tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post7869060549815882116..comments2024-03-19T21:34:44.985-04:00Comments on The Tate-LaBianca Homicide Research Blog: Movie - Once Upon a Time in HollywoodUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-74876785810909735732018-06-15T23:06:30.621-04:002018-06-15T23:06:30.621-04:00NOTE:
I JUST FOUND SEVERAL COMMENTS SITTING IN TH...<b>NOTE:<br /><br />I JUST FOUND SEVERAL COMMENTS SITTING IN THE "MODERATION BIN"... ACTUALLY KATIE DISCOVERED THEM.<br /><br />SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE QUITE OLD.<br /><br />MY SINCERE APOLOGIES TO ANYONE WHO TRIED TO POST A COMMENT, AND NEVER SAW THEIR COMMENT APPEAR ON THE BLOG.<br /><br />I JUST POSTED ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS.<br /><br />AGAIN, MY SINCERE APOLOGIES.</b>LynyrdSkynyrdBandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14729740027224198169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-81135007581726868912018-06-14T23:21:14.424-04:002018-06-14T23:21:14.424-04:00From IMDB - "While the LaBianca house was use...From IMDB - "While the LaBianca house was used in the movie, the Tate house was not."<br /><br />And, "The Manson's "Family" car was the original one used by them, which was loaned by the authorities."<br /><br />Probably BS about the car IMO, but...I have read about Waverly being used elsewhere too...<br />Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17388908256992077315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-61518855472989129272018-05-18T18:34:56.356-04:002018-05-18T18:34:56.356-04:00I don't know if this is true or not, but suppo...I don't know if this is true or not, but supposedly Manson's grandson is selling his ashes to people to make money. That is messed up....katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-83678032076326015242018-05-17T00:15:53.533-04:002018-05-17T00:15:53.533-04:00Okay I'm going to bed. See y'all in the m...Okay I'm going to bed. See y'all in the morning!katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-9698644068972664832018-05-16T19:42:51.464-04:002018-05-16T19:42:51.464-04:00 beaudera, a couple of thoughts come to mind, the ... beaudera, a couple of thoughts come to mind, the first being that criminal statutes, and sentencing, vary from state to state. That alone can make the difference. However, crime does not happen in a vacuum. While there are always similarities in most murders, I think that the premeditated manner in which Harris acted was indicative of an anger or rage, however it did not rise to the level of brutality that the LaBianca’s experienced. Also, LVH was convicted under a Felony Murder rule, in which deaths occurred during the commission of a robbery, i.e., the money that was taken. Rather then saying that LVH has received a far more severe sentence, it could just as easily be said that Harris received too lenient of a sentence, and subsequent parole. Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-83020857393542609622018-05-16T19:39:49.964-04:002018-05-16T19:39:49.964-04:00Dilligaf said...
This site does not deserve the ... Dilligaf said...<br /><br /> <b>This site does not deserve the type of drama that has occurred elsewhere</b> <br /><br />I agree. I once said to you in particular that I wasn't interested in any flame wars in cyberspace. I'm still not.<br />I think disagreement should be handled in an adult manner. Sometimes strongly worded, sometimes passionate, but always respectful. I respect you. I agree with some things you say and I disagree with other things that you say. And I don't object to being disagreed with.<br /><br /> katie8753 said...<br /><br /> <b>I'm not defending what she did</b><br /><br />You're not defending what she did, in terms of murdering someone, but you are providing mitigation which in a way is on that road of "she's not really fully responsible and therefore can be cut some slack." You refer to it as a crime of passion and temporary insanity and then point out the husband was having an affair, said he'd broken it off and then was found with the woman, so that's two mighty points in Clara Harris' favour and three mighty strikes against the husband.<br />But as Beauders points out, she was calculating beforehand and during the crime, made damn sure she rolled the husband and rolled him <i>good</i>.<br />That she knew him and had reason to be angry towards him doesn't somehow legitimize or take the sting out of the crime.<br /><br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-62603637461398197172018-05-16T19:27:14.207-04:002018-05-16T19:27:14.207-04:00Katie to date there is a difference of almost 35 y...Katie to date there is a difference of almost 35 years between Van Houten and Harris, isn't that enough to cover the food and clothes? beaudershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14223387983663922713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-72172697039310534642018-05-16T19:17:58.090-04:002018-05-16T19:17:58.090-04:00katie8753 said...
Dilligaf has been a good fr...katie8753 said...<br /><br /> <b>Dilligaf has been a good friend and trusted blogger for many years now</b><br /><br />I agree. I've read his stuff on three different blogs, to varying degrees and much of what he's said has been insightful and thought provoking.<br /><br /> <b>For you to suggest that he "keep his views to himself" is not gonna fly around here. He's welcome to post his opinions any time he wants</b><br /><br />Please look at the context Katie, in which I said those words. Am I genuinely saying to someone "don't comment here and keep your views to yourself" ? Of course I'm not. For starters, it's not my blog to do that and even if it was, I wouldn't. That's just not my style. If you will have picked up <i>anything</i> about me at this point of having contributed here for 3 years, it's that I'll discuss or argue pretty much any point with anybody if I have a view on it. I'd argue with the Queen and President Trump if I happened to disagree with them on a particular point and they wrote in here !<br />I'll state for the record, of course Dill is welcome to post his opinions. That's actually what the post he objects to means. But we can't have it both ways. Unless you're saying that certain people are fireproof and their opinions so sacrosanct that they must not be wrestled with/disagreed with/questioned.<br />I'm happy for him to say what he desires. It seems however, that the vice is not versa.<br /><br /> <b>If he doesn't want you "dissecting" his posts, then please stop doing it. You can respond to his comments without doing that. Everyone else does</b><br /><br />Contributors often say several things or make more than one point within a post or posts. <br />But I must raise the point that if you don't want whatever you say to be responded to, then why be part of a situation that, in order for it to continue and thrive, demands response ? You may as well keep them to yourself. On top of that, Dil made some points that are factually incorrect. We've made enough noise down the years about how we get a little irked by documentary makers or article writers getting things wrong when the info is out there and easily available so I'm not going to apologize for pointing such out, especially if one is using that wrong info as a bulwark of the point they are making.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-28874887592186961752018-05-16T16:48:18.040-04:002018-05-16T16:48:18.040-04:00Beauders, the difference between Clara Harris and ...Beauders, the difference between Clara Harris and Leslie Van Houten, to me, is that what Harris did was "a crime of passion". I guess maybe you could associate that with "temporary insanity". I'm not sure what her defense was. She was married to a man that was having an affair and he told her he broke it off and she caught them together that day and just "lost it".<br /><br />I'm not defending what she did. But it's a far cry from going into someone's house that you don't even know, have no animosity or hard feelings whatsoever for, and help restrain and kill that person, and afterward raid the fridge, raid the closet, and laugh about it all during your murder trial.<br /><br />I know I keep bringing that last stuff up about the fridge, etc, but it's part of what Leslie is. And that's what makes her, in my opinion, distanced from reality.<br /><br />I wonder even now if she can fully accept what she did. Only she knows.katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-16643703916440544882018-05-16T16:42:08.873-04:002018-05-16T16:42:08.873-04:00Grim, Dilligaf has been a good friend and trusted ...Grim, Dilligaf has been a good friend and trusted blogger for many years now, as well as most of our other bloggers. For you to suggest that he "keep his views to himself" is not gonna fly around here. He's welcome to post his opinions any time he wants.<br /><br />If he doesn't want you "dissecting" his posts, then please stop doing it. You can respond to his comments without doing that. Everyone else does.katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-91100036058273433242018-05-15T09:49:54.163-04:002018-05-15T09:49:54.163-04:00Thanks Dill. I intend to respond to all that when...Thanks Dill. I intend to respond to all that when I get a chance later in the week.katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-5184008711602056592018-05-15T00:29:18.266-04:002018-05-15T00:29:18.266-04:00To all posters here, I responded to Grim Traveler,...To all posters here, I responded to Grim Traveler, but out of respect to you all, I deleted my response to his childish comments. This site does not deserve the type of drama that has occurred elsewhere. The best way to handle it is for me to ignore him, that truly is a win-win...Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-43293407345708950092018-05-15T00:17:15.133-04:002018-05-15T00:17:15.133-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-10469852692948684982018-05-14T18:17:33.056-04:002018-05-14T18:17:33.056-04:00Dilligaf said...
Theory is great but until yo... Dilligaf said...<br /><br /> <b>Theory is great but until you have rubbed elbows with convicted felons</b><br /><br />I <i>have</i> rubbed shoulders with and had fascinating conversations with convicted felons and known some personally, both before and after they were convicted.<br />Theory ain't <i>that</i> great.<br /><br /><b>You can copy my posts, and try to dissect and interpret them to match your beliefs all you want, but until you have seen what I have, do yourself a favor and don’t</b><br /><br />So yours is the last word on everything ?<br />I don't know what you've seen, but I take on board whatever experience you've had. You are entitled to whatever view you've arrived at, I'm entitled to disagree at those points that I may do so and given that this is a public forum, I assume there is something of a discussion going on, one that involves agreement at points and disagreement at others. <br />If you don't like having your posts "dissected" as you put it, perhaps you should just be happy with your views and keep them to yourself. Then you have your "win~win."grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-74807419895823842072018-05-13T23:42:58.016-04:002018-05-13T23:42:58.016-04:00Theory is great but until you have rubbed elbows w...Theory is great but until you have rubbed elbows with convicted felons, I will continue to rely on my actual experience. Rehabilitation is fine for some, however it does little for paying the price for one’s actions. When a woman kills her child by immersing that child into scalding water because it would not stop crying, I have no room for tolerance. When a person starves, or otherwise abuses, an elder relative, and that relative dies, compassion and forgiveness is not at the top of my list. You can copy my posts, and try to dissect and interpret them to match your beliefs all you want, but until you have seen what I have, do yourself a favor and don’t.Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-70560764933333039522018-05-13T23:42:21.821-04:002018-05-13T23:42:21.821-04:00Grim, what can I say I hate Tex Watson and believe...Grim, what can I say I hate Tex Watson and believe he was the main catalyst for the Tate/LaBianca murders. I realize that Watson would be stupid to have said what was quoted but it does ring true situationally. My question to Katie was would that quote change her mind about Van Houten. In my world all pedophiles would be locked up for life and the violent (such as murdering the child to make it easier to get away with it) would be executed. Same with violent rapists either life in prison or death. Clara Harris was released from prison last week. She ran over her husband several times, killing him, because she found out he was having an affair. She was middle aged, no mental illness, no drugs or alcohol, no brainwashing, no hippie cult leader, just an angry wife. She served fifteen years of a twenty year sentence. Now this crime was premeditated, not only did she plan it but she ran over him several times. This woman is just as guilty as Van Houten and committed her crime in the "hang em high" state of Texas. My question is how is it alright for Mrs. Harris to be released after fifteen years and Van Houten won't be released after fifty years?beaudershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14223387983663922713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-78954077678617085012018-05-12T18:30:09.360-04:002018-05-12T18:30:09.360-04:00I think when it comes down to it, the argument sur...I think when it comes down to it, the argument surrounding someone like Leslie comes down to two things: can a person change from a previously held set of values for the better {no one argues it the other way} and should that person ever be given a second chance ?<br />For me the answer to both is yes. <br />But I say that guardedly because as with most things, it's not straightforward. It's a minefield of nuances. For example, a paedophile that has sexually abused children doesn't just change one day and say "oh, I'm not going to do that again." I wouldn't release a child sexual abuser back into society, I'd probably not release a serial rapist either, but then, life is full of nuances.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-31882285140785154882018-05-12T18:21:54.747-04:002018-05-12T18:21:54.747-04:00beauders said...
Would she have stabbed Mrs. LaBi... beauders said...<br /><br /><b>Would she have stabbed Mrs. LaBianca if she was still alive, I think she would have</b><br /><br />I don't think there's any doubt of that. Yes, she got cold feet {she admits this to Marvin Part} when it came to the actual moment but that doesn't somehow soften her heart at the time. If one goes to descriptions of the event, LVH said to Part: <i>"I was going to hold the woman down, and because Katie had done it before it would have been easier for her to actually stab the woman because I was getting kind of freaky about the whole thing. And then I was watching, you know, I was looking more than I was paying attention <b>to what I should have been doing</b>".</i> One can kind of surmise from that that if Pat had got in some telling blows and Rosemary was helpless, she would have joined in without Tex having to make her do so. What got her "kind of freaky about the whole thing" was the difficulty that Pat was having and the fact that Rosemary was raising merry hell and fighting back.<br />Of those that did kill once it was on, Leslie will forever remain the only one that actually wanted to and really believed in the cause. But anyone that chooses to can see she'd left that all behind by 1978 when she was re~tried.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-74945731858983070902018-05-12T18:21:37.855-04:002018-05-12T18:21:37.855-04:00Dilligaf said...
She has had more bites at th...Dilligaf said...<br /><br /> <b>She has had more bites at the apple than most inmates, but the results are the same. Why? Because she is guilty</b><br /><br />She has had more bites at the apple than most inmates because she has been in longer than most inmates. Saying "because she is guilty" is like saying "rain makes things wet." She would unlikely be be in jail seeking parole if she wasn't guilty ! It kind of goes with the territory.<br />The real reason she's still in is because of the Manson connection and everyone knows it, even those of us that aren't American or live in America. Guv'nor Brown actually says that in a variety of ways with each reversal. He just won't use that particular form of words.<br /><br /> <b>The opportunity for parole does not mean you get parole</b><br /><br />And neither should it. It can't be on time served, it has to go way deeper than that. <br />It is kind of interesting that by 2013, of the 106 people that were on death row at the time of the 1972 court ruling in California, 42 of them of them were eventually paroled and 12 of them committed crimes while on parole and of those, 3 killed.<br />Interestingly, the 2 women that were on the wing that LVH and the others found themselves in when they were initially sentenced, both were paroled within ten years, having been sentenced to death. Nothing has been heard of them since and their crimes were as brutal, one murdering an old lady during a robbery and the other murdering her lover's wife.<br />The possibility of parole doesn't mean the guarantee {and neither should it} of it but it does heavily imply that if you comply with certain criteria and more importantly, behave and show signs of change, you'll be given a fair crack at it.<br /><br /><b>Being a perfect inmate does not mean that an inmate has given due penance, but rather, that in a controlled environment, that person has learned to adapt and behave, nothing more</b><br /><br />Now, I agree that that will apply to a number of inmates at various times throughout the history of mankind because that can be very much part of human nature. But it's such an absolute statement that its very absolutism militates against it being true. Life and people simply are not that black and white ~ although they can be.<br />You only have to look at the large number of inmates that don't adhere to correct behaviour within that controlled environment allied to the number of years LVH has been inside to at least question whether someone could keep an act going for 45~ish years. Not only that, why should it be suspect that someone on the wrong side of the law who then lands in prison learns to adapt and behave ? That's one of the purposes of incarceration, is it not ?<br />You might find someone who has killed is more likely to seek to change their ways than someone that steals violently, given that the robber knows that generally speaking, they <i>will</i> be out at some point so there's no need to change if they're only going to face 10 years as opposed to life.<br /><br /> <b>LVH’s ongoing saga of denying responsibility, as well as her 1981 marriage and attempted escape plot, should continue to be used against her in determining her fitness for release</b><br /><br />i. She doesn't deny responsibility. In fact, it gets kind of monotonous hearing her take responsibility.<br />ii. So....she had a marriage 37 years ago that didn't work out. To say that should be used, as Stephen Kay does, to determine her fitness for release, even if tongue in cheek, is frankly insulting to millions of people around the world that have found themselves in a marriage that, for whatever reason, didn't work out.<br />iii. I'm surprised that you would link her to that escape plot given that there's not a shred of evidence to support such a notion.<br /><br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-30657346987948057962018-05-12T17:04:21.235-04:002018-05-12T17:04:21.235-04:00@beauders:
However one looks at it, that supposed...@beauders:<br /><br />However one looks at it, that supposed quote from Tex to Headquarters magazine in '78 is as suspect as the Atlantic is salty. Whatever else Tex was, he wasn't stupid, certainly not by 1978 so I very much doubt he'd say something so obvious and so obviously stupid to an interviewer. Talk to a reporter/interviewer and what you say is going to appear publicly in print. We well and knew that by the late 70s.<br />It's actually an interesting exercise to compare that with a quote Sandy Good is supposed to have made about the death of Ronald Hughes being "the first of the retaliation murders," which appeared in <i>Helter Skelter.</i> She denies it to this day, the person she is supposed to have said it to has <i>never</i> verified it yet it is almost taken as fact.<br />In both instances the quote cannot be verified and therefore can't be challenged. <br />As for Tex, in his book <i>from 1978</i>, he says quite openly: <i>"I went back to the bedroom and <b>told</b> Leslie to help Katie stab the woman, <b>even though it was obvious that Rosemary LaBianca was already dead. Leslie obeyed me</b>, striking mainly on the exposed buttocks, but with none of the enthusiasm that Katie showed."</i><br />So why would he say he wouldn't help Leslie in an interview when he'd already said stuff in his book that could have gone in Leslie's favour ?<br />Because he didn't. The information has been out in the open for 40 years.<br /><br /> Dilligaf said...<br /><br /> <b>it was not proven that Mrs. LaBianca was dead when some of the stab wounds were sustained</b><br /><br />The opposite is actually true. LVH says she stabbed 14-16 times. Only 13 of the wounds were post mortem. It's not possible to conclude anything other than Rosemary was alive when Leslie's first blow was struck. Whether it technically was a blow that was fatal, that we can never know. But as for her stabbing a corpse, for at least one {and possibly 3} blow, nah.<br /><br /> <b>In fact, it was not until years later that LVH began to claim that she was only stabbing a dead person</b><br /><br />That's factually untrue.<br />As a matter of fact, if you think about it, stating she stabbed a dead person is what ultimately convicted her and why she is in her current situation.<br />At some point in September '69 at Willow Springs, LVH told Dianne Lake that she had stabbed someone that was already dead. Linda Kasabian's evidence of Leslie getting into the car on the 2nd night and getting out at the LaBianca's house was ineffective because there was nothing to corroborate it, particularly being a co~conspirator.<br />However, Dianne Lake repeating what LVH said is what culled LVH because there <i>were</i> post mortem wounds and she was the only person in the Family that made any claim about stabbing dead bodies, ergo, she had to have been there.<br />So, long before that crowd were even arrested at Barker, she was saying it. She said it to Marvin Part, her lawyer in December '69. The thing there is that this was a private communication, we only became privy to its contents in 2015. In the tape in question, she admits to her role in everything, she doesn't minimize or try to get out or make herself a victim, but among her many revelations are that she thought Rosemary was dead. Part even asks her <i>why</i> she thought this and she says whereas Leno was making a gurgling sound, Rosemary was just lying there. And in even in her first trial when she was trying to <i>absolve</i> Manson and take responsibility by lying during the penalty phase, she states that Rosemary was just lying there not moving, before she stabbed.<br />For me two things are clear ~ she stabbed someone still alive {even if they were a beat away from dying} and she has always been sure Rosemary was dead ~ repeating that belief to Dianne is what did for her.<br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-46224103081262819722018-05-10T23:08:06.849-04:002018-05-10T23:08:06.849-04:00Here’s the thing, it was not proven that Mrs. LaBi...Here’s the thing, it was not proven that Mrs. LaBianca was dead when some of the stab wounds were sustained. In fact, it was not until years later that LVH began to claim that she was only stabbing a dead person. Which, in and of itself, shows a degree of callousness that you do not find in an average person. It is one of the worst examples of deprivity. Two people were brutally twenty-three and a half years per murder, no, I do not think it is anywhere near enough.Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-82411129753604693392018-05-10T22:31:04.885-04:002018-05-10T22:31:04.885-04:00I understand Dil, I just think she's been puni...I understand Dil, I just think she's been punished enough. According to Tex she was forced to stab a dead body. Would she have stabbed Mrs. LaBianca if she was still alive, I think she would have but Mrs. LaBianca was dead, a technicality that the Board considers. No one forced her to join the Family and it is her fault she was in the position she was in. I think her wanting to go was youthful arrogance, bravado, wanting to be a good soldier, wanting to be as 'brave' as her best friend and stupidity. She only really got it when the stabbing started. According to Tex she was terrified. These crimes happened almost fifty years ago and she has been punished for most of it. Isn't fifty years long enough. I would let her out in her seventies, no sooner. I am not soft on crime, I believe in the death penalty and that it should be used for other crimes---those against children and violent sex crimes.beaudershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14223387983663922713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-52885398854939100902018-05-10T21:10:59.476-04:002018-05-10T21:10:59.476-04:00Thanks Dill!Thanks Dill!katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-47177145237915092722018-05-10T19:42:18.630-04:002018-05-10T19:42:18.630-04:00LVH may be a model inmate, but that does not chang...LVH may be a model inmate, but that does not change the fact that two people are dead, and she played a role in that. She has had more bites at the apple than most inmates, but the results are the same. Why? Because she is guilty. The opportunity for parole does not mean you get parole. Being a perfect inmate does not mean that an inmate has given due penance, but rather, that in a controlled environment, that person has learned to adapt and behave, nothing more. LVH’s ongoing saga of denying responsibility, as well as her 1981 marriage and attempted escape plot, should continue to be used against her in determining her fitness for release. I would, however, support her release if she agrees to the same type of release as Susan Atkins...Dilligafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07052411066646010067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6001083595175224919.post-55872553148552357442018-05-10T10:13:08.824-04:002018-05-10T10:13:08.824-04:00Good point Beauders. And I agree, Bruce Davis is ...Good point Beauders. And I agree, Bruce Davis is a scumbag.katie8753https://www.blogger.com/profile/00353364961453501063noreply@blogger.com