76 replies to this topic

[catscradle77]

Simon Wells wanted us to be the first to see this page and the documents that refute the Manson killed Joel Pugh story.

This should end the debate.

http://joelpughcharl...on.blogspot.com

[TooLate]

catscradle77, on 25 June 2010 - 06:03 PM, said:

This should end the debate.

http://joelpughcharl...on.blogspot.com

Why? I respect the families right to settle on the theory they believe is best fit. Suicide seems to be a good fit - mainly imo due to the door being locked from inside. But no info is goiven as to whether there was another exit - fire exits existed in all similar London hotels I stayed in - including windows.

Psychiatry is my specialty. I am very wary of issues around mental illness sufferers often being downplated eg they often aren't seen as rape victims due to stigma making people see their erepoirts as unreliable. Having mental illness does not equate to being a suicide completer. In fact there are few signs I can see that Joel had lost hope or any of the ambivalence about life/death that normally stands in the way of completed suicide. To be suicidal is something perhaps a majority go through - as in having brief such thoughts, it's fairly normal - but to complete it is much rarer. And to complete it in the way Joel supposedly elected to is almost unheard of. You would need to be quite psychotic, too obviously psychotic for people to be feeling ok about letting their kids visit you. Your conversation (if any) would be far from normal.

I therefore think (speaking mainly from 20 years clinical experience not from any Policing background though) that it is only marginally more likely that Pugh suicided than that the Mansons got to him - given the strong motive revealed here in this website ie CM would not have wanted any chance Good got back with Pugh, since Good was his bank roll. Luckily those with crime policing experience did look for a motive, laying open for eternity the podsibility that there are other possibilities than suicide. I do not believe debate is ended by anything produced here.

It is nothing empirical - just opinion. Including a clear opinion from Good or someone Mansonite that Pugh did suicide. Entirely possible that Sandy could believe this even if it is not true - Mansons MEN did do dirty deeds that not everyone heard about. Unless we can interview Joel the answer may never be known.
It may never be known 100%, though perhaps good taste would say that out of respect for the families right to let the issues fade - so they can rest in some peace of not forever wondering and revisiting - non Pughs should not keep knocking their and the Coroners shared view. I am happy never to discuss it again so as to respect the Pughs right to settle on one view, since if anyone has the right to make the final judgment call about how family history should go down it is them. I really can't see that the call can ever be made with certainty. Too many complications for that to be honest.
Sometimes people want eetainty and need to feel it for their grief process to occur. That's fine, my way though of honoring Joel (as a non griever since I never knew him)would not be to lay down some scenario that can;'t be proved and say "that's it". Due to the risk I could be wrong I'd only eve go as far as saying "I think it was likely that..."
Personally I'd feel very much a transgressor if I said "yep he definitely suicided" when there is a real if small chance this call may be doing him an injustice. One that he is or could be furious about on the other side, as
A) possibly he'd have never done this for a range of reasons and would hate for his family to think this
B) if he was murdered either physically or psychologically driven to suicide with intent eg tormented by words etc in a visit by Davis then the killers win.. there's no chance of moral justice for Pugh, if needed, if the slim chance he was aided to die is completely discounted.

I'll accept the families right to believe what their greatest soul searching tells them, I don't necessarily believe the point they arrived at is the ultimate truth - 80% probability may be the sunm of it. Wrongness is possible. We are only human - none of us were there and wiothout an authentic statement by Joel no one can say. This is somnething many families of suspected suicides must live with - more often though the question is wasit accidental versus suicide - rather than was it... the Mansons greed.

I also find it untenable as a claim that Pugh held such strong views of Manson being a phoney and a dick if he hadn't even met him. Pugh had a science degree - which would suggest a greater propensity for objective & first hand rather than kneejerk judgements.

[catscradle77]

My thoughts-we all have had friends that our partners thought were jerks and had no problems expressing that to us. So, Joel's statement on Manson could have been based on that pure emotion alone, and even though Joel was a scientist in nature, he sure was utterly capable of feeling emotions like the rest of us.

Thru statements from Joel's friends and family, one being Jim Balfour who was present when Sandy came back wanting to marry Joel and he said no, it is obvious that Manson had more from Sandy along that line to fear, than Joel, who albeit seemed to be heartbroken over the loss, seemed to have made up his mind that he was indeed done with her.

We all have been there as well, all heartbroken but knowing it was over and trying to heal.

I am sure this did nothing good to his mental state, already being depressed.

Just my thoughts.

[Birds]

Where emotions like that are involved you simply cannot assume that rational thought will prevail.

[TooLate]

Birds, on 26 June 2010 - 08:09 AM, said:

Where emotions like that are involved you simply cannot assume that rational thought will prevail.

True - imagine being rejected for a common Manson, and then given the consolation shag by your so generous exes obliging good pal. I suppose it was reasonably clear that CM was hardly a positive life coach just by Goods unraveling eg parental extortion. In fact, it almost seems (from reading the Barker arrest postings) that CM had sworn all Spahnies to a vow of maximum naughty behaviour; absobloominglutely no opportunity was to be passed up.
Anyway I maintain we can never know whether mental health or murder factored most here.
It just appears that Pugh was Sandra's best complement - a zoologist to her environmental bent, different endings like a continued romance & easier on drugs may have been better.

[mahlerfan]

TooLate, on 25 June 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

Having mental illness does not equate to being a suicide completer. In fact there are few signs I can see that Joel had lost hope or any of the ambivalence about life/death that normally stands in the way of completed suicide. To be suicidal is something perhaps a majority go through - as in having brief such thoughts, it's fairly normal - but to complete it is much rarer. And to complete it in the way Joel supposedly elected to is almost unheard of. You would need to be quite psychotic, too obviously psychotic for people to be feeling ok about letting their kids visit you.

I therefore think (speaking mainly from 20 years clinical experience not from any Policing background though) that it is only marginally more likely that Pugh suicided than that the Mansons got to him - given the strong motive revealed here in this website ie CM would not have wanted any chance Good got back with Pugh, since Good was his bank roll.

First of all, hats off to Simon for a job well done. Because of his hard work and persistence we now have the most complete story of Joel Pugh's life and death that's ever been available in the literature. He has come alive in my mind's eye in a manner previously unimaginable as a real, whole person. As a result I feel a sense of tragedy about what happened to him, his friends and family, that was previously impossible.

That said, I still share some of TooLate's discomfort with Joel's apparent method of suicide. I have no comparable clinical experience but I do know something about clinical depression and have educated myself over the years about mood disorders and their relationship to suicide (mostly via books for the layperson, e.g., psychologist Kay Redfield Jamison's Night Falls Fast), and the kind of frenzied self-attack Joel seems to have committed is indeed rare and more characteristic of people in a psychotic, not depressed, state. And ironically, Steven Kay's statement that "Charlie wanted very much for Sandy not to be married" provides a compelling possible motive for having him killed.

Question: What about the "test cuts?" These would seem consistent with suicide by exsanguination.

[catscradle77]

Just to flip to see the other side-the Barker Raid report evidences that Sandy was indeed financed by her father and helped the Family with these funds. What if her father wanted her to become legit (away from Manson and with a "normal" life that Joel could have provided) before he gave her anymore money?

So she ventures off to Joel to get what her father wanted to get more money?

That would mean, that Joel would be worth more alive to the family than dead. And if we are to believe Stephen Kay's statement about Manson not wanting her to be married, then this would have been the utmost rebellion against Manson.

And I would think would lead to more against her than Joel.

But alas, pure speculation on my part.

Also, back in the 60's one was not bombarded with the antidepressants lets fix stuff with pills commercials etc. I wonder how depression in men was viewed back then.

[mahlerfan]

TooLate, on 25 June 2010 - 08:36 PM, said:

To be suicidal is something perhaps a majority go through - as in having brief such thoughts, it's fairly normal - but to complete it is much rarer. And to complete it in the way Joel supposedly elected to is almost unheard of. You would need to be quite psychotic, too obviously psychotic for people to be feeling ok about letting their kids visit you. Your conversation (if any) would be far from normal.

I'm reminded of the tragic death of singer-songwriter Elliott Smith in 2003. Smith suffered from clinical depression most of his life and also became addicted to drugs and alcohol. At the time of his death while still taking anti-depressants he had been clean and sober for two months and was working on an album. He had an argument in his home with his girlfriend and she locked herself in the bathroom to take a shower. Soon afterward she heard a scream and found Smith with a knife buried in his chest. He died almost immediately. Because of his depression history it was assumed in the media to be suicide. But the coroner's report was inconclusive and did not rule out homicide.

Three things in this case seem suspicious to me: 1) He was in the midst of working (productively) on a music project at the time and had recently taken life-saving steps (getting off drugs and alcohol as well as caffeine, sugar & red meat) - none of these sound like the actions of a man who's given up on life; 2) Stabbing oneself in the heart would be excruciatingly painful - Smith was stabbed twice; and 3) Having been a drug addict meant that he had dealt with criminals and other drug addicts - could a dealer have demanded payment of a debt? Or could a junkie have found out where he lived and gone there to rob him?

Anyway, none of this is meant to say Simon is wrong about Joel's death. Only that the suicide method was uncharacteristically extreme for someone in his depressed, weakened state, and this fact leaves some small doubt still in my mind.

[mahlerfan]

catscradle77, on 26 June 2010 - 11:14 AM, said:

I wonder how depression in men was viewed back then.

Sadly more often than not as weakness. Men were supposed to be strong and composed, i.e., suffer in silence. Even today depression is an illness that is often trivialized by people who've never experienced it. It is much more than simply feeling blue (author William Styron thought the term "depression" so bland a description for the disorder he felt in his mind that he suggested instead calling it "brainstorm") but many of its symptoms (isolation, withdrawal, lethargy, non-motivation) are easily mistaken for simple laziness, irresponsibility or immaturity. Simon's description of Joel's fading interest in things that once excited him is a classic example of the disorder and I find his father's willingness to fund his travels in the hopes that something would ignite his passion poignant in its compassion.

[catscradle77]

And suicide of a loved one is bad enough. Imagine the Pugh family horror as it was brought to their attention years later, by someone reading HS, that their loved ones death is being associated with the whole Manson saga. It was never brought up, they were never questioned etc. by Fowles while Fowles was doing his investigation.

Perhaps my memory on how they found out is wrong and Simon can correct it, but for some reason I believe I am remembering correctly.

[simonwells61]

catscradle77, on 26 June 2010 - 01:29 PM, said:

And suicide of a loved one is bad enough. Imagine the Pugh family horror as it was brought to their attention years later, by someone reading HS, that their loved ones death is being associated with the whole Manson saga. It was never brought up, they were never questioned etc. by Fowles while Fowles was doing his investigation.

Perhaps my memory on how they found out is wrong and Simon can correct it, but for some reason I believe I am remembering correctly.

Dear Cats (and all)
You are indeed right. No attempt was to contact the Pugh family regarding Police suspicions that Joel was "murdered" by Davis/Manson Family. They heard it through Helter Skelter. Furthermore, it appears no one bothered to check Joel’s previous mental health status with either family or health records. Additionally, the two letters I sourced from Interpol and Scotland Yard were just *enquiries* by Frank Fowles. Nothing was ever followed up. This "belief" just happened to stay with Police. When "Helter Skelter” was being researched, I presume the Manson files were exhumed and Fowles' paperwork concerning Joel was revisited. With a tally being notched up on the Family’s killing, I assume Joel’s story was lopped in with the rest.

I put Steve Kay's comments to display the sense of feeling in at the police end. However, despite Kay's conviction concerning the marriage of Joel and Sandy, Jim Balfour, Joel's closest confident, assured me that absolutely no marriage was ever considered by Joel, despite Sandy request. I did check for a marriage certificate and there is none. So, unless someone knows better, we must assume that there was no marriage; other than Sandy’s request to “borrow” Joel’s surname.

I did think twice when Daniel Pugh asserted Joel's dismay on Manson's demeanour when Sandy hooked up with him. However, the description is most likely to be passed on gossip from the circle they all inhabited, and not a believable confirmation that Joel had met Charlie. Again, Jim Balfour recently asked the circle of friends around Joel if he had met CM, and the answer was a resounding "No". If someone knows better; well, let’s hear it.

I suppose it was right that police checked into this story. But if I, 40 years after Joel's death, can reveal this amount of compelling amount of information that points to the contrary; how come no one was bothered to follow it through at the time?

Thank you for all bearing with me on this. I do hope this message will get out to as many people as possible. I would hate to think the whole “Joel was murdered” scenario is rehashed at some point in the future. He, or his family, really doesn’t deserve it.

Kindest regards

Simon x

[mahlerfan]

simonwells61, on 26 June 2010 - 02:50 PM, said:

Thank you for all bearing with me on this. I do hope this message will get out to as many people as possible. I would hate to think the whole “Joel was murdered” scenario is rehashed at some point in the future. He, or his family, really doesn’t deserve it.

Kindest regards

Simon x

Simon:

I feel safe assuring you that no one who's posted here wants to put Joel's family through any more pain. As I said above you've done a remarkable job of creating a full and compassionate portrait of the man, and with the single caveat of being shocked by his method of suicide I find your account entirely persuasive.

As Cats says it must have been nightmarish for his family to discover years after the fact that he was on some kind of shortlist of possible Manson murders, and although the bare facts as then known did sound very suspicious I think you've written the definitive account of his death unless some new piece of evidence appears.

Thank you for generously posting the fruits of your labor here.

[simonwells61]

mahlerfan, on 26 June 2010 - 04:08 PM, said:

Simon:

I feel safe assuring you that no one who's posted here wants to put Joel's family through any more pain. As I said above you've done a remarkable job of creating a full and compassionate portrait of the man, and with the single caveat of being shocked by his method of suicide I find your account entirely persuasive.

As Cats says it must have been nightmarish for his family to discover years after the fact that he was on some kind of shortlist of possible Manson murders, and although the bare facts as then known did sound very suspicious I think you've written the definitive account of his death unless some new piece of evidence appears.

Thank you for generously posting the fruits of your labor here.

It's my pleasure Mahler (and by the way, I adore your music and that of Erik Satie and Debussey!)

As you can imagine, I have become very protective of Joel since writing this. I am hoping Sandy will read this at some point, and I trust for all the craziness of the time, she too, will be happy that things are now properly in perspective. I'm sure Joel, in his own sweet way, will also be able to travel into the future, aware that his passing was not part of some macabre plot. And it's also for you guys on this site- a solitary beacon of light in a foggy and muddy story. Long may be keep on keeping on.

Si x

[coonhound]

Thanks Simon for 'the note' thats cool.

Just wondering since they occured on the same day. Did Joel learn of the breaking of the Tate case prior to his demise?

Could have been the last straw? The love of your life being involved with the group that commited one of the 'crimes of the century'.

These findings to me give more weight to the death being a suicide but not proof. I remember reading somewhere that Bruce Davis had been to other countries that Joel visited around the same time, if not at the same time.

[TooLate]

mahlerfan, on 26 June 2010 - 01:08 PM, said:

Sadly more often than not as weakness. Men were supposed to be strong and composed, i.e., suffer in silence.

And to drink. Yes thx Simon - it was a good presentation that while showing us your opinion and why it's held presumably shared all material as well - allowing us to form our own "conclusions" if that is even an apt word - methinks not. As Coonhound says the timing is interesting, I'd rather doubt that he'd heard. Also interesting Cats comments that Goods family may have attached conditions to her "dowry" - with unknown impacts. It often was the case for trust fund kids - a flatmate I had in Knightsbridge was the daughter of a mega millionaire, and was oneday left under no illusions that her support would stop unless she settled down, I had to listen to her agonising as an immature little brat over which of her 3 love interests (none of whom she actually "loved" but each had perks) to focus her marital attentions on .

[joe25]

I just finished the post on Joel Pugh..... Simon your work and the posts of others really helps clarify the issue of Joel Pugh's death..... by suicide. The cuts on the neck, wrists, and arms ---- the long axis ones --- are tell tale signs of the ambivalence this ind. experienced as well as intent. He apparently didn't have access to a firearm (the most frequent means of suicide) or the right quantity of pills. As I understand the law in Great Britain, there are restrictions with guns....it is that simple.... it would have been difficult to access one quickly.

I don't know if there were crisis hotlines in Great Britain at the time or someone with a mental health background that he was in touch with or could have connected with.....but the key factors, suicidal desire (perturbation--- intense emotional pain, perceived burden on others, etc.) and lethality or capability (history of attempts, the means to kill oneself, substance abuse, etc.) were not reduced sufficiently (buffers or protective factors --- social supports, sense of purpose, etc.) for him to be kept safe. I agree that loved ones of Joel Pugh do not need to be put through more anguish than they all ready have with any unverifiable theories.

[simonwells61]

joe25, on 27 June 2010 - 02:07 AM, said:

I just finished the post on Joel Pugh..... Simon your work and the posts of others really helps clarify the issue of Joel Pugh's death..... by suicide. The cuts on the neck, wrists, and arms ---- the long axis ones --- are tell tale signs of the ambivalence this ind. experienced as well as intent. He apparently didn't have access to a firearm (the most frequent means of suicide) or the right quantity of pills. As I understand the law in Great Britain, there are restrictions with guns....it is that simple.... it would have been difficult to access one quickly.

I don't know if there were crisis hotlines in Great Britain at the time or someone with a mental health background that he was in touch with or could have connected with.....but the key factors, suicidal desire (perturbation--- intense emotional pain, perceived burden on others, etc.) and lethality or capability (history of attempts, the means to kill oneself, substance abuse, etc.) were not reduced sufficiently (buffers or protective factors --- social supports, sense of purpose, etc.) for him to be kept safe. I agree that loved ones of Joel Pugh do not need to be put through more anguish than they all ready have with any unverifiable theories.

Joe,

Thank you for your excellent and thoughtful reply. I believe that the charity help-line, "The Samaritans", were around at the time, although sadly, Joel didn't appear to have called them.

The "key" (as it were) in Joanne's letter is the line, “even thought of killing my own self”. I am convinced that she wouldn't be writing to Sandy about Joel if she thought Manson had had him killed. Indeed, the tone of the letter reveals no other indications that this might have been the case.

Si x

[TooLate]

simonwells61, on 27 June 2010 - 08:00 AM, said:

The "key" (as it were) in Joanne's letter is the line, “even thought of killing my own self”. I am convinced that she wouldn't be writing to Sandy about Joel if she thought Manson had had him killed. Indeed, the tone of the letter reveals no other indications that this might have been the case.

Si x

They would not necessarily have known if Manson set something in motion - look how he separated Pat and Leslie from the rest after La Bianca, and before flight to the desert.
But good point regardless, and this obvious acceptance of suicide on Joannes part begs another question, had Joel said or done something that registered consciously or subconsciously with her, as indicative Joel was on the edge.

Personally if it was my family I'd much prefer to think it was homicide rather than suicide involved, so the prospect would reduce not increase my distress, but hey we're all different. Revisiting is generally undesired and serves no humane purpose here... if some Manson came forward and took responsibility now it's toolate and would be for the family just like experiencing 2 deaths - say goodbye to another 3-5 years that'll need to be dominated with processing (re), granted the disarray of new revelations didn't just stres you to death. The whole personal narrative built around the meaning of Joels life and death and how that condenses to impact your own identity and world view would require re-doing so meaning could emerge from chaos. To mentally survive humans must create meaning for events that integrates them into a comprehensible life, find sense in nonsense! It happens through examioning our own and others experiences frommany angles. The best therapists work from this basis today.

http://www.amazon.co...n/dp/1583913637

[TooLate]

Clues for crime writers lifted from a writing ed site
(not gospel eg notes not so usual, but worth mulling over)...

Defensive cuts: In a homicide, there will be defensive cuts on the palms of the victim's hands and on the underside of her arms as she tries to fight off her attacker.

NO

Number of wounds and their location: A murder usually involves multiple stab wounds to the side, back or stomach. In a suicide, while there may be additional cuts across the wrist and tentative test stabbings to see if it will hurt, or to work up courage, there will usually only be one (lethal) wound and most likely in the chest.

Location of the murder weapon: In a suicide, the weapon will be at the scene with the victim's fingerprints on it. In a homicide, the weapon is often missing.

Presence of a note: A suicide victim will almost always leave a note.

Stabbing through clothing: A suicide victim will rarely stab herself through her clothing, instead she will open her shirt to expose the skin. Stabbing through clothing, even if there's only one wound, may indicate homicide.

[mahlerfan]

simonwells61, on 27 June 2010 - 08:00 AM, said:

The "key" (as it were) in Joanne's letter is the line, “even thought of killing my own self”. I am convinced that she wouldn't be writing to Sandy about Joel if she thought Manson had had him killed. Indeed, the tone of the letter reveals no other indications that this might have been the case.

Ironic. The infamous letter actually proves its writer didn't believe that Joel was killed.