343 replies to this topic

[Attyla]

TooLate, on 30 July 2010 - 08:21 AM, said:

It'd be fun to do if only we were reenacting a work of fiction not a reality. Who plays CM and does the return trip in a fast Ford replay? Who has the necessary attributes? Monkey climbing ability, print detective, blood puddle hopper, able to contort face to show distaste at the kids actions, the willpower not to stop for breakfast or grab a nice tassled leather Polanski jacket, as you do after killing Crowes etc.

Ability to write really bad music should be on the list

[Crawler]

catscradle77, on 30 July 2010 - 08:23 AM, said:

There is no delicate balance of whatever and you are more than welcome to stay as long as the comments stop please towards/about people.



(why does this seem so eerily familiar -I just like the dancing 'nana)



sorry got emo happy.

ok I will be a good boy for now on. I promise.

[catscradle77]

Crawler, on 30 July 2010 - 08:29 AM, said:

ok I will be a good boy for now on. I promise.

[joe25]

Attyla, on 30 July 2010 - 07:17 AM, said:

Quote

To answer the question on Emmons, I reread it last night.

Claims:

1. he claims after an extensive interview with Sadie and Tex, he and an unnamed person return to the house
2. They scout the house for activity from a spot overlooking the home
3. He enters, cleans up the car, wipes down every location with the possibility of fingerprints
4. He puts the towel on Sebring
5. They leave the glasses as a false clue
6. All of this is done in an hour and 20 minutes

For one, the trip alone just driving would estimate out at 40 minutes. Scouting, driving to a location a bit away from the house, entering it, doing what he claims etc would far extend beyond 1 hour and 20 minutes

I do believe you can scout the house from a distance, but not having the exact layout of the area, I am not sure how close you would have to get and still see well enough to identify the house and see if there was activity

I still question being in the house with all of the blood and him doing what he did and not disturbing anything else, but hey, what do I know

Thank you for your homework and comments. I read on post # 291 the Emmons' book section of Manson's return back to Cielo Dr. and commented on #292. The content of the book, diction, etc. sounds nothing like what I've seen of Manson on TV, newsreels, Backporch tapes, etc. and excerpts from his trial transcripts. I appreciate your efforts as well and you've helped resolve the issue (for me).

Joe

[Birds]

History is written by the victors. The vast majority of people, if asked, would say that HS is a history book. They would no more question it than one of their school text books when they were growing up. We all know that those books are constantly revised and also that they differ greatly from one area to another. There is little question that they put forward information heavily skewed by the prevailing political and ethical context of the time they are printed. IMO Bugliosi's book supports Bugliosi. I am not saying it is fiction. I am saying that it emphasizes the facts which support the theory he is selling, or should I say, has sold. I also think that it is a given, if anything is, that Emmons heavily paraphrased what he believed CM told him. From this thread we can all see that even the written word can be understood differently by different people. My opinion is that HS is an extremely valuable work that presents a great deal of information necessary to the further investigation of these incidents. To a lesser degree I think that Emmons, Sanders, et al also present intriguing information interspersed with rumor, gossip, innuendo and, occasionally, items which are patently untrue. If anyone believes any of these accounts completely, then I am uncertain why they would gravitate to these forums to continue the discussion. Everyone here, to varying degrees, has something useful to add to the discussion. Please don't get so caught up in your own words that you become incapable of listening to others.
Have a nice day.
Now, enough of this...

[Attyla]

Agree that Emmons spends his entire account taking the babbling ranting of a deranged individual and tries to make it readable. That in itself is not a bad thing, but to package it as the words of Manson is taking a liberty I do not think is appropriate. They are not the words of Manson, and in some cases they are fragments of rambling streams of consciousness as evidenced by his various taped interviews.

VB is an attorney. That immediately creates a bias with regards to what he writes, as all lawyers have specific agendas.

The problem is sifting through lies and slants. The key, I believe, is composting the sources. With more credible sources you can usually feel pretty confident with two sources saying the same thing. But with the killers, if they all said the same thing, I would still have my doubts.

Sounds a jaded, but they are all proven liars repeatedly

[Birds]

I guess my point is that all of the sources add something to the mix. But no particular one is without fault. Although I agree with your position re Emmons, I believe there are nuggets of truth which contribute to our search for answers. Finding the wheat among the chaff is another story. All of the authors positions, just like all of the members here, are skewed by their personal experiences, their personality types, political indoctrination, religious beliefs, etc., etc. They, like we, are flawed one and all. If we seek the truth, then we dismiss them, out of hand, at the peril of our quest.

[Attyla]

Birds, on 30 July 2010 - 09:54 AM, said:

I guess my point is that all of the sources add something to the mix. But no particular one is without fault. Although I agree with your position re Emmons, I believe there are nuggets of truth which contribute to our search for answers. Finding the wheat among the chaff is another story. All of the authors positions, just like all of the members here, are skewed by their personal experiences, their personality types, political indoctrination, religious beliefs, etc., etc. They, like we, are flawed one and all. If we seek the truth, then we dismiss them, out of hand, at the peril of our quest.

completely agree. I will add to that that the only sources I consider completely unreliable are the criminals themselves. Testimony and interviews over the years are so conflicting that I challenge anyone to find wheat or chaff among all the BS

[mahlerfan]

Birds, on 30 July 2010 - 09:01 AM, said:

History is written by the victors. The vast majority of people, if asked, would say that HS is a history book. They would no more question it than one of their school text books when they were growing up. We all know that those books are constantly revised and also that they differ greatly from one area to another. There is little question that they put forward information heavily skewed by the prevailing political and ethical context of the time they are printed. IMO Bugliosi's book supports Bugliosi. I am not saying it is fiction. I am saying that it emphasizes the facts which support the theory he is selling, or should I say, has sold. I also think that it is a given, if anything is, that Emmons heavily paraphrased what he believed CM told him. From this thread we can all see that even the written word can be understood differently by different people. My opinion is that HS is an extremely valuable work that presents a great deal of information necessary to the further investigation of these incidents. To a lesser degree I think that Emmons, Sanders, et al also present intriguing information interspersed with rumor, gossip, innuendo and, occasionally, items which are patently untrue. If anyone believes any of these accounts completely, then I am uncertain why they would gravitate to these forums to continue the discussion. Everyone here, to varying degrees, has something useful to add to the discussion. Please don't get so caught up in your own words that you become incapable of listening to others.
Have a nice day.
Now, enough of this...

Beautifully spoken, Birds. I couldn't agree more.

[Dilligaf]

Attyla, on 30 July 2010 - 09:34 AM, said:

Agree that Emmons spends his entire account taking the babbling ranting of a deranged individual and tries to make it readable. That in itself is not a bad thing, but to package it as the words of Manson is taking a liberty I do not think is appropriate. They are not the words of Manson, and in some cases they are fragments of rambling streams of consciousness as evidenced by his various taped interviews.

VB is an attorney. That immediately creates a bias with regards to what he writes, as all lawyers have specific agendas.

The problem is sifting through lies and slants. The key, I believe, is composting the sources. With more credible sources you can usually feel pretty confident with two sources saying the same thing. But with the killers, if they all said the same thing, I would still have my doubts.

Sounds a jaded, but they are all proven liars repeatedly

Uhm, who are the liars? The killers or the lawyers?

[Attyla]

oh sorry, that last was a bit confusing, the criminals...but frankly most lawyers while they do not lie, spin like a top

[Dilligaf]

Attyla, on 30 July 2010 - 10:34 AM, said:

oh sorry, that last was a bit confusing, the criminals...but frankly most lawyers while they do not lie, spin like a top

Which is why, when I grew up, I wanted to be a Pip, not a Spinner. Boy, was my mom disappointed. The upside is being able to spin makes it easier in my Spinning class at the gym.

[Crawler]

catscradle77, on 30 July 2010 - 08:31 AM, said:

OWW! Sorry Attyla, Tequila makes me mean and nasty. No more TWI"s (Typing While Intoxicated)

[Attyla]

we really need a rimshot smilie

[Attyla]

Crawler, on 30 July 2010 - 10:46 AM, said:

OWW! Sorry Attyla, Tequila makes me mean and nasty. No more TWI"s (Typing While Intoxicated)

its all good, wine does the same to me after the second glass.

[mahlerfan]

catscradle77, on 30 July 2010 - 06:15 AM, said:

There once was a thread full of snark
All about whether to see in the dark
It started out nice
all Sugar and spice.

Then it went to hell...sorry couldnt come up with a rhyme.

There once was a poster named Mahler
Who shared a suspicion with Crawler:
He thought that Manson fellow
Returned to Cielo
But this idea Joe couldn't swaller.

[Attyla]

mahlerfan, on 30 July 2010 - 10:51 AM, said:

There once was a poster named Mahler
Who shared a suspicion with Crawler:
He thought that Manson fellow
Returned to Cielo
But this idea Joe couldn't swaller.

Waiter....check please

[Crawler]

mahlerfan, on 30 July 2010 - 10:51 AM, said:

There once was a poster named Mahler
Who shared a suspicion with Crawler:
He thought that Manson fellow
Returned to Cielo
But this idea Joe couldn't swaller.

[Attyla]

Dilligaf, on 30 July 2010 - 10:38 AM, said:

Which is why, when I grew up, I wanted to be a Pip, not a Spinner. Boy, was my mom disappointed. The upside is being able to spin makes it easier in my Spinning class at the gym.

See, and I wanted to be a temptation until I saw the docudrama and realized they all died terrible deaths

Now Im glad I can barely play the radio

[Bottledbrunette09]

Attyla, on 29 July 2010 - 02:48 PM, said:

lets consider, there was one bulb outside, and Manson had to move around avoiding blood on the ground....blood that was everywhere so as to not track it further and implicate himself. Blood that would appear almost black. Black on areas of black pavement in the dark even with your eyes adjusting would be tough. Blood on grass would be near impossible.

Sorry, that one was tough for trained officers in the day, let alone an untrained person at night

Just reading your remarks and a thought came to me, whether it happened or not, but what if Manson and whoever was with him came in through Sharon's bedroom? That way, they wouldn't have to step in all the blood on the front porch and that could explain why there wasn't extra footprints around the crime scene. They could of been examining the bodies on the front yard, Abigail's being the furthest from the front door, and after examining her body, saw the bedroom door opened and went in through there. I haven't heard from any source that there was a lot of blood in Sharon's room, just a bloody fingerprint and perhaps some drops as Abigail was running away, and then the hallway was pretty clean, so perhaps they came in that way and then wiped off more fingerprints. Another thought occured to me. Maybe someone scooped up some of SP's blood, somehow, and then brought it into the house and threw it around, which could explain why (and IF) his blood was inside the house. I'm thinking all this stuff as I read everyone's comments. Ramblings......and wild thoughts..........