The Short Life and Tragic Death of Steven Parent

(photo source: Find A Grave) 

Other than Sharon Tate's unborn child, Steven Parent was the youngest victim of the Manson Family's August 8-9, 1969 slaughter and undisputedly the least known.  Up until his connection with the notorious crimes, he had a very ordinary, middle class upbringing. 

Steven Earl Parent was born on February 12, 1951, the firstborn child of Wilfred and Juanita Parent.  The Parent family moved to the Los Angeles suburb of El Monte - known as "Friendly El Monte" and "The End of the Santa Fe Trail" - roughly thirty miles from Beverly Hills but a world away around 1958.  Their three bedroom, two bath rambler on East Bryant Street, built in 1956, was soon bursting as Steven was joined by a sister, Janet, and two brothers, Greg and Dale.  

Steven attended high school at Arroyo High, beginning in 1965.  It was in 1966, halfway through his freshman year, that he was arrested for petty theft.  It's generally accepted that he stole several radios  - he was known to be a hi-fi bug and enthusiast and reportedly took those items apart to see how they operated.  There is, however, a February 2, 1966 Los Angeles Times article that mentions a 14-year-old El Monte teen who was arrested for committing one to six burglaries at area schools.  As the offender was a juvenile, no name was given.  Whether the teen mentioned in the Times article was Steven or not, he spent the next two years in juvenile detention.  While there, he was reportedly tested at near-genius level for electronics.  

(photo source: charlesmanson.com)

By the time he graduated from Arroyo in June of 1969, Steven stood just a whisper over six feet tall, with red hair that earned him the nickname "Carrot Top."  According to Vincent Bugliosi, the author of Helter Skelter and prosecutor of Steven's killer(s), Steven had dated a few girls in school but no one in particular.   He enjoyed listening to folk music and playing the guitar but his main passion continued to be electronics.  Planning to attend Citrus Junior College in Azusa, to the north of El Monte, in September, he was holding down two jobs to save up money for his tuition.    During the day he worked as a delivery boy for Valley Cities Plumbing Company on Rush Street in South El Monte.  In the evenings, he was a salesman at Jonas Miller Stereo on Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills. 

In late July, Steven picked up a hitchhiker named William Garretson.  This seemingly innocuous act would set the wheels in motion to alter the course of his life.  Garretson, an Ohio native, was the summer caretaker for the property located at 10050 Cielo Drive in Benedict Canyon.  The home, owned by Rudi Altobelli, a manager and producer, was being rented out to director Roman Polanski and his wife, actress Sharon Tate.  Altobelli normally resided in the guesthouse but had hired Garretson on during the months he was in Europe.   After dropping Garretson off at the property, the caretaker told Steven to feel free to drop by anytime he should be in the area.

On Friday, August 8, 1969, Steven left home around 7:50 in the morning to begin work at Valley City Plumbing.  He came home for lunch and asked his mother Juanita to iron and lay out clothing for him so when he returned home after finishing his day at Valley City, he could quickly change and be on the way to Jonas Miller Stereo.  The day progressed normally, with Steven working his shift at Valley City, followed by Jonas Miller.  After clocking out at the stereo store, he stopped by Dales (a service station) in El Monte around 11 p.m. to chat with the brother of a girl he dated.  He asked the boy if he wanted to go for a ride; the boy declined.  From there, he made an innocent decision that would result in tragic consequences for him - he headed to 10050 Cielo Drive.  

Steve had a Sony AM-FM Digimatic clock radio he wanted to try to sell to William Garretson.  He arrived on the property around 11:45 p.m., noticing Abigail Folger and Sharon Tate in the main house as he made his way to the guesthouse.  Upon arrival, he asked Garretson who the pretty ladies were in the house and then showed Garretson the radio.  Garretson passed on the purchase but offered his guest a can of beer, which Steven accepted.  Steven also used the guesthouse phone to call a UCLA student by the name of John Friedman - he was building Friedman a stereo.  It was roughly around 12:15 a.m. when Steven bid Garretson farewell and left the guesthouse, headed for his car, his father's white 1966 Nash Ambassador, in the driveway.

Just over eight hours later, his body was found behind the steering wheel, slumped over toward the front passenger side, the clock radio beside him.  

The official story was that as Steven was leaving the property and had rolled his window down to access the button to open the gate, he was accosted by Charles "Tex" Watson, who, with Patricia "Katie" Krenwinkel, Susan "Sadie" Atkins, and Linda Kasabian, were entering the property to slaughter everyone present as part of Charles Manson's ludicrous Helter Skelter motive.  As Tex ordered the boy to stop, Steven pleaded with him, "Please don't hurt me.  I won't say anything."  Armed with a bayonet and a gun, Watson at first slashed at Steven, who instinctively held up his left hand to protect himself, causing a gash on his wrist that severed his wristband and caused it to fly into the backseat, where it was found later that morning by police.  Watson then took out his gun and fired three times, hitting Steven in the left cheek and twice in the chest, the latter two wounds of which were fatal.  Watson then pushed the car back up the drive, away from the gate.  This recounting has Steven Parent being the first victim of the Manson Family that night.

Recently, however, there have been theories that Steven was not the first victim and may have been the last, or nearly so.  In these theories, Steven was walking back to his car from the guesthouse and came upon the horrific slaughter going down at the main house.  Panicked, he literally ran for his life, with a hopped up Tex Watson in pursuit, reaching his car and attempting to tear out of the property.  In his desperation, Steve backed into the split rail fence and Watson caught up to him.  It was then that Steven pleaded for his life and that Watson went after him with the knife.  Finding that it was difficult to achieve his goal with the knife while his victim was seated behind the wheel, Tex unloaded his gun three times into the boy.  

Whichever version is the correct one, the split rail fence was broken with chips of paint from the Parent car found on the fence and pieces of the wood found under the back bumper of the car.  It was agreed by the Manson Family members present that Steven did plead for his life with those exact words, leading anyone to wonder what he meant when he said "I won't say anything" if he didn't see anything, as he wouldn't if he had been the first victim. 

For Wilfred and Juanita Parent, that Friday night was long and unnerving for them.  Steven had never stayed out all night and not come home.  The police, upon finding Steven on Saturday morning, did not locate his wallet or driver's license and so he was dubbed John Doe.  A reporter on the scene managed to make out the license plate of the car and had it run, finding out it belonged to a Wilfred Parent in Elm Monte.  That reporter managed to track down the Parents' parish priest and notify him that the dead John Doe might be Steven Parent.  While the priest was headed to the morgue on Saturday evening to possibly make an identification that would spare Wilfred and Juanita, the Parent family headed out to dinner, hoping that Steven would be home when they returned.  Instead, an El Monte police officer appeared and handed Wilfred a business card with a phone number on it and instructed him to call.  Wilfred called the unidentified number and was stunned when he was connected to the L.A. County Morgue.  He was told the morgue had a body they believed was Wilfred's son.  The physical characters and clothing matched; the priest was also able to positively identify the Parents' oldest son.  That night, the Parent family, minus Steven, crawled into one bed and cried until the early hours.

Steven's funeral (photo source: RXSTR) 

Steven Parent was buried at the Queen of Heaven Cemetery in Rowland Heights on Wednesday, August 13.  

Arroyo High School dedicated its 1970 yearbook to four students and a teacher, with Steven being one of the students.  Part of the memorial stated: "Life goes on with all its joy, sorrow, love, pain, and laughter . . . yet death continues."  

His family eventually left California, finding the memories and publicity of the notorious killings too painful.  They relocated in Texas, where Juanita had lived during her later childhood and before her marriage to Wilfred.  

In 1972, the UCLA student Steven had spoken to before leaving the Cielo guesthouse published a sci-fi book under the name David Gerrold.  He dedicated the book to Steven.    

In 2009, Linda Kasabian participated in a documentary where she admitted for the first time that, on Tex Watson's orders, she crawled over Steven's dead body, searching for a wallet and/or money.  This explains why no wallet or identification was found on him (and also further supports a burglary angle or motive.)  

In the decades since his untimely and terrifying death, people who once knew Steven leave memorials for him on the Find a Grave website.  They mention summers past, of swimming together, of playing in fields behind homes, and pretending to be radio announcers and that Steven was always thrilled to share a birthday with Abraham Lincoln.  The girl named Tina - now a woman in her sixties - who had Steven as her prom date only months before he was killed still muses on whether they would have eventually married, had children and grandchildren together.  It can never be known.  

 

Steven's final resting place (photo source: Find a Grave) 

    

 

Remembering Jay Sebring

 

A smiling Jay (source: Tumblr)

Fifty-one years ago tonight, Jay Sebring became one of six people (if you include an unborn baby) who lost their lives in one of the most violent, gruesome, and senseless murders in U.S. history. But Jay was so much more than just a victim.

Born in Birmingham, Alabama as the fourth and final child of an accountant and housewife, he was raised in a very average middle-class existence in Southfield, Michigan. Following graduation from Detroit Catholic Central High School, he enlisted for what would turn out to be a four-year stint in the Navy. That enlistment changed the course of his life, as he found a passion for cutting hair — which he did for the enlisted men during the Korean War.

Finding his calling, he journeyed to Los Angeles, where he changed his name from Thomas John Kummer to the more stylish and sexy Jay Sebring. Following barber school, he spent three years in tutelage at women’s beauty parlors before striking out on his own. His Sebring salon, one of the first salons for men in the United States, became as trendy as its location — the corner of Fairfax and Melrose in West Hollywood. Sleek and modern, with masculine wood paneling in the main salon, Sebring catered to his celebrity clientele, which began flooding the salon, by having a private entrance for them, as well as a VIP room. At a time when barbers charged $1.50 for a haircut, he could command $25 and up, thanks to his revolutionary Sebring Method, which involved using scissors rather than clippers and cutting the hair to the style of the head and in the direction of the hair growth. Sebring also encouraged daily washing of the hair before styling and using hair spray rather than Brylcreem or pomade, which was the standard (along with infrequent washings.)

A kind, deep-thinking and stylishly sophisticated man, Jay became the first male celebrity stylist to such stars as Warren Beatty, Marlon Brando, Henry Fonda, Paul Newman, and many others. He designed Jim Morrison’s famous shaggy ‘do and flew to Las Vegas every three weeks to tend to the locks of Frank Sinatra and Sammy Davis, Jr. Wealthy oilman Saul West paid him $500 (plus expenses) to fly to Dallas to cut his hair.

His success and popularity led him to going directly to the set of 1960’s Spartacus to personally tend to star Kirk Douglas’ hair and to be the lead hair stylist for The Thomas Crown Affair in 1968 and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in 1969.

Jay was instrumental in the film career of Bruce Lee, who he met in 1964 in Long Beach at the International Karate Championships. Jay introduced Lee to Bill Dozier, a television producer who cast Lee in The Green Hornet.

Although he had no acting aspirations himself, Jay appeared in a December 1966 episode of Batman (also produced by Dozier) playing a character called Mr. Oceanbring, a clever take on his own name. He also played a frontier barber in a 1967 episode of The Virginian.

In 1967, he founded Sebring International, as a means to franchise his salons internationally, teach his hair cutting method, and sell his haircare products. In addition to his flagship salon in Los Angeles, he opened salons in New York, London, and San Francisco. His San Francisco salon opened less than three months before his death; he was due to be in San Francisco the day after his death.

Although married in 1960 to a model, most of Jay’s acquaintances agreed that the love of his life was Sharon Tate, whom he met in 1964, after he and his wife separated and their divorce was pending. He and Sharon dated for three years, the relationship only floundering when she met director Roman Polanski on a film set and fell in love with him. Despite this, Jay and Sharon remained the best of friends. Sharon’s last home, the one on Cielo Drive that she shared with Roman, was only a mile from Jay’s Easton Drive residence.

That night of Friday, August 8, 1969, Jay drove his black Porsche up the hill to Cielo Drive where he, Sharon, and the Polanskis' two houseguests, Voytek Frykowski and Abigail Folger, went to dinner at El Coyote restaurant.  Returning home around 10:30, he and Sharon went to the master bedroom, where she could rest and he could sit and talk to her. Frykowski took a nap on the sofa in the living room and Folger changed into a nightgown and read “Madame Bovary” in her bedroom. They had less than two hours to live.

Jay, who had trained in karate with Bruce Lee, was no match against the knife and gun-wielding Tex Watson, who was high on speed and stood a good half-foot taller than the stylist. He was reportedly defending Sharon when he was shot, stabbed seven times, and kicked repeatedly in the face by the boot-wearing and blood lusting Watson. When he was found the next day, only feet away from the body of Sharon, Jay was still wearing her high school graduation ring, which she had given him during their courtship, on a chain around his neck.

In the half-century since his death, Jay has been remembered primarily as a murder victim; a famous one, thanks to the grisly nature of the crimes and the celebrity connection. But he was so much more than that. He was a revolutionary genius in his industry, a person that changed it so much his hair cutting method is still used today and is considered an industry standard. Sebring International survives today, although had Jay lived it’s hard to know how many salons and products he would have today.

Jay is remembered by those who knew him as a kind, thoughtful man who was unfailingly loyal. His last actions in life were those of being thoughtful and loyal to Sharon Tate, whom he defended until the very last.

Jay Sebring, October 10, 1933 — August 9, 1969 

(source: Hollywood Reporter)

Gary Hinman: The Forgotten Manson Family Victim

Gary Hinman (photo: charlesmanson.com)

On July 25, 1969, Gary Allen Hinman was 34 years old, a UCLA student who was aiming to add a PhD in Sociology to his existing degree in chemistry.  To support himself, he worked at a music shop teaching piano, drums, the trombone and the bagpipes.  He also reportedly sold relatively small amounts of mescaline and/or marijuana for extra money.  

A year earlier, he had become interested in Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism and by the summer of 1969, he was planning a religious pilgrimage to Japan with his parents, who were going to pay for the trip.  A kind and gentle soul, Gary was known to open his Topanga Canyon house to friends and acquaintances in need.  Unfortunately, this generosity would cost him his life.

He had met Bobby Beausoleil and other so-called Manson Family members through the commune scene and counterculture that enveloped Los Angeles in the late Sixties.  An open-minded man who had once played at Carnegie Hall, Gary allowed Bobby (and others) to stay in the basement of his home in 1968.    

Beausoleil was 20 years old when he met and moved in with Gary.  He was a musician and an actor, having appeared in Mondo Hollywood and Kenneth Anger's 1967 film Lucifer Rising, as well as contributing to the movie's soundtrack, which was a condition in order for him to appear in the film.  (He would eventually produce the soundtrack from prison.)   He was living with Gary when he was cast in a supporting role in  the X-rated The Ramrodder, which was filmed at Spahn Ranch in late 1968.  It was Beausoleil's first introduction to Charles Manson and his so-called "Family."   Although he would never become a full-fledged member, he did associate with them and the girls.  

At some point, an invitation to join The Family was reportedly extended to Gary, who, being devoted to Buddhism, declined.  However, he did give Beausoleil and Manson guitar lessons.  

Gary's home at 964 Old Topanga Canyon Road
(photo: cielodrive.com) 

There are conflicting accounts as to what exactly led to Gary's murder.  Some say The Family was given incorrect information that he had recently come into $30,000.  There was also the story that Manson was offended that Gary had refused to join The Family, which would have included turning over all his assets to Manson.  Beausoleil, in a 2018 interview, claimed that he had purchased 1,000 tabs of mescaline from Gary and then turned around and sold the drugs to another person, who complained of the quality.  Beausoleil went to Gary's home on July 25, 1969, looking to get his money back with two girls in tow, Mary Brunner and Susan Atkins.   Mary, a former librarian at the University of 'Wisconsin, was Manson's first follower and mother to his then 15-month old child.  When the baby had been born, it was Gary who had donated formula, baby food, and clothing for his benefit.  Susan, a former stripper and devoted Manson follower, had a nine-month old baby behind at Spahn Ranch.  Both girls were allegedly sent along as Manson felt they could help to encourage Gary to hand over money as it was said that Gary had been intimate with both at times in the past.  

The trio found that Gary did not have the money to refund Beausoleil.  Nor, apparently, did he have any recent financial gains, much less $30,000.  He showed the people he considered friends that he only had $50 in his checking account.   When threats with a gun didn't work, Beausoleil beat the peace-loving Gary, while Mary and Susan apparently looked for anything worth selling in his home.  At some point, Gary either voluntarily signed over title to his two vehicles or did so by force.  

Mary Brunner recalled later that Manson was called at the Ranch and informed that Gary was not forthcoming with any money.  Shortly afterward, Manson, armed with a Samurai sword and fellow Family member Bruce Davis, arrived at Gary's residence and after walking through the front door, without a word, slashed Gary's left ear and down the side of his face.  It bled profusely.  According to Beausoleil, Manson told him he had cut Gary to show Beausoleil "how to be a man."  Manson then left in one of Gary's vehicles, leaving the bleeding and pleading man with Beausoleil, Brunner, and Atkins.  

Over the next 24 hours, Brunner and Atkins stitched up Gary's damaged ear with dental floss while Gary chanted and prayed.  According to Mary Brunner, he told the trio he would forget what had happened and would call his wound just a scratch, so long as they just left.  

Reporting following another phone conversation with Manson, Beausoleil informed Brunner that he was going to kill Gary.  

Beausoleil said that Gary had insisted on receiving medical attention, leaving Beausoleil to realize there was no way out of the situation he had gotten himself into.  

At some point on July 27, 1969, Beausoleil stabbed Gary twice in the chest.    However, Gary lingered for hours with the wounds before Beausoleil, Brunner, and Atkins took turns holding a pillow over Gary's face to speed his death along.  It was Atkins that was holding the pillow when Gary took his last breaths.  Once he had died, they used his blood to write "Political Piggy," along with a cat's paw, on the wall, thinking it would implicate the Black Panthers.  

The three then left the home with the whopping $20 they managed to score from their crime.  They used the money to buy coffee and strawberry cake.    

On Thursday, July 31, authorities received a report of a possible homicide and found the body of Gary Hinman.  He was still clutching his prayer beads in his hand.  

A week later, on August 7, 1969, Beausoleil was found on the 101, between San Luis Obispo and Atascadero, sleeping in Gary's other vehicle, with the murder weapon secreted in the tire well.  He was arrested for the murder and on April 18, 1970 he was found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to death.  His sentence was commuted in 1972 to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole.

Beausoleil under arrest
(photo: thejuicyreport.com)

Over the years, it was speculated that the Tate-LaBianca murders, occurring on the evenings of August 8-9, 1969 and August 10, 1969, were committed in a haphazard attempt to free Beausoleil by showing copycat murders happening while he was in jail on charges for Gary's murder.  

Beausoleil himself would change details regarding the killing of Gary.  In 1981, he would claim that the murder was solely the result of a botched drug transaction, although a drug deal was never brought up during his trial.  He also claimed that he had unknowingly supplied members of the Straight Satans motorcycle gang with a bad batch of drugs and they had demanded their money back from Beausoleil.  In that interview, he denied that Manson had ever come to Gary's home and that it was Beausoleil himself who had cut Gary's face with a knife when the two were struggling over the gun.  

In 1998, Beausoleil reversed course again, saying that it was indeed Manson who had inflicted the facial wounds.  

Before her death in 2009, Susan Atkins said she had never heard mention that the trio went to Gary's home over drugs.  "In hindsight," she said, "the death of Gary is perhaps the hardest thing to understand or make sense of."  

Gary in life 
(screenshots from Helter Skelter: An American Myth)

Bobby Beausoleil remains incarcerated for taking the life of Gary Hinman.  He was recommended for parole on his 19th suitability hearing, in January of 2019, although the governor of California reversed that decision in April that same year.  Today, he claims to regret what he did to Gary Hinman, a man he considered a friend, and says he should have faced the music but "instead, I killed him."     

   

Gary's final resting place in Glenwood Springs, Colorado
(photo: findagrave.com) 

Leslie Van Houten: Appeal Denied

Photo:  ABC News

In better late than never news, and I do mean that, Leslie Van Houten, once known as Lulu when she lived and conspired with the notorious Manson Family, once again lost her chance at parole.  (And when I say "lived and conspired with," I also mean "killed with.")

As you may know, Van Houten was recommended for parole by the California Parole Board last September, a recommendation that was shut down by Governor Jerry Brown in January.  Van Houten and her attorneys then filed a writ of habeas corpus with the Los Angeles County Superior Court seeking an appeal on Brown's refusal.  That petition was responded to last week with a 16 page ruling that stated, among other things, Van Houten "may someday be suitable for parole, when her commitment offense is no longer predictive of current dangerousness, it is not yet that day."  The legal document also called the crimes she participated in "among the most abominable committed in California in the second half of the 20th century" and Judge William C. Ryan noted "Petitioner's crimes terrified a generation and remain imprinted on the public."  Judge Ryan also pointed out that "if any crimes could be considered heinous enough to support a denial of parole based on their circumstances alone years after occurrence, they must certainly be the crimes perpetrated by the Manson Family."

Debra Tate, younger sister of victim Sharon Tate and now the only surviving child of Paul and Doris Tate, was quoted after the ruling as being "very pleased."  Ms. Tate says she believes that Van Houten is "as self-consumed today as she ever was, and that is the premiere marker of a sociopath."

Van Houten was 19 in 1969, when she joined Manson and several of his other Family members on their second night of murderous glee at the home of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca in Los Feliz.  By her own account, she knew that people would die that night and she put a pillowcase over Rosemary LaBianca's head and stabbed the woman some 16 times.  After the couple was slaughtered, she joined Charles "Tex" Watson and Patricia "Katie" Krenwinkel in playing with the LaBiancas' dogs, eating their food, drinking some chocolate milk and helping themselves to Rosemary's clothing.

Over the years, due to being the youngest convicted Manson killer and the argument that she "only" participated in the killing of two people, Van Houten has had more support for her release than other Manson Family members.  However, like Watson and Krenwinkel, Van Houten too has also laid the majority of the blame at the feet of the now-dead Charles Manson.  Last summer during a hearing to present mitigating evidence in Van Houten's favor, former Family member Catherine "Gypsy" Share testified that prior to the murders Van Houten was "extremely docile" and it was her belief that Van Houten would have done anything Manson asked her to.

If you've read my previous posts on Leslie Van Houten and the Manson Family in general, you'll probably guess that I'm okay with this denial.  I will never forget that Vincent Bugliosi, the District Attorney who prosecuted the Manson Family, stated that he believed that Van Houten was the least devoted of Manson's followers.  That's a frightening thought - - the least devoted of all and yet she would still kill for him.  (Unless of course that "kill for him" is utter rubbish and she simply wanted to kill.)  I also can't get out of my mind how Van Houten acted during the trial in 1970.  She giggled and laughed, even while the terrifying and painful last moments of the victims were being detailed, and when asked by her own attorney if she ever thought about Rosemary LaBianca, she said, "Only when I'm in the courtroom."  That coldness is what I believe Rosemary LaBianca saw, not the "extremely docile" person Catherine Share attempted to describe.

I've said this many, many times.  Leslie Van Houten, and all the convicted Manson Family members, were granted far more mercy than they ever showed their victims when the death penalty was declared unconstitutional in California and their death sentences were commuted.  Getting life sentences with the possibility of parole was yet another gift.

Were Leslie Van Houten not linked to Charles Manson and the infamous killings, do I think she'd get parole?  Probably.  But she is linked with Manson.  That will never change.  And the murders were horrifying, brutal and senseless.  Rosemary LaBianca was only 39 years old.  The last thing she heard before being stabbed to death was her husband, screaming in pain and begging for his life, while Tex Watson killed him in the other room.  An hour or so before she was killed, she was crying about the Tate murders the night before -- crying because she couldn't understand how anyone could be so cruel.  I have no sympathy for Leslie Van Houten; I reserve my sympathy for the LaBiancas who did nothing other than be home that night.

Van Houten's attorney, Rich Pfeiffer, refiled the writ with the appellate court.

Van Houten remains incarcerated at the California Institute for Women in Corona.

Rosemary LaBianca

December 15, 1929 - August 10, 1969

She is the victim, not Leslie Van Houten

Book Review: "Hunting Charles Manson: The Quest for Justice in the Days of Helter Skelter" by Lis Wiehl and Caitlin Rother

As Helter Skelter was the first true crime book I ever read, and one that will permanently sit on my list of best true crime books, I have a lifelong interest (sounds better than fascination) in the so-called Manson murders.  No book can truly be held up to Helter Skelter, nor should it.

Hunting Charles Manson is a notable and strong entry of the books on the infamous summer of 1969.  It doesn't cover as much ground as Helter Skelter, which gives us a lot of information on the criminal trial, but it also doesn't have its intimidating (for some) page count.

Hunting Charles Manson starts with background information on Manson himself, giving the reader an exploration of his home life, mindset and how he started down the road that would lead him to the Haight-Ashbury and the birth of "The Family."  I found the sections of the inception of The Family particularly interesting; the result is beneficial insight into why he managed to attract so many females to his coterie who remained loyal to him for years.

Many of his Family members are also given page time.  Rather than being portrayed as merely Manson's bloodthirsty minions, the authors demonstrate they were real people with real lives before becoming part of Manson's contingent.  It will make you think about what might have happened had they never met up with him; was the Family was little more than a drug-addled cult?  The authors' descriptions of daily life on Spahn Ranch are extremely well done.  I could visualize the hot dust blowing on the old movie sets and Family members grouped around, listening to Manson playing guitar.  It brings on a wistfulness -- even sadness -- that this communal living, instead of bringing love and peace, spawned violence and death.

The murders themselves are each recounted.  The details, if you are sensitive, can be agonizing to read and envision.  Gary Hinman, Steven Parent, and Donald "Shorty" Shea are often given the short-shrift of the verified Manson victims; Parent is the forgotten victim of the Tate-LaBianca crimes while Hinman and Shea are very nearly forgotten as victims at all.  More details are provided on Hinman and Shea as people versus just murder victims; it makes their loss, and the violent actions of Manson and the Family, all the more poignant and effective.  Thanks to this book being recent and published after Shea's body was discovered, a long-held legend within the Family that Shea had been "chopped up" into pieces and scattered in multiple graves can be discounted as well as providing a solid account as to Shea's final movements and day of life and who was involved in killing him.

The convicted killers' convoluted and tangled web through the legal system is also explored and this is one of two points in the book that I didn't agree with.  Sections on Charles "Tex" Watson, the man involved in every murder save Gary Hinman and the self-professed "right hand man" of Charles Manson, read almost sympathetically.  Even if you do believe that Watson is paying his debt to society and has become a born-again Christian, I cannot forget that he brutally stabbed to death Sharon Tate, who begged for the life of her unborn child, and then went on to marry and father four children while incarcerated.  I find that particular irony distasteful and revolting.  While Watson may have taken so many illegal drugs as to hinder his thinking, it didn't affect his ability to torture and kill and I simply cannot grant any sympathy to him; only to his victims.

The other point in the book that I didn't agree with - - and this is more my opinion than anything else -- is a motive for the Tate murders put forward in Hunting Charles Manson.  I've heard of the motive previously and this book does an excellent job in breaking it down and presenting it.  The problem I have with it is that it doesn't explain how and why Steven Parent became a victim, if you believe that Parent was the first person on Cielo Drive to die that night.  (And there has never been evidence to suggest otherwise.)  But again, that's simply my opinion and motive is something we may likely never get a firm answer on, especially now that Manson is dead.

Hunting Charles Manson does something that many books in the Manson library have not been able to do and that's provide a fresh look on crimes that have been written about, debated and dissected for nearly fifty years.    I appreciated the view inside Manson's life for the last ten or so years of it -- something rarely written about.  I also like that Ms. Wiehl and Ms. Rother showed the determination and strength of Debra Tate, Anthony DiMaria and Kay Martley as they attend and have attended parole hearings for years, speaking not so much of the ugliness their loved one experienced at the hand of Manson, et al. but of the precious memories they have of the precious people that were.

Hunting Charles Manson is an excellent resource for exploring the psyche of Manson in our quest to answer why.  Why did he turn out the way he did?  Why did he want strangers butchered?  Why does he continue to fascinate today?

I have been a fan of Caitlin Rother's books for years and made it a point to get this book solely based on her as an author.  As with her previous books, Ms. Rother presents the story and attempts to get into the mind of madness and answer the questions that puzzle those of us who have been fortunate enough to remain distant from the crime.  She is always respectful of the victims and their survivors, not glorifying the violence or the offender, and that is one reason I am a fan.  She's also a darn good writer.  For more information on Caitlin Rother and her books, go here.

I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Hunting Charles Manson for true crime buffs or readers looking for information on Manson and his crimes.  The fact the book features information from as recent as early 2018 is a bonus.

Hunting Charles Manson is available for purchase at major booksellers.

FTC Disclosure:  The review copy of this book was provided to me by NetGalley in exchange for a fair and honest review.  The provision of this book did not affect the outcome of my review.  I was neither paid nor compensated for this review.  

Leslie Van Houten: Denied!

In a stunning case of good sense and forethought, California Governor Jerry Brown has gone against the recommendations of the parole board and denied Manson Family killer Leslie Van Houten parole.

Last September, a California Board of Parole panel found her "suitable" for release but Brown, on January 19, denied her that privilege, believing that she should remain incarcerated due to the "aggravated nature of the crime" and Van Houten's reluctance to wholly take responsibility.

This is who counts - Leno and Rosemary

I absolutely agree with Governor Brown's decision.  As he said, "The devastation and loss experienced by the LaBianca family and all the victims' families continues today."  What Van Houten did - - regardless of her age - - cannot be righted. Ever.  I have read where people say that she was young, she made a mistake . . . she was nineteen or twenty at the time.  Old enough. Making a mistake is dropping out of school or quitting a job or settling for a poor boyfriend.  Not stabbing a woman in the back with a knife, to the hilt.

What I find interesting is that while some want to give Leslie Van Houten mercy, claiming her age at the time or her small victim count compared to the other killers, they were never merciful toward Charles Manson, who didn't put a knife in any of the victims.  Yes, he at the very least suggested his merry little band of murderers where to go and what to do and he did initially tie up Rosemary and Leno LaBianca but he did less in action than Van Houten did.  So why the push to grant her parole?

A joyful Leslie (right) during the trial

I've said this in other posts and I'll say it again.  Leslie Van Houten was considered the least devoted of Manson's minions.  The least.  Let that sink in.  Yet she still willingly and happily accompanied the group that night back in 1969, knowing full well what their bloody mission would be, and partook in the violence.  She had zero sympathy for Rosemary LaBianca, fighting for her life, as she helped to put a pillowcase over her head and a lamp cord around her neck and then took a knife to her. She had zero sympathy for her, or any other victim, when she sang and giggled in court.

Leslie Van Houten wasn't a child, she was a legal adult.  I don't care what kind of drugs you are doing, or what kind of alcohol you are drinking, or if your mother forced you to get an abortion or your parents were mean or you weren't popular in school or whatever else.  It's no excuse for murder. None.   And blaming Manson, at least in part, seems to be the modus operandi for those left, as both Patricia Krenwinkel and Tex Watson have done the same.

Governor Brown previously denied Van Houten parole in 2016.

Does the Death of Manson End the Family Mystique?

The news that Charles Manson had died of natural causes (unlike the victims who died due to his orders/influence/crazy) on Sunday has put his infamy back on the front page and dredged up the summer of 1969. 

From this . . . 

I have to admit that while news of Manson's passing isn't wholly surprising (he was 83 and in failing health, after all) there was still a part of me that figured Manson would outlive everyone else involved in this horrible case.  I'm happy to be wrong here.

Manson, whether alive or dead, seems to generate more vitriol and hatred than any other Family member.  Understandable, to a degree, since he was the "face" of the Family and certainly the one who garnered the most press attention, both during and after the trial.  Does that hatred now transfer to the still living killers?  It should. 

Tex Watson should be hated just as much as Manson.  He personally shot Steven Parent to death; he personally shot and stabbed Jay Sebring and Voytek Frykowski to death; he stabbed an already dead or dying Abigail Folger; he personally stabbed to death Leno LaBianca; he at the least held Rosemary LaBianca, and more likely stabbed her.  He admitted to cutting Sharon Tate's face before she was slaughtered; who personally stabbed her to death has been under debate for decades.

. . . to this. 

Bobby Beausoleil personally stabbed Gary Hinman to death, after Gary begged him not to.

Bruce Davis was present when Gary Hinman's ear was sliced off by Manson.  He was also present when Donald "Shorty" Shea was killed, as well as when Family member John Philip Haught committed suicide (or should I say "committed suicide" since Haught was playing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded handgun.) 

Patricia Krenwinkel was present at both the Tate-Polanski residence and the LaBianca residence on both nights of murder.  She personally stabbed Abigail Folger in the residence and, wielding an upraised knife, ran after Abigail when the poor woman made a break for it, out the back door.  She caught Abigail on the lawn and continued to stab her.  She stabbed Leno LaBianca after Watson had killed him and left a carving fork and knife in his body.  She stabbed Rosemary LaBianca and helped to hold the woman down.  She wrote in blood at the LaBianca residence.

Leslie Van Houten was not present for the Tate murders but she was for LaBianca, and she knew full well what was going to happen. She personally stabbed Rosemary LaBianca, possibly administering the death blows. She also aided and abetted in the murder of Leno LaBianca and, with Watson and Krenwinkel, ate the LaBiancas' food, showered in their bathroom and played with their dogs after butchering the couple.  

With old Charlie's death, that's two Manson Family killers who have died where they belong - - in prison.  (If you're not sure, the other is Susan Atkins -  she who told Sharon Tate "Bitch, I have no mercy for you," and who actually tasted Sharon's blood, who died in 2009.  Nope, I didn't cry for Susan then and I'm not now.) 

Manson's death ends an era in a way that the deaths (and eventual deaths) of his followers (convicted or not) has not and will not.  While California taxpayers should be rejoicing that they no longer have to support Manson's sorry ass, they do still have to contend with Watson, Krenwinkel, Beausoleil and Davis.  Van Houten has once again been granted parole by the Parole Board; it's a wait and see game, once again, with Jerry Brown.  But that's another story.

Does the story of "Helter Skelter" die with Manson?  Will interest in the crimes and the remaining Family fade away?  I think not.  The brutality the laughing killers used on their victims, as well as the celebrity factor (Sharon Tate being an actress and the wife of Roman Polanski; Jay Sebring being a hair stylist to the stars; Abigail Folger being heiress to the Folger Coffee empire) and the sad/gory fact that Sharon Tate was heavily pregnant at the time she was killed will keep the murders in the forefront of true crime.  It may be harder to comprehend today, where such violence isn't as shocking, sadly, but the Tate-LaBianca murders truly were the crimes of the century.  Before August 9, 1969, even in Los Angeles, people did leave their doors unlocked. Inviting strangers, or friends of friends of friends, into your home wasn't crazy.  After that weekend in Los Angeles, things changed.

What do you think?  Does the story of "Helter Skelter" die with Manson?  Will the case finally gather dust on the crime books?

Should Leslie Van Houten Be Granted Parole?

Van Houten in 1970

Vincent Bugliosi predicted this, although he believed it would happen many years ago.  He did think that the Manson "girls" would be granted parole, paving the way for Tex Watson, Bruce Davis, Bobby Beausoleil and eventually Manson himself.   So this shouldn't be all that surprising.

The Manson "girls" aren't girls any longer.  Only two remain - - Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houten - - and both are in their sixties.  (The third, Susan Atkins, died where she should have - - still incarcerated and a guest of the State of California.)

Van Houten had her twenty-first parole appearance and the Board recommended that parole be granted.

This makes me angry.  I'm a resident of California and I don't want to see Leslie Van Houten (or any of the Merry Manson Band of Murderers) at my grocery store or in my neighborhood.   I know that some have said that she is the least culpable in the group of killers but killing is killing in my book.  She can whine all she wants about how Rosemary LaBianca was already dead when Leslie took a knife repeatedly to her back and it makes little difference to me.  Leslie held her down, Leslie aided and abetted Watson and Krenwinkle at the very least.  At most, she stabbed a woman who was still alive at the time.  Coroner Thomas Noguchi said that a number of Mrs. LaBianca's wounds were antemortem, meaning they occurred before death.  There is no way to say which wounds Van Houten delivered and which were delivered at the hands of Krenwinkle and/or Watson so I think it's best to err on the side of caution and assume that Mrs. LaBianca was still breathing when Van Houten attacked her.

Van Houten today

This is a woman who laughed and joked during the criminal trial, when witnesses were talking about the brutalization of the victims, their pleas for mercy and when her own life was on the line (she and her co-defendants received the death penalty.)    She admitted she felt no remorse for the victims' deaths, their pain or their loved ones' pain.  She admitted she only thought about Rosemary LaBianca while in the courtroom.  Within her first few years of incarceration, she was found to have a woman's prison guard uniform in her cell.  Until last month, she never admitted responsibility for her actions nor any remorse.  She blamed her actions on Charles Manson, on drugs, on her parents' divorce and on an abortion she had as a teenager.

To the finger pointing, I say this - - bitch, please.  We all deal with various shit in our lives.  Some of us have more to deal with than others.  Some of us handle that shit better than others.  None of it - - no matter how much or on what level - - justifies breaking into someone's house and slaughtering them.

I don't buy Van Houten's remorse.  I think she's a sociopath and this is just a calculated act in order to leave prison in something other than a pine box.

Something else about Van Houten scares me and that's this.  Bugliosi said himself that she was the least devoted of Manson's followers (and he should know.)  Think about that.  She was the least devoted out of this ragtag group and she was willing to kill strangers on his orders?  That's frightening.  What would she have done if she was utterly devoted to him?

If you don't believe that Manson ordered those murders, that would mean that Van Houten simply thrilled in killing.  Or maybe it's both.

Her attorney claims that this "violent act" was the only one of her life.  Not only would I hope so but isn't it enough?  Her "act" resulted in the violent and horrific deaths of two people that can never again live.  She has been given more compassion and mercy than the victims were.  They begged for their lives and were met with laughter, insults and the business end of a knife.  She and the others have been given the gift of parole hearings, of education, of families and of life.  Now she wants to beg and plead?  I say let's respond to her pleas with the same denial she gave her victims.  No business end of a knife but with a resounding "no."

While it's true that no amount of punishment will ever bring back the persons that were killed, punishment is punishment, justice is justice and life should mean life.

If she is granted parole, how long before Patricia Krenwinkle follows suit?  If Krenwinkle is granted parole, the clock will be ticking on the men.

Rosemary and Leno LaBianca

None of these people should get parole.  None of them.  I hope that Governor Jerry Brown is listening to the people and thinking about justice, the victims, the victims' families and what is right.

Sharon Tate's sister Debra started a petition to keep Van Houten in prison.   Add your name as a supporter here.

Let me know what you think.  Has Leslie Van Houten served her time?  Should she be paroled?  If so, why?  If you think she should remain in prison, give me your thoughts on that.

Linda Kasabian's Story Sounds Like B.S.

The History Channel aired a little docudrama about the Tate-LaBianca murders back in 2009, to mark the fortieth "anniversary" of the deaths, and they were kind enough to replay it this past weekend.  I think I may have seen it when it originally aired but if so, it either didn't make enough of an impression on me to warrant comment or I didn't fully watch.  In any event, I watched yesterday and what I saw made me angry.


The docudrama was told as Linda Kasabian saw it, with dramatic reenactments interspersed with interviews of Kasabian who was supposedly hidden with a bad wig, sunglasses (in some shots) and sketchy lighting.  I have to say that if this was how to keep her hidden I sure wouldn't want to go into witness protection with the History Channel covering my back.   I could pick Kasabian out in the dead of night, with one eye shut, in a swamp covered in mud on a foggy day.  Sheesh.


Anyhow, this was promoted back in 2009 as the first time she spoke publicly in forty years about what happened - - or in other words, since she testified at the trial that put Charles Manson and his merry band of murderers in prison.  If you aren't up on your Manson facts, Kasabian was given immunity in order to testify as she did not actually kill anyone that night and prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi stressed that she was just a little hippie girl that wasn't cut from the same cloth as Manson and his followers.


What struck me right away (besides the bad wig) was that when recounting meeting "the Family" and Manson for the first time, Kasabian looked wistful, as if she were remembering a loved one who had passed on or recollecting a fun, joyous time in her life.  I have no doubt that she bought lock, stock and barrel into the commune style living and the free love-share everything philosophy that the Family espoused.  To each his own.  I do think that the reenactment of Spahn Ranch was much cleaner than the reality likely was and the actors cast were much more attractive and prettier than their real life counterparts would have been. 


I found it unsettling that Kasabian recalls her first meeting with Tex Watson in such dreamy, awe-inspired tones, as if she was a lovesick teen.  Watson's sex appeal was off the charts, per Linda, and the attraction so instant that the two were having sex within hours of her arrival at the Ranch.  Tex Watson, in case you need a refresher, was Manson's main hit man on the nights of August 9 and 10, 1969 and personally stabbed to death a pregnant woman.  Yep, you can see why he would be so attractive.   So here I'm thinking that not only is Linda's judgment on where to live a bit sketchy but also who she finds attractive.


So her story about the murder nights is essentially the same as what she told Bugliosi with the notable exception that she is now claiming that she climbed into Steven Parent's car after the oh-so-sexy Tex Watson shot him four times in order to take the wallet from the dead teenager's body.  Hmmmmm.  She didn't kill him but her hands aren't exactly as clean as Bugliosi would like us to believe.  Unless of course she is lying.  More on that.


Linda continues to maintain that she was sent around the back of the house to look for open doors or windows and returned to Tex and lied, despite the nursery window being open and without a screen and then remained outside while Watson, Krenwinkle and Atkins went inside to do away with Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger and Voytek Frykowski.  She claims she remained outside, giving Atkins her knife when Susan ran outside asking for it and then telling her to listen for sounds, and came face to face with Frykowski when he stumbled outside after being attacked, desperate for a means of escape.  She sobbed and cried about how she looked into his eyes . . . and then did nothing, watching him stumble off before Watson (again) caught up him and slaughtered him on the lawn.  That Watson, he sure is a catch.


She claims she wanted the killings to stop but she did nothing to stop them.  Did she run screaming from the property?  Nope.  Did she jump in the killers' car, to which she had the keys, and peel the hell out of there?  Nope.  She waited in or by the car and when the trio returned, exuberant over their fresh kills, she collected the bloody knives and clothing and tossed them out the window. 


Let's break this down.


She said she thought the group was going on another "creepy crawlie," wherein they would dress in black, break into homes and rearrange furnishings in order to freak the occupants out when they awoke.  So why would the group need rope, a gun and knives?  Why would Watson need to cut the phone lines at Cielo?   


I can buy that she was in a state of shock during and after the murders.  Her daughter was back at the Ranch and even if she had taken off from the Cielo property, if Watson, et. al. had gotten to a phone before she could get back to reclaim her daughter, who knows what could have happened.  She couldn't very well show up at the Ranch without her cohorts. 


She certainly knew the next night when she was instructed to put on black clothing and grab a knife what was going down.  She didn't enter the LaBianca home or property but claims that she thwarted another planned attack on an actor she had met.  She, Atkins and Grogan were instructed by Manson to drive to Venice Beach, gain entry to this man's apartment and kill him.   Linda claims that she intentionally knocked on the wrong door so that said man wouldn't be killed.  Okay, but what about the poor person who opened the wrong door?  How did she know they wouldn't kill him or her?


Linda sees her chance for escape - - too late to save Sharon Tate, her unborn child, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, Voytek Frykowski, Steven Parent, Rosemary LaBianca or Leno LaBianca - - when she is asked to visit Bobby Beausoleil in jail in L.A.  She says she is unable to get to her daughter so leaves without her.  Okay, a girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do.  But does she drive directly to the LAPD and tell them she can solve the Tate-LaBianca homicides?  Nope.  She goes to New Mexico and into hiding.


What mother does this?  She says that she "knew" the Family wouldn't harm her daughter but she also told Bugliosi that Manson had said that at some point in the future they may have to kill children as well.  Knowing absolutely that the Family had butchered a pregnant woman, I certainly wouldn't be betting my child's life on anything they had to say. 


A few more things come to mind as well.  Linda was supposedly brought along on the two nights of murder because she was the only member of the Family with a valid driver's license.  However, Linda did not drive on either night.  So what difference did having the license make?  So why was she brought along?  She had only been with the Family for a month.  Some have speculated that Manson chose those Family members that were most expendable to him to send on his murderous mission but I don't think so.  Patricia Krenwinkel was said to be Manson's female equivalent - - utterly devout.  Leslie Van Houten and Susan Atkins were also reported to be fully in with the Family and its beliefs, including murder.  Only Tex Watson was said to be independent in any way but he followed Manson's orders like a good soldier.  It doesn't wash for me suggesting that any of these people were expendable.  I think Manson sent those followers he knew were the most antisocial, the angriest, the most fucked up who would slaughter strangers for shits and giggles.  So what does that say about Linda Kasabian?


She claims she didn't hurt anyone.  She says that Tex ordered her to stay outside . . . but why?  They didn't know how many people were inside.  Does it make sense that Tex would enter the house with just two women to commit those murders?  (Granted, they were armed with a gun, bayonet and knives.)  Did they truly need a look out (a job which Linda failed at pretty miserably) or was Tex making sure that his little sweetie wouldn't go down for murder? 


Linda Kasabian, in my mind, proved herself to be a shitty mother.  She joined the Family, where her daughter was promptly taken away from her.  Manson believed that parents ruined their own children and therefore shouldn't be allowed to raise them.  Linda should have run right then but she stayed and handed her daughter over to be grouped with the other children, in a separate building, taken care of by other Family members.  When she fled after the Tate-LaBianca murders without her daughter, she didn't get herself to the nearest law enforcement officer or building; she fled to freaking New Mexico.  Where she hid without her daughter, who she would get back only after the raid at Spahn and all the children were taken into protective services.  Still at that time, Linda said nothing.  Only after Susan Atkins began spilling the beans while in jail and an arrest warrant was issued for Kasabian did Linda start talking.


Had Linda come forward immediately, the murder of Donald "Shorty" Shea wouldn't have happened.     It's also possible the deaths of John Philip Haught (known as "Zero" within the Family and who was found dead from playing Russian roulette with a fully loaded pistol), and Joel Pugh (husband of Family member Sandra Goode) could have been prevented. 


I'm not sure I buy Bugliosi's suggestion that Linda was just a little hippie girl.  She had committed criminal activities prior to joining up with Manson and happily stole $5,000 from her husband's friend after Tex Watson suggested it to her on the day they met.  She clearly had no problem with the theft, as she had no problem doing the "creepy crawlies" with the Family.  She admitted in 2009 that she searched a dead teenager's body for a wallet.  How do we know she didn't do more than that?   

A New Book on Sharon Tate

I hate to say that I'm a Tate-LaBianca or Helter Skelter junkie but I've read Vincent Bugliosi's book many times, as well as various other books and articles on the case.  Eventually I became a fan of Sharon Tate's - - her sister Debra's book  (Sharon Tate: Recollection) is a gorgeous collection of photos and remembrances.

When I heard that Ed Sanders, author of The Family, was releasing a new book, and on Sharon Tate, I was excited and decided that I most definitely needed to read the book.  That excitement quickly fizzled out when I read excerpts through The Daily Mail.

Among other things claimed, Sanders writes in Sharon Tate: A Life that Sharon participated in threesomes with her husband, Roman Polanski; that she participated in orgies with other famous Hollywood folk that was captured on video; that Polanski showed these videos to his friends; that Sharon was initiated into witchcraft in 1965 following filming of Eye of the Devil and pictures of her inside a consecrated magic circle were taken.   There are also quite a few allegations that in an effort to hold on to Polanski, Sharon got caught up his drug-fueled and sexual decadence, that Polanski wanted Sharon to have an abortion and when she refused, he refused to have sex with her and began an affair with her friend Michelle Phillips, and that during that last summer of her life, Polanski was dismissive of Sharon, calling her a "dumb hag." 

I'll start with the Polanski allegations first.  I think it's fairly well known that Polanski had no desire for children; I believe he admitted that himself in his autobiography.   It's also well known that he was less than faithful to Sharon during their courtship and marriage and despite what may have been said immediately following the murders, Sharon was well aware and it was a source of unhappiness for her.  She was considering leaving Polanski and the marriage after her baby was born (sadly, she did not get that chance.)

As far as the drugs go, Sharon was no saint.  She had experimented with drugs before meeting Roman so I'm not sure it's fair to claim that he got her into that lifestyle.  He told the LAPD (and may have mentioned in his book) that the first time he dropped acid, he had done so with Sharon and it was her fifteenth or sixteenth trip.  She also appeared to be a recreational marijuana smoker before she met the director so I'll take the drug related stories with a relatively small grain of salt, at least.

After the murders, when the LAPD was searching the residence on Cielo for evidence, they found a tape of Sharon and Roman having sex.  If there were other videotapes on the property, as Sanders alleges, don't you think the LAPD would have booked them into evidence?  It's not like anyone would have had time to search the property and get rid of them - - the home was locked down once the bodies were discovered.  If the tapes existed, the other parties on the film would have a possible motive for murder.  Because of this, I don't think these videos ever existed . . . just another rumor out of many in this case.

The allegation that Sharon was participating in orgies goes against what everyone has said about her since 1969.  She was said to be sweet, almost naïve, and a homebody at heart who only wanted a home, husband and baby.  If Sharon did indeed participate in these acts, where were these people in 1969 or 1970? 

The witchcraft initiation rumor - -and it's just that, a rumor - - has been around for years.  There is no proof or substance to it.  Again, if there were indeed pictures of Sharon being initiated, where are they?  Surely in this age of eBay and internet, they would have surfaced by now. 

Sanders also got the facts glaringly wrong.  He claims that Terry Melcher was the owner of the house at 10050 Cielo Drive but the owner was actually Rudy Altobelli.  Melcher was the tenant at the house prior to the Polanskis moving in.  It may not seem that large of a mistake but it certainly makes you call Sanders' other so-called facts into question.

Perhaps most amazingly is that Sanders claims that Manson was paid $25,000 by a Satanic group to off Sharon because of something relative to the Robert Kennedy assassination she overheard.  This is so ridiculous it's almost not worthy of comment.  But let's address it anyhow, for argument's sake.  $25,000 was a large bit of money in 1969 (and would equate to over $650,000 today.)  If Manson had collected that sum, where was it?  Did he have some secret bank account that Bugliosi never found?  And if Manson was paid to knock off Sharon Tate, why would he send a vagabond band of killers to her home, with others present, and with such unwieldy weapons as a bayonet and 40 plus feet of rope?  Why would they commit such overkill?  Why butcher Rosemary and Leno LaBianca the next night?  None of it makes sense.   Never mind that Sharon supposedly knew something about the RFK assassination that was kill worthy.  If she knew something, don't you think she would have told Roman Polanski?  And wouldn't he have mentioned it to the LAPD when they were attempting to find a motive? 

Despite how good The Family was, Sanders failed miserably on this one.  Who was his source, Manson?  I think Sanders was trying to find the most salacious and juicy gossip in order to sell his book.  Shame on him - - just another person who has no difficulty in murdering Sharon's memory.

The Daily Mail article - - big grain of salt, folks - - can be found here.

The MacDonald Case: The Tate/LaBianca/Manson Connection

If you believe Jeffrey MacDonald's account of what happened that night of February 16-17, 1970, the crimes had a direct correlation to the so-called Manson Family murders that happened in Los Angeles in August of 1969.  MacDonald alleges that a band of drug-crazed hippies invaded his home and while on an acid trip, slaughtered his family and left him barely alive.

Let's look at the connections between the two crimes.

Both the Tate-Polanski and LaBianca residences were home invasions, with the killers entering the homes uninvited in the very early morning hours.

Per MacDonald's story, his home was entered by a group of hippies in the wee hours of the morning.

Victim Sharon Tate was pregnant.

Victim Colette MacDonald was pregnant.

The Tate and LaBianca victims were stabbed multiple times.

The MacDonald family victims were stabbed multiple times. 

The word "Pig" was written in Sharon Tate's blood at the crime scene.

The word "Pig" was written in Colette MacDonald's blood at the crime scene.

On the surface it seems there is a lot connecting the two cases.  However, looking at the differences shows there are more of those than similarities.

Both Colette MacDonald and Kimberley MacDonald were bludgeoned with a club.  Other than two victims being hit with the butt of a gun, no Tate-LaBianca victims were bludgeoned.

Three of the Tate victims suffered gunshot wounds. None of the MacDonald victims had gunshot wounds.

Rope was placed around the necks of two, possibly three, of the Tate victims to either restrain them and/or hang them.  No rope was used or found at the MacDonald scene.

The Tate-LaBianca killers brought their murder weapons with them to each crime scene.  The MacDonald killers came empty handed and used weapons found at the residence.

The Tate and LaBianca victims were allowed to fall where they may.  No effort was made to return them to any particular room or "pose" them in any fashion.  Kimberley MacDonald was initially struck in the master bedroom and carried back to her own room, placed into her bed with her favorite blanket, and the covers pulled up to her neck before she was struck again and stabbed.  Colette MacDonald was bludgeoned in Kristen's room and then carried to the master bedroom in a bedsheet, where she was deposited on the floor before being killed by further blows and stabs.

The LaBianca victims were restrained with leather thongs and the cord from a lamp.  The MacDonald victims were not restrained.

At both the Tate and the LaBianca scenes, the male victims were restrained first and attacked first.  Makes sense as the men would be the larger threat to the killers.  At the MacDonald scene, MacDonald reported that his wife and children were attacked first and he was attacked last, despite being a far greater threat than a pregnant woman and two little girls.

No children were present or killed (save the unborn son Sharon Tate carried) at either the Tate or LaBianca crime scene.  Two little girls were found slaughtered at the MacDonald crime scene.

The Tate crime scene was not contained - - victims ran through the house and into the yard to escape their killers.  Two bodies were found on the yard and one body was found in a car.   The MacDonald crime scene appeared more methodical.  Each child was found in her own bedroom and Colette MacDonald was found in the master bedroom.  The bloodshed appeared to have been contained in the three bedrooms.

The Tate property was isolated, with the canyons able to play tricks on hearing.  The location was chosen in part due to its isolation, allowing the killers to murder their victims without threat of discovery.  The LaBianca residence had a fairly long driveway set off the road.  The MacDonalds' upstairs neighbors reported they could hear when the tv or stereo was on, or when MacDonald and his wife had loud discussions.  It seems inconceivable that four drug-impaired hippies could have massacred the family and attacked MacDonald, a Green Beret, without them hearing. 

The phone lines at the Tate residence were cut, isolating the victims.  The phones were not touched at the MacDonald residence.

The Tate killers discarded their bloody clothing and the murder weapons off an embankment en route from the Cielo Drive address back to the Spahn Ranch location.  The MacDonald killers supposedly discarded the murder weapons outside the back door of the MacDonald residence under a bush. 

Upon discovery of the Tate victims the following morning, housekeeper Winifred Chapman ran screaming for help to the closest neighbor.  Upon regaining consciousness from his wounds, MacDonald stated he did not go to the neighbors for help because he "didn't know them that well." 

No victims were left alive at the Tate or LaBianca scene.  In fact, all the victims were horribly overkilled.  Jeffrey MacDonald was left alive at the MacDonald scene and his wounds were entirely inconsistent with those suffered by his family.

A March 1970 issue of Esquire magazine was found at the MacDonald residence after the crimes, with a cover story on the Tate-LaBianca murders.  Many facts reported in the article were incorrect, including the word "Pig" being written on the headboard of Sharon Tate's bed and that acid had something to do with the crimes.  The word "Pig" was written in blood on the headboard above where Colette MacDonald slept and MacDonald reported that the female intruder stated that "Acid is groovy." 

Tate killer Susan Atkins spilled the beans to a cellmate while incarcerated for another crime, implicating herself and the other Manson Family members.  All of her information checked out, leading to the arrests and convictions.  Drug addict and police informant Helena Stoeckley claimed to have possibly been present at the MacDonald scene, recanted that "confession", stated again to have been there and then recanted again.  One of the persons she claims to have participated in the murders was proven to have been in jail that night.  Her story has never checked out.

Hmmmm . . . what do you think, dear reader?