Tuesday, January 28, 2014

The Leno LaBianca Estate... and how it got that way.


Ok, let’s deal with Leno first as his estate is pretty much straightforward:
Leno was broke.  Nothing more to it.  This should come as no surprise to any of us.  When all of his assets were sold off it wasn’t enough to cover all his obligations.  His business – his family’s business – subsequently failed.

Let’s begin with what Alice LaBianca has to say in No More Tomorrows which she calls “A Biographical Novel” (whatever that means).  Also, in the author’s note, she says the story is how she remembers it, “mostly fact, some fiction.”  Oh boy.  Caveat noted.

Leno’s business, Gateway, had been started by his father and mother.  Leno’s father expanded it to include a second wholesale business which was eventually sold off once market conditions made it the smart move.  They were somewhat closed corporations… there were shareholders but there were two types of shares, voting and non-voting, and all the shareholders were mostly family involved in the business anyway.  

Anthony, Leno’s father, manipulated the shares in such a way that he controlled the most votes and so he was basically able to appoint whomever he wanted to positions of power.  This is how Leno eventually came to be in charge.  Anthony’s brother, Sam, owned only 19% of the stock and it wasn’t enough for him to keep his position as vice-president once Anthony decided Leno should replace him.  


So in 1950 Leno was first appointed to the board and then the board appointed him VP of both Gateway and the Wholesale Corporations.  According to Alice LaBianca, Sam didn’t speak to them for more than a year.  Also, Leno’s sisters were upset by it too, as their husbands the Petes (Smaldino and DeSantis) were passed-over as well.  Leno’s older sister (Smaldino) was particularly miffed her husband wasn’t made VP.


In 1951, Anthony died and so at 26 Leno became the President of both corporations.  He inherited 3301 Waverly Drive too, known by the LaBianca family as Oak Terrace and moved in.  Leno’s mom moved into an apartment on the property in the back of the garage, like she was Fonzie or something.  Leno and Alice sold their house in Alhambra and bought a beach house which was for them to live in the future, but had to be rented out upon purchase, to afford it.  Leno owned the exact same amount of stock as his sisters, but he was solely responsible for the success of the business.  The pressure is building.

Leno and Alice begin to have marital problems, and in 1954 they both move out of Waverly and into separate apartments... Alice with the children.  Leno’s mother moves back into the house and she eventually buys it back from Leno.  By the time Alice has their third child, Leno is growing very distant.  He bought Alice a new house and they sold their beach house.  After a couple of half-hearted reconciliation attempts, they knew their marriage was over in 1956 and Alice begins to feel a sense of foreboding about the house on Waverly.  It’s isolated, separated from the house on one side by the large wall, and by over 200 feet on the other side.

By 1957 Leno had sold-off the Wholesale business and had expanded Gateway.  Alice remarried and in 1959, Leno had met and fallen in love with Rosemary, complaining that he always falls for women who want careers.

Early 60s and Leno’s brother-in-law Peter Smaldino wants out.  This is notable because in the Second Homicide Report it’s noted that Ray Norwood, the company treasurer, tells the police that Leno and Smaldino didn’t get along and Leno thought Smaldino was always watching him.  Alice claims that Smaldino objected to being second fiddle to Leno and also that Leno was expanding the business too fast and borrowing too much money and that he didn’t want to stand by while Leno “loses it all”.

Norwood told the police that in 1964, Gateway sold some of their stores and received $400,000... but because of the sale, they were making less income and were still paying three executive salaries, and one of those executive salaries had to be cut.  According to Norwood, Smaldino volunteered, if his terms were met.

What Norwood and Alice both agree on, is that Smaldino wanted his stock to be redeemed in cash.  Norwood says Leno unwisely agreed to pay Smaldino $250,000 (in cash) to get rid of him, so he would be free to do as he pleased.  According to Alice, Leno’s attorney advised against it, suggesting Leno only pay him 25% of his shares in cash, and take a note for the rest.  In that case, Smaldino would still be on the board.  Leno said it was his mother’s decision.  According to Leno, she suggested to him, it was best to make peace with the family... pay them their cash... and let them go.  So they did, and the Smaldinos opened-up their own liquor store business.  Alice says, this is the beginning of the end for Gateway.

Now, remember that Smaldino is the one who suggests to the police that the murders may be mafia-related because of Leno’s gambling debts.  But the other Pete, Pete DeSantis, who is the head of the Sons of Italy, doubts it.  DeSantis is Leno’s other brother-in-law who remained at Gateway, and Norwood describes him as allowing Leno to do whatever he pleased, because he was always so distracted by his duties with the Sons of Italy.

Alice writes of Rosemary opening a boutique in an old Gateway truck and then opening up a dress shop with a partner in Beverly Hills.   They bought the Disney house and then sold it quickly for a nice profit because it was more trouble than it was worth... and then of course, bought the Waverly house back from his mother for $18,000... and eventually (as we shall see documented), takes out a second mortgage on the place for $44,000.

Sometime in 1968 Alice writes, that Leno called her and stated he was trying to get out of the grocery business for good... and asked her to lend him enough money, to buy out Pete DeSantis’ shares... and then he could have control and sell the company off for good.  Alice says she could have lent him $20,000, but that was all... and it wasn’t enough.  1968?  Begs the question: If Rosemary is so successful, why can't she front him the money?  Why go to your ex-wife when your current wife is lying right next to you? 

Alice also writes, that around this time, is when the neighborhood started to turn with hippies and pot parties and such.  Remember also, that it is about this time, that Harold True and his folks are living next door, and that the Waverly house has apparently been broken-into more than once.


April 1969 Leno and Alice’s daughter Cory turns 21.  This allows her to be appointed administratrix for Leno’s estate in a couple of more months.  Leno comes to visit her... and Alice and Cory notice something a bit strange about him, describing him as “preoccupied and upset”.

On April 9th Leno writes Cory a letter which updates her on all of his horses, most notably ‘The Kildare Lady.’  Leno refers to these horses as “our” horses.  Whose?  He and Rosemary’s?  It’s never clear, but there are pictures (as well) of two of them... one with one of Alice’s daughter riding... and one which Alice named "Leno’s Lady", once she bought them after Leno’s death.  Alice wasn’t able to hold onto the two horses for long either, but she writes of Leno’s plans to buy a ranch and raise these horses full-time.  Alice never says it is any secret, so I can only assume that Rosemary must have known about them as well.  Why they remained a secret from the LaBianca side can only be surmised, but I bet we can surmise on that in a bit.  This is the letter also, where Leno complains of two “pot parties” being broken up by the cops right next door on Waverly.

Alice writes that Leno was trying to make a final agreement to leave Gateway (because the jig was up and everyone knew about Leno's misdeeds with the company's bucks - editorial comment), which he only could accomplish, if someone bought-out his shares... and that Leno’s attorney wrote-up a proposal that Pete DeSantis would buy them all, over a period of ten years.  DeSantis was skeptical of this arrangement and objected.  Leno went to his mother, but she told him they would just have to weather these troubles as well. 

The Second Homicide Report has DeSantis learning after Leno’s death, that Leno planned to buy a ranch in Vista, California for $127,000, but that he had no idea where he could possibly get the money, because by this time, they all knew... (both Petes and Leno’s mother)... that Leno had been misappropriating lots of money from the business for quite some time, and restitution was to be made.

Alice has it that ostensibly on August 8th; Pete called Leno and told him that after talking with Leno’s mother, that they could work something out as a birthday present.  But in the Homicide Report, DeSantis claims no such thing, and further goes on to state that he thought Leno’s exit proposal was “absurd”, because it wouldn’t even come close to covering what Leno had taken from the company.   He thought it to be only a bargaining point and that he never got to discuss it with Leno because the meeting on August 9th never happened.  DeSantis also admitted he thought Leno’s mother would have been generous to Leno, even though he didn’t deserve it.

Alice writes of her interrogation by the LAPD, and that she was incredulous about what they were insinuating about Leno's lifestyle and gambling addiction, as well as drug dealing and mafia connections.  Drug dealing?  The police insinuated this?  Why, pray tell?  This is the first solid connection even hinted at that the police may have been concerned about a drug connection.

Alice writes that she returned to Waverly in September to collect things for her children.  The house was sold almost immediately (if October 1970 is immediately, as we shall see) and that Leno had a will naming her as trustee, but that he never signed it, which is why the court appointed their daughter Cory as administratrix.

Leno’s interest in Gateway was a minority one, so it wasn’t appraised, but everything had to be sold because the liabilities far outweighed the assets.  She could have bought Leno’s minority share for $10,000 and claims that it was worth much more, but because Pete DeSantis told her she would never have any say in the business she declined, and it was bought by the creditors.  Within one year after that, the family business was no more.  Six years after Leno’s death, his mother died and the estate was finally settled.


Some thoughts:  

Ray Norwood, the Gateway Treasurer, in the second homicide report tells the police that Gateway was a successful and stable company which always operated at a profit until 1962, which was the time that Leno began taking “advances” from the company in excess of his own salary and expenses.  This was after his marriage to Rosemary.

Alice’s description of Rosemary is pretty good.  She says she kept her distance from Alice and that they were polite, but that Rosemary was good to Alice's children and was particularly close with Cory, and that she always participated in the LaBianca family’s activities.  No hint of any marital trouble with Leno is made at all.

LaBianca Family Statements at the parole hearings also bear out the state of financial affairs described by Alice and borne out by the records.  In 1998 Alice herself said at Leslie Van Houten’s hearing, Make no mistake about it, the entire LaBianca family has suffered untold deprivation, frustration, anxiety and financial ruin because of these murders. Leno's mother died of a broken heart just six years after her son's murder, losing the business to merciless creditors - the family business that Leno was managing and she and Leno's father had founded in the late 1920's. We emphatically oppose the release of any of the Manson ménage...We also want to say that Suzanne LaBerge, daughter of Rosemary, the murdered wife of Leno at the time, does not represent the LaBianca family. She certainly did not represent us at that May 4, 1990 parole hearing for Tex Watson, when she made that pathetic appeal for his release because she "forgave" him. As Ms. Van Houten continues her incarceration, let her continue to remember that what she did that fateful night was forever. The Manson family mark on this society is deep. As deep as the stab wounds to their helpless victims."

The Smaldino family has also made statements from time to time at LVH Parole hearings.  As late as 2010 and 2013 Louis Smaldino, Pete’s son, spoke of the financial ruin their family faced as a result of the once successful family business being lost.


What Leno’s Estate Documents Tell Us:

The house at Waverly Drive was sold and closed in October of 1970.  Leno’s daughter Cory was named administratrix.  It sold for $55,750.  The buyers assumed the $41,997.25 unpaid balance of the mortgage and paid cash for the rest as the property was in “breach’.  The legal sale document reads, Said sale was made for the advantage, benefit and best interest of the estate of Leno A. LaBianca, deceased, in that said property is the residence in which said decedent was murdered and has been difficult to sell; that said sale is required to generate cash for the purpose of paying legal and other taxes; that there is little or no cash in said estate to pay the debts thereof, and that it is necessary to sell substantially all of the property therein to meet said obligations.”  It further goes on to state that the sale price was at least 90% of the appraised value of the property.  Also in this document, it states that Cory has secured a probate bond of $91,400 and that after the sale of this property that “the value of the personal property and of the probable annual income from the remaining real property belonging to the estate will not be in excess of $91,400.

A probate bond is a monetary amount rendered in order to insure that estate proceedings are processed legally and fairly, as well as honestly.  Some states require the executor of an estate to post a probate bond when the estate holder dies as part of the distribution process.  It protects beneficiaries basically.  But the amount also indicates what the estate is probably worth.  In this case, less than $100,000 which is what the police estimated may have been Leno’s total worth in shares at Gateway, income, etc.

Next in January, 1971 we have Ray Norwood’s declaration as the Controller-Accountant of the State Wholesale Grocery Company, which was a claim of $119,128.14 made against both Leno and Rosemary’s estates because of community property provisions, broken down as follows:  $25,057.00 as balance due on principal and interest on a note from October 15, 1964.  Personal advances to Leno in the amount of $77,171.14 which were made at his direction dating back to May, 1960 and continuing until August of 1969.  Details of how these advances were made can be found in the homicide report, as well as noting that Leno did make payments back to the company twice, $15 grand in ’68 and $30 grand in ’69.

Advances to MA Findley of $10,200.  This is Alice LaBianca herself, in 1965, ’67 and ’68 and may have been child support payments.  Mr. Norwood also suspected payments made to the Almour Corporation were child support payments made directly to Alice as a dummy corporation.  The homicide report says the police will continue to thoroughly examine this aspect of the finances, but if they did we don’t know, and Alice hasn’t told us.  Probably after the arrests the police stopped looking.

Advances were also made to C. Chatham, a personal friend of Leno’s.  $6000.00 outstanding.  Who is C. Chatham and why does she have $6000 of Gateway's money?

Leno also from time to time would cash his own personal checks at his various stores.  Sometimes the checks would bounce, and Mr. Norwood claims an unpaid balance of $700.00 for these.

Let’s remember that Leno also had trouble at least once because he skimmed the money from the Money Order part of his business at the stores, and had to secure a personal loan to pay it back.  This reminds me of how sometimes storeowners cheat the lottery for a while until they get over their head and lose it.  In fact, why didn’t this guy ever get indicted?  These certainly are prosecutorial offenses.  But I digress.

In November, 1966 Leno and Peter DeSantis secured a $400,000 note with two deeds of trusts as collateral.  In October of 1969 this had an unpaid balance of $369,596.04 and the Summit Finance Corporation sued Rosemary’s estate for that amount plus interest and attorney’s fees in the belief that “Claimant is informed and believes that property subject to administration in decedent’s estate (Rosemary’s) is liable for satisfaction…”  Before that, back in February of 1966 Summit Finance had also loaned Leno $25,000 and so they also sued Rosemary’s estate for the unpaid balance of $16,350.00 plus interest and attorney’s fees.  I haven’t seen the documents, but I can only assume that just like Mr. Norwood’s Gateway claim, that these are duplicates of claims made against Leno’s estate as well, and may be borne out by the fact that the final document I reviewed specifically referring to Leno’s estate is from March of 1975 when Leno’s son Anthony, now as the administrator of Leno’s estate, basically sued the Summit Finance Corporation to question them for embezzling and concealing the property of the estate.  In other words, my non-lawyerly mind tells me, Anthony wished to sue to either regain some or all of the property which the court conveyed to Summit as restitution, or to be compensated fairly for it.  As if it was done in error.  I have no idea, but would love to know how that all turned out.

Combine all this, with the fact that we know Leno also had an outstanding personal loan of $30,000, as well as a loan for the boat, and we can know for certain that Leno was a very desperate man in August of 1969.  Again, as Lynyrd has pointed out, most gamblers have debts that are both on and off the books, so who knows what all else Leno may have had going on?  I know it myself, because although I have paid most of it off, I still owe my sister $200 from a little trouble I got in (not gambling) back in 2009-2010.  I also know from a good friend’s family issues with gambling, and substantial on-the-books legal debts that, once a person dies, if you have a good lawyer, the spouse of the person may not necessarily be on the hook for debts in the other spouse’s name.   At least now.  In New York in 2014.  What the deal was in California in 1969 I do not know.


So, as for Rosemary LaBianca?  More to come….

73 comments:

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Thanks Starship.
That's very detailed.

I'm gonna give it a close read, as soon as I get a chance.

bobby said...

Kicks ass, Starship. Thanks. !

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

((((((((((-----BOBBY-----))))))))))

katie8753 said...

Thanks Starship! Excellent work! You just got that book and you've already read it? You must be an Evelyn Wood graduate. LOL.

We still don't know if Rosemary had $2.6 million, or if a mafia connection was involved, but I agree with you...why borrow money from Alice if Rosemary had so much dough?

But like you say...more to come! Can't wait!

Thanks!!!!

bobby said...

FYI- there is a show on PIVOT channel mright now with . Johnwaters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgUU-YuYTDM

LS, Thanks for the !!!! BOBBY !!!

The best sound in the world to a person is hearing their name !

CarolMR said...

Thanks, Starship.

katie8753 said...

The best sound in the world to a person is hearing their name !

BOBBY! That's so true!!

MrPoirot said...

Nice story Starship: Leno and his Mom keep selling the family home back and forth to each other every five years.
Leno also had plans to buy a horse ranch. He should have just bought Spahn Ranch. Everything at Spahns would be the same except Leno would live in George's house but Lynette would not be allowed to squeak but Rosemary's boutique would introduce a line of designer buckskin dresses and Gateway would eliminate it's meat department.

bobby said...

could it be that after checking out True's house & then finding the the previously empty Labianca house with people in it that, it became a murder of oportunity ?

MrPoirot said...

Who was living in True's house at that time? Was True's house empty?

1 I surmise that much of the evening riding around supposedly looking for victims may have been spent by Charlie trying to figure out how he was going get his minions to kill without having to kill anyone himself. Charlie may have had his fill of doing the deed himself after the Crowe and Hinman killings. It was time for others to get their hands dirty.

2 Back when Charlie was partying at True's place, the Labianca house house was empty so Charlie took girls next door to the Lab house to fool around. Charlie had a long history of knowing how to get in that house. Charlie said this.

3 If it were really a mob hit done by Charlie wouldn't Charlie have stayed to make sure the hit was completely successful? Why would he leave a hit and trust it being completed by other people? Charlie was not happy with how these same killers did the deed the night before. Would Charlie walk out of a mob hit they had paid him to do himself?

katie8753 said...

I agree Mr. P. If it was a mob hit, seems like Charlie would have stuck around to make sure it happened, instead of just doing a little soft shoe and getting lost.

And then why go after Nader? Was that just dessert?

starship said...

Mr. P, I sure would like to see and read the things you claim in your above comment.

MrPoirot said...

Sorry Starship I don't remember where I read that about Charlie taking girls over to the Lab house while they were partying at True's house next door. Charlie did say he did that.

Season said...

"Yeah, I went to the LaBiancas'. I went in there and seen an old man on the couch, and I said, 'Hey, man, I didn't know you was in here, sorry. There was nobody here the last time I came.' I used to go there whenever they had big parties at Harold True's house next door. It'd be empty. It was the crash camp where everyone would go to fall on girls. I'd live in there for a couple of hours at time, that's all. Anyway, I turned around to get out. Tex was right behind me. It was his play, not mine."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/charles-manson-today-the-final-confessions-of-a-psychopath-20131121#ixzz2rvc39dgS

bobby said...

I'm just saying Charlie definitly said he was used to Labianca house being empty. Suddenly it's not. Crime's of oportunity do happen.

MrPoirot said...

Wow! The Italians reconvicted Knox and Sollecito.
Being one who thought she was 100% guilty at first, my opinion changed completely after looking closer at all the supposed evidence. This is a bad verdict and I doubt any DA in America would press charges off what the Italian prosecutor offered in court to convict Knox with.
The sole killer appears to be Rudy Guede and he has never implicated anyone else.

bobby said...

She does not have to go back & serve the sentence does she ?

MrPoirot said...

No Bobby. Italy has no extradition treaty with the US. I doubt Italy could get her extradited on a 2 outta 3 verdict even if Italy did have a treaty with us. Plus Italy would not ask for extradition until the next appeal is decided. It aint over yet.

katie8753 said...

Why would Charlie drive around for hours then pick the LaBianca house for the second night of murder if he thought it was empty? That doesn't make any sense.

bobby said...

Thanks MrPoirot

bobby said...

I know Katie, In thestandard scenario it doesnt make sense. I just know countless times CM saying he used the Labianca house to crash or have sex etc because while partying @ Trues house it was next door & not ocupied.Thats why why I tossed that out there. Not because I think I know something or anything like that.

bobby said...

Oh & the road mangler thinks CM was after him& settled for Labianca right ?

CarolMR said...

The COL has an interesting post from 9/25/13 comparing Susan Atkins with Amanda Knox. I personally think Amanda and her boyfriend are guilty. Interesting that Meredith's family always believed Amanda was guilty. What had their late daughter told them about Amanda and Raffaele that would make them think they were guilty?

MrPoirot said...

Amanda's bizarre behavior in the police station is why she was convicted. She was sitting in Raffe's lap and then did a split on the floor in the station.

Behavior can help select a suspect but to convict a defendant you need physical evidence. There is no physical evidence on Amanda or Raffe. If I were to vote a person guilty of murder you'd have to show me some real evidence. Sitting in somebody's lap isn't evidence unless you're in Italy.
Rudy Guede was convicted with finger prints and a lot of DNA.

CarolMR said...

I thought Raffaele's footprint was found in Meredith's blood in the bathroom?

katie8753 said...

Mr. P., sitting on someone's lap in the police station and doing splits when you're being questioned about murder is a little bizarre, don't you think?

I think she's guilty. She's got a few screws loose.

She laughed all the way thru the first trial, thinking she was too pretty to be convicted.

Think again, Amanda.

katie8753 said...

Bobby, I wasn't directing my comment about Charlie going to an empty house to you. It was more to Mr. P and Season.

I don't get the point. Can someone elaborate??

katie8753 said...

Hi Carol! I think Amanda's guilty too.

Now...why would Charlie tell his "kids" that they were too messy the night before, and that he was going to show them how to do it, and then go to a house he thought was empty???

Especially if it was a "mafia hit".

Please fill us in....

MrPoirot said...

CarolMR said...
I thought Raffaele's footprint was found in Meredith's blood in the bathroom?

Poirot replies

It isn't known whose footprint that was. It is a smeared footprint.

MrPoirot said...

katie8753 said...
Mr. P., sitting on someone's lap in the police station and doing splits when you're being questioned about murder is a little bizarre, don't you think?


Poirot replies:

That is why I initially thought she was guilty.
Katie would you convict someone of murder for sitting in someones lap?

katie8753 said...

Mr. P, that's a good question. I don't think the jury ever saw that.

It reminds me of Jodi Arias doing hand stands and wondering why she didn't apply makeup during her police investigation.

Her jury never saw that either.

What I'm basing my opinion on is Amanda's laughter during her first trial. She thought every witness, ever witness statement, every accusation against her was funny. And she laughed and laughed. The jury DID see that.

Same as Jodi. The jury didn't see her stupid antics in the police interrogation, but they did see her laughing at the prosecutor during the trial.

A sane and normal person being accused of first degree murder would be solemn, but Amanda and Jodi both thought it was a big joke.

And the kicker is....Jodie is definitely guilty. Where does that lead Amanda?

MrPoirot said...

Let's say Amanda is guilty and you Katie are on her jury and there is no physical evidence of any kind against her or Raffe. No blood. No finger prints. No witness puts either Amanda or Raffe there at the time.
Will you vote Amanda and Raffe guilty without direct, measureable evidence?
I get you wouldn't. I bet you'd be asking why the prosecution failed to provide you with concrete evidence upon which to base your decision.

katie8753 said...

Mr. P, there wasn't any physical evidence against Charlie either for the TLB murders.

If he had just sat down like a normal person, he probably would have walked.

But even without physical evidence, don't you think a jury can see if a defendant is trying to control the court room? To laugh and make a mockery out of justice?

That's what happened.

And yes, I would have convicted Amanda based on her courtroom antics, just like Charlie was convicted on his.

katie8753 said...

And now Mr P, please answer my question.

Why would Charlie go to the LaBianca house to show the others how to kill if he thought it was empty???

MrPoirot said...

Katie you just convicted an innocent woman.

MrPoirot said...

Katie why would Charlie be carrying a gun into a house that he knew was empty?

katie8753 said...

No she's as guilty as hell.

Katie why would Charlie be carrying a gun into a house that he knew was empty?

Mr. P, that's what I've been asking you. Am I talking to myself?

You are the one who said he thought it was empty.

The rats are winning....

katie8753 said...

Mr P, if you want to talk about the Amanda Knox case, please come to my blog. I have a thread up about it.

Let's get back to this case.

I'll ask one more time...why would Charlie go to an empty house to kill people, which is what you inferred...

If I get no answer, I'll assume that everyone thinks that Charlie is a big, fat LIAR.

Which is what I think.

MrPoirot said...

Katie copy and paste where I said that.

katie8753 said...

Mr. P you said this:

Back when Charlie was partying at True's place, the Labianca house house was empty so Charlie took girls next door to the Lab house to fool around. Charlie had a long history of knowing how to get in that house. Charlie said this.

Then Season said this:

Yeah, I went to the LaBiancas'. I went in there and seen an old man on the couch, and I said, 'Hey, man, I didn't know you was in here, sorry. There was nobody here the last time I came.' I used to go there whenever they had big parties at Harold True's house next door. It'd be empty. It was the crash camp where everyone would go to fall on girls. I'd live in there for a couple of hours at time, that's all. Anyway, I turned around to get out. Tex was right behind me. It was his play, not mine."

So why did you even say that if you didn't think that?

katie8753 said...

You have no proof of ANY of this.

MrPoirot said...

Katie you have something you are mixing up. I'm talking about the lab house being empty when Harold True lived next door. Harold True moved out in 68.

It is while True was next door that Charlie attended partys and would steal away with a chick and go into the empty house next door.

katie8753 said...

Mr. P, you posted this, and when Starhip asked you where you got it, you said I don't know.

Then Season posted this stuff from the Rolling Stone mag.

Is this what you were talking about? Because if so, it doesn't make any sense.

MrPoirot said...

I'll read the thread over tomorrow and see if I can see what you are asking. I cant see what doesn't make sense at the moment.

katie8753 said...

Of course it doesn't make sense. To suggest Charlie went to an empty house?

That doesn't make sense at all....

MrPoirot said...

No sense makes sense

katie8753 said...

That's a cop out Mr. P. Tell us why you said that.

Season said...

Katie, Starship asked where Mr. Poirot had seen/read that about Charlie & the LaBianca house. I had just finished re-reading the article, so posted it.

Going back to reading/lurking now. Have a good day.

katie8753 said...

Okay thanks Season!

CarolMR said...

Hi, Katie! I'm glad you agree that Ms. Knox is guilty. The frustrating thing about TLB is that we will never know the truth. I believe only Charlie knows the truth and he'll never tell. Even if he opened his mouth now, who would believe him?

katie8753 said...

Carol you're right. I think Charlie is the only one who really knows why the TLB murders were committed and any explanation he might offer would be nonsense anyway.

And I do think Amanda got away with murder. I don't know if justice will ever be served in that case.

bobby said...

If If If one of them, CM included came up with some concise & plausable explanation as to the reason for the series of murders then I may believe it to be the truth. If more than one of them came out with the same plausable explanation at the same time then it would be even more believable to me.

So: Please Please forgive me when I point out that alot of the players, researchers & writers all came up with that damned HS bullshit motive together at the same time.

Confused in ( insert city here )

MrPoirot said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVIANE6h3Cw

Supposedly Charles Manson knew Robert Conrad who played James West in "The Wild Wild West".
At 36:50 in this episode the evil Dr Miguelito Loveless sings a Beach Boys tune "Sloop John B" which is a Beach Boys hit.
Odd that a 1960s Beach Boys tune would be sung in a TV show taking place in the 1870s.

MrPoirot said...

Oops the song appears at 35:50

The women in the duet is Pheobe Dorin. Dr Loveless is Michael Dunn

Robert Conrad had a Beach Boys tune sung in 1966 on The Wild Wild West.

Also in this show is Phyllis Newman who was the girlfriend of a big time mafia guy

So here in this one episode is Robert Conrad, Beach Boy music and the mafia connection a year before Charlie is released from prison.

louis365 said...

La la la la la

CarolMR said...

Didn't Ed Sanders have a "blind item" in his book about an actor with whom Charlie had an affair when the actor starred in a popular weekly TV show? There were several good answers and I still don't know who Sanders was talking about.

bobby said...

Also in this show is Phyllis Newman who was the girlfriend of a big time mafia guy


I cant fing anything on that. Mr.P can you direct me ? Thanks.

bobby said...

fing/find

MrPoirot said...

Hey Bobby
Sorry but the best I can document that claim I made was that I heard it on TV back in the 70s. It's just something I remembered about Phyllis Newman because. I used to see her on game shows like Hollywood Square and such. Phyllis Newman was part of the group that orbited around Frank Sinatra and that worked in Vegas.

MrPoirot said...

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151189942890270&set=a.10150693408265270.414036.340801225269&type=1&theater

Here is Phyllis Newman on Facebook. There is a pic with her and Sammy Davis and Jghnny Carson. Sammy and Sinatra knew lotta mafia. So probably did Phyllis Newman. Doesn't mean she was in the mafia.

bobby said...

Thanks MrP.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Congratulations to Johnny, and all the Seattle fans.

I must say though... from an outsider's perspective... it was probably one of the most boring Super Bowls, that I've ever watched.

When you don't have a horse in the race... at a minimum... you want to see some healthy competition.
The game was over, before it started.

The Bronco's started by giving-up a ridiculous safety... and from there, it was all downhill.
Who hikes the ball 6 feet over the quarterback's head???

It was a complete routing.

To salvage the night... I was dying to see the Chili Peppers perform at halftime... and even THAT didn't pan-out.
RHCP performed the chorus of "Give it away" for like 23 seconds... and it was over.

I barely watched the second half.

I knew the Seahawks would win... but, that was ridiculous.

For me personally... this year will go down, as one of the biggest "Sleeper Bowls" ever. LOL

Let's face it... even the commercials sucked this year.
Usually, the commercials ROCK!

When the Bears destroyed the Pats (46-10 in 1986) it definitely sucked balls... but at least we had the entertainment value of Coach Ditka... Jim ""Hollywood" McMann (LOL)... and "The Fridge" Perry. LOL
That team was funny. LOL

Weigh-in Folks!

katie8753 said...

Robert Conrad & Chas? That's a thought picture I don't wanna have.

But...Robert was thin and neat. Not that there's anything wrong with that. LOL.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

Venus writes (via email):

Samantha Geimer will be on the Piers Morgan show on CNN, thought you might want to mention it....


I'm pretty sure, she means tonight.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Venus & Lynyrd!

MrPoirot said...

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2012/01/mountain-of-the-dead-the-dyatlov-pass-incident/

For you mystery hounds here is a strange one

matt prokes said...

I happened to catch that Piers Morgan show the other night.
While its her right to handle things however she wants it still blows my mind that she seems to bear no ill will towards Polanski.
She almost seems to....like him.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

PROKES!!!

Where you been Bro?!

Rob King said...

I remain forever and more, completely dumbfounded by this elusive "truth" everyone talks about with regards to TLB.

The killers are known, everyone agrees on that, right?
The killers, all imprisoned with little or less than zero chance of getting out, all have confessed to both the act and their motive, right?
All the killers say they were acting on orders from Manson and that these orders were some variation of "killing pigs" so as to turn society upside down.
And we all agree that Charlie Manson is a delusional psychopath. Expecting "truth" from a delusional psycho is just flat out stupid. Ain't gonna happen.

But to be fair, it's not a whole lot of people who 'seek truth' with regards to TLB. It's not like the JFK thing were half the country thinks the truth has been obfuscated. It is a very very small sample of folk who believe the whole TLB story has yet to be told.
I am curious about these people. Even amongst this small sample there is a full spectrum. You have the ones who simply hate Bugliosi and HS, like the Col. Then you have others like RH whose entire concept of the universe revolves around TLB ("it ended the Vietman War" etc etc). There has to be more to the TLB story for Robert or else his life's work will have been pointless.

Idiots run amouk.
Nearly fifty years, and not one conclusive piece of evidence to indicate otherwise.
Seriously, I am not being disrespectful or trying to pick a fight, but can you guys who still believe there is "added truth" to the TLB story explain why you believe this. I am honestly curious. Is it just that people want a mystery, need a mystery, so that they will invent one even
where none logically exists?

When Charlie dies, and nothing comes out, will the books be closed then?

matt prokes said...

I'm still around, I've just been super busy the last few months.
Leary-I had a link to an interview with June o. from a while back where i'm pretty sure shes talking about you...If you're interested I can find it and send it to you via email.

leary7 said...

Matt, is it that interview with Solerno in the NY Times? I never saw that until years after it was published. I was out of the country. But man when I first read it did I want to sue her for libel. She tells about 8 boldface provable lies. It actually gives a bit of insight into her father's pathology.

I have thought about it and think I will answer my own question. I believe that many folk want there to be more to the TLB story simply because the want a Second Act. I mean the First Act was so damned interesting and compelling it is just plain human nature to want more.
Charlie is such a repugnant creature that it remains in bad form (for most) to be fascinated by TLB, but really what other crime (save JFK) comes even close in terms of historical and cultural relevance?
Speaking of Second Acts, we all fantasized a bit that the Tex tapes might provide some new fodder but that seems to have gone up in smoke.
That's what Squeaky's assassination attempt was - a vain attempt for a Second Act to get Manson back on center stage. Weak. But I haven't completely dismissed the possibility of Star and Grey Wolf pulling something. I still see Manson wanting to exit with a bang.

bobby said...

leary7 said...
But I haven't completely dismissed the possibility of Star and Grey Wolf pulling something. I still see Manson wanting to exit with a bang.

Had not given that any thought before but, now that you bring it. Interesting & not at all a far fetched prediction. Thanks Leary

leary7 said...

Charlie's Second Acr, or Closing Act - it's an interesting concept to ponder, Bobby. You gotta wonder, given the egotistical showman he has always been, sitting there 23 hours a day in his cell if he doesn't contemplate an encore.
I always thought there would be a Family Second Act given the level of fanatical belief - but I think everyone has underestimated the effect of the Como split amongst the women.