intellectual materials from most all major American companies. Of course, it made ME think about all the folks who "take" my films and POST them on websites like YouTube.
It seems to me that WE all have a "position" (agenda) which supports OUR way of thinking.
IE: Most SEE the Manson Family as EVIL killers, while I also SEE them as "ending" the Vietnam race WAR.
Most also SEE me as a "hog" of the TRUTH. Truth, the whole world is entitled to.
Personally, I don't care, after I'm gone , if others make CM their Messiah, with MY hard earned intellectual materials, WHY do I have to USE MY precious time to chase down these criminals while I'm still alive? Back in the late 1980's my friend John Babcock, ABC news director, would tell me their new hires were coming out of college with an actual "we're entitled attitude." So are we really headed for Communist leader, just like CM?
Robert Hendrickson said...
It seems to me that WE all have a "position" (agenda) which supports OUR way of thinking
While maybe some people can be more neutral than others, I think that's the human way.
But it is difficult to give up a position that one has arrived at and maybe been with for a considerable time. It's a funny thing, but on the internet, it's sometimes a lot harder to change one's position, even though the majority of people {in some cases, all the people} haven't got a clue who a particular contributor might be. It feels very public and exposed sometimes.
IE: Most SEE the Manson Family as EVIL killers, while I also SEE them as "ending" the Vietnam race WAR
You've said that a number of times, that Charlie {and the Family} "ended" the Vietnam war and I've never understood that, given that US troops were pulling out in '73 and the war came to a close in '75. Although South Vietnam felt America had betrayed them in the latter two years of the war, it wasn't really America that ended that war. It was the final onslaught of the North Vietnamese that, ironically, the USA had been fighting, that really brought the war to a close. When you say you see Charlie and the Family as having ended the war, can you explain what you mean by that ?
As for the Family being evil killers, well, that's a convoluted one. I guess because I was a teenager when I first became interested in Charlie, the Family, Bugliosi, and the whole kaboodle, I didn't really think in terms of evil or the good guys. They were all just characters in this story. So I've never thought of them as evil killers and as I've gotten older and a bit wiser, I've found myself in a variety of scenarios that I haven't necessarily liked but which have enabled to me at least understand where Manson and various Family members were or might've been coming from.
I also see life as being a continuum and what someone was like in one decade is not necessarily what they are in the next.
Most also SEE me as a "hog" of the TRUTH. Truth, the whole world is entitled to
I think the clamour for entitlement came in the wake of the issuing of certain rights. It's a strange one, when people are helped or provided with stuff that they never had before, we don't always say 'thank you.' It's like we sometimes start to behave as if we should have certain things as of right.
Col Scott used to paraphrase this interesting saying when pointing out that people were not entitled to their opinion, they're entitled to an informed opinion.
It has to be said that the technological advancements that paralleled the rise of the internet were and are a real game changer and the whole subject of copyright has had to be re~thought out. The world may be "entitled" to truth {and even that's debatable}, but it doesn't mean that we are entitled to peoples' work that encapsulates that truth.
If that work is not commercially available then I can understand people making it available if they're not gaining from it.
WHY do I have to USE MY precious time to chase down these criminals while I'm still alive?
That's always a choice you have to make. Unfortunately some people only come to their senses when the law {or a couple of heavies with chains wrapped around their fingers....!} falls on them from a great height.
That said, viewing, listening or reading certain materials that are out there in naughty fashion can be part of an important process in helping one decide whether or not to buy. If I watched something on YouTube and I knew that I would like to watch at my leisure, I'd buy it if it were available commercially. But that's me. People laugh at me because I still like physical media.
Grimtraveller, Robert is right about a couple 2 - 3 things: "Everyone on this blog is a troll at one point" Manson family ended the Vietnam race war" "No one has a right to steal my intellectual property" So first, as a 'resident troll' who returns from time to time, thanks to the gracious nature of Matt & company, I will explain what I think Robert means... Manson family took Vietnam war off people's minds, (racial agenda's included) and being an inventor with a Patent, I understand Robert's right to PROTECT his intellectual property, as intellectual property is hard won, and if it's documented, NO ONE has the right to steal it! They will anyway, but the copyright/Patent gives you the right to fight them in court. GOD bless Robert Hendrickson! Also Grim, you are highly intelligent, I'm glad to have you on the planet! BTW, what's with the half dressed / half naked profile picture? Were you ever in the circus? With the Elephant MAN perhaps?
joseph esposito said...
I think Robert means... Manson family took Vietnam war off people's minds, (racial agenda's included)
I suppose you could argue that. But news and concerns are often more subtle than that. The concerns about Vietnam didn't die. By 1970 the debates had been raging for around 4~5 years. That's a long time. Other things claimed the attention span.
I don't know if the various long term events of my adulthood are comparable but what I've observed over the last 35 years is that whatever long term concerns are in the news over a period of years tend to ebb and flow. Sometimes, something will happen and that will bring such and such back to the top of the news agenda. And other periods will be fallow periods. The events of TLB were obviously big news but they weren't always big news. Sometimes people just get bored with saturation coverage. We saw that here in the UK over the 2nd Iraq war or 911 or Princess Diana or Michael Jackson, among other events.
And I wonder about the racial agendas being off peoples' minds. The early 70s in many ways seem just as, if not more racially charged in the USA than the 60s. Or maybe it just seems that way to me in retrospect as someone outside looking in.
and being an inventor with a Patent, I understand Robert's right to PROTECT his intellectual property, as intellectual property is hard won
I agree with that. Human beings being what we are though, when we hear about certain films, books or pieces of music connected with an interest of ours that aren't at the present time commercially available and there's a chance to view/read/hear via a pirated copy, then people will. I don't advocate stealing people's stuff.
BTW, what's with the half dressed / half naked profile picture?
That was 2012 or 2013. That T shirt had got to the end of it's life and I'm not sentimental about clothes I've had for a decade or two so I ripped it up before I threw it away. But I liked the look of it so I thought I'd take a couple of pictures of myself in it.
For some reason, my T shirts always go at the neck first.
Grim, first let me apologize to Matt & company for diverting away from this blog, which is Charles Manson & family & the surrounding crime scene. 2nd, please let me reiterate & add to what I've already said: "I think you are highly intelligent, in fact a brilliant & compassionate human being" "I'm proud to have a person of your 'high caliber' on this planet! I'd much rather have someone like you on this planet, than some head cutter or some RAT / FBI/police shooting 'ANOTHER' unarmed suspect! I don't agree with the Michael Moore narrative, that police set out to mow down Blacks, BUT far too many police are trigger happy MURDERERS! Did you know that they shot an unarmed MAN in Oregon? By all accounts he was surrendering & his hands were up! Kudo's to Robert Hendrickson for reminding us of this ever prevalent & disturbing trend. In terms of viewing/reading/or listening to a pirated copy of unauthorized material, I agree with you & Robert, I've done this myself simply because I didn't know any better, a real dilemma for musicians as well. As for me poking at your profile picture, please understand I was just trying to elicit a laugh! It goes without saying that highly creative people are avant garde and you are definitely highly creative! Thank you for being you!
Bobscamarumbump said...
The drug burn story has been corroborated by at least 3 former members. 86 George who gave Charlie the sword was tracked down and opens up about the entire thing. It appears more indepth details about Hinman's van is revealed too. Beausoleil has agreed to do an interview for it and Gypsy who dated a SS is going to be interviewed as well
More than 4 years on, we're still waiting for this film and this corroboration that doesn't really change anything, even if true.
Well, I'm not really waiting. Wake me up when it arrives !
Ho~hum. Almost 6 years.
By the way, Bobby has, in recent years, changed his stance on Danny DeCarlo's involvement. Kind of reminds me of part of the lyric for Trapeze's song, "Loser":
Losing my direction
Running out of time
Walkin' around in circles
Going out of my mind
I'm down for the third time
I'm glad to see
Everything is changing
Everything but me
I'm a loser
Maybe the documentary will air on the Disney Channel when it eventually sees the light of day !
Post a Comment