Autopsy of Abigail Folger

Same here. Blondie - first pregnancy third tri was in the summer - you couldn't get me away from the beach - I could dig a cool hole in the sand and be comfortable for a little while.

I wish I knew what the conversation was between Jay and Sharon that night - they were so engrossed in one other's company they did notice a skank moving around the hallway in black clothes. Looking at pictures of the bedroom it was kind of small.

Was it this skank?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8YSXSB8bOk

:rofl: Good one creepycrawler!!!!!!!!!!

I missed the Blondie name, Courtney! :cats2: I'm with you, I wish I knew what they were so engrossed in, too. I wish there were more pictures of the hallway, the doorway and the way the bed was in relation to the door, because I don't see how S & J didn't see SA peeking in. When I think of the different ways they could of been laying/sitting on the bed, I can't figure out how one of them didn't see her. When I heard about the Michelle Phillips "scandal", I wondered if that's what Sharon and Jay were so engrossed in talking about since according to reports, she was in a funk. I want to go to David Oman's house and talk to the ghosts about what they were talking about that night. :cats3: Maybe we could get some answers if he would let some of us in who know how to question Jay and Sharon's and maybe George Reeves' spirits and find out the real story behind everything. :flush:

Blondie

BB, there ar ephotos in the "HS" book that show how the bed was positioned. There was also a TV show about a year or so ago that supposedly recreated waht Susan saw when she looked in the room and my friend who was watching it with me said, "If that's how they were really positioned on the bed, there's no way I'm buying the 'just friends' scenario!!" It did look a bit, uh, cozy. Sharon could've seen the door if she was looking, but Jay had his back to it.

I also want to know what they were talking about (I don't buy that idiotic recreation of their 'alleged' conversations in the "HS" remake....puh-lease!! :thinkn: ) plus Susan said they were holding hands so I'd like an explanantion of that too!!

Jeez--excuse the typos, i need to stop typing in such a hurry, I transpose letters when i do that.... :woops:

:jawdrop: The holding hands is a new one on me!!! See, you learn something new on here everyday!!! I must of missed that show, I wonder if it might perhaps be on YouTube? Happen to know the name of it, perchance?

i don't remember where I heard that....I'll ask my friend which show had the recreation of the way they were posed on the bed. I remember "Sharon" was lying on her back and "Jay" was sitting right beside her--almost leaning over her....it was pretty chummy!!

remember this is coming from susan atkins a known liar.

The problem about this for me is that it is all based on what Susan says she saw. Susan has contradicted herself a lot in testimony and whereas I tend to think much of what she has said - particularly in her second, unfinished book - is probably fairly accurate, it's not possible to know which bits are and which aren't.

So for me to accept this cosy interpretation of Susan and Jay sitting holding hands asks too much of me, when the only source is a woman whom we know to be unreliable. This is in fact the problem with much of the anecdotal evidence surrounding the case. 40 years of repetition has given things like this (and Joel's murder by Bruce Davis) credibility, but - as in family history, which I am deeply involved in, if the original 'fact' is erroneous, no amount of repetition will somehow make it true.

Family History at least allows you to go back and check records, and although the information may have been incorrectly recorded at least you do have a source. That is why in this case the trial testimony and police reports are so crucial, and so much more reliable than anecdotal memories of neighbours and film stars, or stories in the press and other media, most of which repeat each other with no concerns about checking the 'truth', such as it might be.

So, with respect, I dissent from the usefulness of this line of investigation. We're unlikely to ever be sure that this scenario is a true one, and we're certainly never going to know 'what they were talking about', so we can only speculate. I'm not much into speculation, especially on a site like this which has embodied the word 'truth' in its title.

Peace

Jem

Jem, I totally agree. I wasn't trying to give the implication that this was the truth, it just came up in the conversation so....I wish we could know what was being said. Even IF Susan did hear them, I wouldn't believe her. Plus, I'm sure that if she did hear them, she probably couldn't make out what was being said. So, no problem, I totally understand what you're saying and I agree. :toast:

As per the autopsy report, post #1, the 3rd page it has listed the following:

21 Documented stab wounds and then in another column..... Undocumented stab wounds and then lists 7 of them. Later in the report, there is some explanation about the 7 undocumented stab wounds.

What is the difference between Documented and Undocumented stab wounds? What would be the purpose of documenting the "Undocumented" stab wounds? If the undocumented stab wounds are documented, why are the 7 wounds not included in the final summary or listing?

Hey - just re-reading this thread and looked up the pages that deal with the day of the killings and Bugliosi makes it clear that they did in fact eat there. Am I misreading or misinterpreting something?

perhaps the waitress who swore that Sharon and friends were at the cafe was thinking of an earlier day but mixed it up with the day of the murders?

Right, but my point was that in Helter Skelter Bugliosi didn't appear to be skeptical at all about their dining at El Coyote.

Thats how I read it too. I am not sure where BB read that in HS. Maybe she will see this and let us know CT

I read the book in 1975, and everytime I go to the library to check out HS, its always checked out. Seems that our library system, as huge as it is, only has like 2 or 3 copies in all the libraries and they seem to always be checked out, so I can't always check on stuff. I do remember reading that about Bugliosi saying that there was a rumor that Sharon, Voy, Abigail, and Jay ate at El Coyote, but that it was a false story. He seemed adamant, at least that's the way I took it. Sorry I can't be anymore clear on that, its just from my memory of reading it that many years ago. I would love to read again with a much more mature mind, since I was in high school when I read it, and perhaps I will see things in a different light. My dad had a copy of HS, but when I went to his house to get it a few months ago, I couldn't find it, and when I asked him where it was, do you know what he told me??? HE THREW IT AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :jawdrop: hthedrama: Oy vey!!!

It's in the first homicide report. They had a reservation at El Coyote for 4. The assistant manager saw the reservation in the book. The waitress working that night couldn't identify them when shown photos. I tried to copy and paste that part of the report here but it didn't work.

I don't think its unbelievable. For Sharon to go to Sheila Welle's house she would have had to get dressed up and be there for a while. To go with Jay, Gibby and Voytek to El Coyote - she wouldn't have had to get too dressed up and she wouldn't have been there all night. If Debra Tate had come over to Sharon's house that night she would have been there for the night, she felt comfortable with Jay and Voytek and Gibby were living at the house.

Thanks and its okay. It was a long time ago when I read it too.My copy of HS walked away sometime ago and never returned. I just have never replaced it. I too would like to re-read it with diferent eyes. As I remember stomach contents were consistant with mexican food. I guess I should read back through the contents in the various reports.