This is probably really stupid-but later on, the holding up of one finger by Sandy and Squeaky was quite prevalent. But around this time Charles Manson seemed to be doing the three finger thing. It just struck me as odd, and I wonder if it meant anything?
There is no question that M was a big lover of hand signs. The three fingers, how about the famous "read between the lines", i.e. the surreptitous middle finger?
I don't think either of those I posted really help but they're all I could find. Supposedly Manson knows a bunch of masonic secret hand gestures that judges used, he would flash them to mess with the judges. Or so the story goes...
Very possible. How about this one -- self-incrimination: Three fingers -- three minions involved with murder: Hinman -- Beausoleil, Brunner, Atkins Cielo Dr. -- Watson, Atkins, Krenwinkel Waverly Dr. -- Watson, Krenwinkel, Van Houten Shea -- Davis, Grogan, Watson Obviously -- Manson behind the three --
In spite of what the conspiracy theorists like to think, there is actually just one series of gestures that any Mason would ever have any need to use outside a tyled Lodge room. And with armed Sheriffs and bailiffs in the courtroom, that series of gestures would be a complete waste of time, as there are also some phrases associated with those gestures. So I seriously doubt he ever saw any judges using any Masonic gestures. If he felt that using some other gestures would identify or prove him to be a Mason, the mere act of making those gestures outside a tyled Lodge room would prove that he most certainly was not. And those are the gestures I'm guessing he was likely trying to imitate. Cats, his clothing and hair style being the same in both images, I almost wonder if two photographers happened to take photos of him within seconds of one another.
Thanks, it's always nice to be seen. I was doing some work on the blog for Cats and decided to slide in here to see who I might aggravate or agitate anyone. :winkn: :hijacked: I'm away, before I get in trouble again.
Maybe Charlie is telling the Family members who are still free and in the hall ways of the courthouse to commit a third crime. thus showing all of the Family member who are in jail are innocent of the first two crimes? Just a thought. Vince
I am trying to come to terms with the concept of a masonic lodge accepting Manson as a member (see Mike's comment a few posts above). The mind boggles, for a multitude of reasons ... Jem
Here in Indiana, we are allowed considerable leeway, when investigating the background of someone peitioning for membership. Last Spring, I was on an investigating committee for a fellow who obviously was petitioning for all the wrong reasons. Multiple moving violation arrests, multiple drug possession arrests, multiple DWI arrests, etc. We had scheduled a personal interview with him and were wondering how best to explain our denial of his petition, but he never showed. A couple days later, I learned he had missed the meeting because he was once again a guest of the county. That arrest would have made number 43 on his record, if you can imagine. We destroyed his petition, returned his check and quietly warned the other Lodges in the county to watch for him to come calling on their doorsteps. No, Manson's character ensures he will never be considered for membership in a Masonic Lodge.
After knowing my Dad was a 32nd degree Master Mason, I have a hard time seeing him hanging out with Charlie at a Lodge meeting. Also, at his funeral, his Lodge brothers came and did the ceremony they do for a fallen brother, and I have a hard time believing that some of those old timers would have hung with Charlie either. It is possible he picked up some stuff along the way, but other than that, I have my doubts on it. Though, in her teen years, Leslie was a Job's Daughter.