I didn’t express myself very well. I meant the victims at Cielo Drive were random in that the house (owned by Melcher), not the people, was the target. Hopefully that makes a bit more sense.
Wikipedia corroborates that, saying that Manson
*had been to 10050 Cielo Drive, and although he knew that Melcher had moved, the house represented his rejection by the show business establishment. He instructed Watson, Atkins, Krenwinkel, and Kasabian to go to the house “and kill everyone there”, while he remained in their camp at Spahn’s Movie Ranch.
*
If memory serves me right, Bugliosi was exasperated by bad police work. There was a bloody hand print a crime investigator wrecked, they wouldn’t go and see a man who said he found a bloody knife and there were other things that he got angry with because he was afraid there wouldn’t be enough good evidence left to win a trial.
On September 1, 1969, a 10-year-old boy found a gun on his lawn in Sherman Oaks. He carefully took the .22 caliber Hi Standard Longhorn revolver to his father, who immediately called the LAPD. The gun was dirty and rusty and had a broken gun grip.
A couple of weeks earlier, the LAPD forensics experts determined that the .22 caliber revolver with the broken grip used on the Tate victims was none other than a Hi Standard .22 caliber Longhorn revolver, which was relatively unique and rare.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/manson/8.html
IIRC the father had to call the police to remind them he’d turned in a gun an awful lot like it… :rolleyes:
*A “possible” bloody fingerprint left on the button of the front gate mechanism at Cielo Drive, might have provided a clue to the killer’s identity. Which officer destroyed the print by activating the gate?
DeRosa. Knowing the potential evidentiary value of the print didn’t prevent Officer DeRosa from obliterating it, in his rush to leave the crime scene.*
rolleyes
I remember being thoroughly unimpressed with the police investigation when I read the book.
The most jawdropping thing about the police works is that one night in an affluent neighborhood of LA several people were massacred with guns and knives. Some of them tied and bound and they are stabbed repeatedly post mortem. Weird things were written in their blood. Though some minor effects were stolen this was obviously WAY beyond your typical home invasion/robbery.
The very next night, a middle aged couple is tied and bound, massacred and stabbed many times post mortem. Weird things were written in their blood. Though some minor effects were stolen this was obviously WAY beyond your typical home invasion/robbery.
Police saw no connection between the two events. Everybody else did all across the country, but the official police verdict was that they were two unrelated crimes (save that the Labianca scene may have been a copycat crime*).
With the .22 mentioned above, the only reason it got introduced as evidence was that the man who turned it in got disgusted with police brushing him off when he called to remind them and called a local TV station. It was also TV station reporters who (after Atkins confession) changed clothes in a car and timed it so they could find approximately the spot at which the killers ditched their clothing (police having not been able to find it).
I’ve also read that overnight L.A. sold out of guard dogs and handguns, security services were at an all time premium if you could get them, and gates and alarm systems (like the one at the Tate house which didn’t prevent the crimes) were back ordered for up to a year.
*True to a degree. Watson and Atkins, neither of whom has ever denied their complicity since their conviction, both now say that it really wasn’t the convoluted “let’s start a race war” scheme so much as an attempt to get Bobby Beausoleil sprung from prison by committing similar crimes to the one he was in prison for.
In 2004 there was a remakeof the miniseries Helter Skelter. It is generally considered not as good as the original. Here’s one of the weirdest things on the Internet not to involve pornography, offensive photographs, or political claims:
A critical review of that miniseries by Tex Watson (who watched it in prison)
Contains such corrections as
That is the story Kosinski liked to tell but Polanski, in his autobiography, stated “no one else was expected at the house that night, not even Jerzy Kosinski” (quoted from memory but that is very close).
Well, he was a novelist. Only natural he’d like a better story.
Sorry, should have italicized that the first time.
I saw both, 20+ years apart. The first is the better, IMO. The actress who played Susan Atkins (Nancy Wolfe) in 1976 was really good, and quite a babe IMO.
Looks like the whole movie is on that channel.
I was not alive when these murders happened. I didn’t know anything about them until I watched the movie one night, in a hotel room on the beach in Mexico, in complete solitude. This is not the sort of thing I would usually allow myself to watch, but I think being in Mexico (and being slightly drunk) I felt significantly less anxiety than I usually do watching that stuff.
Still, I found it absolutely horrifying. The worst part was when one of the female killers, after chasing down and slaughtering all these people, bitched that her wrist hurt from all the stabbing. It conveyed both the complete lack of remorse AND the horror of the force involved in stabbing someone. Ughhh.
The relatively modest housethat Tate/Sebring/Frykowski/Folger were murdered in was later owned by Trent Reznor, who reported some unusual happenings in the place but later said “I was fucking with you, nothing unusual happened while I was there”. It was demolished 25 years after the murders when the new owner was tired of the tourists and this wasbuilt in its place (is it me or does that look like a La Quinta Inn?).
Bugliosi knew very well about the Melcher connection. He interviewed Melcher extensively about his contacts with Manson before the trial, and was delighted to learn that Manson had been to the Cielo Drive house before the murders.
Bugliosi went with the race war motive at trial because he had evidence for it. Manson had discoursed ad nauseum to everybody at Spahn Ranch about Helter Skelter, but he hadn’t said anything to anybody about a revenge killing of Terry Melcher.
It’s possible, of course, that Manson was less than forthcoming about his motive. He may have felt that an apocalyptic race war was easier to sell to his drug-addled acolytes than a petty revenge killing. It’s also possible that both motives entered Manson’s clouded mind–race war as the general motive for the killings, anger against Melcher for the selection of the particular house. But that can only be speculation, and could not be supported at trial.
I’ve got a question about the Tate murders in particular, and I’m hoping the Dopers can answer it.
Bugliosi mentions that eyeglasses were a clue at the Tate house (I recently pulled my copy of Helter Skelter off the shelf, and thumbed through the picture section–glasses (they appear to be horn-rimmed, but it’s not very clear) seem to be stuck in the sofa). I’ve also got a copy of Manson: In His Own Words, co-written by Noel Emmons (I think). In that book, Manson claims that he and an unnamed associate went back to the Tate house after the murders but before the discovery of the bodies and planted the glasses as a fake clue. He claims the Family used the glasses at the ranch(es) as a sort of magnifying glass to start fires, etc.
With all that as an introduction, my question is, does anyone know the truth about the glasses? Whose were they? Was Manson telling the truth about going back to the house, or was that just empty boasting? I’ve only read that claim in that one book, but nowhere else have I heard about that particular clue. It certainly didn’t lead to anything, at least not like the discovery of the .22 gun did. Someone, somewhere, must have more information about this than I.
I haven’t read the book recently, but I’d find it hard to believe Charlie or anybody else would risk breaking in to leave the eyeglasses when they had no idea when the bodies would be found. Charlie’s crazy but he also had some common sense as a criminal and was all about alibis for himself. He was at the Labianca’s house, but left before the killing started.
On a completely different note, I had no idea that Woodstock happened the same week as the murders.
Sorry to get in late, but while “only” seven people were involved in Helter-Skelter, remember that in his book Bugliosi believed that Manson was responsable for between 100 and 150 other murders.
The most recent was (I believe, it’s been a while) an attorney that was representing some other member of the family but not Manson.
Ronald Hughes. He represented Leslie Van Houten and disappeared during a fishing/camping trip during the trial. His remains were later found but so badly decomposed that it was inconclusive as to whether it was foul play or accident (though very few people believe it was an accident). She was given another DA, but as a result of the oddity of her attorney a mistrial was declared 6 years after her conviction and she was tried again. She was sentenced to death the first time- commuted when the death penalty was abolished- and sentenced to life (the highest possible sentence) the second time.
During her retrial she was out on bond, worked at her lawyer’s office, and lived with a friend of her family under minor supervision. There were no incidents and she did not attempt to contact other Manson family members, which is something her supporters point to for her release. She’s the only member of the Manson murderers to have been free at all since 1971.
As for other murders, Susan Atkins was by her own admission involved in the murder of Gary Hinman for which Robert Beausoleil is still serving a life sentence, and this was on orders from Charlie. Clem Grogan, the only member of the family convicted for murder (not Tate/Labianca houses) to have been subsequently paroled, murdered Shorty Shea on Charlie’s orders. One of the bikers who gave a deposition testified that he’d seen Manson personally murder a black drug dealer with a bayonette, though this was never pursued once he was sentenced to death (though Bugliosi had planned to had he not been convicted in Tate/Labianca).
Without reading the rest of the thread, YES! The descriptions of Charlie’s followers practicing their murder skills on people who likely never realized how close they came to being victims was absolutely chilling.
I can’t say I remember much about the murder news when it happened in '69, but the book (and to a lesser extent the movie/mini-series) has stayed with me. Can’t listen to the White Album without a thought or two.
Whatever his motives (spurned musician or race war hero or latter day messiah), Charlie managed to make himself larger than life. I imagine when he dies in prison it will be BIG NEWS and I will find myself reading that scary book again. With the doors locked.
It’s weird to me that none of them have died. So many people- Manson, Atkins, Watson, Krenwinkel, Van Houten, Beausoleil and Fromme- then not in prison you have Mary Brunner and several other family members-who were all smokers, all drug users before prison and probably at least to some extent in prison, have all been in very “high stress” situations (Charlie for instance was set on fire and got severe burns all over his body)- yet they’re all still alive. I’ve no idea of the statistical odds but I’d guess that in a random group of that many similar age/similar background/similar lifestyle (pre 1969 at least) people on the outside of prison probably at least one would be dead by now from natural causes.
Maybe creepy crawling is good for your health. (And if so it could be Susan Powter’s comeback infomercial.)
Tori Amos tells a weird story about visiting Trent to work on a music project together & trying to cook themselves a chicken dinner, but the chicken never cooked through & always came out bloody. Trent fucking with us- yeah, but I don’t think Tori would just make that up as a joke.
Unless Trent was tossing out a well-cooked chicken when Tori wasn’t looking & put in a half-cooked bloody one.