Thursday, May 11, 2017



Debra Tate has been diagnosed with breast cancer.  Her good friend is asking for donations to help Debra with medical expenses.

We wish her a full recovery!

https://www.gofundme.com/helpdebratate 




121 comments:

Dilligaf said...

Prayers for her...

katie8753 said...

Thanks Dill!

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. I think that Sharon's brutal murder for no reason at all caused the Tate family to just fold. When you have feelings of anger, fear, repulsion and depression for years, it allows certain sicknesses to invade your immune system.

Doris was depressed for years, and only came out of it when she got the chance to keep these killers in prison. It gave her a kind of hope. But that kind of hope doesn't over-ride the anger at people who murdered your child.

Patty tried, but I don't think her heart was in it. You can see how sad she is in the parole hearings.

Debra has tried too, but I really think that going to these parole hearings and seeing these killers every time just takes something out of you every single time.

And it's not just the Tate family, who knows who else is succumbing to deadly disease because of these murders.

Tex, Pat, Susan, Leslie, Bobby, Bruce & Charlie didn't just kill the people at Gary's house, Cielo Drive, Waverly Drive and Spahn's Ranch those nights, they managed to finish off the victims' families, and probably their own families.

Susan only got out because she got cancer too. Pat, Tex, Leslie, Bobby, Bruce and Charlie should NEVER get out while they're still alive. I hope that parole board knows that.

Clem, Mary and Linda shouldn't be allowed to walk around free either. They're all just as guilty!

Dilligaf said...

You hit the nail on the head. When you get soft heads who cry about the hard life that convicts experience in prison, they seem to always forget about both the victims and their families. Philosophically speaking, I have often wondered if the murder victims, though often times die brutally, are better off as compared to their families who die slowly over yeas. I have met too many families who'd lives were ruined, and never recovered, because a loved one was killed.

Venus said...

Excellent posts.

I'm thinking good thoughts for Debra and am sending prayers her way.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

who knows who else is succumbing to deadly disease because of these murders

Suzan LaBerge had a nervous breakdown and Doris Tate fell into years of depression in the aftermath of the murders but in both cases, one can see a direct tie in between what happened and their mental health. Grief, guilt and giving up can have a powerfully detrimental effect on one's mindset and state of mind. However, bodily diseases/conditions don't follow in the same manner and to ascribe cancers and the like to the murders is pushing the boat out way too far. It's almost like trying to make the murderers worse than they are/were when, in truth, to take someone's life in the way the TLB victims lives were taken, one does not need to make anyone look worse.

Dilligaf said...

When you get soft heads who cry about the hard life that convicts experience in prison, they seem to always forget about both the victims and their families

I think that's for obvious reasons. The victims are dead, the families of the victims aren't themselves generally seen as victims in need of any kind of legal or judicial help beyond the conviction of the guilty.
Interestingly, the hard life that convicts experience in jail is often at the hands of other convicts and that rarely changes. But there's a good reason why reformers attempt to rid prison of any state sanctioned hardship that borders on inhuman ~ it is that that has partly been responsible for how things got to be how they are. Manson is a classic case in point. While he has been responsible for the carrying out of all of his moves, from a young age he was subject to the kind of institutional harshness that is hardly going to endear one to the prevailing society. That's not being soft, that's just recognizing what happened and saying much of it was wrong. It doesn't excuse him but it sure helps explain him.

Philosophically speaking, I have often wondered if the murder victims, though often times die brutally, are better off as compared to their families who die slowly over years

Because they have actually died ? Interesting conundrum. Is having a loved one murdered the worst thing that can possibly happen to someone in life ? For some people that will be the case but there are many people for whom that is not going to be so, for a whole variety of reasons. Some people would cope far worse if their spouse had an affair with one of their siblings than if they were murdered, for example.
Philosophically speaking, I think what a person happens to believe {religiously, spiritually etc} will also have much to do with whether they are "better off" than their loved one that has been killed.

I have met too many families who'd lives were ruined, and never recovered, because a loved one was killed

I think that even if people don't actually want to say it, there's a recognition that a family member has some modicum of choice in where they take something after a loved one has been killed. They don't have to internally collapse. It sounds almost cruel to say it but refusing to acknowledge it doesn't mean it is not true. When people die in a war situation, their families are expected to just shoulder the burden and get on with it.

katie8753 said...

grim said...

Suzan LaBerge had a nervous breakdown and Doris Tate fell into years of depression in the aftermath of the murders but in both cases, one can see a direct tie in between what happened and their mental health. Grief, guilt and giving up can have a powerfully detrimental effect on one's mindset and state of mind.

I don't recall reading about LaBerge having any grief. In fact, she tried to get Tex out. As far as Doris is concerned, she did succumb to grief, which I don't imagine anyone would wonder why, her daughter and her firstborn grandson were slaughtered. She did experience depression, which is understandable, but she never once displayed that she wasn't in her right mind.

However, bodily diseases/conditions don't follow in the same manner and to ascribe cancers and the like to the murders is pushing the boat out way too far. It's almost like trying to make the murderers worse than they are/were when, in truth, to take someone's life in the way the TLB victims lives were taken, one does not need to make anyone look worse.

I don't think it's pushing the boat at all. It's been well known for years that the brain can make the body sick. If one suffers from depression, anxiety, fear, hate, bitterness, and other negative emotions for years, it wears the body down, and once the body has been worn down, it's easy for dangerous diseases such as cancer to take hold and break down the immune system.

What are the chances that the entire Tate family would be dead by now except for Debra? And she now has cancer too. All 3 female members of Sharon's family had/have cancer. 2 are already dead. What are the odds of that happening? A million to one?

I know you can't actively blame a murderer for killing the victims' families with disease, but I think that's exactly what happened in this case, and I think that it should be part of the parole process when considering parole for a murderer.

Dilligaf said...

Grim,

There is no doubt that the Wooly Hophead had tough experiences growing up, and that it shaped him in many ways. However, as you pointed out, that does does not excuse him from any culpability in the crimes committed. Unfortunately, there are many that believe a pass should be given, or that there are always mitigating circumstances that should lessen the responsibility, and subsequent punishment, for any crime committed. To me, that dog just doesn't hunt. Unless you are the less than the 1/2 of 1/2 of 1% percent of the population that does not know that murder is wrong, than you know what you are doing, there is no rehabilitation from committing such a crime, and as such, are deserved of receding the maximum sentence allowed by law, regardless of the societal angst that many thug huggers demonstrate today.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

I don't recall reading about LaBerge having any grief. In fact, she tried to get Tex out

In the book "Helter Skelter" it's written that the death of her mother caused Susan a nervous breakdown, the implication being that it prevented her from testifying.
As for the situation with Tex, that was over 20 years later and a direct result of both her and his Christian conversions and their subsequent meetings. Many people like to pour scorn on this but it's not drastically different from the schemes many LE agencies have in which perpetrators meet with either victims of crime {if they're still alive} or their families, the object being that the perp has to face what they've done through actually coming face to face with those they've wronged.

What are the chances that the entire Tate family would be dead by now except for Debra?

I've no idea. However, there are many families in which many members die what we might call "before their time." My Dad's family was one such.

And she now has cancer too. All 3 female members of Sharon's family had/have cancer. 2 are already dead. What are the odds of that happening? A million to one?

I don't know but one could easily argue that there's something in the family that has predisposed the females that way. Whenever I've gone for check ups the Doctors always ask about family medical history. Why ? Because they need to have some idea what might be floating around the gene pool of the family which in turn might have some bearing on what they may find {or look for}.
Truth is, you have no idea what lies in the lineage of both sides of the Tate family. You have no knowledge of what any one of them may have done to contribute towards their condition. Smoking, secondary smoking, diet, asbestosis, who can tell ?

I know you can't actively blame a murderer for killing the victims' families with disease, but I think that's exactly what happened in this case, and I think that it should be part of the parole process when considering parole for a murderer

I think that's daft. Where do you draw the line ? Can you even draw a line ? If a prisoner has been a model prisoner for 30 years but the husband of the victim and the victim's sister keep coming down with the flu' you're in effect saying your proposal should carry weight.

It's been well known for years that the brain can make the body sick. If one suffers from depression, anxiety, fear, hate, bitterness, and other negative emotions for years, it wears the body down, and once the body has been worn down, it's easy for dangerous diseases such as cancer to take hold and break down the immune system

That's a stretch. It has been mooted for years, not "well known." The relationship between disease and state of mind is by no means a fait accompli and done deal. As with most things in life, one ignores nuance at one's peril.

katie8753 said...

Grim, if you don't know that harboring negative emotions and attitudes for YEARS can cause health problems, then I'm assuming you must be living under some kind of rock. It's doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. I doubt that you will find one doctor who encourages people to be depressed, angry, sad or fearful because it's "good for you".

I don't know the Tate family medical history of course, but I've read a lot of books about Sharon Tate, and I've never seen it mentioned that her grandparents had cancer or died from it. I guess I could e-mail Debra Tate and ask her about her family history, but I'm sure she wouldn't answer my e-mail. She has no idea who I am.

As far as LaBerge goes, I think her trying to get Tex out is either insane or some kind of scheme. Doris herself told her that she was disappointed in her, and that her mother (Rosemary) would probably be disappointed in her too. She said she just did it because of "her Christian beliefs". I'm all for forgiving someone who brutally killed your mother, if that's possible, but trying to get them out? NO WAY!

And I didn't say that people should show up at parole hearings saying they have "the flu". I think I made myself clear on my point. Don't see any reason to keep saying it. All I said was that families failing to even survive due to horrendous murders of family members should be part of the parole hearing, which it isn't. Just my opinion.

katie8753 said...

I made a thread about Debra Tate being diagnosed with cancer, and Grim didn't say one thing about him being sorry she was diagnosed with cancer.

That's sad.

Donna Nelson said...

I agree with most everything Grim says. With the exception, from a clinical standpoint, there is a biopsychosocial model of disease. Biological - of course handed down through genes, psychological - internal stress, and social - external stress. I believe these things together can weaken a person's immune system and allow the gene component to kick in. I realize there are exceptions however. While I find it unfortunate for Debra, I have never felt the compassion I felt for her mother and sister. Debra seems to at least in part be attention seeking. In fact, I think some other surviving family members have turned this into an attention-seeking and an opportunity for publicity. I think remembering her sister and honoring her memory should be most important. The courts have spoken about the fate of the killers and paroles boards, and the governor now speak. The family members that do not attend parole hearings after all these years... I doubt care any less for their murdered family member than Debra does... they have simply moved on with their lives. I think stress not only regarding the death of Sharon but continually attending parole hearings over the years (to include those that were not even at Sharon's house) has perpetuated stress for Debra, and for her mother and Patti. You forgive, NOT FORGET, for yourself, not for the killers.

katie8753 said...

Well Donna, I agree with your comments about going to the parole hearings. That would have been less stressful to the entire Tate family to not attend those hearings. I can't imagine what it's like to sit and listen to how your daughter/sister was killed over and over again. It's got to be exhausting, painful and debilitating.

I think that Doris took it up to save her sanity. It was the only thing that got her through. And I think her daughters took it up after their mom died, to carry on her legacy.

But I will point out one thing. Before the night of the Cielo Drive murders, Debra & Patty had a big sister who was beautiful, successful that they loved and admired. They also had parents who provided safety and love.

The next day it was all gone. The sister, the mom and probably the dad. All gone in an instant. And that "all gone" lasted for years.

I don't know how that feels, but it's gotta feel pretty bad.

katie8753 said...

I know a lot of people don't approve of Debra Tate because they think she's just an attention seeking person who has intruded upon parole hearings that she shouldn't be attending, but I think of her as a person who has lost her whole family.

And I'm not about to start judging her.....because I don't know what it's like and I have no idea how she feels.

Donna Nelson said...

No judgment. Just observation.

Donna Nelson said...

I was 7 years old when this crime took place. I have no memory of news stories. As i became a teenager, I read Helter Skelter and found it fascinating. Early on pre- internet..there was not much information regarding the victims outside the book. Once info became available, I have been fascinated and highly sympathetic toward Sharon in particular. I think she was a completely gorgeous and had unprecedented style unmatched til this day. She seems to have been a truly beautiful person inside and out. Such a tragedy for her life to be cut short. I am just a stranger.. I can only imagine how her family and those that knew and loved her must have felt.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Donna. Your comments are always welcome!

Donna Nelson said...

Thanks Katie.

beauders said...

So is Debra the last living member of the Tate family who actually knew Sharon or are there cousins? Donna are you related Manson Family researcher Bill Nelson?

Donna Nelson said...

No not related to Bill Nelson the researcher but coincidentally my dad's name is Bill Nelson.

katie8753 said...

Hi Beauders, I don't know if there are cousins. Haven't read about any of them. Although there must be, I guess.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

When you have feelings of anger, fear, repulsion and depression for years, it allows certain sicknesses to invade your immune system

That, at best, is a belief. It is not unshakable fact. Now, many believe this, within and without both the scientific and religious/spiritual communities. I personally am not at all surprised when people who are angry, bitter or depressed become ill in other spheres. But I can't and won't state as a fact that what you posit is the case because I don't know that ~ and neither do you.

if you don't know that harboring negative emotions and attitudes for YEARS can cause health problems, then I'm assuming you must be living under some kind of rock It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out

Negative emotions and attitudes can begin health problems. For example, you might just give up on eating healthily or sleeping healthily or keeping yourself in good trim which can then lead to all kinds of things, some of which will be illnesses.
But remember, this part of the conversation began with you implying that the murderers were responsible for the health problems of the victim's family members. That is what I'm primarily disputing.

I doubt that you will find one doctor who encourages people to be depressed, angry, sad or fearful because it's "good for you"

No. Yet, paradoxically, many recognize that artists, filmmakers and songwriters produce some of their best and most profound work in precisely those conditions which is partly why certain "minders" would keep their charges plied with drugs and booze to perpetuate that state which means great art which means lots of money which means {for some of them} the continued ride aboard the gravy train. If John Lennon had been a happy chap in the 60s he wouldn't have written most of the great stuff he did. Van Gogh wouldn't have painted much of the stuff he did if he was outrageously happy. And so on....

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

As far as LaBerge goes, I think her trying to get Tex out is either insane or some kind of scheme

It was neither.

Doris herself told her that she was disappointed in her, and that her mother (Rosemary) would probably be disappointed in her too

Bearing in mind that Doris Tate had never met Rosemary, it's almost insulting to tell her daughter how her own mother would feel.
That said, I think Doris was moved by a certain amount of guilt because she really played the part of the pushy Mum in regards to Sharon becoming an actress.

She said she just did it because of "her Christian beliefs". I'm all for forgiving someone who brutally killed your mother, if that's possible, but trying to get them out? NO WAY!

Well, for many Christians the two would go hand in hand. Personally I think at that particular juncture in time Suzan was wrong to bat for release because I don't think Tex had served long enough. But that's my feeling on it and I think she demonstrated something in publicly forgiving that is and was very powerful and beautiful.

And I didn't say that people should show up at parole hearings saying they have "the flu"

I was being facetious but demonstrating how far one could take your proposal. But think about it; if someone is so devastated by the loss of a loved one that their immune system becomes compromised, why shouldn't they be able to claim that their regular and continuous 'flu is as a direct result of the murders if their cancer can be argued to be........

All I said was that families failing to even survive due to horrendous murders of family members should be part of the parole hearing, which it isn't

And I repeat what I said; I think that's daft. It will be very hard to quantify a person's claim that their family member did not survive their life because a member of the family was murdered. It probably sounds really harsh to some ears but in life, there is a modicum of choice that a person carries when awful situations befall us. Many of us are quite happy to say that to murderers that may have been abused in their past. It cuts both ways.

I made a thread about Debra Tate being diagnosed with cancer, and Grim didn't say one thing about him being sorry she was diagnosed with cancer

Why do I need to do that ?
In a post I did on May 2nd in reply to some things you said in your "Crazy after all these years" thread, I mentioned the same thing about me. You didn't say a thing either. I don't hold that against you or think that's sad or feel you should have an opinion or should say something.
I share the opinions and thoughts that I want to share and that I think might make good discussion points, not the things other parties think I should.
I wouldn't be happy hearing anyone had cancer or any other ailment. But it's not an interesting discussion point for me.

katie8753 said...

Grim said:

Bearing in mind that Doris Tate had never met Rosemary, it's almost insulting to tell her daughter how her own mother would feel. That said, I think Doris was moved by a certain amount of guilt because she really played the part of the pushy Mum in regards to Sharon becoming an actress.

Seriously??? Do you really think that??

Donna Nelson said...

My Aunt by marriage knew Suzanne. Suzanne told her that Doris was a 'mean bitch'. Guess that is after Doris told Suzanne she was a dumb shit.

Donna Nelson said...

Probably truth from both sides.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...


Hello Ms.Katie8753

My Condolences to Ms. Debra Tate.
I hope she becomes a Cancer Survivor.
Cancer is Brutal. I myself have been battling Prostate Cancer for over 8 years.

Ms. Katie:
There was a lady,
Sharmayne Leland-St.John,
Whom I find to be Very,Very Credible,
that commented on a blog of yours here, that some
Charles Manson Family members were swimming in the pool at the
Cielo Drive murder house the day before
(which would be August 7th, 1969)
Sharon Tate, Voytek Frykowsky,
Jay Sebring, Steven Parent and
Abigail Folger were murdered there.
Katie, has there been any more information concerning this situation?

Thanks


Mario George Nitrini 111
---------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

Donna, your aunt by marriage knew Suzanne? How lucky you must feel.

What does she say about Tex getting out now?

katie8753 said...

Hi Mario. I don't know if you're a name or a number. You want to know if the Manson Family was swimming at the pool at Cielo Drive on August 7th? Ask Kimchi. She's the one who wrote that thread. I have no idea. I you want my opinion? I'd say they weren't swimming there.

But that's just me.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Thanks Ms. Katie.
I don't know who Kimchi is.

Mario George Nitrini is my real name. The 111 is for:
The Third

Mario George Nitrini 111
----------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

Well just fill me in on more info. Because I'm not sure what you're talking about. You say the Charles Manson Family members were swimming in the pool at the
Cielo Drive murder house the day before
(which would be August 7th, 1969)
Sharon Tate, Voytek Frykowsky,
Jay Sebring, Steven Parent and
Abigail Folger were murdered there.

That's not the Charles Manson Family!

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

Seriously??? Do you really think that??

Yes to both parts of what you've quoted.
Because Doris couldn't do what Suzan was able to do at that time in forgiving, for her to then project her own self and feelings on Rosemary and saying that they would be representative of Rosemary's feelings when she'd never even met her, yes, I think that's insulting. I understand her doing it and why but it's still insulting !
As for the guilt bit, I do think Doris felt some guilt. It's actually not at all unusual. Now, it's only my opinion and we can never know one way or the other. But I do suspect she felt some guilt.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

There was a lady, Sharmayne Leland-St.John, whom I find to be Very,Very Credible, that commented on a blog of yours here, that some
Charles Manson Family members were swimming in the pool at the Cielo Drive murder house the day before Sharon, Voytek, Jay, Steven and Abigail were murdered there.....has there been any more information concerning this situation?


No and when challenged she got rather annoyed.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Ms. Katie

A lady,
Ms. Sharmayne Leland-St.John a few years ago, made that statement on this blog about Manson Family members swimming in the Cielo Drive pool a day before the murders.
I was just asking a question about it.

grimtraveler:

I have read the exchange between you and Ms. St.John.
"rather annoyed?"
Yes she was.
You flat-out called her a liar.

Mario George Nitrini 111
----------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

Mario What are you talking about? Called who a liar? The people you listed are NOT in the Manson Family. Is this a joke?

katie8753 said...

Grim in Greg King's book he says that Doris was totally against Sharon going into show business. She tried her best to put that idea to rest, to no avail.

Where did you read that Doris pushed her into show business? And I'm sure you never met Doris, so how would you know if she felt guilty? And what did she feel guilty about?

katie8753 said...

As i said before, you need to address your questions about Sharmayne Leland-St.John to Kimchi. I don't know anything about that lady.

william marshall said...

What's up Katie & everyone sorry for going off topic but I have a question at least in my opinion two pretty big stories especially the second one were never mentioned here or on several other blogs the first would be the passing of William Garrettson in 06 & the second one the attempt on TeX Watson's life this past December another inmate stabbed him several times with a sharpened paint brush & attempted to throw him off a fourth floor tear in my humble opinion it would have been fantastic had he succeed

william marshall said...

What's up Katie & everyone sorry for going off topic but I have a question at least in my opinion two pretty big stories especially the second one were never mentioned here or on several other blogs the first would be the passing of William Garrettson in 06 & the second one the attempt on TeX Watson's life this past December another inmate stabbed him several times with a sharpened paint brush & attempted to throw him off a fourth floor tear in my humble opinion it would have been fantastic had he succeed

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Ms. Katie,

On a blog post here on this blog dated
Monday, June 8th, 2015, titled:

Sharmayne Leland-St.John, Jay Sebring, Roman, Elizabeth Folger

You can read the exchange between
Ms. Sharmayne Leland-St.John &
grimtraveler,
about the Pool claim made
by Ms. St John.

Mario George Nitrini 111
---------
The OJ Simpson Case

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Hello Kimchi

Anymore about:

Ms. Sharmayne Leland-St.John's claim about the pool situation?

Thanks

Mario George Nitrini 111
--------
The OJ Simpson Case

Donna Nelson said...

Katie - I have had only 1 discussion with my Aunt. I don't see her that often as she lives out of state. I don't even remember how the subject came up with her but we didn't discuss any details beyond that. It was more of passing exchange. I should ask her more but really not that close to her although she is a very nice lady.

katie8753 said...

Donna you should try and find out more about that. We can make a thread out of it if you want! Just let me know.

katie8753 said...

Hi William, good to see you. I knew Garrettson passed away, but I didn't know that Tex was stabbed. At least I can't remember reading that. I wonder what started that fight. I thought Tex was all holy and stuff.

Let me know if you can find any info on that. I'll look as well.

Thanks!

william marshall said...

Hey Katie it was either Manson's back porch tape's or Cielo drive.com that had the write up about the Watson incident I was really surprised it wasn't bigger news on the various Manson blog's apparently the other guy was much smaller so Watson was able to subdue him once again to bad in my opinion Watson is a waste of humanity

katie8753 said...

OK yeah I remember that. So Tex knows how it feels to get stabbed!!!

Thanks William!

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

in Greg King's book he says that Doris was totally against Sharon going into show business. She tried her best to put that idea to rest, to no avail...Where did you read that Doris pushed her into show business?

Greg King's book. If you have the paperback version, have a look at pages 13, 20, 30 and 33. Doris was not against Sharon being in showbiz at all, she pushed her in that direction from an early age. It's her Dad that was against Sharon being part of that world. Doris even makes the point that Paul wasn't at all enthusiastic.
Where does King say Doris was against it because I don't recall that at all. If he says it, let me know where so that I can look at the context. I remember coming out of reading that book with a very strong impression of Doris and the role she played in Sharon's foray into showbiz which I found interesting because prior to when I read it {between November last year and Feb this year} the only impression I had of Doris was that of the fearsome advocate for the families of murder victims.

And I'm sure you never met Doris, so how would you know if she felt guilty? And what did she feel guilty about?

I don't even know what Doris looked like.
I never said I knew how she felt. I said I think she felt guilty, same way I think the 3 housemates of Harold True that rejected Charles Manson's request to share their house were the real intended victims of LaBianca murder night. I don't know that. I process the information I have at a given time, look at the characters involved, weigh it all up and reach a current conclusion. In concluding about Doris, I take into account her total unwillingness to hear anything about her daughter's killers that could be in any way construed as positive. Even Patty and Debra could see changes and progression ~ yet were no less adamant that the killers remain in jail.
Sometimes, people on a mission can be acting out of a deep seated guilt. Some cops or lawyers can become tremendous in their jobs partly because early on they may have let a bad guy go or seen an innocent person convicted when they could have spoken up and didn't. That guilt becomes part of their motivation. It's interesting what people can feel guilty about, ranging from their parents divorce to surviving a catastrophe.

So Tex knows how it feels to get stabbed!

Ironic isn't it ? Same applies to Bobby and Clem who also got stabbed in jail and both claim it was an epiphany of sorts for them.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

I have read the exchange between you and Ms. St.John.
"rather annoyed?"
Yes she was.
You flat-out called her a liar


Ah, fun times !
Suffice it to say, as far as I'm concerned, her comments that were the subject of that original 2015 thread were, um, "found wanting." If what she claimed about "the girls that killed Sharon were swimming at Cielo the day before" was true, that would change everything and she didn't seem to catch my thrust in both questioning her and expressing doubt....

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

grimtraveler:

You DON'T know for sure of what Ms. St.John said about Manson Family members swimming in the pool on August 7th, 1969 is wrong.
You Weren't There.

"fun times?"
She didn't catch your thrust?
You flat-out called
Ms. Sharmayne Leland-St.John:
A Liar.
Why?

Mario George Nitrini 111
------------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

Grim you and I must not have read the same Greg King book. I don't have the book, I rented it at the library, so I can't cite page numbers, but I recall that when they were living in Italy Sharon wanted to go to LA by herself and start acting, and Doris was deadset against it. It think he said she had a "premonition" that something bad would happen.

I know Doris put Sharon in baby beauty contests, but I wouldn't call that pushing her into acting.

I don't blame Doris at all for not wanting to hear anything positive about her daughter's killers. I wouldn't be interested in hearing that either. She probably wanted to kill them all herself.

katie8753 said...

Grim, why do you think that Harold True's roommates were Charlie's intended victims at Waverly Drive? Wasn't that house empty? Wouldn't Charlie have known they'd moved?

beauders said...

Grim I'm curious what do you think of Watson taking advantage of conjugal visits to have four children? From what I understand all four are Christians and were mainly raised by their mother, who I consider a true Christian. I don't think Mrs. Tate cared if Sharon was an actress or not but did enjoy that she was successful at her chosen profession.

Unknown said...

Jeez ...i wonder if Sharon can have conjugal visits with Roman and her little angel Paul richard...oh and jeez i wonder if Abigail can have a conjugal visit with her family bday party she was supposed to have Aug 10...oh and lets not forget. 18 year old Mr Parent...hmm can he get a conjugal visit with his professor to grafuate the college he was going to....furthermore twatwaffle lets talk about Rosemary and Leno...hmmm watching thier kids go off to college....oh and jeez shorty shea...well he was just a ranch hand...so any of these deluded skank ass manson slaves...yeah i get the forgiveness thing im just making a point...im a survivor of a violent crime i was 6 when my throat was slightly slashed by a drunk pervert who tried to molest me i got away ...im forty fkkn five now and see my scar everyday in the mirror..let me ask all the intelligent mansonistas...did any of you talk to the surviving families.....hear this i will fight along side Deb until my last fkkn breath...and if deb and i dont meet ever ...I tell you this i will back 1111000% of whoever takes over the legacy....... .until you have been a victim or a family member of a victim do me a favor please..my little snugglepins.........shut the fuck up

grimtraveller said...


Debra Tate has been diagnosed with breast cancer. Her good friend is asking for donations to help Debra with medical expenses

I was thinking about this today and what crossed my mind is how this wouldn't happen in the UK. Someone with cancer wouldn't need a friend to appeal to the public for donations to help with medical expenses because of our National Health Service.
Basically, the way it works is that each month, week or however one is paid, as well as income tax, the govt takes out a sum of money out of each person's wages called national insurance. It goes into a huge pot and it means that medical care is free at the point of use. In other words, if your appendix bursts and you're three steps from death, an ambulance will get you to hospital and you'll be operated on, no questions asked. You'll be nursed back to health and you just get on with your life. You never have to worry about medical expenses. Now, many people carry out private medical insurance in addition to national insurance because then you can go private if you so choose but the principle behind the NHS is that everyone is taken care of should they need to be and everyone contributes to one another's care. While theoretically, one may pay into the system yet never need it, I have never come across or heard of a person that hasn't needed their doctor or a hospital at some point in their life, be it for something minor or something major.

Unknown said...

until you have been a victim or a family member of a victim do me a favor please..my little snugglepins.........shut the fuck up

Lots of people will have a great deal of empathy with this but ultimately, you cannot prevent people from having valid opinions on something just because they have not gone through it or know someone that has. You don't need to be a filmmaker in order to have an opinion on whether a film is well made. You don't have to be a parent in order to have a valid opinion on how children should be brought up. You don't need to be a lawyer or judge in order to have a valid opinion on whether certain laws are ineffective, harsh or lax. You don't need to be a politician in order to have a valid opinion on how government can be run.

katie8753 said...

Grim, how does the NHS take money out of your paycheck if you don't have a job? I'm sure there are plenty of those in the "UK". Do they take it out of your welfare check?

The reason healthcare is so screwed up in this country is because of Obama. He screwed everything up. We used to could get healthcare here at low cost, but all that's gone because of his "Affordable Health Care". Private insurance disappeared from here. They all fled.

It's sad that you're mocking a cancer patient who has a friend who is trying to help her.

katie8753 said...

What's up with that?

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

you and I must not have read the same Greg King book. I don't have the book, I rented it at the library, so I can't cite page numbers, but I recall that when they were living in Italy Sharon wanted to go to LA by herself and start acting, and Doris was deadset against it

Yes, but that involved her leaving Italy and going to the USA on her own. It was Sharon being away from her that she was against, not her being an actress. Doris actually said "I felt fine about Sharon being a star as long as I was close by..."
Anyway, consider these excerpts:

"Sharon clearly wanted to get more experience. While Doris Tate was enthusiastic, Sharon's father was less certain."

"Palance went a step further: he arranged for Sharon to travel to Rome for a screen test. Accompanied by her mother - and against the wishes of her father - she duly kept the appointment."

"Paul Tate was adamantly opposed to Sharon's involvement in this world, but Doris conspired with her daughter to further her opportunities. While she did not necessarily push Sharon against her wishes, Doris Tate had always viewed her daughter's exceptional beauty as a means to an end, whether as a beauty contestant or an actress."

"She explained that Jack Palance had rung and asked if she would join him for dinner. Schultz was visibly angry at the interruption of their plans but Doris stepped forward saying 'Now, Art, don't be upset. This is an opportunity for Sharon.'"

"All that came of the evening was further encouragement to consider an acting career, prodding which, by now, Sharon was also receiving from her mother."

"'Ransohof' remembers Forquet, 'came in and told Sharon that he was opposed to her marriage and wanted her to stop seeing me. He threatened to drop her contract if she didn't break things off. And her parents got involved too. They were worried that I was standing in the way of Sharon becoming a big star. I remember her mother talked about money, money, money ~ all the money Sharon would lose if she quit acting.'"
That's why I got the impression that Doris was somewhat pushy in terms of her daughter becoming an actress.

I know Doris put Sharon in baby beauty contests, but I wouldn't call that pushing her into acting

From the very start, she placed her child in a certain world which brought with it exposure to a mindset that was a million miles away from the rest of the population. King says "encouraged by her mother, Sharon was not above exploiting her physical charms."

I don't blame Doris at all for not wanting to hear anything positive about her daughter's killers. I wouldn't be interested in hearing that either

Susan Atkins, in one of history's great ironies, helped to save the life of a fellow inmate that had slit her wrists and was bleeding to death. Not to say that she should have been granted parole for that, but there are some things that it is just not real to dismiss, no matter what someone has done in another context. Like I said, even Patty and Debra and people like Stephen Kay and Vince Bugliosi could see some of the positive things that the killers had done with their lives ~ and none of them were of the opinion that any of them should be out.

She probably wanted to kill them all herself

A perfectly understandable reaction.
I'm not saying that Doris should have been forgiving or that Doris should have been content to see her daughter's murderers walk free.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

how does the NHS take money out of your paycheck if you don't have a job? I'm sure there are plenty of those in the "UK". Do they take it out of your welfare check?

The NHS doesn't take the money, the govt does. But part of what it goes towards is medical treatment should you ever need it.
If you're out of work, you don't pay those contributions. You get credits which go on your record but they're not automatic. Once you're back in employment you resume paying national insurance.
No system is perfect and in all systems, people can fall through the cracks but being out of work isn't and never has been viewed as a lifestyle choice for most of the population. Yeah, there are long term unemployed people but by and large those out of work seek to get back in.

We used to could get healthcare here at low cost, but all that's gone because of his "Affordable Health Care". Private insurance disappeared from here. They all fled

That's interesting because lots of people here have private medical insurance which acts as a supplement to what the state provides. It usually means you get stuff done faster. In certain instances it will mean that you get better quality treatment. But private insurance is thriving despite the health service.

It's sad that you're mocking a cancer patient who has a friend who is trying to help her

Mocking ? How in the universe do you read comparison of one system to another as mocking ?
Let me try again.
In the UK, an appeal like this would never have to happen. Someone with cancer would be taken care of and would not have to worry about something like medical expenses because we don't face them. We have a national insurance system that goes towards benefits of all kinds and the idea is that no one need be in the situation where their money could run out because the health service is free at the point of use. But we all contribute towards it. And because of the way we do it, through tax and national insurance, one never notices that one is paying for it. I would not want to be greeted in a hospital with questions about whether or not I had insurance if my leg was hanging off !
I was not mocking anyone and I have to say, I'm somewhat suspicious of your notion that I was. I wonder if you actually attempt to understand things that anyone says if it is not in agreement with your default position. It's a fantastic thing that her friend is trying to do for her by the way.

katie8753 said...

Grim said:

Someone with cancer wouldn't need a friend to appeal to the public for donations to help with medical expenses because of our National Health Service.

This is what I'm talking about. Are you mocking people who are trying to help Debra?

If someone doesn't have a job and NEVER gets a job, how do you take tax out if that person doesn't pay any tax? And I know there are lots of people in the UK who don't work. Please don't try and confuse us and say that 100% of the adults in the UK work.

katie8753 said...

I said it before, and I'll say it again. We used to have private insurance in this country, but Obama killed all that back in 2010. It's a FUCKING FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't explain it better than that!

katie8753 said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6K9J4G6pgM

grimtraveller said...

Mario George Nitrini III said...

You DON'T know for sure of what Ms. St.John said about Manson Family members swimming in the pool on August 7th, 1969 is wrong

I don't know for sure that your name is Mario George Nitrini III. I don't know for sure that you know anything about the OJ Simpson case. I don't know for sure that you didn't murder your mum or burgle your teacher's house. I don't know for sure that you don't play the trumpet and French horn simultaneously. I don't know for sure that you've battled prostate cancer. If we start going into all the things that we do not know for sure, most conversation in this world would break down and it would be a rather quiet planet.
So what we do, especially in a case like this is we look at all of the evidence we have to hand and we look at what various involved parties have said both past and present and from that we build a picture if we can.
The housekeeper, Mrs Chapman, stated that Wogiciech Frykowski used the pool daily. Yet he did not know who any of his assailants were, demonstrated by his asking Tex Watson who he was and what he wanted. Not only that, both Susan Atkins & Linda Kasabian testified that they did not know where they were going and all the female killers followed Tex that night because he knew the layout of the house. In 48 years not one of the women has said they were ever at the house, let alone the day before and where Susan Atkins tried to put the blame on Linda for masterminding the murders, she later admitted it was lies ~ as did Pat Krenwinkel. They are the women Ms St John identifies because they are the women that were done for killing Sharon Tate. Who was at the pool that Thursday 7th August that has ever come forward and said they were there ? The onus is never going to be on me to show they weren't there, the onus is always going to be on the person claiming that they were there. And Ms St John could not and cannot do so. Like I said earlier, if Pat and Susan were swimming in that pool the day before, then someone must know this. Who is the person ? Why did they not speak out ? It changes everything. It could even mean Charles Manson had nothing to do with it all. For the women to have been there prior to the murders, especially in the pool as guests the day before, is huge.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone claiming they were without demonstrating that it is so is lying. They will have their own reasons for doing so but lying it is. The other alternative, spreading info they do not know to be true, is arguably worse.

You Weren't There

That's a fairly ridiculous thing to say to someone. Ms St John wasn't there. Vincent Bugliosi wasn't there. None of the investigating officers were there.

You flat-out called Ms. Sharmayne Leland-St.John: A Liar. Why?

Because I believed that that is what she was. She presented a tale in such a way as to make it seem that she was aware of vital information that no one else was privy to and I considered that she was lying. Or worse still, repeating false claims.

katie8753 said...

I'm just kidding. I left my keys in my extra horse. I'll git goin. We'll talk about this tomorrow.

BTW I agree, the Manson family wasn't swimming in the pool at Cielo Drive the day before. That's ludicrous.


grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

We used to have private insurance in this country, but Obama killed all that back in 2010. It's a FUCKING FACT!
I can't explain it better than that!


Well, you're going to have to because that is an opinion, not an explanation.

This is what I'm talking about. Are you mocking people who are trying to help Debra?

If it was anyone but you, I'd ask if you were seriously asking that.
I think I said I thought it was a great thing her friend was doing for her. It also happens to be true that such a thing would not happen here. You might get people making all kinds of appeals for a number of different things {food for food banks, clothing for refugees, money for research, even vital organs if they felt desperate enough} but not money to help with medical expenses as that's provided for. One exception I can think of would be if a certain medical/experimental procedure simply was not available here but could be performed elsewhere but the person or family concerned couldn't afford to fly out to said country and pay for said treatment in that country. Then you might get an appeal.

Please don't try and confuse us and say that 100% of the adults in the UK work

Talk about putting words in my mouth ! I never said that or anything even akin to it. But it is no surprise for nuance is rarely your strong point.

If someone doesn't have a job and NEVER gets a job, how do you take tax out if that person doesn't pay any tax?

Obviously you can't take tax if the person is out of work but that person would still be provided for. It is more rare than hens teeth to find someone who gets to the age of 67 {retirement age} having never had a job. It was more common in the days when you had housewives.
Incidentally, if one earns below a certain amount, they are taken out of the tax system altogether.

Unknown said...

i wonder if Sharon can have conjugal visits with Roman and her little angel Paul richard...oh and jeez i wonder if Abigail can have a conjugal visit with her family bday party she was supposed to have Aug 10...oh and lets not forget. 18 year old Mr Parent...hmm can he get a conjugal visit with his professor to grafuate the college he was going to....

Do you understand what conjugal visits actually are ?

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

grimtraveler:

You say you don't know for sure I don't know anything about
The OJ Simpson Case?
grimtraveler, google my name and read.......or better yet:
Contact anyone from
The Prosecutions side and/or
The Defenses side in
The OJ Simpson Case and ask about me.
And you don't know for sure that my name is Mario George Nitrini 111?
Good Grief........

So grimtraveler, do you really feel it appropriate of you to have called Ms. Sharmagne Leland-St.John
a Liar?

Mario George Nitrini 111
--------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

I'm going to bed. See y'all tomorrow!

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

why do you think that Harold True's roommates were Charlie's intended victims at Waverly Drive? Wasn't that house empty? Wouldn't Charlie have known they'd moved?

Folk have long wondered "why the LaBiancas ?" and this gave rise to all the theories about Suzan LaBerge, Joe Dorgan and Rosemary LaBianca herself as this drug dealer. Whereas there had long been theories galore about Cielo, the inhabitants, the connections, whys and wherefores, Waverley was always couched in a mysterious cloud of nothingness. You'd maybe get the odd story peaking out here and there about Leno having to come to Harold's house to tell them to keep the noise down of their wild parties, but this was always shown to be crap, Harold True saying he always thought the house next door was empty, but more significantly, according to the Stovitz interview of 27/1/70, he'd left before the LaBiancas moved in. It was with the knowledge that True was leaving the house that Charlie asked him if he could move in in his place and it was True that said it wasn't for him to say; ask the three housemates. He did and they said no.
Charlie unwittingly confirmed the property's status in 2011 when talking to Vanity Fair when he spoke of knowing the house next door as being empty because he'd been in it.
Both in 1970 and 20 years later Harold True expressed no surprise at the actual locations of the murders. In one of the interviews he said Charlie went to where he knew. Knowing that he was familiar with both sites is significant for obvious reasons but True's 1970 revelation that Charlie was turned down as a housemate by True's three former housemates pushes the whole thing into a different realm as far as I'm concerned. Charlie {in George Stimson's book} says he went up first to see Harold on the night of the LaBianca murder. But he'd known for months that Harold no longer lived there. True states that in that 1970 interview. That is dynamite because it begs the question, why did Charlie go up to Harold's former house knowing he no longer lived there ?
This can never be proven but I suspect that those 3 housemates were on the menu at that point. All the other random attempts hadn't worked out that night, why not go with what you know ? Fortunately for them they were either out or no longer lived there themselves ~ neither of which Charlie would have known.
The LaBianca house doesn't appear to have been the initial target. If one takes Charlie's words he says he went up to see Harold which we know isn't true. He had been in the LaBianca house in the days when it was empty and saw the light on and a dog. That seems to be what aroused his attention.
If he had been going to slaughter the 3 housemates, he would have done so in the knowledge that the former True house was isolated enough to not attract attention ~ because he thought the LaBianca house was empty. Given that the former True house was empty but someone was in the house next door, isolation at 2am still applied.....
There is also the matter of having told his accomplices that he was going to show them "how to do it" and thus far, he hadn't...

katie8753 said...

I say I'm going to bed and he keeps talking. I can't catch a break!

I'll deal with this tomorrow!

grimtraveller said...

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

You say you don't know for sure I don't know anything about The OJ Simpson Case?
google my name and read.......or better yet:
Contact anyone from
The Prosecutions side and/or
The Defenses side in
The OJ Simpson Case and ask about me.
And you don't know for sure that my name is Mario George Nitrini 111?
Good Grief........


You're missing my point. Whether I google your name or talk to the defence or prosecution, I won't know for sure that what you say is true. I could not stake my life on anything you say about yourself being true. Only a fool would do that, not knowing you.
However, I do believe you. That is my point. You are the one that said I couldn't be sure of whether or not the Family killers swam in the Cielo pool on Aug 7th because I was not there. However, having listened to the evidence of everyone that could speak of that day and date and the subsequent events, I've no reason to believe that Pat and Susan swam in that pool ever, let alone the day before the murders. I believe them when they say they'd never been to Cielo before. And I currently have no reason to not believe your claims.
You appeal to me looking up certain sources to verify your claims. That's exactly how I can say that Pat and Susan hadn't been in that pool.
What's good for and goes towards testing your veracity also applies to them.

do you really feel it appropriate of you to have called Ms. Sharmagne Leland-St.John
a Liar?


She says she was a prime suspect for the murders. That is not true. She is never once listed as a suspect in any of the police reports.
What would you refer to her as ? A fantasist ? An untruther ?

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

grimtraveler:

I am glad you believe me.

And believe me, there situations in The OJ Simpson Case that certain people say are true, and I know for a flat-out fact that they are lying.
WHY? Because I personally lived it......
My main focus in The OJ Simpson Case was The Limousine Company because my ex-nephew-in-law, Rocky Bateman, was OJ Simpson's regular limo driver from approximately August of 1993 to June of 1994.
And OJ Simpson says he doesn't know any Rocky Bateman..........?
.....I don't think so.....
It's unreal.......
There are situations in
The OJ Simpson Case, that if they ever are revealed mainstream, are going to ASTONISH people, to say the least.
As far as
Ms. Sharmagne leland-St John's claims are, for me, I leave them open.

So please let me ask you this grimtraveler:

Do you believe I had an encounter with Charles Manson in January of 1969?

Mario George Nitrini 111
------------
The OJ Simpson Case

grimtraveller said...

Mario George Nitrini III said...

So please let me ask you this grimtraveler:
Do you believe I had an encounter with Charles Manson in January of 1969?


I neither believe nor disbelieve you on that one as yet. But I have very firm thoughts on Sharmagne's revelations.

beauders said...

I'm curious what do you think of Watson taking advantage of conjugal visits to have four children?

I don't blame Watson for taking advantage of the conjugal visitations in the period that California operated them and I don't think he was wrong to do so. After all, it was mandated by the State. And if children came out of that situation, it was essentially between him and his then wife. In a way, his wife is more culpable for the children arriving than he is. On the other hand, she obviously felt that having children would help complete her life and I would hazard a guess that at the time she loved Charles Watson and couldn't really see herself having children with any other man.
However, I don't think conjugal visits should ever have existed. I'm not part of the brigade that believes prisoners should be treated like shit. Incarceration is punishment in itself. I believe that even prisoners are entitled to basic human rights such as decent treatment, decent food, vocational training and education, help with their problems, decent living quarters, a job to do, communication with friends and family etc. And I don't think it's a travesty that they have access to TV, radio, books, sporting facilities, music making equipment and a swimming pool. However, there are also things that they should have to forego if they are in prison and sexual intimacy with a spouse/partner that is on the outside is one of those things. I think the right to vote is another.
Conjugal visits aren't technically just about sex though in reality they are and I don't think people should be able to father children while in prison, especially if they're on a life sentence and may never come out.
That said, in the UK, when women are sent to prison and they're already pregnant, in some of the jails the children live there with their mums. I remember once playing bass in a play that a group did in a women's prison and I was surprised at the number of children that were there. It got many of us feeling rather emotional, actually.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

I say I'm going to bed and he keeps talking

It's an open public page. I'm not just talking to you or writing for your benefit. Whatever I write will be here when you get up dearie, so you go on to bed and a good night to you !

katie8753 said...

Hey Mario 3 quick questions:

(1) was your nephew the one who picked OJ up that night and saw a black man sneaking on the property before OJ came out of the house?

(2) Do you think OJ did it?

(3) When/where did you see Charlie in January 1969?

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Hi Ms. Katie

Ok, question # 1:

No.
Rocky Bateman was SUPPOSED to drive OJ Simpson that night.
I have blogged about this situation. I'll find a post that i made explaining......somethings are very, very wrong with
The Limo Company
In The OJ Simpson Case.

#2.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but due to what I went through in the aftermath, for almost 2 decades, in The OJ Simpson Case and Saga,
It's best for me to stay mum.
I hope you understand. Thanks.

Katie, on The Manson Family Blog,
I commented Generally about my encounter with Charles Manson.
The blog post is Titled:

"Charles Manson is returned to prison after stay at Bakersfield hospital"
Dated January 7th, 2017.

I got ripped into pretty hard.
Not a problem though for me.
And I will say this, the
Manson Family Blog, just like this blog, is extremely informative, and is very good, including the commenters who ripped into me.
And actually, the latest blog post made by commentator & blog post by David (aka Dreath), Really helped me remember......
Katie, you can only imagine how I have been ripped into with
The OJ Simpson Case.........

Thanks Ms. Katie

Mario George Nitrini 111
---------
The OJ Simpson Case

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

Alright Ms. Katie.

For the Conspiacy regarding
Town & Country Limousine Service, the Limo Company in The OJ Simpson Case,
in your google search engine, please put Rocky Bateman's name in it and also,
"unexplained mysteries"

Click on unexplained mysteries titled:
The OJ Simpson Case and More.
Schroll down to post # 6 by me, and please read.........

Mario George Nitrini 111
-------
The OJ Simpson Case

TomG said...

Welp, let me be as gentle as a New Jersey person can be.....

President tried to give you backwoods people universal, single payee health insurance but you said you don't want no socialist program from a colored. Because thats what your talking head Fox masters taught you to say.

So Debra Tate gets breast cancer, now she's got to come on the internet and beg for money that she won't pay her doctors who want make her any better anyway but charge a ton just the same.

katie8753 said...

Tom what the hell are you talking about? Obama's stupid healthcare plan is still in effect. That's why nobody can afford it and nobody can afford to go to the doctor!

TomG said...

I got a good idea, let's ague. Who won the horse race?

katie8753 said...

They're just about the run the horses. I'll know in about 15 minutes or so.

katie8753 said...

Cloud Computing won by a nose!

katie8753 said...

He beat the 2 favorites, Classic Empire & Always Dreaming. He moved up from 3rd place to win. What a race!!

TomG said...

Thats me. Always Dreaming. Horses. They're as complex as humans.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Mario for that info. I personally think OJ did it.

Mario George Nitrini 111 said...

You're welcome Ms. Katie

Mario George Nitrini 111
--------
The OJ Simpson Case

katie8753 said...

Grim that Harold True interview is on LSB3.com. It's hilarious.

I can imagine that Harold True's house was on his list, but didn't Linda say something when they arrived, to not attack that house, because it was Harold's, and Charlie said "no the house next door"?

Not attributing truth to either party now....

And don't you find it interesting that Charlie drove aimlessly for hours and then suddenly drove straight to Waverly Drive. Don't you find that odd?

I've always wondered if Suzanne let Charlie know that the LaBiancas were home. There are only 2 people in the world who knew what time the LaBiancas got home that night: Suzanne and the newspaper guy. No one else on earth would have known that.

beauders said...

Grim, how does your system treat medications? I take a medication that bills out at $1300.00 a month, thank goodness I have insurance.
Catherine Share has claimed that she and Atkins swam in the pool at Cielo when Watson and Morehouse where house sitting there.

katie8753 said...

Hi Beauders, weren't Watson and Moorehouse there in January of 1969? Although that certainly has been argued that it never even happened. Even so, it wasn't the day before the murders.

katie8753 said...

BTW do you have group insurance or private insurance? Just wondering...

beauders said...

Group, I'm extremely lucky. I guess we all just have to decide if we believe Share or not, my opinion she has no reason to lie. Let's hope she publishes her book soon. She lives in Dallas Katie maybe you need to go say hi and we want to read your book.

katie8753 said...

That's good you have group insurance Beauders. I'm glad for you!

I'm not sure if Moorehouse & Tex were at Cielo in January of 1969 or not. I always believed that until I started hearing talk that wasn't true. If it is true, I see no reason to doubt that the girls went swimming there. I just find it very hard to believe that any Manson girls were swimming there the day before the murders.

She's writing a book too? That's a lot of books we're gonna have to buy! LOL.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

Grim that Harold True interview is on LSB3.com. It's hilarious

It was actually on this site that I heard it and it is hilarious. The late Mr true sounds like a bear with a sore head, but I think I would too, if someone rang me up out of the blue to ask me questions about a murder case that had concluded 20 years previous !

didn't Linda say something when they arrived, to not attack that house, because it was Harold's, and Charlie said "no the house next door"?

Yes, she recognized the house from a party she'd been at the previous year. The thing that she purportedly said would be the one thing that torpedoes my theory, unless she said it to him after he came back to the car, not as soon as they pulled up.

And don't you find it interesting that Charlie drove aimlessly for hours and then suddenly drove straight to Waverly Drive. Don't you find that odd?

Not any more. One thing that Pat, Susan, Linda, Tex and Leslie all agree on is that Charlie said that that night, he would show them how to do it. In retrospect, they didn't need showing which sort of indicates a certain competitive streak in Charlie, but hey. So I guess showing them what a cool head he was and being the ace divine criminal that was going to bring his prophecy to fruition, they needed to be shown how he could at random do these things which involved driving about. It occurs to me that the amount of driving they did that night came as a direct result of things going wrong. Houses with pictures of kids, church closed, houses close together, sports car driving away......
One can imagine a certain amount of frustration creeping in as Charlie who was supposed to show this crowd that had committed 5 murders that were dominating the news how to do it....hadn't shown them anything except what could be construed as failure or cold feet. I can almost imagine Pat or Susan thinking "by this time yesterday, Tex had offed 5 people !" That is, if they actually thought for themselves in that way. So I reckon he just headed to somewhere that he knew, the former True house. I really do think those 3 housemates that rejected Charlie were on the menu by then but when he got there, by his own words, no one was in. He knew Harold had moved out some 10 months previous so why would he have made his way towards that house ? He says to see Harold but we know from True that this was not true.
It was only when he was skulking around the back of the True house that he saw a light on next door and a dog in the yard. He had always known the house as empty. He knew the layout because he told Vanity Fair in 2011 that he used to go into the LaBianca house to have sex. And he went to the dog and to see why the light was on.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

I've always wondered if Suzanne let Charlie know that the LaBiancas were home. There are only 2 people in the world who knew what time the LaBiancas got home that night: Suzanne and the newspaper guy. No one else on earth would have known that

It is amazing how many things of major note happen or have their beginnings in sheer coincidence. The Police as a band would never have formed and become global million sellers if Stewart Copeland hadn't run into Andy Summers purely by chance on the train one day. Same with the Rolling Stones. Jagger and Richards hadn't seen each other for 11 or so years, since they were about 6, when they happened to run into each other on the train and one noticed the other had some blues albums which he was interested in. From tiny acorns do mighty oaks grow.....
And it's sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas got home not long before a frustrated Charles Manson decided to walk up the drive, not to their house, but to the one next door.
Suzan LaBerge had a nervous breakdown in the aftermath of her Mum & stepdad's murder. Not one of the people in that car has ever said that Charlie stopped to make a phone call. I think the idea that she was in on her mum's murder is conspiracy gone wild.

beauders said...

Grim, how does your system treat medications? I take a medication that bills out at $1300.00 a month, thank goodness I have insurance

It's a complex system at times. If we are on general prescription medication the individual pays £8 per prescription. There have been times when the Doc has prescribed Ibruprofen but said to me I'd be better off buying it at the supermarket because 2 packs {they won't sell an individual more than 2 packs !} would be way less than £1 whereas if I presented the prescription, I'd pay 8 times as much. At the same time, certain conditions come under medical charge exemption so for example, because I've been diagnosed with prostate cancer, I now have an exemption card so I don't have to pay any prescription charges. Whatever medication would be prescribed, I would be exempt from the charges. For serious conditions, that would be the case. Children, pensioners, students and the unemployed are also exempt from charges. In Scotland, because they have a devolved govt, their govt has decreed that there's no charges for anyone.
But there are also some newer drugs that are deemed to be so expensive that the govt won't pay for them because they calculate that the health service budget couldn't stand such a cost. For example, I remember a couple of years ago, there was a drug that helped women with breast or cervical cancer {I can't recall which} that wouldn't cure them, but would alleviate their pain and give them some semblance of quality of life. But the health minister felt that the cost could not be justified for someone that was only going to be alive for another 8 or so months so they didn't go ahead with making it available on the national health service. It was a horrible catch 22. For conditions where the person is expected to live for years, the cost of the treatment/medication is free. Free at the point of use, that is. We all pay into the pot through our tax and national insurance.
I can understand why some people would have an issue with our system here. But I look at it from this perspective; if I don't need medical help for 40 years, I don't mind paying into a pot that helps those that do need it, even if they are wasters. I think health is too delicate to play politics, morals or vengeance with.
But except for those drugs that are deemed to be wildly expensive, all our medication is covered. As I mentioned earlier, many people here still have private insurance and much stuff is done using it. The idea behind the national health service is that it is not necessary for a person to have to have insurance or money, they can be treated for anything regardless of their financial status and situation.

grimtraveller said...

beauders said...

Catherine Share has claimed that she and Atkins swam in the pool at Cielo when Watson and Morehouse where house sitting there

It'd be interesting to determine exactly when she did claim that if she did because she's lying if she really said that.
Vincent Bugliosi made some factual errors in the early versions of "Helter Skelter" and because I have the 1977 Penguin edition, I've no idea if later versions corrected them but one of the clangers he dropped was in saying that it was arranged for Dean Moorehouse to live in the guest house at Cielo. This is not true.
Moorehouse testified in the Watson trial that he lived at Dennis Wilson's house with Tex for a couple of months in the summer of '68 and then they lived in a tent at Spahn after that then he became a wandering pilgrim, turning people onto acid truth after that. He never says he lived at Cielo. He's actually asked a number of questions about when he lived with Tex and where he lived with Tex. He's also asked if he'd been to Cielo with Tex and he says yes.
Tex never once in any of his books or interviews has said he lived at Cielo. He says he knew the house because he'd been there. He actually goes so far as to say that one of the reasons Charlie earmarked the house as the starting point was because Tex knew the layout. But neither he nor Dean lived there.
So Catherine Share, if she really did make a statement to that effect, is lying. Susan Atkins never knew the house which was partly why she was to do whatever Tex told her.

beauders said...

Group, I'm extremely lucky

At my work we used to have a private group insurance. We were encouraged to use it but I never did because I never needed it. Then when I ran into a few back hassles and needed some intensive massages, I discovered the group insurance had been cancelled ! I later found out it was because so many of the staff availed themselves of it !! So I've always paid for my sessions with Dr Yii !

I guess we all just have to decide if we believe Share or not, my opinion she has no reason to lie

It really is dependent on when she made the statement and exactly what she said. It makes far more sense if the pool she's talking about is Dennis Wilson's. That fits in squarely with tons of corroboration and also meshes perfectly with where Tex and Dean stayed and when.

Let's hope she publishes her book soon

All these books coming out ! I'm waiting on two Lake autobiographies, one by Dianne and one by.....Greg !
Maybe Dianne's will inspire Catherine to put hers out.

katie8753 said...

Grim said:

And it's sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas got home not long before a frustrated Charles Manson decided to walk up the drive, not to their house, but to the one next door.
Suzan LaBerge had a nervous breakdown in the aftermath of her Mum & stepdad's murder. Not one of the people in that car has ever said that Charlie stopped to make a phone call. I think the idea that she was in on her mum's murder is conspiracy gone wild.


Sheer coincidence? I don't think anything that happened those 2 nights of murder were sheer coincidence. I think that Charlie knew exactly what was going on.

It's amazing how sheer coincidence could have mastered these murders. Sheer coincidence that there were only 4 people in the house that night at Cielo Drive, when there seemed to be people in and out all the time?

Sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas arrived home from Lake Isabella at around 2:00am that night and they only had time to put on bed clothes and read the paper?

Sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas had dropped Suzanne off 30 minutes or so earlier?

Sheer coincidence that Harold True had moved out of that house?

I know it sounds conspiracy gone wild to include Suzanne in on this murder, but it seems awfully strange that after she got dropped off, Manson went from driving aimlessly to heading straight to Waverly Drive.

You say Suzanne had a nervous breakdown? BTW, what is a nervous breakdown anyway. Do you just get nervous and breakdown?

Suzanne was in charge of her mother's will after the murder. She met with lawyers a lot. Doesn't sound like she was that nervous to me.

And no I can't prove that Charlie made a phone call during that notorious drive, but he did leave the car several times and disappear for a while, so how do the riders in the car know what he did? By their own admissions, they were sleeping most of the time anyway.

katie8753 said...

He could easily have made phone calls at pay phones, and no one in the car would be the wiser.

katie8753 said...

And BTW, back in 1969, a gallon of gas probably cost 25 cents/gal. You could put a 2 bucks in the tank and drive for hours.

How do I know this? Because I used to do it!

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

Sheer coincidence? I don't think anything that happened those 2 nights of murder were sheer coincidence. I think that Charlie knew exactly what was going on

That's because you choose to buy the "Charlie as overarching mastermind" caricature. There were a number of coincidences those two nights. Steven Parent visiting William Garretson and leaving at the time he did and running directly into the killers. The proximity of Rudolf Weber and Jay Sebring's houses. The Kotts' guests leaving when they did and not running into the killers. Sharon not going to Sheila Wells' place and Debbie not coming over to Cielo. Four of the victims not staying longer at El Coyote. The time on Parent's clock radio. The next night, the sports car zooming off as Charlie approached with murderous intent. The time the LaBiancas got home and the time Charlie was heading to the former True house. Seeing the dog and Leno leaving the light on.....

It's amazing how sheer coincidence could have mastered these murders

That doesn't even make sense. I didn't even hint that coincidence mastered the murders.

Sheer coincidence that there were only 4 people in the house that night at Cielo Drive, when there seemed to be people in and out all the time?

Yes. There weren't people in and out all the time. From when Sharon returned there were quite a few times when there was no activity in the house. And 3 of the 4 people you mention were living there, although 2 of them had started moving their stuff back to their own pad.

Sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas arrived home from Lake Isabella at around 2:00am that night and they only had time to put on bed clothes and read the paper?

Absolutely.

Sheer coincidence that the LaBiancas had dropped Suzanne off 30 minutes or so earlier?

Yeah.

Sheer coincidence that Harold True had moved out of that house?

I don't know what you're getting at there. He'd moved out around September '68, before the LaBiancas moved in. What's your point ?

it seems awfully strange that after she got dropped off, Manson went from driving aimlessly to heading straight to Waverly Drive

Not if you factor in that Mr "I'm going to show you how to do it" hadn't shown his merry band anything up to that point. It's a bit like deciding to go out for a meal or drink to somewhere you've never been but finding all the tables are taken wherever you go or the bars are too packed so you end up going to your usual haunt.

You say Suzanne had a nervous breakdown? BTW, what is a nervous breakdown anyway. Do you just get nervous and breakdown?

Bugliosi & Gentry write "The deaths of her mother & stepfather had caused Susan Struthers to have a nervous breakdown. Though she was slowly recovering, we called Frank Struthers to the stand to identify photographs of Leno & Rosemary LaBianca and to describe what he'd found on returning home that Sunday night."
As to what a nervous breakdown is, here is a helpful pointer in that direction.

And no I can't prove that Charlie made a phone call during that notorious drive, but he did leave the car several times and disappear for a while, so how do the riders in the car know what he did?

They don't know what he did but they did see him go to building proximities.
Your point is self contradictory though. If Suzan was with her parents returning from Lake Isabella, how could she have taken a call from Charlie ? How would either of them have known when she'd return from Isabella ?
We don't like coincidences but often, we overlook the reality that one thing that marks humans as unique is our ability to react at the drop of a hat. Wars and marriages have started because of this !

katie8753 said...

Well this is one of my theories, and it's ONLY a theory, has nothing to do with facts.

What IF Suzanne was involved in this and what IF she told Charlie she was driving back that night with her parents and what IF she told him to call periodically and if it just rang that meant she wasn't home yet and what IF she finally did answer and told him they should be home by now.

That's what I was getting at. I'm not saying I'm sure Suzanne did that, just a theory of what MIGHT have happened, along with many many others that are out there.

beauders said...

Katie a lot of people believe Suzan was involved, personally I don't. Bill Nelson hated Suzan for her going to Watson's parole hearing. He started this theory in response. Nelson stalked Suzan and I know this because I have a disc he sent me of him doing so and he was on her private property, her home. Grim most people in the U.S. do not know who Greg Lake is. I am assuming you are talking about the guy from Geordie Shore. Didn't he date Mercedes from Hollyoaks? That has to be only interesting thing about him, what is his book about?

katie8753 said...

Thanks Beauders. I find it VERY odd that she tried to get Tex out. I can't imagine trying to get my own mother's killer out of prison. Creepy!!!

katie8753 said...

Possible terrorist attack in Manchester, England.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/22/manchester-arena-evacuated-reports-gunshots-explosion/

katie8753 said...

Let's see how CNN blames this on President Trump!

katie8753 said...

When we get to 100 comments, it will shift to a new page. Watch!

katie8753 said...

Well 101 comments, LOL.

katie8753 said...

Well I guess Google quit doing that. It used to make you click on the first 100 or the rest.

LynyrdSkynyrdBand said...

It does that at 200.

beauders said...

Whoever blew them self up in Manchester was targeting children. The footage shows many preteen and teen girls with a parent running from the venue.

katie8753 said...

Hi Lynyrd!

Beauders that was horrible!!!

grimtraveller said...

beauders said...

most people in the U.S. do not know who Greg Lake is. I am assuming you are talking about the guy from Geordie Shore. Didn't he date Mercedes from Hollyoaks? That has to be only interesting thing about him, what is his book about?

The Greg Lake I'm referring to is Greg Lake, the guitarist/bassist/vocalist/songwriter that played with King Crimson on their insanely groundbreaking debut {In the court of the Crimson King} and was part of the prog band Emerson, Lake and Palmer. He spent a few years writing his autobiography but he died last December. His book comes out a month before Dianne's is slated to appear.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

I can't imagine trying to get my own mother's killer out of prison

That's the thing though. Once we're actually able to get our minds around something, actions follow. It's both the glory and horror of the human condition. It goes a long way towards explaining some of these people whom this blog has spent years talking about.
When Jesus said to his disciples that if they did not forgive, they would not be forgiven by God, he was making a point so profound that most believers I know never even go there. But he was also showing us that many things we don't want to do or certainly wouldn't naturally do are possible if we accept that God not only wants us to, but will supply what's needed to do so. The snazziest definition of willpower I ever heard was in relation to God ¬> we supply the will, he supplies the power.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

Well this is one of my theories, and it's ONLY a theory, has nothing to do with facts

I prefer to have facts supporting any theories I arrive at. And I mean workable facts because they are the ones that will brace theories and make them at the very least plausible.
There's nothing wrong with your theory, in and of itself, except that there's nothing factual to lend it some plausibility. That's the main problem with Nichloas Shreck's book and what separates it from George Stimson's one ~ even though essentially I believe the conclusions of neither. But at least George deals with known, documented, verified facts and proceeds from there with his questions, suppositions and theories.

katie8753 said...

Grim, why do you think that Suzanne tried to get Tex out and didn't try to get Leslie or Pat out?

Wouldn't she have forgiven them all?

beauders said...

Grim my brothers were fans of Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, I should have known that was who you were talking about. You don't seem like the type who would be a fan of Geordie Shore.
Katie I'm not answering for Grim but I think Suzan tried to help Tex because they are both (supposedly)Born Again Christian. Atkins was a Catholic and I don't think Krenwinkel or Van Houten have an established religion. If they want peace in their hearts I would recommend Buddhism to them.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

why do you think that Suzanne tried to get Tex out and didn't try to get Leslie or Pat out?

Wouldn't she have forgiven them all?


Yes, I believe she would have forgiven them all but Tex is the one that she had some semblance of a relationship with.
She established contact with him. It wasn't like Tex was looking to make amends. In fact, he did not even know who she was for quite a while. She was doing kind of prison outreach/visiting with the church she was with. It's a fairly common thing, people who have found Christ trying to give prisoners some hope, befriending them and sharing a better way with them in a place where seeing that on any regular basis is at best difficult. But it's also typical of God to tell Suzan to forgive the guy that killed her mum. I bet she didn't want to do it initially. Who would ?
God can be as funny as challenging at the most awkward and unexpected of times.
I think Suzan truly lived her faith instead of just talking about it and having got to know Tex a little could accept he'd gone through changes. And I agree with her, he had. I just feel that at that particular time, he hadn't served enough time in jail for 7 murders, irrespective of the changes he'd gone through. I think all of the TLB killers plus Clem and Bruce had actually gone through significant changes a relatively short period after their convictions. However, there is far more to a parole consideration than simply whether you've changed, especially when one adds some of the complexities of the entire Manson episode. 22 years for 7 murders was just not allowing justice to be done. I believe Suzan's heart was in the right place, but she wasn't necessarily seeing the bigger picture.

katie8753 said...

Thanks Beauders! I love Emerson Lake & Palmer too! I don't know much of anything about Buddhism, except that Gary Hinman embraced it, but it didn't save him. But then, he was up against savages....

katie8753 said...

But Grim, I'm sure Suzanne knew that Leslie & Pat were also involved in killing her mother. Whether or not she had some kind of involvement with Tex, don't you think their names came up during their meetings? If not, that would be WEIRD!!!

For her to only try and get Tex out on the basis of forgiveness, to me, is just ludicrous. Which causes me to wonder if there wasn't some other agenda in mind on her part. Or on Tex's part!

katie8753 said...

You know I may have made this comment before, but I'll say it again if I did. For anyone who is mad at Debra Tate for being involved in these killers' parole hearings, I'm sure that Debra wishes her sister had never been killed by these mongrels.

I'm sure that she wishes every day that she still had her 2 sisters and maybe even her mother around to laugh with and hug, instead of attending these horrible parole hearings, sitting and listening to how her sister and her friends were slaughtered, ad nauseam.

I'm sure she wishes she had never even heard of Charles Manson and his minions.

Forgiveness is a beautiful thing. It goes back to what I was talking about in the beginning of this thread. That forgiveness relieves someone of negative, dark feelings that can cause harm to one's health.

But forgiveness can be a hard thing to administer, depending on how horrific the offense is. And I don't think anyone is capable of judging whether or not forgiveness has been achieved, unless you are walking in someone else's moccasins.

And that certain precludes me, because I haven't done that.

katie8753 said...

As far as Suzanne goes, if she did indeed achieve forgiveness for Tex for stabbing her mother to death as she crawled on the floor screaming, and afterward, not only showered her blood off in her own shower, but enjoyed food and beverage afterwards, while the blood was still seeping out of her wounds, then more power to her.

But if forgiveness includes 1 killer, it should indeed encompass the entire entourage, which includes ALL of the home invaders: Tex, Leslie, Pat & Charlie!

grimtraveller said...

The fact that you would forgive all the killers but only get to know one of them an go to bat for that one is not inconsistent at all.
I'm not Suzan so I don't speak for her but as someone who follows Christ and shares some of the common experience that pretty much all Christians at some point will go through if they are seriously in that relationship, I can say that it would be utterly inconsistent and make no sense for someone to forgive the worst of your family's butchers but not the others.
Forgiveness is hard to administer and it does depend on how horrific the offence is but bear in mind that we assume, quite wrongly, that the murder of a loved one or relative is the worst thing that can befall a person. Actually, anything can be hard to forgive. There are people that have forgiven their abusers while others still won't forgive someone their partner/husband/wife/girl or boyfriend had an affair or one night stand with. Some people won't forgive someone that sacked them or reported their child to the Police. Only the individual can honestly say what they will find difficult to forgive.

grimtraveller said...

katie8753 said...

I don't know much of anything about Buddhism, except that Gary Hinman embraced it

In his parole hearing last year, Bobby Beausoleil said he'd embraced it.

katie8753 said...

Grim said:

In his parole hearing last year, Bobby Beausoleil said he'd embraced it.

Wow! What an effrontery towards Gary! The only reason Gary handed the gun back to Bobby when he confiscated it, was because of his belief in peace thru Buddhism. Otherwise he could have blown Bobby's head off and lived happily ever after!

katie8753 said...

And I've read that Bobby was laughing at Gary for saying his mantra when he was dying.

What a hypocrite!

beauders said...

I have known addicts who have embraced Buddhism and have been able to stay sober, that is why I would recommend it to Leslie and Pat.
Katie for all we know maybe Suzan did forgive Susan, Leslie, and Pat. She did not get a good reception at Watson's hearing so it's possible she just gave up attending any parole hearings. I do think that Tex was the first on her list because he would be the hardest to forgive and they were members of the same faith.

grimtraveller said...

beauders said...

I do think that Tex was the first on her list because he would be the hardest to forgive and they were members of the same faith

Very astute observation. I think you're right.

katie8753 said...

And I've read that Bobby was laughing at Gary for saying his mantra when he was dying

The problem with that is that most of what we know about Bobby's attitude regarding the Hinman murder came from Danny DeCarlo and Susan and Susan Atkins as we know changed her stories and observations more frequently than the country changed its president !
That said, having spent a while reading up Bobby's own account of the murder on 7 separate occasions between 1978 and 2016, and how he felt in its aftermath, I can't shake the feeling that he's batting on a sticky wicket.

What a hypocrite!

Not really. If he acted a certain way back then and 48 years later he embraced a way of life that went against what he did, that's not hypocrisy. That's maturity.