I was reading Colonel’s blog (as I usually do), and found the Bugliosi/HS conversation on his second thread “Shrugs” particularly interesting. It’s very, very good stuff! Heck… those topics are essentially the “cruxt” of blogging this subject.
Anywho… I was going to post a couple boring documents today… and then decided… it would be more fun… to participate in the Bugliosi/HS topic.
But… here’s the twist: Rather than write-up an entire thread… I’m uploading my “notes” only… in “outline form”. You folks fill-in the blanks! Fill-in the blanks, or tear it apart… your choice. As always, I could be completely full of shit… you decide!
My thoughts on the importance of Bugliosi today… in regards to solving the case/motive question:
1) Essentially, Manson convicted himself.
2) Bugliosi’s only, REAL, “claim to fame“ was successfully predicting how Manson would “play his cards”. Bugliosi knew… if he gave Manson enough rope… Manson would hang himself.
3) Bugliosi had little (if any) concrete evidence against Manson… so he designed a plan, which would allow Manson to convict himself… with his own personality… and demons.
Think of the movie “A few Good Men”. Tom Cruise had little concrete evidence on Nicholson. BUT… Cruise knew Nicholson was a big lion, who wanted to “roar”… and he painted him into that corner… and got a confession. OK… a really cheesy analogy,…and not 100% “analogous” (LOL)… but, it’s a similar concept.
The actions of Manson and his “family”... were essentially a confession in action form… a confession that Manson was the leader. Bugliosi predicted these idiots were going to “act-out” this dramatic real-life play. Through his research, Bugliosi had already observed all the necessary elements in action, to make that prediction!
Bugliosi KNEW… Manson and company… were…. (at that time) in-capable of practicing ‘self-control”… as a means of winning the case for Manson. These folks were FAR beyond switching gears. “The family” was NOT going to portray Manson as a mere follower! That wasn’t going to happen… and Bugliosi knew it. That’s how Bugliosi won the case.
4) The jury did NOT convict Manson because they were sold on the Helter Skelter story. The jury convicted Manson, because they were convinced Manson was in-charge, and thusly a conspirator to the murders. Manson himself (and ‘the family“ collectively)… convinced the jury of those two facts… NOT Bugliosi. The HS story (beyond Bugliosi‘s book) was secondary.
5) Bobby (blogger Bobby) made a great point. OJ Simpson was a wife-beater, and a murderer… but there’s absolutely no denying… he was a great football player. You have to separate personal life, from professional assessment. Bill Clinton was a great president. The economy was fabulous… jobs and overtime were everywhere. Internationally, we were on good terms with the world. His blowjobs from Monica… were between him and his wife… he and God. But professionally… the man did a great job. The presidency, is a job.
A blowjob? LOL
If you hire a carpenter to build you a house…. and he’s does a spectacular… highly-skilled job,…at a fair price… do you care who he’s banging or stalking on his own time? Does it make him a bad carpenter?
6) Bashing Bugliosi, although great fun… adds nothing towards finding the true motive.
7) Bugliosi was the prosecutor… he prosecuted. Folks need to get over that simple fact.
If you really want to bash an incompetent man (who completely screwed Manson)… take a good look at Kanarek. Kanarek was Manson’s defense attorney for cripes sakes… and he NEVER put on a defense!!! Now THAT guy committed a crime. Sure, Bugliosi threw Kanarek a few compliments out of “professional courtesy” in the past… i.e., “Kanarek scored some points”, etc. But C’mon… Kanarek sucked!
8) Starship said… “I have bigger fish to fry”… and that says it all. At the end of the day, bashing Bugliosi is a fruitless endeavor. It will never produce a real motive, or solve the case. As Leary said: Bugliosi is not a hero or a villain… he did a job.
9) Why did Manson screw himself??
I’ve always believed it was pride. Manson wasn’t going to eat a big piece of humble pie, and play by “the man’s” rules. He wasn’t going to sit there like a deaf/mute… a nobody… a follower. If Manson couldn’t win on his terms, he didn’t want to play.
MattP has also suggested: Manson was convinced… he couldn’t be convicted of murder, without actually killing. Truth be told… it was likely heavy elements of both.