Showing posts with label Ed Sanders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ed Sanders. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

William writes... regarding Ed Sanders' book

Crime Scene Discrepancies

Ed Sanders in his book The Family said that there were considerable discrepancies between the crime scene described by Tex, Linda, Susan, and Katie and what the police found in the morning.

1. Face towel over the head of Jay Sebring. Susan Atkins gave long detailed accounts to anybody who would listen about every aspect of the crime, yet neither she nor evidently the others tucked a face towel over the head of Sebring.

2. The rope extending from Sharon Tate to Jay Sebring. According to Atkins, Sharon stood and moved around the room, yet she did not mention anyone fixing the rope.

3. The steamer trunks in the living room. Located by the hall door they were knocked over during the night. There was a stain of blood on both trunks. It was Sebring’s blood, yet the killers said he was shot, stabbed and killed in one spot and never moved.

4. The glasses. Belonging to a severely myopic person, they were near the steamer trunks face down with the ear frames sticking up.

5. Two large pools of blood on the front porch. The one to the left of the door mat was Sharon Tate’s. The other one on the north edge of the porch was Sebring’s. Yet according to Linda, Susan, and Katie neither Tate nor Sebring ever left the house.

6. Spatters of blood from Sharon in the front hall and on the door sill. While the four perpetrators were on the estate, Sharon was never in the hall.

The above discrepancies show that a second entry was made into the house. According to Sanders, Manson told a lawyer at the trial that he and a companion returned to the scene of the crime “to see what my children did.”

Best wishes,

William Weston

Thursday, January 21, 2016

"Sharon Tate: A Life" by Ed Sanders - Book Review


From what I can see, Ed Sanders didn't mention anything new about this case except for these things:

Hatami now has no memory of Charlie being at Cielo Drive in March of 1969 (which doesn't make any difference really).

Sanders claims that Sharon "overheard" something about Sirhan Sirhan (yes he has the same first & last name) and an "English Cult" contracted Charlie to kill her.

And then he says "what she overheard can't be mentioned".

We haven't solved these murders.  We're back right where we started.

And, at the end of Sanders' book, it seemed he was sad about Sharon's murder, but WHY did he go on and on about her being in a cult???

That's the problem with these new books.  They propose lots but prove nothing....

Tuesday, January 5, 2016

EXCLUSIVE: How Roman Polanski forced wife Sharon Tate to have threesomes and make home sex videos for his friends but refused to sleep with her once she got pregnant and wanted her to get an abortion

  • Sharon Tate was a flower child caught up in Roman Polanski's world of decadence and drugs 
  • An Army brat, she confided to Polanski that she was date-raped at 17 by a soldier in Italy, a new book about the actress reveals
  • '[Polanski] told her how to dress; he told her what make-up he liked, what he didn't like,' reveals Tate's friend
  • He was even pointedly cruel to her in front of others at times, calling her 'a dumb hag'
  • Sharon got caught up in Polanski's sexual decadence and drug taking
  • When Tate refused an abortion, Polanksi went back to London and had an affair with Michelle Phillips of The Mamas & The Papas 
  • The author suspects that Charles Manson was paid $25,000 by a British satanic cult to target Tate 
Sharon Tate had a fatal attraction to dominant men - none more so than famed film director Roman Polanski. 

Polanski had the professional and personal power Sharon craved and thus she was drawn into a world of frequent humiliations, subjected to his sexual proclivities that included drugs, affairs, orgies and home sex videos he shared with friends.

Polanski ruled Sharon's entire life from the time she met him until her violent death at the hands of Charles Manson's gang of evil,  writes author Ed Sanders  in his provocative, well-researched book, Sharon Tate: A Life, published by Da Capo Press.

Tate's father Paul was an army captain who was frequently absent. To occupy herself, her mother, Doris entered her beautiful little daughter in beauty contests.

Validation from beauty pageants and recognition of her looks, combined with strong direction from men became an imperative for the tragic actress.


Sexy starlet: Roman Polanski trolled Sunset Boulevard and the boulevard's clubs for girls he brought home for threesomes with Sharon Tate, a new book reveals
Sexy starlet: Roman Polanski trolled Sunset Boulevard and the boulevard's clubs for girls he brought home for threesomes with Sharon Tate, a new book reveals

When she was crowned Miss Tiny Tot of Dallas in the summer of 1943 at six months old it marked the beginning of what became a lifelong pursuit: to be in front of the camera. 

She won global beauty contests in Europe and then back in the US with the frequently changing residences of an army child.

But life was not all crowns and pretty clothes. The author reveals that Sharon was raped when she was 17 while on a date with a soldier in Italy. It was a secret she kept, and only later confided to Polanski. He said that 'it hadn't left her emotionally scarred'.

Commercials followed and she caught the bug: she wanted to be an actress, a star, the 'new Marilyn of American cinema'.

Introduced to hot-shot producer Martin Ransohoff in 1963, she signed a seven-year contract and at age 20 she was earning $750 a month. But she desperately needed acting lessons to further her career.

Ransohoff sent her to New York to the famed Lee Strasberg's Actors Studio but Sharon didn't connect with Strasberg's technique. 

She did connect with French actor Philippe Forquet. 

Their love affair progressed to a marriage proposal and engagement along with rumors of beatings and claims by Forquet that Sharon cut him in the chest with a broken wine bottle.

Ransohoff demanded that his starlet terminate the relationship or he would dissolve her Filmways contract. Tate quit Forquet but not her fatal attraction to dominant men.

She hooked up with actor Steve McQueen, became engaged to Jay Sebring, a kinky, dungeon-loving hairdresser to the stars, and then began her last love affair with uber-dominant director Roman Polanski.

Powerful connection: Tate was engaged to a successful (and kinky) hairdresser to the stars, when she took acid with Polanski and made love with him at dawn. The pair moved in together in Easter 1966
Powerful connection: Tate was engaged to a successful (and kinky) hairdresser to the stars, when she took acid with Polanski and made love with him at dawn. The pair moved in together in Easter 1966
Dominance: 'He told her how to dress; he told her what makeup he liked, what he didn't like. He preferred her with nothing, no makeup. But he ruled her entire life from the time she met him,' reveals new book
Dominance: 'He told her how to dress; he told her what makeup he liked, what he didn't like. He preferred her with nothing, no makeup. But he ruled her entire life from the time she met him,' reveals new book

The couple initially connected when they were living around the corner from each other in London.

Tate was engaged to Sebring at the time but after sharing a cube of acid with Polanski and making love at dawn, the engagement became past tense and Polanski  and Tate moved in together around Easter,1966.

Sharon got the starring role in front of the camera but it was in Polanski's home sex videos he shared with friends.

Polanski filmed orgies at their house and showed the videos at parties, later reported to be sadomasochistic porno movies with many recognizable Hollywood faces. 

He trolled Sunset Boulevard and its clubs for girls he brought home for threesomes.
Sharon was totally intimidated by him. 

'When she was out in public with Roman, she never felt adequate enough to open her mouth,' writes the author.

'She could only talk to him alone. Her problem was that she had always been beautiful, and people were forever losing themselves in fantasy over her – electing her a beauty queen, imagining her as a wife, dreaming of a caress. 

'Most people had fantasies. But a few people, like Polanski, took charge.

'He told her how to dress; he told her what makeup he liked, what he didn't like. He preferred her with nothing, no makeup. But he ruled her entire life from the time she met him,' Tate's friend Joanna Pettet told the author.

Ransohoff urged Polanski to test Sharon for a role in The Fearless Vampire Killers, a period comedy he was making in London.

She got the role but Polanski confessed that he sometimes required as many as seventy takes for the inexperienced actress to get her part right.

Sharon's first big film role came in 1965 in Eye of the Devil, a movie about human sacrifice. She got the role after Kim Novak fell from a horse and the film had to be reshot without Novak.

Filmed in London, English magician Alex Saunders, known as 'King of the Witches', was hired as technical adviser.

Saunders later claimed that he befriended Tate on the set and initiated her into witchcraft. He said he had photos showing her inside a consecrated magic circle.

Sharon realized that she wasn't going to get a film role in a big movie playing at the time like Sound of Music or Tarzan and the Valley of Gold. Her acting wasn't good enough.

'I don't fool myself. I can't see myself doing Shakespeare,' she said.

She wanted to play light comedic roles and confessed in an interview to being influenced by Faye Dunaway and Catherine Deneuve.

'I'd like to be an American Catherine Deneuve. She plays beautiful, sensitive, deep parts with a little bit of intelligence behind them.'

Sharon rented a house in Los Angeles and continued trying for bigger film roles while getting panned by critics for the two films she had made. 

Polanski stayed in Europe filming and revealed that his wife acquired her first vibrator at that time, says the author.

Back in each other's arms, Sharon introduced Roman to the America she knew – junk food, drive-ins, popcorn and the California coast at Big Sur and Topanga Canyon, where friends of her lived.

It was 1967, the summer of love and Woodstock, and the rise of the hippie phenomenon. Sex and drugs topped the charts as a quick trip to finding oneself and communicating with others.


Crime scene: Tate's death was one of the most brutal murders in the history of Los Angeles. According to an INS criminal investigator's report, the English Satanist group had commissioned Manson to kill Sharon because of 'something that she unfortunately overheard that she was not supposed to overhear either in regards to Sirhan Sirhan or about Sirhan Sirhan,' the man who killed Robert F. Kennedy
Crime scene: Tate's death was one of the most brutal murders in the history of Los Angeles. According to an INS criminal investigator's report, the English Satanist group had commissioned Manson to kill Sharon because of 'something that she unfortunately overheard that she was not supposed to overhear either in regards to Sirhan Sirhan or about Sirhan Sirhan,' the man who killed Robert F. Kennedy


It was that fall when a converted school bus painted black rolled into Topanga Canyon with the words 'Hollywood Productions' written on the side. Its occupants were a roaming group of followers of Charles Manson, himself desperately seeking fame from his music.

The motley crew moved into a secluded house called the Spiral Staircase at the mouth of Topanga Canyon near the Pacific Coast Highway. 

Meanwhile, Tate had a starring role in the 1967 cult classic, Valley of the Dolls, and attended the premier of the film that took place on a docked cruise liner in November in Venice, Italy.

Tate stayed on board for the 28-day journey that ended in Los Angeles and arrived home to bad reviews calling Tate 'a no-talent show girl'.

She took a mini-vacation with girlfriends to a spa in Big Sur, up the coast, while Polanski returned to Los Angeles and invited a young Balinese model to his rented beachfront mansion in Santa Monica for a night of lovemaking.

Tate and Polanski were married two months later in January 1968 in London. Sharon was 25, Polanski 34.
After returning to LA, they moved into the famed Chateau Marmont on Sunset Boulevard. The couple rented different houses before settling into their last – on Cielo Drive high up in Benedict Canyon.

Decadent parties followed.

When she learned she was pregnant, Sharon telephoned her former fiance Sebring to ask his advice on whether or not to tell Roman. He said to wait a month when it would be too late to have an abortion.

Sharon was pregnant when she found a movie of Roman making love to someone else in their bed and thought of ending the marriage.

Roman, for his part, did not want to father a child, Shahrokh Hatami, a confidante of Tate's told the author.

Polanski wanted her to get an abortion in Brazil and when she refused, he went back to London and had an affair with Mamas and Papas singer Michelle Phillips.

'I told him that I'm expecting his child, he said that he doesn't want to father a child, and protested,' Sharon told Hatami.

'You can't do anything, it's my child. I'm going to keep it,' she told Polanski.

Polanski was bored by her pregnancy and stopped having sex with her - but not multiple other partners.

That summer 'he treated her like she was a piece of excess baggage. He was even pointedly cruel to her in front of others at times, calling her 'a dumb hag' and criticizing her whenever she expressed an opinion,' writes Sanders.

She was under his spell and he was in love with her despite treating her badly.

'We have a good arrangement,; Tate said. 'Roman lies to me and I pretend to believe him.'

The house at 10050 Cielo Drive was a revolving door with celebrities dropping by, unknown people flitting in and out, and orgies fueled by cocaine and hallucinogens like mescaline.

It was owned and rented out by Terry Melcher, Doris Day's son, a musician and record producer.

Michelle Phillips, of the Mamas and the Papas told of visiting that house and 'everyone in the house was busy filming an orgy and Sharon Tate was part of it'.
Melcher and his girlfriend, Candice Bergen moved into Doris Day's house in Malibu. 

Melcher knew 'Charlie' Manson and along with his pal, Beach Boy Dennis Wilson, they had been trying to get showbiz manager Rudy Altobelli to make Manson a star.

It was to the Cielo Drive house that Manson came looking for Melcher and sent his Family to kill the occupants when there was no forthcoming record deal to make him a star.


Polanski was in Europe finishing the script for the Day of the Dolphin and Sharon returned to America by ship, the Queen Elizabeth II, too pregnant to fly.

She did not want to come back to LA to have her baby and was very lonely.

Roman filled the house with friends of his so she wouldn't be lonely. He wanted her in LA. 

Sharon suspected he was having an affair in London. She thought about splitting up after having the baby. 

Roman promised Sharon he would leave London the next day, Saturday – only to find out the embassy was closed and he couldn't get a US visa. He would have to fly the following Monday or Tuesday.

That was too late.

On the night of August 9, 1969, eight months pregnant, Sharon was stabbed sixteen times and murdered along with Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, Steven Parent and Voyteck Frytowski – by the Manson Family.

The book's author concludes, after years of interviews with principals in the case as well as dogged research, that the one loose thread in the story is the role of a mysterious English satanic cult that was active in LA in those years.

The author learned new details after working with LA private investigator Larry Larsen, a former LA County deputy who assisted the investigation into the death of Robert F. Kennedy.

Larsen had been informed through associates that the English satanic group had recruited Charles Manson to murder Tate because of information she had learned about RFK's assassination.

The contention is that members of the English cult had invited Sirhan Sirhan to LA parties and one such party took place at Sharon Tate's residence, where sexual and ritualistic rites occurred – along with heavy drug use.

According to an Immigration and Naturalization Service report, the English Satanist group had commissioned Manson to kill Sharon because of 'something that she unfortunately overheard that she was not supposed to overhear either in regards to Sirhan Sirhan or about Sirhan Sirhan'.

Whether or not Sharon knew something about the Robert Kennedy assassination remains unanswered.

Sanders conducted a correspondence with Manson back in the 1980s. Manson sent him a six-page reply to a question list but also said 'I'm not schooled enough to play words on paper with you…'

Manson refused to answer a follow up question asking whether he was offered $25,000 to kill Tate as alleged by a woman and her husband who stated they witnessed the contact with Manson.

'Indeed, it may all be smoke and mirrors and ultimately impossible to prove beyond doubt's shadow,' writes Sanders.

'No loose ends can prevent our sense of outrage and anger for the horrible injustice perpetrated upon Sharon Tate and her friends.'

Sharon Tate: A Life, by Ed Sanders and published by Da Capo Press is available on Amazon


Sunday, September 22, 2013

Not what I was hoping for....

At first I thought, "Who better to play that self-proclaimed gangster Charles Manson than perhaps the best gangster actor of all time?"

I would have thought DeNiro would have nailed it, but instead he reverts back to acting like an old mafia-like gangster.  And I really couldn't figure out who Michelle Pfeiffer was playing, Sandy or Squeaky?  Gypsy even perhaps?  Why they made Tex into a teenager I'll never know.  The portrayal of Leslie Van Houten was right on though.

But don't even get me started on all the facts they have messed up.  Even Sanders, that Fug, wasn't as bad as this.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1204986880/tt2404311?ref_=tt_ov_i
==============================================================
Speaking of Sanders...

Buckley, Kerouac, Sanders and Yablonsky discuss Hippies

Monday, September 9, 2013

For Fug Fans...

Ed Sanders Live at Burchfield Penney Art Center January 12, 2013

This video has a little of everything for the Ed Sanders fan.  Poetry readings, sing-songs, sociology and Ginsberg....

What was of interest to me however, was the last paragraph in the description of this video:  
"Two of his books, 'The Family' and 'Tales of Beatnik Glory' are under option to be made into movies."

I checked Imdb and found a title in development- "The Family" scheduled for 2014 but you need Imdb Pro to get any information, of which I am not a member.  So I have no idea if this is related or not..if someone else has access, we would appreciate any info.

Watch the Sanders video here:
http://vimeo.com/59084324

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Why do we care about these crimes?

Venus Writes:
What is it that makes a crime so notorious and newsworthy?  People are murdered every day, but only a few crimes are ever talked about.  Why have some crimes become historical?  What makes them topics of never ending conversation?  Why do we CARE?

Think about Jack the Ripper, the Black Dahlia, the Clutter family murders, the MacDonald family murders....do these murders resonate because they happened to regular people?  They could've happened in one of our neighborhoods.  The Clutter family was a well-loved and respected family.  Their murders happened in a small town.  Was that why it was so shocking?  Things like that shouldn't happen in small towns.  Do we think that they should only happen in big cities with high crime rates?  After all, that makes more sense, right?  Crimes are more common in big cities.

Why are we so fascinated?  Is the main fascination with Jack the Ripper and the Black Dahlia the fact that they were never solved?  While there have been numerous suspects, no one was ever tried for the murders. 

What about the celebrity murders?  To name a few:  Nicole Brown Simpson, Lana Clarkson and, of course, the Manson murders.  Why do we care if celebrities were killed?  Is it because we think that things like that shouldn't happen to the rich and famous?  Does it make them seem more normal?  Do we feel as if we knew the victim since we've read about them in magazines and seen them on the movie or TV screen? 

Do we care about Sharon Tate because of the horrific fact that a very pregnant, defenseless woman was murdered?  She died while trying to protect her unborn baby.  Is that why we feel so much (understandable) sympathy for her?  Is that why this crime still generates so much attention?  Do we care because an heiress was murdered?  How many people probably walked by Abigail Folger on the street and never knew who she was?  Jay Sebring was a famous hairstylist.  He died while trying to protect his former fiancee.  It made him into a heroic figure.  Is that why we care about him?  Steven Parent was just a teenager whose own parents couldn't believe he was murdered at a movie stars house.  The LaBiancas were a couple enjoying a night at home.

Bad things aren't supposed to happen in a place where stars live.  That's a place where dreams are supposed to come true.  Is that why we care?

Or....is it because we're grateful that it didn't involve one of our loved ones?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lynyrd Responds:



Why is this case so memorable, marketable and widely-discussed?
That’s an interesting question, which has been debated and pondered many times.

If you polled 100 people, you’d get several different answers.

My best experience (in regards to this question),  was a lengthy discussion between Leary7 and SaintC.
It was one of their first blog conversations… and it pressed-on for several days.
OK… it was more of an argument, but who’s counting. LOL

As Leary said it best:
"This case is interesting, because it contains 'several interesting elements'".
I couldn’t agree more.
Leary nailed it.

Ed Sanders opens his book, with a strikingly similar sentiment.

Sanders writes:
"The Manson case had everything--- it ripped aside enough of the veils of Hollywood to titillate the nation’s and even the world’s interest.  It had rock and roll, it had the lure of the Wild West, it had the essence of the 1960’s with it’s sexual liberation, it’s love of the outdoors, it’s ferocity and it psychedelic drugs.  It had the hunger of stardom and renown; it had religions of all kinds, it had warfare and homegrown slaughter, it had it all in a huge moiling story of sex, drugs and violent transgression."

For some folks (such as Venus)…  the Hollywood backdrop is their main catalyst… (with Sharon Tate and Jay Sebring as their focal point).  Their focus is fueled by "stars who have fallen from the sky" sorta speak.  "Hollywood" as it were, is the allure.  

As for me, the Hollywood angle has never been a major motivator (of my interest).  It’s certainly an interesting piece of the puzzle (no doubt).   It adds spice.  But people have been murdered in Hollywood before… and bottom line… most of the victims weren’t really famous anyway. 

No… it’s the context of these murders… and most specifically… the killers themselves… who make this topic interesting (to me).  It‘s "the family’s" unique lifestyle… the 1960’s setting… and my eternal intrigue with Manson’s psyche which motivate me.

I’d love to crawl inside Manson’s brain for a week, and take a good look around.
Psychologically… what makes this guy tick?

As for the other "Manson associates":
Who ARE these freaks? And, how did they arrive at this strange ability to kill without remorse?  What “transformed” them??  OR…were they transformed at all??  Could it be, that these folks were always predisposed to evil acts, and simply needed the right set of circumstances to trigger them?  And if that’s the case… how did they all find each other??  That notion certainly brings renewed meaning to the phrase “birds of a feather… flocking together”.  

Their lifestyle (and  unwavering devotion) is yet another, related study.

Bottom line:
From a psychological and sociological standpoint, this entire situation (and the folks involved) presents a goldmine of study.

Then of course… there’s the girls… always the girls.
Heck… what red-blooded man, isn’t intrigued by a bevy of beautiful young women?
The “Manson women” have ALWAYS been a huge draw for me.

And then of course… there’s the "legal element".
It’s not my top interest… but, I do enjoy kicking-around legal debates, as much as the next "makeshift lawyer" from time to time LOL

And of course… last, but not least… there’s the endless “motive” debate and question.
"Motive" is a topic, which any legitimate TLB forum must explore.

Yes… there are several reasons to become interested in this case.  
“Several interesting elements” as Leary, said it best.  

There’s "something for everyone".  And THAT my friends, is why this case has stood the test of time… and books and movies will continue to be marketed.

For the record:
I believe the TLB case involves MORE "interesting elements" than any other murder case in history.  The only case which approaches this case (in terms of interesting elements), is the JFK assassination.  But still, I give the nod to TLB, by a landslide.   

And in all murder cases… I submit… it’s the motive and the murderers, who make things interesting.  Not to sound flippant… but truth be told… anyone can become a victim.  The concept of "victim" (in and of, itself), is somewhat self-explanatory.  The real question becomes:  Why did the murderer kill?  What made the murderer tick?  What was going-on, inside that freak’s mind?  What circumstances led to this horrible situation?  How and Why, did this happen?   
And THAT, my friend Venus, is the REAL intrigue! LOL

Peace!