Monday, December 12, 2011

As Promised... a review of Frank Howard's Movie
"Helter Skelter Murders"
(previously released as "The Other Side of Madness", 1971)
My Review: 
This is clearly a low-budget, "B movie".  That's a given.  Never-the-less... I watched this movie, with a completely open mind.  Actually... I watched this film, with more than an open mind.  I watched it with "hopeful anticipation".  I combed all 81 minutes very closely, specifically looking for an original TLB motive to be presented

The first 39 minutes (of the film), offer next to nothing... other than some pretty cool music, and a few short clips of the actual Spahn's ranch.  Also of note... they do include Charlie's original "mechanical man" and "garbage dump" songs.  There's very little in the way of plot development... except a few doses of classic "Helter Skelter" and "Charlie's in charge" build-up interspersed.  These first 39 minutes move so SLOWLY however... you're literally tempted to put a bullet in your head. LOL  Believe me friends... it's brutal.

The murders essentially start around 40 minutes in, and things pick-up just enough, to make it tolerable.  The murders are a crude re-enactment, with the script taking some "interpretational liberties". 
Bottom line, however: 
There's no original motive presented.  As always, "Helter Skelter" is  the theme.  They overdub audio of Charlie's voice, essentially "preaching HS" sporadically (in the background), throughout the entire film.  This over-dubbing is included (almost like  a backing-track) during scenes at the ranch... in the courtroom... while the killers prepare to leave for Cielo... while they drive to and from, the murder scenes, etc.  (This of course is not Charlie's actual voice, but a simulation). The only portion (of the film) which vaguely hints at an alternative motive, is Tex asking  for money, twice at Cielo. 

Tex and the girls, each take one pill, before they leave for Cielo.  That's the only inclusion of drugs, in the movie... other than some "partying" at the beginning of the film... which "suggests" possible drug use... but drugs aren't depicted explicitly (to my recollection).  There's absolutely no dialogue on the topic of drugs included in this film.  

In the very ending credits... there's a paragragh which reads:
"This picture is a grim warning.  The use of drugs must be rigidly controlled, if there is to be any future for our society, or our country itself". 
My interpretation: They're suggesting that "the family" would not have been mentally corrupted, and susceptible to Manson's mind control, without the help of drugs.  There's no suggestion throughout the entire movie, that the victims had any association with drugs what-so-ever. 

I personally, didn't see any reason at all, to run out and grab a copy of this movie... other than, from a "collectors" standpoint.  If you're a person who wants to own every movie and book on this subject... grab it for your collection... and let it collect dust.  Other than that... take a pass.  
My biggest complaint: There's just WAY too many unnecessary scenes, that go nowhere.  They could have easily lopped-off 35 minutes from this film, and it would have been much more tolerble.  You just keep thinking: "Is this f#cking scene ever going anywhere, at all"?! LOL  And usually...it's not.  Plot-wise... the first half is brutally slow.  One last bright point though... the woman starring as "Abigail Folger" was breath-takingly beautiful. 
MattP, has provided a copy of the film (in it's entirety). 
To view, "click" below.  Thanks Matt!



video
video
video
video
video
video

128 comments:

St. Circumstance said...

Thanks for the Copy- Ill be warned- but I still want to watch lol

Great review- Thanks L/S!!

Thanks for making it easy Matt!!

katie8753 said...

Well since the first part of the movie is so boring, I skipped to the 3rd clip. If that movie moved any slower they would still be filming it. LOL.

I won't go into what was wrong with the few minutes I watched it, but suffice it to say, there's a WHOLE lot wrong in this movie regarding the facts of the case.

The part where Steve Parent gets in his Volkswagen Bug (and yes...I did say Volkswagen Bug) and Tex walks up to him and they just stare at each other for about 5 minutes without saying a word isn't just creepy. It's mind-numbingly boring.

"Next slide please....next slide". HA HA HA.

katie8753 said...

Sorry, Matt. I forgot to say thanks for the links to the movie.

THANKS!!!

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

In retrospect, I may have been a bit harsh on this review.

This is one of those movies... whereby... if we all got together in one room... we could get totally blasted, and actually have tons of laughs with...

Ya know... like one of those original "faces of death" films. LOL

For someone learning the case, and studying it closely... which is the perspective I watched it from (seeking informational value)... it sucks.

But, as a "casual watch"... for folks who already know the case... it could actually be kinda entertaining, what with the great music and such.

In fairness...
I also think watching the show on a full-size television, in a living room, with beer and popcorn... (as opposed to, at a computer screen)... could set that necessary laid-back mood as well.

"Cultish" laid-back party material... not bad.
Serious documentary... forget it.

As a cult film, while drunk or high with friends in a living room... I raise it 2 out of 10 stars... to maybe a 4! LOL

This is one of those shows, which would be good, on a second or third viewing, while laughing with other TLB freaks... and watching casually.

Like when you throw "Jaws" on in the background at a party... and everyone's "half-watching".
You kinda refer to the "good parts" every once in a while.
There's enough good parts in this movie, that one could "refer to"... here-and-there... to have it worth playing "in the background".
(After Hendrickson's footage of course!)

You simply can't give this movie your full attention!
Ahahahahaha

Mary said...

So Lynyrd...when shall we all attend the showing at your house. I will bring the liquor...I am sure that St. will bring his special libation - we can have a sign in sheet for the pot luck. Just make it after April so we don't have to run into cold weather.

katie8753 said...

Mary HA HA HA!!!

I wouldn't volunteer to bring the liquor if I were you. That might run into some money.

I'd say let's make it BYOB or BYOD.

The sign-up for potluck is good. Put me down for chips. Then I won't have to cook. LOLOL.

katie8753 said...

That would be a gas. Everyone gathered around the big screen to view a movie that we can critique like MST3K. What a hoot! HA HA HA.

Mary said...

Damn Katie - you are always one step ahead or me. Yeah, liquor was not the thing to volunteer to bring. I will bring brownies. Special brownies.

St. Circumstance said...

I want brownies

Mary said...

I remember MST3 - only watched it few times...we should so do this. Lynyrd...we need for you to arrange a few screenings...have to make it at least 3 or 4 different movies since we are coming from all over the country. Make it worth our while.

katie8753 said...

Mary, good idea. Lynyrd's got a big house. We'll all crash at his pad.

I'll get there one day earlier to help him clean up the place.

I'll do the name tags too. We'll do screen names. No real names allowed. LOLOL.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Screen names... LOLOL

Yeah Mary...

Liquor might run ya a couple thousand dollars.
LMFAO... (I'm practically crying over here). LOL

I'd have to invest in a nice "high-def" large screen too.
I doubt Circumstance, wants to watch my 27" Sylvania. LOL

I'll seriously, keep the idea in mind.
It would be a complete scream.

Everyone would have to bring their "TLB collection", as well.
"Show and tell". LOLOL

Jeez...
If Mike from Backporch showed-up, he'd need to fly-in a seperate charter plane, just for all his stuff! LOL

katie8753 said...

Okay,

Circumstance: you're in charge of sound. Make sure it's not too loud to bother the neighbors.

Starship: You're in charge of the fish tank. Make sure no one taps on it.

Mary: You're in charge of the coats. Make sure you pile them all on the spare bed in alphabetical order.

Kimchi: You're in charge of the appetizers. Just make sure they're flowing smoothly among the party goers.

Lynyrd: You're in charge of entertainment. When things get out of hand you can get your guitar out and serenade us back to civility.

Mr. P: You're the bouncer. If anyone breaks anything...then you break something.

HA HA HA HA.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

What if Jim shows-up from New York?

AHahahahaha

He's in-charge of driving everybody nuts! LOLOL

katie8753 said...

Beauders: you're the creative consultant. If anyone in the room disagrees with the movie being screened, you'll have the last word as to authenticity.

Me??? I'm going to be in charge of the entire operation. I'll have a walkie talkie and will be in touch with all of the "host operations". I will tie up all the "loose ends".

I am the ultimate "party planner". HA HA HA.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Nah...

Saint's in-charge of the mixed drinks... and booze.

You gotta go with your strengths.

LOLOL

katie8753 said...

If Jimmy shows up, I have a contingency plan.

He will be met at the front of the house, and escorted to another house in the neighborhood, with the excuse that the party has been moved.

Then, the occupants of that house will soon learn about things they wish they hadn't. LOLOL.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

What if the bouncer, needs to be bounced? LOL

Sorry, Mr. P, just being realistic.
hahaha

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

MattP, has quite an extensive collection of movies and music.

He'd be the A/V specialist...

katie8753 said...

We'll show the films in chronological order.

If anyone has a film that he/she wants viewed, please bring it in DVD format.

Lynyrd, we will need at least a 60" LCD TV with THX Lucasfilm sound.

I think it's all on sale at Walmart now. HA HA HA.

katie8753 said...

Maybe I'll cook up a big pot of my world class spaghetti. It's really "to die for". LOL.

One of the secrets is to (1) get the flavor into the pasta and (2) cook the pasta just past "al dente".

Slow cook the sauce for a long, long time, then combine.

Mama Mia!!!

Serve up with a nice vinaigrette salad and hot garlic bread.

On sale now. Just $15.99/plate at Katie's. HA HA HA.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Same old, same old...

But, figured, I'd share a TLB-related article which just came-out:

I found the very last two paragraphs regarding Leslie kinda interesting...

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/haunting-memories-of-helter-skelter-ring-of-death-2960297.html

v717 said...

It´s always interesting to read in the commentator field and see what other people think. I picked up this comment from the article "Haunting memories of Helter Skelter ring of death."
"I think you should know Vince Bugliosi did an interview where he admits that "Helter Skelter" wasn't in Charlie's mind and the killers already had the murderous instinct in them which completely contradicts his earlier claims that they were all brainwashed. In my opinion, this indicates that nobody was ordered to do anything and they killed those people of their own free will."
That is in line with FBI-profiler Johnn Douglas who interviewed Charles Manson a couple of times. Here is what he has to say.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALFxOp4wVk8

And that is also in line about Mansons comments about Susan Atkins. I think Manson is telling the truth here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmT2Laudog

But I´m also aware that this is not the whole truth. But at least it´s the beginning of the truth.

MrPoirot said...

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...
What if the bouncer, needs to be bounced? LOL

Sorry, Mr. P, just being realistic.
hahaha

Mr Poirot replies:

I used to be a bouncer but I got fired for asking a blind bar patron for his drivers licence. I told him his dog could stay but he couldn't. Some people have no sense of humor.

starship said...

I've only ever gone out with a blind date once. But that's only because her seeing eye dog kept stepping on me.

Mary, our Aprils up here probably eat your Januarys for breakfast.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

I had a HUGE crush on a deaf girl in high school.

I'm telling ya, this girl was beautiful.

"Nancy"...
She was an irish girl, with long brunette hair.
She was really exquisite...

adam said...

Blogger v717 said...

And that is also in line about Mansons comments about Susan Atkins. I think Manson is telling the truth here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsmT2Laudog

"You dumb fucking cunt, I already had the world. You've just put me back in prison".
Is this what a guilty man would say? Makes you wonder....

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

"You dumb fucking cunt, I already had the world. You've just put me back in prison".

Adam...
You have no idea... how many times, that phrase applies to blog administration. LOL

katie8753 said...

>>>Lynyrd said: I had a HUGE crush on a deaf girl in high school.>>>

That reminds me of when Jerry Seinfeld was dating that deaf girl, and he and George talked her into reading lips at a party so George could find out why his ex-girlfriend broke up with him. LOL.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

"The King of Queens"...

Doug says:

"It's the Marley Matlin effect...
She's smokin' hot, but you think 'cuz she's deaf, you might have a chance"
.

LOL

Mary said...

sharon's ring sold for $21,260! I know you are tired of this story...but the end is now

leary7 said...

Lynyrd...
sorry about this, I know we are not supposed to go off topic, but I don't know how to ask you a question directly. Is there something on the site that allows that?
I was curious if anyone knows what Charlie's net worth is? If he were to die in the near future would his estate be worth anything? Does he get residuals from songs or mechandise sales or such?
Also, just quickly, did you see the great Beauders post on the thread where we were discussing Melcher and Wilson? Beauders says that the 'Helter Skelter' in blood writing was not released by the police and that both Melcher and Wilson later claimed if it had been they would have known right away it was Manson and gone to the police. The relevant and significant aspect there being if that had happened then Shorty Shea might have never been killed. I have always wondered why Shorty's wife never brought a civil suit against Manson or the police or someone, even George Spahn...like the Goldman and Brown families did against OJ.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Thanks Mary!

That's over double the starting price.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Mary!

I wonder who bought it??

Cease2 said...

"Those diamond rings they're obscene
You sit there and you wonder
And you say 'who's to blame?'
Take a look at yourself"


Manson, "People Say I'm No Good"

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Hi Leary!

Great post as always.
I have to run some errands, but will definitely respond later.
Everyone... please feel free to join-in, on Leary's commentary.

Leary...
There's evidently some confusion, which I should clarify for everyone.

Your questions and comments are always on-topic, and most welcome.

There was a short period (recently), where a small minority of folks were coming on the blog, for no other purpose (essentially), but to insult one another.
Moreover Leary... it was in regard to old feuds, which didn't even originate here.

It was old feuds, being re-hashed from other locations... namely YouTube and Facebook.
I tried my best, not to take sides.
Eventually...
I had to delete some of those posts, as despite my pleas, it was never-ending.
The comments were deleted... hence the confusion... (as to what I'm referring to, regarding "off-topic").

When I said "off-topic"... I meant bantering, feuding, and insults... which have nothing to do with me, this blog, my bloggers, or the thread topic.

Leary...
Your posts, questions, and commentary, are always WELL within the boundaries of "on-topic"... even the JFK stuff.

Peace... Lynyrd

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

((((((((((CEASE2)))))))))

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Mary... feel free to share information on the ring.

I know others like Venus and Carol, would likely be interested, in hearing the details.

Cease2 said...

Hi Leary, Interesting point about the Manson estate. As far as I recall, a relative of Voytek's won a half a mil judgement against Charlie & co-convicted. That's been ongoing, i think, with monies coming in from various covers (Guns n Roses being the most) and CMs share from the re-release of LIE.

But ...after Charlie kicks the bucket. Be interesting who goes after the estate & the ongoing royalties, artwork, writings.

leary7 said...

yeah, Cease, I have always thought, respectfully, that Charlie dead might be allot more "active" than he is alive. By that I mean like a painter whose work triples in value once after he dies.
Lynyrd made a great point that I never thought of that Bruce and Leslie and Pat's chances of parole might increase dramatically once Charlie is gone. I imagine Lulu in her cell with a Manson voodoo doll and a bunch of pins.
And I still think a Manson funeral would be a fascinating affair. Who would attend? Would the Bug? Would the ex-felons be allowed? Would there be weeping and self-flogging by Cappy and Lynn and such? Would Doris Tate be outside pickiting?
Would all the bloggers attend and be relegated to a special section? What would Katie wear?
All important questions.

leary7 said...

not Doris, sorry, what's the last daughter's name? I know the Col calls her Orca. can't remember. brain freeze.

mattprokes said...

its debra tate leary.
would'nt micheal brunner be entitled to mansons estate since hes chucks son?

Mary said...

"An engagement ring Roman Polanski gave to Sharon Tate before she was murdered by the Manson family in 1969 has been auctioned off ... and TMZ has learned it raked in more than $21k.

The ring was surrounded in controversy -- with Tate's sister insisting it wasn't Sharon's "official" engagement ring -- but rather an "unofficial symbol of her relationship" with Polanski.

The auction house later produced a letter signed by Polanski, contradicting Tate's sister.

The controversy didn't seem to matter when the ring hit the block at the GottaHaveRockandRoll.com auction -- because the item sold for $21,260 ... well over the $10,000 starting bid.

So far, the identity of the big winner has not been revealed."

http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/13/sharon-tate-engagement-ring-auction-sold-roman-polanski/

Mary said...

https://www.gottahaverockandroll.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=8698&searchby=3&searchvalue=sharon tate&page=0&sortby=0&displayby=2&lotsperpage=25&category=1&seo=Sharon-Tate

the auction sites says final bid was $17,717

can nothing be straight forward anymore????

St. Circumstance said...

I am straight forward Mary :)

St. Circumstance said...

I think I read somewhere Charlie has no money- Prisoners are not allowed to profit from the crimes- so he couldn't have made any money legally since he went in- and he had zip when he went in...

His supporters put some dough in his canteen account for incidentals- but he probably doesnt have much of an estate to leave anyone...

They cant go after money he makes illegally- or through his ATWA contributions to other people...

So me thinks Charlie may be worthless at the end of the day in real terms... at least to himself and offspring- so long as he is in the can- at least legally...

St. Circumstance said...

and Maybe that explains why Star is doing what she does lol

maybe she is alot smarter than I have been giving her credit for...

Cha Ching- Cha Charlie


Nahh

katie8753 said...

Good question Leary.

I think it's a law that convicted killers can't profit from their crimes.

I have read, like Cease says, that any money that Charlie earned went to Voytek's son. I don't know how he was allowed to earn it.

I doubt if he has any money. But St., like you said....maybe Star knows more about Charlie's finances that we think. LOL.

katie8753 said...

Mary thanks for the update on the sale of the ring. I guess TMZ got their info wrong. :)

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

What Cease2, was referring to...

"The royalties will be the first money that Mr. Frykowski has received since winning a $500,000 Federal lawsuit against Mr. Manson in 1971".

Read the green print:

http://www.lsb3.com/2011/05/showdown-charlie-vs-axl.html

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Leary asked:

"did you see the great Beauders post on the thread where we were discussing Melcher and Wilson? Beauders says that the 'Helter Skelter' in blood writing was not released by the police and that both Melcher and Wilson later claimed if it had been they would have known right away it was Manson and gone to the police. The relevant and significant aspect there being if that had happened then Shorty Shea might have never been killed. I have always wondered why Shorty's wife never brought a civil suit against Manson or the police or someone, even George Spahn...like the Goldman and Brown families did against OJ".

Hi Leary.
I did see Beauders' post.
She's always generous, and nothing short of amazing, with her information.
We're very lucky to have her contributions, here.

Bugliosi has always maintained, that the "Helter Skelter" writing in blood... was comparable to Charlie leaving his fingerprint, at the scene.
I've heard Bugliosi say that a couple times... "the writing was tantamount to a fingerprint".
That's probably why that evidence was guarded so vehemently, and not disclosed.

As for the civil lawsuit... I can only guess.
My guess, is that back in those days... civil lawsuits of that nature, were probably much less exercised in-general.
I wonder what Dilligaf (the lawyer), would have to say on that topic?

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Leary...

The funeral question, is interesting.

Manson has a modest 'following" of sympathizers.
One has to wonder how much money they'd "pony-up" for a funeral service.

I'm also wondering, if there are any laws governing how "ceremonious" a (still incarcerated) felon's funeral can be?

This is what I've always "pictured", for no apparent reason:

I've always pictured Manson being cremated immediately, and the ashes being un-ceremoniously discarded somewhere, by a prison official. LOL
That... followed by a week of cheesy news coverage, and HS movie re-runs.
The end.

Or...
In my area, they have something called "Paupers field".
It's a place for folks with absolutely no money or family... and they mark the grave, literally with a steel post, with a number on it.
I'm assuming there's a large book somewhere (computer now-a-days), with all the corresponding names, for the respective marker numbers.
It's a Very sad sight actually.
It's 95% homeless men... and old widows, with no children.

I really believe, we'll live to see your question answered, in the next five years.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

"Gladys Knight"!!
Thanks for adding yourself, as a "follower"!

Welcome Aboard!
I'm looking forward to your comments!

Love your song... "Midnight Train to Georgia"! LOL

katie8753 said...

>>>Matt said: would'nt micheal brunner be entitled to mansons estate since hes chucks son?>>>

Has Charlie ever acknowledged that Pooh Bear is his son? I think that Brunner wants to be as far away from Manson as he can get.

Manson might not have any money now, but after he's dead, just think what his possessions will go for.

If Sharon Tate's ring brought $17,000+, what would Charlie's stuff bring?

Maybe Star oughta start pressuring him to write:

"I, Charles Manson, being of sane mind (cough), do hereby declare this to be my last will and testament." And leave it all to her.

HA HA.

katie8753 said...

Oops, meant to say "being of sound mind". LOL.

katie8753 said...

>>>Leary said: Lynyrd made a great point that I never thought of that Bruce and Leslie and Pat's chances of parole might increase dramatically once Charlie is gone. I imagine Lulu in her cell with a Manson voodoo doll and a bunch of pins.>>>

HA HA HA. Yeah, they're probably wishin', hopin' & dreamin' that Charlie would just kick off. They're way beyond following him at this point. Bad life choice.

If Charlie was gone, they might get a better chance at getting out. But I think the stigma of what they did, who they did it to, WHY they did it and HOW they did it, will always be a factor at parole hearings.

So, even sans Charlie, their chances of living in prison until "death does them part" are pretty good.

CarolMR said...

reptaI rented this movie years ago because I thought the actress who played Sharon was a girl I went to high school with who had had some bit parts in TV shows. It wasn't the same girl. I always wondered why any movie about the murders at Cielo never depicts the actress playing Sharon wearing what she really wore that night - a bikini underwear set. Maybe because then they'd have to get an actress who was really pregnant?

"I know others like Venus and Carol, would likely be interested, in hearing the details." - Lynyrd

Yes, thanks, Lynyrd, I am interested. And thanks, Mary, for the info on the auction of the ring.

Dilligaf said...

LS, You can call me the former Lawyer as I retired from being a prosecutor after 25 years on December 1st, a well needed rest :)

In re civil cases filed for a wrongful death 40 years ago, it typically was not done. Not as a matter of law, but as difference in societal views. It couldhave been that the victim's families in that era saw such tragic acts as something to close the wound, hide the pain, and move on. Victimology was seen as something much different back then. It is much more common today but the payouts are not as huge as one would think. I do have a personal problem with some of the cases filed today, but I suspect that in 10 years, things will change again and we will see fewer of them. Don't get me started on Fred Goldman, that man needed (needs) serious therapy..

I would not totally discount the creation of a blind corporation or trust being created to shield potential money earned by CM. Because his name and image is so marketable, there is a value, regardless of how tasteless that value may be, attached to it.

The same goes for his remains. Once he is no longer taking up air that could be used for someone more deserving, his remains would be valuable to some. No Potters Field for him.

katie8753 said...

Hi Carol. I agree. These movies just overlook important details over and over again. But I guess authenticity isn't on the menu with a Manson movie. LOL.

katie8753 said...

Hi Dilligaf. I was going to ask you a question yesterday but I couldn't remember how to spell your name. I'm going to call you Mr. Dill. LOL.

Isn't there a law the says that a convicted murderer can't profit from his crime in any way? I can't think of the name of that law.

I think it was enacted after Charlie, et al, were convicted. Would that law go back and apply to any living convicts or just go forward?

>>>I would not totally discount the creation of a blind corporation or trust being created to shield potential money earned by CM. Because his name and image is so marketable, there is a value, regardless of how tasteless that value may be, attached to it.>>>

That's very possible. Charlie seems to have plenty of people on the "outside" to hide any money he has.

>>>The same goes for his remains. Once he is no longer taking up air that could be used for someone more deserving, his remains would be valuable to some. No Potters Field for him.>>>

That's creepy. Well, we know Michael Jackson won't be getting his body to stuff it. Would anyone else be that demented?? Grossssss!!

katie8753 said...

Speaking of auctioned jewelry, Liz Taylor's jewelry sold for $115 million.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/14/elizabeth-taylors-jewelry-sells-115-million/

Dilligaf said...

Hi Katie,

I think you are referring to the Son of Sam laws that were passed in many states, which prevented those convicted of a crime from benefitting financially by publishing books, movies,interviews, etc. These laws, though well intended, were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Many states re-wrote a more narrowly defined law which could pass constitutional muster. The California legislature took a slightly different tact by extending back in 2002, the statue of limitations in which a person could file suit against someone attempting to profit from their crimes.

While there have not been as many cases filed lately, this is not a totally settled area of law as you have to balance the desires of society and/or a victim's family against a First Amendment right of freedom of speech.

Some have claimed that laws like this, or the numerous "Jessica's" type of laws are simply kneejerk reactions from our elected officials who feel they must do something. While well-meaning in most cases, many of these laws do not stand in their original form. I have always maintained that elected officials do two things well, nothing and over-react...

Dilligaf said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
leary7 said...

thnks all for info. It's great to have someone as familiar with the law as Dilligaf on here.

Saint is most likely correct in saying Manson probably doesn't have any money personally, but as he also said, maybe Star or somebody is doing Charlie's bidding and has a nest egg of sorts.
I have never heard of a law prohibiting anyone including incarcerated felons from a decent funeral, that would seem unconstitutional to me.
Knowing Charlie's narcissism and sense of showmanship, I simply can't imagine he wants to go out with a wimper and not a bang or a bash. Nowadays allot of times a funeral they have a video of the deceased speaking. It would be Charlie's last rant and I don't think he would pass that up.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Mr. Dill.

Yes, it was the Son of Sam law I was trying to remember the name of it.

I'm assuming the laws of each state regarding certain issues vary. I remember after Casey Anthony was acquitted, the prosecutors were saying that it was sad that she would now be able to get blood money off her own daughter since she was acquitted, versus not being able to if she had been found guilty.

I guess in Florida, convicted murderers are banned from making any money. At least, that was my impression.

So I guess in California, Charlie does have the right to profit, as long as there are no outstanding judgements/leins levied against him. Of course, as you say, he could always try to hide any money that he makes.

katie8753 said...

Hi Leary!

>>>Leary said: Nowadays allot of times a funeral they have a video of the deceased speaking. It would be Charlie's last rant and I don't think he would pass that up.>>>

You hit the nail right on the head! That would certainly fit Charlie to a "T". LOL.

leary7 said...

Actually, since this thread started about a movie, I have always thought Charlie's funeral would be a great setting for a Manson movie. The premise being folk are allot more interested in what Family members look like now and are doing now then another rehash of '69.
Think of how The Big Chill started with the funeral scene and all the old college pals coming together.
As I said earlier, there would be just so much intrigue if Charlie were to have a big public funeral. Who would show, who might not get along and spat, who would give the eulogy, pallbearers etc etc.
YOu could have shots of all this and intersperse flashback scenes to capture the days of Spahn.
I was daydreaming about this last night and thinking who could play the Manson Girls as they are today. Maybe Sissy Spacek doing Squeeky? Jami Gertz from Still Standing as Ouish. Patricia Clarkson as Cappy. Sandy is a tough one, maybe Chloe Sevigny from Big Love. Jay Leno as Mary Brunner (he's got the chin) and so on.
How about Linda showing up at Charlie's funeral. If it happened in real life a show like Inside Edition might pay her to go. Hard to turn down easy money. But that would create some intrigue, eh? Who wouldn't pay to see an encounter between Linda and Sandy, real or fictional.

leary7 said...

Dilligaf...
Are prisoners entitled to social security? Do they have to file tax returns? Would Manson's tax returns be accessible? Probably not. Hasn't Bobby B. made some dough over the years? Why wouldn't Hinman's sister have sued over that?
Questions questions.
And since you have confessed to being a retired prosecutor can you please answer the big one for allot of us. When the death penalty was reinstated, could they not have charged Tex in the Shorty Shea murder and gone for the death penalty. I know he couldn't have been tried again for TLB, but he did participate in Shea's killing and was never charged as far as I recall. As a matter of fact, since there is no statute of limitations on murder, couldn't Tex be charged today in Shorty's murder?

katie8753 said...

Leary I love your idea for a new movie on this case. Starting at Charlie's funeral and going back to the old Spahn days.

I don't know how much the public would like it though. I think they would rather see a "horror flick" with lots of carnage.

Maybe the carnage can occur at his funeral. Lots of opinionated people would be there. LOLOL.

Good questions for Mr. Dill too!

I remember when they did the last "dig" at Barker's, I think Debra Tate was hoping that if they found more bodies, more murder charges could be brought. Although I don't know if it would be possible to prove anything by that point.

Marliese said...

Leary...ya think Charlie's quarters are paid? ROFL. Or that he qualifies on a "spouse's record?" LOL! Federal law prohibits prisoners from receiving social security benefits, and if they're receiving social security benefits when they become incarcerated, their benefits are suspended. If a qualifying spouse or dependent children are receiving benefits on the prisoner's social security record, they are allowed to continue receiving those benefits, but we know that doesn't apply here, right? :)

And I'm pretty sure a prisoner has to pay taxes on earned income...just like anyone else.

katie8753 said...

Hi Marliese!!! Good to see you!

I'm assuming that Charlie has never paid into Social Security, never really having much of a "job". I don't see how he could collect any benefits.

leary7 said...

thnks for the info Marliese. I feared it was a dumb question. I should google and do homework before I ask so many dumb questions here.

yeah, Katie, it is fun to speculate on what conflicts or spats would take place if everyone showed up at Charlie's funeral. The psychopath was a master manipulator and it would be beyond entertaining to think of him pulling the strings on all his old puppets from beyond the grave. The music itself would be interesting. I suspect Star or Squeeky would be in charge. It would just be the weirdo social event of the decade. I'd walk backwards from Boston to be there.

katie8753 said...

Leary, there is no such thing as a dumb question. :)

I could just see Charlie looking down (or up???) at his own funeral, laughing his ass off, knowing that he's STILL in charge. HA HA.

Wow. Talk about fireworks. Star Vs. Sandy. THAT I'd like to see. LOLOL.

Marliese said...

Hi Katie! Been excruciatingly busy...you don't want to know. :(
But have been trying to check in and read here and there from time to time.

Like Leary, i've always wondered about prosecuting Tex for Shorty's murder but i suppose at this point the cost outweighs the benefit...the magnitude of his crimes will likely always prevent him from earning parole, no matter how entitled he may be to apply for it. We've probably heard or read why he wasn't charged for Shorty back in the day but off the top of my head, I can't remember the explanation.

Col once posted the idea that the Labianca case be re-opened and Clem prosecuted for being there...and eventually let him plead to time served if he truthfully answered some questions. And watch people come unglued...people hiding truth, about a 40 year old case being brought to life again.

Thanks for the happy hi Katie. :)

katie8753 said...

Marliese, I'm so glad you had time to comment. You're a fount of info on this case. Thanks!

I agree. Prosecuting Tex at this point would probably be a waste of money. Too much time gone by. Evidence gone, etc. Even if Tex got the death penalty, it would take years for him to be executed. Why not just let him die of natural causes. LOL.

That would be VERY interesting if they prosecuted Clem for the LaBianca murders. The stuff we might find out. WOW!!

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

((((((((((MARLIESE))))))))))

Two Marilyn's and Jean Harlow... SWEET! LOL

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

So much to say (on several topics)... but alas, duty calls...

I'll have to catch-up, a bit later.

MrPoirot said...

I wonder what happened at Susan Atkin's funeral?

Marliese said...

Like Katie said, no dumb questions Leary. i just find the idea of prisoners getting social security checks hilarious...Charlie Manson in particular, with what we know of his noble work ethic and all...a pimp and a murderer paying taxes and qualifying for benefits...
Generally speaking, nothing personal towards you for asking. :)

katie8753 said...

I've always wondered why Clem wasn't prosecuted for LaBianca. He was in the "look for murder car" just as much as Susan & Charlie.....

katie8753 said...

>>>Mr. P said: I wonder what happened at Susan Atkin's funeral?>>>

Did she even have one???? Talk about losing interest when they die. LOL.

Marliese said...

There was that article awhile back in the Orange County something or other magazine about her husband...at that time, he was keeping her cremated remains in an urn on his desk, if i remember correctly. Can't remember what if anything was said about her funeral. I'm sure her husband saw to it that she was put to rest with dignity...have you heard that something 'happened'? Poirot?

Marliese said...

Thank you Lynyrd. :) You too. hugs.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

OK... a little catch-up now... LOL

THEN, back to my duties. LOL

=====================================

Leary said:
>>>>"Nowadays allot of times a funeral they have a video of the deceased speaking. It would be Charlie's last rant and I don't think he would pass that up".<<<<

I have to admit Leary... I'd pay pretty good money, to see that video speech, as well! LOL
My curiousity alone, wouldn't allow me to miss it.
No doubt, the theme (of Manson's final message) would be:
"Bury me upside-down, so the world can kiss my ass"! LOLOL
I'd still have to hear it for myself though...

======================================

Katie said:
>>>>"So I guess in California, Charlie does have the right to profit, as long as there are no outstanding judgements/leins levied against him".<<<<

Well...
The $500,000 judgement that "Bartek" won, back in 1971... expires every ten years.
Luckily, his lawyer kept "renewing it" (however that works)... so when the Guns-N-Roses cover version of "Look at Your Game Girl" was released... Bartek got his money... well... some of it anyway.
(I'm not sure how much Bartek actually got over time).
My assumption, (and this is only an assumption), is that further settlements against Manson are unlikely... since, even a judgement as old as 1971, must be continually renewed.
But... that's just a complete assumption.
Dilligaf? LOL

Dilligaf is gonna wish, he was still working. LOL
So much for retirement. : )

=======================================

Leary said:
>>>>"Jay Leno could play Linda".

LMAO.

I always thought Linda was a very attractive blonde, large chin and all.
But then again... I'm pretty easy, when it comes to being pleased by women's looks. LOL
I found all the Manson girls attractive, except maybe 2 or 3... and even at that, they weren't that bad. LOL
Mandatory rinse-off at the waterfall, or horse trough though! LOL

MrPoirot said...

Marliese said:
...have you heard that something 'happened'? Poirot?


Poirot replies:

Nah I never heard a word. i suddenly realized they got rid of Sadie without any fuss.

I can't imagine Charlie going quietly but then, they got rid of Bundy quietly.

katie8753 said...

Mr. P, when Bundy was executed, they partied hearty outside, dancing and setting off fireworks.

I think he was well hated. LOL.

Marliese said...

Katie, trying to remember...about clem and the labiancas, i think it had something having to do with the original 'we won't seek the death penalty against you if...' offer to Susan that fell apart. Bugliosi briefly mentions his explanation for excluding clem in HS, i'll have to look it up later. :)

Clem, he's one lucky guy. I may stand alone with this, but i don't think what Bret did was so awful. The man is a convicted murderer...a killer. And he knows a whole lot more than he's ever said.

"we got five piggies last night."

It's not like he was exonerated. He's still a convicted murderer.
Not being hateful, just saying...he's one lucky guy. A jury thought he should die.

I think it's important to remember that according to people that knew Bret personally, he didn't reveal the information thoughtlessly or without careful consideration. And it's not like he revealed anything that wasn't true. He didn't lie.

Katie, i know you had the utmost respect for Bret. I did too. He was always very kind and polite. And always fair and neutral. I find comments of concern for a convicted murderer's right to privacy regarding his background very unfair.

katie8753 said...

Marliese, I'll go back and try to look up why Clem was only prosecuted for Shorty. I probably knew that at one time, but have forgotten it.

I totally agree with you about Bret. He didn't reveal any information about Clem without carefully thinking it out.

If privacy was that important to Clem, he should have just laid low and gotten a job that didn't put him in the spotlight. That was his choice.

Clem is no different than any other convicted felon who is released from prison. If the press gets wind of where/who he or she is, that's too bad.

It's called the "price of infamy".

Marliese said...

Katie, just want to clarify that although i initially addressed you in my last post, i wasn't implying that you were criticizing Bret. i know that you haven't and that you hold Bret in high regard. I was just saying ...

katie8753 said...

Marliese, no worries. I knew exactly what you meant! You and I think alike on quite a few subjects! :)

Dilligaf said...

A judgement is typically valid for 10 years in California. However, you must apply for a renewal prior to the expiration of the judgement. Miss it by 1 day and you will be out of luck. You can find more by looking up California CCP 683.

Marliese is correct in re Social Security payments. If paroled, a parolee may apply at that time.

Why not charge Clem? Many reasons come to mind, cost being a huge reason. A secondary reason is the type of evidence. How easy would it be to secure a verdict? In Clem's case, was there direct physical evidence linking him to Shea's murder, or was it more circunstantial evidence? Balance the strength of the evidence and the cost versus the likely outcome and many times the decsision cn make itself. These cases had cost the County of Los Angeles both time and money over the years, it may have been politically expedient to make the decision to move on. The Shea case did not attract as much attention or outrage as TLB did.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Mr. Dill!

Your legal expertise is a big help on answering some of these questions that most of us don't know the answer to. All we can do is guess or bluff.

Course, I'm speaking for myself. HA HA.

Marliese said...

Dilligaf said>>>> The Shea case did not attract as much attention or outrage as TLB did. <<<<<

Hi Dilligaf...so true, and still...to this day it doesn't. It pisses me off how little attention Shorty and his terrible murder receive.

It's been said that every single one of those losers at the ranch had a hand one way or another in Shorty's death or clean up and cover up of it...

It was brutal and vicious and they let his remains rot for years...cowards...all of them. Murdered because Charlie figured him for a snitch and to this day that lying coward won't admit his involvement there.

The death of Shorty Shea deserves as much attention and outrage given each of the other victims. Steven is often left on the sidelines too, along with James and Lauren Willett.

Dilligaf said...

No problem Katie. I spent a good amount of my career bluffing.

I just moved down to SoCal, am very close to Spahn, Cielo, and Waverly. I plan on using some of my time driving to these locations to finally but a real image to my knowledge, versus a photo. I know I will see nothing new, but it is something I have always wanted to do, but could never find the time.

MrPoirot said...

Shorty may have gotten in the car with his killers because he didn't have any reason to fear them since it was Frank Retz who snitched on them. Clem has made recorded statements revealing his deep anger at Shorty for snitching.

katie8753 said...

Marliese, that's so true. Shorty, Steven, Lauren, James, Gary and any other victims we don't know about deserved to live just as much or more than any of these loser family members.

Just because some of the family members (mostly big-mouthed women) weren't charged or imprisoned for these crimes, doesn't mean they weren't/aren't guilty of conspiracy and cover up.

The whole kit and kaboodle should have been locked up!!! Then they could visit each other on the workyard all they wanted while busting up rocks.

Or...kill each other if things got testy enough. LOL.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Well said, Marliese.

To "infamous Jim's" credit, he always says "HTLB", instead of just TLB... including Hinman.

I submit, and agree, there's a few more initials unrecognized.

I wouldn't recommend putting Shorty's "S", first though.
SHITLB? LOL

Sorry... bad Lynyrd humor.
Sometimes, I can't help myself.

Shorty and the Willets, are always forgotten... and Steve Parent has even been described as "collateral damage"... "in the wrong place, at the wrong time".

Moreover... the punishment for these deaths (Shea and the Willets), seemed quite lenient.
How much time did Clem serve for Shorty?
12 years?

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Poirot said:
>>>>"Clem has made recorded statements revealing his deep anger at Shorty for snitching".<<<<

If you can locate that audio Poirot, send it to my e-mail.
I'll gladly upload it, to the blog.
Sounds interesting...

MrPoirot said...

Pardon Lynyrd, i meant recorded in writing by court authorities. I did not mean audio. Sorry.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Dilligaf said:
>>>>"No problem Katie. I spent a good amount of my career bluffing".<<<<

Like I always say, Dilligaf:
"If you can't dazzl'em with facts, baffl'em with bullshit".
AHahahaha
The success of this blog, is a striking testament to the effectiveness, of that creedo.
LOLOL

======================================

Dilligaf said:
>>>>"I just moved down to SoCal, am very close to Spahn, Cielo, and Waverly. I plan on using some of my time driving to these locations to finally but a real image to my knowledge, versus a photo. I know I will see nothing new, but it is something I have always wanted to do, but could never find the time".<<<<

Please... take 3 hard-drives worth of photos, and send them in. I can never have too much material... and a "California Connection" never hurts!
: )

CarolMR said...

Off-topic, but here goes: There is an article about Doris Day in the 12/19 issue of People magazine. She is releasing her first album after 17 years. There are no present-day pictures of her in the article. I hear she doesn't want to be seen and that's why her interview several years ago with O'Reilly was an audio one. In the People article she says the biggest tragedy in her life was her son Terry's death from melanoma. No mention of Manson, of course. Surprisingly, she said Paul McCartney is a big fan of hers and has since become a good friend.

katie8753 said...

Mr. P, wasn't Charlie mad at Shorty because he married a black girl? I think there was more to this hatred of Shorty than just the alleged "snitching".

I think Shorty & Charlie just rubbed each other the wrong way on a daily basis. At the end of his life, Shorty was afraid of staying at the ranch. It's too bad he didn't trust his own intuition.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

I made a new thread, for that discussion Carol.
Thanks!

Bing said...

katie8753 said...
I've always wondered why Clem wasn't prosecuted for LaBianca. He was in the "look for murder car" just as much as Susan & Charlie.....

What I find strange about that whole thing was that Susan was charged and convicted on the LaBianca murders while Clem wasn't even though I seem to recall the Bug saying in "Helter Skelter" that "Clem Tufts" was even named in the search Warrant that was place on the bus during the Search at Barker Ranch by Bugliosi and the Inyo Co. Sheriff's office......He is One Lucky Muthafucka

katie8753 said...

Hi Bing!

Yes Susan & Charlie were convicted of the Labianca murders, even though they weren't involved in the actual killing, so why wasn't Clem charged and convicted as well?

Marliese mentioned that Bugliosi explains it in Helter Skelter. I'll have to look that up and get back with you.

>>>He is One Lucky Muthafucka>>>

Yes indeedy. He's got more of a life than he deserves, that's for sure.

Marliese said...

Katie said>>>Yes indeedy. He's got more of a life than he deserves, that's for sure<<<<<


That is for sure, and exactly why it's screwed up that he dares complain about someone revealing who he is now. He's a convicted murderer. His background is subject to the same scrutiny as any other convicted felon.

katie8753 said...

>>>Marliese said: He's a convicted murderer. His background is subject to the same scrutiny as any other convicted felon.>>>

That's right Marliese.

Look at Casey Anthony. She's so hated that she has to hide, and if someone outed her, there wouldn't be anything she could do about it legally, she would just have to dig out another hiding place. And she's not even a convicted felon, although she should be.

I've always said (agreeing with the Col) that Clem didn't have a leg to stand on with that threat of a lawsuit anyway. It's not against the law to report news.

Mr. Dill.... do you concur??? :)

bobby said...

This is just a perfect oportunity to thank Mariese and Katie for the the great dialog and expression of thoughts that you both share. Marliese i know what you mean about getting caught up in life and not being able to contribute to the blog. certainly not that my contributions could compare with yours but i do know about getting to busy. Anyway I so enjoy your input that when you have time to do it I need to take time to thank you.
Bob.

katie8753 said...

Hi Bobby!!

I love it when Marliese AND you comment. Always interesting stuff and right on the money!!! :)

bobby said...

Thank you Katie !

sbuch113 said...

It's the Son Of Sam law that prevents the convicted from profiting from thier misdeeds.

MrPoirot said...

katie8753 said...
Mr. P, wasn't Charlie mad at Shorty because he married a black girl? I think there was more to this hatred of Shorty than just the alleged "snitching".

I think Shorty & Charlie just rubbed each other the wrong way on a daily basis. At the end of his life, Shorty was afraid of staying at the ranch. It's too bad he didn't trust his own intuition

Mr Poirot replies:

If Shorty truly feared for his life would he have gotten in that car with three Family members? I have to wonder if Shorty didn't completely underestimate the leathality of the Family. Current wisdom says they tricked Shorty into the car to go get car partd. But the most likely trick they used was telling Shorty his horse was loose. Any cowboy will fall for that trick every time.

I doubt if Shorty's wife had any bearing on his death because that marriage was over. there was minimal contact between Shorty and his wife by summer 69.

katie8753 said...

>>>Mr. P said: I doubt if Shorty's wife had any bearing on his death because that marriage was over. there was minimal contact between Shorty and his wife by summer 69.>>>

I didn't know that. I do know that Charlie didn't like his marriage. He thought it was "unmanly" of him to marry into another race.

>>>If Shorty truly feared for his life would he have gotten in that car with three Family members?>>>

Ruby Pearl says that Shorty confided to her that he was afraid of them. He was staying elsewhere at night instead of bunking at the ranch.

According to Clem (if I'm remembering this right) there were only 2 family members in the car with Shorty...Clem & Tex. Tex told Shorty to drive off the road a bit with some pretext then signaled Clem to hit him on the head with a tire iron. Tex dragged Shorty out of the car, and then Charlie and Bruce showed up in another vehicle and Charlie ordered everyone to stab him.

katie8753 said...

>>>sbuch said: It's the Son Of Sam law that prevents the convicted from profiting from thier misdeeds.>>>

Thanks sbuch! If you'll read back a bit, Mr. Dill explained that law and that it's been overruled in most every state. I didn't know that. Thanks for your input!!

katie8753 said...

Of course, Clem went from "we got five piggies last night" and "I cut his head off" to (after being in prison for a few years) "was that wrong"? "Maybe I shouldn't have done that".

It's funny how prison isn't funny. It kind of takes the wind out of your sails.

After being in prison for a few years and Charlie didn't resurrect anybody and free anybody, I guess Clem figured he'd been taken for a fool.

"Well I guess I'll tell you where we buried him if you'll let me out."

Ahhhhh, Clem....it looks like YOU'RE the snitch. HA HA.

Don't be mad if someone "snitched" on you. LOL.

MrPoirot said...

Clem was a ranchhand along with Shorty at Spaghs before Charlie ever arrived. Yet Clem joined the Family and then helped murder Shorty. So much for old times sake huh?

leary7 said...

I am totally with Marliese - and I know Saint feels strongly on this too - that it is a total abomination that Grogan has walked around a free man the past several decades.
They say he got parole because he lead them to Shorty's body and also the judge felt he was to stupid to be a dangerous criminal...but I have always felt the Shea murder was regarded as a "lesser crime" because he was just a ranchhand and not a movie star or celebrity hairdresser or heiress or even a grocery big shot. Shorty got shafted.
I know we live in a celebrity culture but it is just flat out disgusting how much notoriety influences the judicial system.

Do you think any of the old guys would attend Charlie's funeral? Chuck Lovett or Brooks? Would Donkey Dan make scene? TJ would have for sure. And I still wonder if the Bug would show up. He always loved the camera. I could see him showing.

Marliese said...

Ah, Bob, you're one of the good guys ~ you are...really. When your name appears in the comments, i always think oh good Bob's here...you're genuine and real. If there were 'like' buttons here, i'd sure be hitting them for every one of your comments.
Thanks much.

Happy Christmas to you and yours...

Marliese said...

leary7 said...>>>>
I am totally with Marliese - and I know Saint feels strongly on this too - that it is a total abomination that Grogan has walked around a free man the past several decades.<<<<<


It is, Leary...it totally is...an abomination.
Am I remembering the news reports correctly...he was only 33 years old when he was released? Luck. He's damn lucky the make up and inclination of the parole boards were what they were at that time...focused on so called rehabiliation I suppose, not punishment for brutal crimes against human life. When Clem was released, I'll bet they all thought they had a chance.

And what does revealing where Shorty was buried have to do with fitness for release? So he could prove he didn't cut off Shorty's head? What a guy. How about what he did do...let the man's remains rot for years and lied about it...how moral of him to desecrate the remains of the man he ambushed, bludgeoned and stabbed to death.

And he complains about being outed for who and what he is now...he really has no basis for any complaint whatsoever, he's a convicted murderer is what he is and he should thank his lucky stars he's been a free man for the past 25 years.

katie8753 said...

>>>Mr P said: Clem was a ranchhand along with Shorty at Spaghs before Charlie ever arrived. Yet Clem joined the Family and then helped murder Shorty. So much for old times sake huh?>>>

Yeah, he was a great friend....NOT!!

Not only is Clem a murderer, he's a child molester. He should be a registered sex offender.

Too bad if his little "rock band" didn't work out. Screw him.

katie8753 said...

>>>Leary said: And I still wonder if the Bug would show up. He always loved the camera. I could see him showing.>>>

Yeah Leary, Bugliosi probably would show up. To have the last laugh. LOL.

leary7 said...

a couple of years ago I seem to recall that Germany had to move Rudolph Hess's grave to an undisclosed location because it had become a shrine for neo-Nazis.

Which raises the question if Charlie's grave would become such a place, a destination for his fans. I kinda envisioned Squeeky buying a big plot in some old graveyard out in Death Valley and welcoming any old Family member to finally rest there. Who would join Charlie out in the dessert one last time? Lynn and Sandy and Cappy probably, the others not so sure.

Marliese said...

When Charlie is pronounced dead...in prison, any guesses who will step up and claim his dead body? Can just anyone, or would they have to prove they're legally entitled to receive his remains?

leary7 said...

which raises the question, Marliese, about the rights of blood relatives. Maybe Dilligaf could answer that one. We know Charlies has a half sister thought she has never surfaced. The question about Charlie's kids goes round and round. My guess is that Manson being a control freak he has made some arrangements with either Star or Lynn. I'd be shocked if he just left it all to "blowin in the wind". He's to much of a performer for that.

katie8753 said...

I doubt if Charlie's half sister wants his carcass. Or anyone else with any brains for that matter.

beauders said...

i think manson is going to do just about anything he can to outlive bugliosi. he would see that as winning their little war.

katie8753 said...

>>>Beauders said: i think manson is going to do just about anything he can to outlive bugliosi. he would see that as winning their little war.>>>

Beauders you're probably right on the money! Who can live longer? LOL.

fiona1933 said...

I think there is more to Shorty's death than the 'snitch' business. It was supposed to be Frank Retz who was trying to get them off the ranch, plus shorty got in the car with his killers: therefore the we-are-going-to get-him-for-snitching stuff looks suspect already.


The thing is, that in Helter Skelter, Bugliosi made the Family, and Spahn Ranch appear to be a compact and fairly small affair. Yet it was sprawling and disorganized, with people coming and going all the time, not a highly organized cult with a leader making plans. Things happened, they happened as reactions to other things, and no-one saw a whole picture because there wasn't one.

No-one knows who really knew who, but there are many rumours. One is that Shorty was seen with Rosemary Labianca, who was also reputed to be dealing LSD. That is not so wild: her dress shop seems to have made a suspiciously large amount of money. Rosemary was curiously terrified by the Tate murders, really disturbed.

Were all these people connected and got on the wrong side of someone? Voytek, bringing in MDA, thinking to make a quick buck before Abigail dumped him? Possibly in partnership with Jay, whose business wasn't going well? Dealing it through Rosemary and her boutique dress shop: it's a good cover for the Beautiful People to drop in and buy a frock and also 'something for the weekend'. Maybe delivered or even purchased by Shorty, who was always going on these trips in quest to be a star.

No-one can ever know because drug activity is secret and when carried out by the outwardly respectable, it's double secret. Sharon and her friends were, to the public eye, respectable: no real tabloids then, secrets were mainly kept. It is entirely possible and not far-fetched at all that Shorty knew Rosemary and knew who had killed her and why. Perhaps the snitching he died for was the possibility he would testify to something that would completely incriminate Manson. It seems amazingly unlikely that the guy would have been slaughtered by three or four people just for telling a blind man to run them off the property. If that were the case, a little scare would have been enough, surely?

The standard explanation has to be rubbish.

And as for why Clem and the others would have done this, they give their explanations in everything they said: "Never ask why. Live in the Now" etc. They really believed this stuff. they were really living it.