Showing posts with label ED SANDERS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ED SANDERS. Show all posts

Friday, February 2, 2024

MANSON AND HIS ZOMBIE ZEITGEISTS


Vincent Bugliosi's "Helter Skelter: The True Story of the Manson Murders" is the most popularly cited as the primary sourcebook for the infamous Tate/LaBianca killings since it was published in 1974. However, there is another treatment of this story and it was published several years before that, when the killings were only two years old.

Written by Ed Sanders, Bay Area poet and founding member of the 1960's band, The Fugs, "The Family" is a gripping remembrance of the circumstances that lead up to those fateful and horrific nights. Sanders is noted for being one of the first individuals to participate in that era's counterculture and his narrative is vastly different in style than Bugliosi's.

Here is a book review from the 5 November 1971 issue of The Los Angeles Free Press, written around the time it was first published. Following that is a story that has persistently been a thread through the history of Manson and his cult followers; that a vast conspiracy of satanism and murder was underneath it all as described in Maury Terry's, "The Ultimate Evil". Completely true or not, it makes for fascinating reading.


In 1988, People Still Lived in Fear of Charles Manson's "Satanic Network"
Nearly twenty years after the Manson Murders, Michael Bendrix explored Manson’s place in what seemed to be an expanding web of terror

by Michael Bendrixjun | June 1, 1988 | lamag.com
Marina Habe’s body was found on New Year’s Day, 1969, by a dog. The body had been tossed to the bottom of a ravine off Mulholland Drive, and when police arrived, the dog’s owner said he wanted to be sure his name got in the paper.

Every detail of Marina’s murder and the time on either side of it left some sliver of absurdity. She was 17, coming home alone late at night from a date, got to her driveway and then, as her mother watched from a window—awakened by the sound of a racing engine and not knowing whether the man standing beside her daughter’s car was friend or foe—disappeared into another car. The coroner said she was held for a day, fed, raped, and stabbed.

The murder was never solved. A detective on the case believes Marina was the random kidnap victim of a dope dealer-biker nicknamed Spanky, now dead, but the evidence is inconclusive. Others familiar with the case believe it may have been the work of Charles Manson’s “family”; the Tate-LaBianca murders occurred nine months after Marina’s. A newscaster at the time of the Manson trials even suggested that Marina had connections with the Manson Family, but I’ve always thought that extremely unlikely because she had been living out of the state until a week before her death, and anyone who knew her—I’d grown up with her off and on—could tell you that Marina, a devout Catholic, would never willingly have anything to do with the likes of Charles Manson.

She was missing for two and a half days before her body was found, and of all the horror that circulated through the little bungalow off Doheny where her mother lived, certainly the worst was the horror that settled into the eyes of her mother. “Why don’t you take me?” she often shrieked during those two days as she lay on her bed, her hand on the telephone waiting for a ransom call that never came. Sometimes she would cover her face with her hands, and through her fingers you could see her screaming, but she made no sound.

Three years later, Marina’s mother married my father, whom she had known for many years, and together they have recovered. Progress has been gradual and erratic, broken easily by the prisonlike fact that Marina was an only child. Now, 20 years later, Marina’s mother has finally developed the strength to separate herself from that time, not to forget or to accept, but to unlock herself from an obsession. Her one remaining guilt is that she wishes she had done more herself to try to solve the murder.

A murder, and an unsolved one at that, inevitably permeates a family, leaving races of guilt, resentment and, above all, cynicism. The stain never quite comes out of the memory, and memory itself is forever stimulated by pictures on a living-room table, by letters and diaries in a bottom drawer, by odd belongings that from time to time reappear in the back of a closet or hidden in the garage. The memory is also in the survivors, in the faces of my stepmother and my father and, I suppose, to a lesser degree, myself. Ironically, it was in the days just before her murder that Marina and I became closest.

The problem is that the original questions have never been answered, and so, of course, the stain can’t be removed. Can the murderer, or murderers, still be out there? What was the motive? What were the circumstances? What was the story that goes along with the facts?

It was in the hope of finding the story, or at least completing a scene of what might have happened, that I became so fascinated by The Ultimate Evil, a book by an East Coast journalist named Maury Terry. The book shed new light on things; on the Manson murders in particular, and above all on what the people may have been like who murdered Marina. After reading Terry’s book, I reached him and arranged to meet him in Los Angeles, so that we might talk about his book and about what I assumed was his obsession.

The Ultimate Evil, published just a year ago (it has sold an impressive 50,000 copies, mostly on the East Coast), presents evidence for an extraordinary assertion: that a single satanic network, existing primarily in California, Texas and New York, has carried out, or has been involved in, numerous murders including among many others, the Roy Radin murder in Copco Canyon in 1983; the Son of Sam serial killings in New York City in ’76 and ’77; the bizarre ritual murder of Arlis Perry, a Stanford University graduate student’s wife, in 1974; and finally, the crime of crimes, the August 9, 1969, so-called Helter Skelter killings of Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger and Wojiciech Frykowski, followed the next night by the murders of Leno and Rosemary La Bianca.

Terry’s book, which focuses on the Son of Sam shootings and revelations by David Berkowitz himself, is in part a record of Terry’s struggle against the popularly held belief that Berkowitz did all the shootings and that he did them alone.  Moreover, it was an investigation by Terry and a handful of others that established a link between Berkowitz and a satanic cult operating in Westchester County, a link that units of the New York Police Department have been investigating for the last two years.

Terry himself is now working closely with police in Southern California and New York. His evidence for a nationwide satanic network is based on testimony from a variety of sources, including Berkowitz, prison informants, undercover police and FBI operatives, as well as former Satanists. The portrait Terry paints is that small groups of dedicated devil worshipers in New York, North Dakota, Houston and Los Angeles who willingly put themselves in the service of others—drug lords and power brokers in need of reliable assassins.

The specific connections Terry establishes between the Manson murders and the Son of Sam shootings is this: Although Manson and David Berkowitz never knew each other, they both belonged—at different times and on different coasts—to the same umbrella satanic-cult organization, called the Process. Also known as the Church of the Final Judgment, the Process was begun by Robert deGrimston—a disciple of L.Ron Hubbard, the creator of Scientology, and a student of the late Aleister Crowley, the notorious devil-worshiping Englishman who once described himself as “the wickedest man in the world.”

According to Terry, deGrinston, who now lives on the East Coast, met Manson on at least one occasion, in the spring of 1968 at a residence in Topanga Canyon. Moreover, says Terry, deGrimston traveled in some of the same social circles as Manson—and also, interestingly, Manson’s victims. According to Terry, these circles were all at least tangentially linked. One was the Sharon Tate circle that included Jack Nicholson, Robert Evans, John and Michelle Phillips, Jay Sebring, Warren Beatty, Jane Fonda, Peter Sellers, Wojiciech Frykowski and Abigail Folger. Another circle, the one Charles Manson has most often been associated with, included Doris Day’s son Terry Melcher and Beach Boy Dennis Wilson. Still another circle revolved around Mama Cass Elliott and included someone that Terry in his book calls Manson II. According to Terry, Manson II is as terrible a figure as Charles Manson and clearly a satanist.

The link between Charles Manson and satanic cults is not new. In his 1971 book, The Family, Ed Sanders described how in 1968 Manson was involved not only with the Process but with a chapter of another cult known as the OTO (or do Templis Orientis), whose headquarters were in the Blythe. The leader of this particular OTO chapter was Georgina Brayton, a long-time Satanist who believed that a racial war between blacks and whites in Los Angeles would erupt in the summer of 1969. The notion of race war was, of course, one of the key themes in Manson’s vision of Helter Skelter.

But Terry’s assertion goes beyond Helter Skelter and the idea that by framing blacks for the murders of whites, a race war would destroy Southern California. Terry argues that the Tate murders had to do with drugs, one of the original police theories. As for the LaBianca murders, he thinks they may have been either an effort to cover up the true purpose of the Tate killings or, possibly, another hit based on Rosemary LaBianca’s alleged LSD dealings.

In The Ultimate Evil, he quotes an un-named ex-FBI operative as saying: “Frykowski was the motive. He had stung his own suppliers for a fair amount of money, and that didn’t go down well at all with the people at the top of the drug scene here. And to make it worse, he was upsetting the structure of the LSD marketplace by dealing outside the established chain of supply. He was renegade.”

According to Terry, while the sale of street drugs was controlled by motorcycle gangs, particularly Hell’s Angels, upscale distribution was handled by a pyramid-shaped chemical-dope organization that included, among other high-ranking members, “a former Israeli who had strong links to the international intelligence community.” It was these people, Terry says, who, knowing Manson’s satanic background and his vision of Helter Skelter, offered Manson some kind of contractual arrangement—not money, but perhaps help in his recording career—in return for which Manson arranged the deaths of Frykowski and Abigail Folger, then living with Sharon Tate while Tate’s husband, Roman Polanski, was in Europe. Folger was a target apparently because she was helping Frykowski finance his drug dealings.

Moreover, according to Terry, there may have been a personal motive for Manson to want to kill Folger. A former undercover FBI operative told Terry that Folger had met Manson in San Francisco and had even given him money. “Manson turned against Folger,” the informant told Terry, “when she refused to lay out any more bucks for him and also because she wouldn’t come across for him sexually. Charlie wanted to make it with her, but she shot him down.”

I asked Vincent Bugliosi, Manson Family prosecutor and author of the bestseller Helter Skelter, what he thought of Terry’s book. Bugliosi said he had not read it; he sticks to his conviction that the motives for the Tate-LaBianca murders were: (1) Manson’s desire to create Helter Skelter; (2) Manson’s feelings of rejection from the social circles his victims traveled in; and (3) Manson’s intense preoccupation with death and murder.

“We’re in the area of speculation,” Bugliosi says. “It’s like the JFK assassination: No one comes up with hard evidence. There simply is no hard evidence that drugs were the motive. As for the suggestion that Manson killed the LaBiancas to cover up the first night’s murders, don’t forget that he had Susan Atkins put Mr. LaBianca’s wallet in a service station in what he thought was Pacoima—in the heart of the black community in the Valley—but was actually Sylmar, in the hope that a black person would find the wallet, use the credit cards and be blamed for the murders. Everything Manson did supports what he told his followers: that Helter Skelter was about to begin. I don’t know of any other motives he had. Perhaps there were some, or maybe Charlie’s the only one who really knows what his motives were.”

Terry strongly rejects the word speculation: “I have an FBI operative who was at dinner in San Francisco with Charles Manson, Abigail Folger and Manson Family member Shorty Shea in September 1967—two years before the murders. That alone changes the whole case. I’m not saying Helter Skelter was not a motive; I’m only saying that a stronger motive was a drug burn.”

“Terry points to another piece of evidence he has come up with, something that Son of Sam David Berkowitz revealed through a fellow prisoner, something involving the man Terry calls Manson II. In fact, Manson II appears to be the link between major satanic groups in Los Angeles, Houston and New York and the one person who may have played a prominent role in the Son of Sam shootings in New York, the satanic murder in the Stanford University Memorial Chapel and the Roy Radin murder in L.A.

According to Terry, Berkowitz told him that during a meeting of Satanists in New York, Manson II claimed Charles Manson “volunteered” to commit the Tate murders for a specific motive, beyond Helter Skelter. But Berkowitz did not reveal to Terry whether Manson II had explained exactly what the motive was.

Why give this strange man, Manson II, credibility? Terry says that one reason is because in 1968 Manson II hung out in the same social circles as Charles Manson; what’s more, he was a member of the very drug organization that wanted Frykowski and Folger eliminated.

It was one of those heavy, lukewarm lemonade-colored days when Maury Terry and I drove up Benedict Canyon to the house on Cielo Drive that was the scene of the Tate massacre, and then later out to Copco Canyon, where Roy Radin’s body was found. A long drive to see a couple of murder sites and get some pictures for Maury, whose study of cults has left him something of a celebrity. He has talked the talk-show circuit; done Geraldo Rivera; and recently, he spoke before a special conference of law-enforcement officials in Rhode Island. He’s been to the studios to talk about film possibilities from his book, and always when he returns home there are telephone messages from parents, police and prisoners, everyone either requesting help to solve a crime or offering information or telling him still another story about the devil.

With all the time he’s spent in Mephistophelian territories, Maury was not what I expected. There was not the residue I would have thought, not the stain of thinking about something for too long, the stain I know so well. No apprehension, no fear, just fatigue.

An anecdote told to me by a private investigator named Judy Hanson best describes the man: “When Maury came out to California in 1987 to investigate the death of Roy Radin, I was helping out and chomping at the bit to get started, but we had to shelve everything until after the Super Bowl. That’s the funny thing about Maury: He’s not obsessed by what he does. He just stumbled into it, and frankly, he’d be the last person to go looking for something like Satanism. It’s too West Coast for him, too weird.”

Maury grew up in Yonkers, New York, played three sports in high school, went to Iona College, got a job as a business writer and later as a journalist with the Gannet newspaper chain and the New York Post and hasn’t missed a New York Giants home game in 14 years. He’s a neighborhood guy, goes to a bar near where he lives called TGIF, plays gold and watches The Golden Girls on Saturday nights. His favorite movies include old John Ford films, particularly The Searchers with John Wayne. It was an interest in the Son of Sam case and a stubborn sense that “things didn’t add up” that sent Maury down the path to the devil.

After spending so much time investigating the dark side of the word, he often sounds more like a cop than a journalist: “I don’t care if they’re Satanists or aliens or longshoremen, “ says Terry. There’s a body, and somebody pulled the trigger. I look upon it as an investigation. I don’t get wrapped up in the religious aspects. I have friends who have gotten too caught up in this. They lost the ability to handle an investigation because they saw it as a crusade, and when you become a zealot make mistakes: You want things to be there that aren’t.”

At 41, Maury likes what he’s doing, but he’d prefer to write novels. In the meantime, he’s committed to writing a pair of books about Satanism. After that maybe fiction, something along the lines of Ludlum.

As Maury knelt for his portrait outside the gates of the Tate house, a neighbor approached. He was angry. “You see what you’re causing?” he said. “You’re encouraging more people to come up here even after all these years. And for what? Not for altruistic reasons. You’re up here writing a story to make a buck. Well, everybody’s fed up with it. I could get awfully nasty if I wanted to.”

He was nasty enough already, I thought, and fortunately we were almost finished shooting. I could well imagine his frustration with the National Enquirer image the place has inherited, yet there is something about what happened in that house and, by extensions, in this city, something to be remembered. It should be a monument to the nature of illusions, I thought to myself. The victims believed they were safe, that their California lifestyles were free. Similarly, the killers assumed they were safe, so long as Charlie wasn’t angry and so long as their drug-enriched dreams were not broken.

After Cielo Drive we drove north to Copco Canyon, 60 miles up Interstate 5 at the top of the Grapevine. It’s the Hungry Valley Road exit. Back up in there is a short, narrow valley marked by a one-lane dirt road and a dry streambed and surrounding hills that from a distance have the texture of mange on a dog’s back. Back up there is where, in June 1983, a beekeeper smelled the remains of Roy Radin and contacted the police. As we drove to the spot, Maury told the tale of Radin, dead at 33.

He was a concert promoter, a millionaire many times over by the time he was 25. He kept old acts alive, acts like Milton Berle, Red Buttons and Tiny Tim. He was also a decadent man whose kinky parties, held at his mansion in Southampton, Long Island, were well known to police. He also dabbled in Satanism, and Terry believes he was the chief sponsor of at least some of the Son of Sam shootings.

Before he died, Radin was trying to get into the movie business and was negotiating a deal with producer Robert Evans, then looking for $35 million to finance The Cotton Club. It was Radin’s old friend Elaine Jacobs, ex-wife of a big-time Miami cocaine dealer, who put Radin and Evans together.

But things went awry. In May 1983 there was a falling out between Evans and Radin over the issue of participation in Cotton Club. Evans apparently suddenly found himself in a minority position in his own project and tried to buy Radin out. But Radin resisted.

On the night of Friday the 13th, Radin got into a limousine with Jacobs outside the Regency Hotel in Hollywood. They were supposed to have dinner at La Scala, but they never made it, and sometime that night Radin disappeared.

Actor Demond Wilson, who played Redd Foxx’s son in the TV series Sanford and Son and whose careeer Radin had managed from time to time, acted as Radin’s armed bodygaurd on this particular night—Radin had wanted somebody to stay with him that night because he had received several recent anonymous threats. Radin’s regular bodyguards were in New York, and it was Wilson’s job to trail the limo with his boss and Jacobs, but Wilson could not keep up in heavy traffic.

What actually happened that night can only be surmised. In The Ultimate Evil, Terry claims that while Jacobs’ lawyer never allowed her to be questioned by police, she told Tadin’s personal secretary at the time that she and Radin had quarreled on the way to the restaurant, and when they stopped for a red light on Sunset Boulevard, she got out. Later in the same conversation, according to Terry, she changed her story and insisted is was not she but Radin who had left the car.

Radin was taken to Copco Canyon, where he fought with his kidnappers, or perhaps was permitted to make a run for it, and was then gunned down. He was found on his back, his body badly decomposed, his hand still holding onto a shrub branch. According to Terry, the police’s main suspect in the Radin murder is Manson II. It was he, they believe, who drove the limo that night.

And who is Manson II? Terry, who has seen his picture, describes him as five-foot-ten, 180 pounds, with dirty blond or brown hair, sometimes with a mustache. He was born in November 1948, has a high-school education, spends time with weights to keep himself in shape and works as a bodyguard, often for celebrities. He lives in Hollywood and uses a store in West Hollywood for a mail drop.

According to Terry, Manson II has been involved with satanism since he joined the Process, probably in 1968, and he once tried to commission an artist to paint pictures of human sacrifices on the walls of a nightclub. (The artist declined the offer.) He has an arrest record and is a top suspect not only in the Radin case but in an organized-crime disappearance/murder that took place in Washington, D.C., in 1977. Terry also says he has evidence that puts Manson II in one of the Son of Sam shootings, also in 1977.

We arrived in Copco Canyon, and Maury found the spot where Radin’s body was discovered. It was here, two months after police had found the body, that Maury made his own amazing discovery—a King James Bible, missed by police because it was so far under the shrubbery.

The Bible was significant for several reasons. First, it confirmed what Terry had been told by informants—to look for a satanic sign at the murder site. But it also suggested something about the police’s main suspect, Manson II, and confirmed Terry’s own suspicions about Manson II’s satanic connections. “It was deliberately folded open,” Terry wrote in his book about finding the Bible, “bent at the spine so that its left-hand pages were beneath those on the right. To ensure that it remained open to the intended passage, the front cover and the first few hundred pages had been torn off.”

The intended passage was Isaiah, Chapter 22, which reads, in part, “toss thee like a ball into a country and there thou shalt die … And behold, joy and gladness, slaying oxen, and killing sheep, eating flesh and drinking wine; let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die.”

Terry believes that this particular passage was deliberately left as proof that the people who did the killing were satanists—ironic because Radin himself had dabbled in satanism.

The most frightened part of what Terry is suggesting, of course, is that most of the satanic groups that were actively involved in crime in the ‘70s are still in place and still active. Furthermore, he says, they have become increasingly involved in child pornography and cocaine distribution. He insists that police are aware of the organizations and often swap information with him, but they are slow to pick up on the vast threat posed by satanists.

“If you’ve got an organization that can boast David Berkowitz and Charlie Manson among their members,” Maury told me when we left Copco Canyon, “then you’ve got a fairly dangerous organization. And there’s no indication they’re stopping.”

In fact, he added, David Berkowitz—whose information Terry insists has turned out to be extremely accurate—has told him that the headquarters of the many disparate satanic organizations involved in crime is in Venice, California, and that the most active of all these groups includes approximately 50 people, some of whom are locally well-known art gallery owners.

A few days later, Maury and I talked about Marina. I even introduced him to the detective who had worked on the case the longest, the one who believes Marina’s murderer was the biker named Spanky. Maury thought the evidence against Spanky tenuous at best and was skeptical of the way the police had handled the investigation.

In an unsolved murder, the police are often made to be the scapegoats by the victim’s family: In a curious way, that’s somehow more reassuring than the thought that all the available expertise and technology still couldn’t solve the crime. What kind of criminal could carry out so perfect a crime? Maury’s doubts about the police’s handling of Marina’s case coincided with everything my stepmother felt, though my father was less convinced. In any event, he had little desire to awaken his old nightmares.

As for Maury, he has promised to look into Marina’s murder. He’s in touch with people on both sides of the prison walls. Perhaps someone remembers an old story that always stuck in the mind.

Ironically, his efforts have rejuvenated my stepmother, brought her a miraculous energy and a new belief that even if Maury finds nothing, she may be nearing an end to this stage of her grief. She can now say that she has made an effort, even after all these years, and that for better or for worse, now may be the time to put the past away. Whether she can actually do that, particularly if Maury can’t provide any new details, is difficult to say.

As for myself, reading Maury’s book has opened a strange door. I’ve reread the two classic Manson books, Helter Skelter, and The Family. There are still parts of those books I can hardly manage, scenes that generate an extraordinary physical reaction, and overwhelming urge for revenge and the fantasy to be back at that time, warn people, to change history.

After Maury, the detective, my father and I had lunch to discuss Marina, my father and I drove up to Mulholland Drive to see the place where Marina’s body had been dumped. There was a real April shower that day. A good view had gone gray. The hillsides were a rusted-hull color. No people, no cars. No dog.

My father shivered in the cold as he pointed down the ravine. There was a shelf of ground with trash on it, and beyond the shelf a long, steep drop to the bottom. “Down there,” he said.

We stood and looked, and there was nothing to see. I tried to imagine the tumbling of her body and the  moment before that, the toss itself, and then back further into the hands that held her and then up into the mind that controlled the hands. I tried to fight my way through all the years since it had happened and through all that I didn’t know, struggling to penetrate the heart of someone I could only crudely imagine. I tried for an instant, but that seemed like a dead end.

Then this occurred to me: I don’t think Marina’s killer acted from an intellectual need to prove he could kill someone. Undoubtedly, he acted on impulse. Sometime during the 14 minutes police estimate it took Marina to drive home from her date’s house, someone saw her, followed her, grabbed her. But what was it about her that so caught him? Did she remind him of someone else? Was it her beauty? Or her manner? Whatever it was, the killer took a bold step—to follow her into her own driveway. The act suggests someone not thinking, just acting. A man, most likely, whose killer instinct was triggered by something in Marina, who, whatever her worst faults may have been, was not an evil person.

Maury believes that evil is simply an absence of good, but I think evil feeds on good, that you can never have one without the other, that something in the one ignites the other. It’s not much to go on, but if I have nothing else from Maury Terry, then at least now I have a theory about the forces that caused Marina Habe’s murder.

“C’mon,” my father said. “Let’s get out of here.” And we did.

Saturday, August 10, 2019

CHARLES MANSON IS DEAD, BUT LIVES ON


It seems as though Quentin Tarantino's new film has rekindled a surge of interest in the last summer of the 1960's. This included of course, the time of the Tate/LaBianca murders, which, along with the incident at Altamont just a few months later, were the counterpoint to that great experiment of peace and music, the Woodstock Festival.

The following trio of articles show the different aspects of the Manson Chronicles. First, the article by Ed Sanders, who as a journalist spent time with the Manson Family and wrote the book, "The Family" in 1971 examines why this subject is forever fascinating to the public. The next article relives the time right after the murders, when Hollywood, and many of its local musicians and celebrities headed for safety in a grip of fear, believing they may be next on the hit list. Lastly is an article that examines series of unsolved murders after the Manson killings that are suspected of being suspicious as having the taint of the Manson Family on them.



Why Pop Culture Still Can’t Get Enough of Charles Manson
As Quentin Tarantino’s new film revisits Los Angeles at the end of the ’60s, a man who was there — and literally wrote the book on Manson — argues that we never really left.
By Ed Sanders | July 24, 2019

The Manson case had a touch of evil to it — in fact, more than a touch; it was, in many minds, a post-apocalyptic deluge. It exposed how defenseless the folk-rock stars, the movie stars, the producer stars, the drug stars, the limo driver stars and thousands of would-be and wannabe stars were in their pretend fortresses up in the hills of Los Angeles and Malibu.

No one had guards packing pistols or rifles in the summer of 1969. It was as if the whole Los Angeles scene were being protected by the hippies at Hog Farm commune, who provided security at Woodstock consisting of what their leader called “seltzer bottles and cream pies.”

Then, around midnight on Aug. 8, Abigail Folger was lounging in a Cielo Drive guest room in Benedict Canyon, reading a book, when a knife-wielding Susan Atkins walked into her bedroom unannounced. Folger, an heir to the Folgers coffee fortune and a guest of the very pregnant actress Sharon Tate, waved hello.

It was ultimate vulnerability.

The ultra-brutal killings that followed stunned the world, prompting headlines about Hippies and Weirdos and Ritual Murder. Along with Folger and Tate, who was married to the director Roman Polanski, the victims that night included Folger’s boyfriend, the Polish writer Wojtek Frykowski; Tate’s friend, the hair-stylist-to-the-stars Jay Sebring; and a young man named Steven Parent, who had been visiting the estate’s caretaker.

The next night, in another part of town, the owner of a supermarket chain, Leno LaBianca, and his wife, Rosemary, were killed in a similarly barbaric fashion, with the words “Healter Skelter,” misspelled by one of the killers, written in blood on the LaBiancas’ refrigerator.

Things changed quickly in Los Angeles after that.

As I first began to investigate the case for my 1971 book, “The Family,” the allure of the Tate-LaBianca murders seemed obvious: It had famous rock ’n’ roll stars like Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys, who briefly housed the so-called Manson family; it had the appeal of the Wild West; it had the bass drum of the 1960s, with its sexual liberation, its love of the outdoors, its ferocity and its open use of drugs. It had the hunger for stardom and renown; it had religions of all kinds; it had warfare and hometown slaughter; and it had it all in a huge panorama of sex, drugs and violent transgression.

But now, I ask myself: What is the big deal about the Manson family? After 50 years, surely the obsession has died down?

It has not. As the bountiful media attention around Quentin Tarantino’s new film, “Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood,” attests, the obsession is alive and well. And that film is only the latest in a long line of pop culture products from the past half-century to be inspired by the crime, including movies, TV series, a stop-motion animation film and too many documentaries, books, articles and musical tributes to count. At least one prestigious university offers a semester-long seminar on the murders.

As the novelist Graham Greene noted in “The Third Man,” “One’s file, you know, is never quite complete, a case is never really closed, even after a century, when all of the participants are dead.” And as Tarantino knows, Hollywood dotes on self-revealing and self-obsessed stories about itself.

We may be stuck with Charlie Manson for a while.

The End of the ’60s
The Manson case had ripped aside the veils of Hollywood and inflamed the world’s interest, and as a fairly well known musician and writer of the counterculture at the time, I was interested, too, if at first for different reasons. For years after my book was published, I had so much Manson family lore in the front of my brain that my personal calendar was based on what the Manson group had done on that particular day in 1967, ’68 or ’69.

When I first started looking into the family, I thought they might be innocent, and might have even been framed. I pondered whether some scheme were afoot to blame a hippie tribe with psychedelic dune buggies for some killings that others had committed.

I soon learned otherwise.

In my weekly column, written during the 1970 trial for The Los Angeles Free Press, I tried at first to write about Manson and the other defendants as human beings, not cult demons. I was also concerned with whether Manson and his followers were being judged by a jury of their peers.

In addition, I was against the death penalty, and the prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi, although a good Los Angeles liberal, was very adroit at putting on a trial that could lead to a death sentence.

If Manson got death, I wrote in one of my columns at the time, then what about William Calley and the perpetrators of the massacre at My Lai during the Vietnam War?

Because of my countercultural bona fides — among other things, I was a member of the rock band the Fugs, and the Free Press was the country’s premier underground newspaper — I was accepted by remnants of the Manson family. Before and during the trial, they invited me out several times to their home base on the Spahn Movie Ranch, at the edge of the San Fernando Valley, where several key scenes in Tarantino’s movie take place. After a garbage run dinner, they asked me to lead their communal singing in which they specialized in Manson’s songs. They handed me a guitar, but I turned down the offer.

A few weeks before the trial, which was scheduled for June 15, I had gone camping with members of the Manson family, along with a documentary filmmaker, out in the vastness of the mountains above Death Valley, 50 miles from the nearest phone. I slept in a van with a key — and not yet arrested — member of the group.

Even though I often dressed more like a Manson family member than like Bugliosi, I nevertheless had an assignment from Esquire and a book contract from a major publisher, so I had access to the prosecution and homicide investigators. When I called one of the prosecutors, Burton Katz, he was dumbfounded to learn that I had slept in that van beside the guy he believed had cut off the head of Shorty Shea, a former stuntman working on Spahn Ranch who had disappeared several weeks after the Tate-LaBianca murders. (When investigators finally located Shea’s body, over a decade later, his head was attached.)

That’s when I began to get the shivers about the Manson group.

I had also begun learning about a plot to free Manson.

The young man in the van, I found out, had during our trip asked a member of the film crew, “What would you say would happen if one night 75 heads were cut off?” From what was being tossed about, it was obvious an escape attempt for Manson was being planned.

Members of the Manson family said that he had maps of the Los Angeles sewer system. They said there was a set of parallel dry tunnels running all the way from downtown to the edge of the desert, which you could barrel through on motorcycles to freedom. They had talked to the filmmaker about chopping off heads as a distraction to aid the escape.

I told them I didn’t care about their plans. I wanted them to think that an escape meant nothing to me so they wouldn’t become suspicious.

I had never snitched in my life. In my youth, I had been counseled by friends never to catch the eye of a police officer and to be very wary in their company. Later, as someone whose face had been on the cover of Life magazine as a leader of the so-called “other culture,” I was doubly suspicious of the police. In writing and researching the book, however, I began to feel sympathy and respect for a number of police officers whose work I began to understand and appreciate.

So I decided to go to the authorities. I contacted a CBS reporter who was covering the trial and told him what I knew. Together we made arrangements to tip off the police.

The weekend before the trial began, I learned that Manson had been moved to a super secure cell at the Hall of Justice, the same place he was to be tried. The cell had previously held Sirhan Sirhan, the man prosecuted for the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. 

Fear Swept the Poolsides
There was great fear of Manson and his disciples, at least in Los Angeles during the trial, among those associated with movies and the music business. One need look no further for the origins of our abiding fixation: Many of the culture’s prominent voices from the past 50 years were shaped by that fear, their worldviews and obsessions forged in it. (In a recent interview with Esquire, Tarantino, who grew up in Los Angeles and was 6-years-old at the time, called 1969 “the year that formed me.”)

I saw that fear at work firsthand. Whenever my band played Los Angeles in the 1960s, we stayed at Sandy Koufax’s Tropicana Motel, located on Santa Monica Boulevard near La Cienega. There was a banana tree by the pool and hibiscus bushes with large red flowers. And there was always a party. During the summer of 1970, while I attended the Tate-LaBianca trial, I stayed with my wife, Miriam, and ­5-year-old daughter, Deirdre, at the Tropicana.

Others in the music business were also staying at the Tropicana that summer, including Kris Kristofferson, the 5th Dimension and Janis Joplin, who was cutting her final album, “Pearl.” In the afternoons, the tables by the pool would fill up with visiting friends, including Phil Ochs, the writer John Carpenter and the singer Rita Coolidge.

The musicians were very anxious that I not bring any of the Manson family to the Tropicana. A few vowed to move out if I did, and I promised I wouldn’t.

A ripple of fear seemed to sweep across the poolside when it appeared that I had breached the edict one afternoon, as two hirsute young men came to visit me. Their names were Glenn Frey and J.D. Souther, and you could almost hear the shudders around the pool, where everyone was certain I had violated the ban against Mansonites.

Frey, whose band the Eagles would sell tens of millions of albums, was not attired in the threads of a star. Souther, who wrote many hit songs during the ensuing decade, was similarly bedecked. Their band, Longbranch Pennywhistle, performed a Fugs cover at their concerts, and the two had come by to invite Miriam and me to a show.

Kris Kristofferson told Miriam at the time that when the two men came poolside, he contemplated diving into the pool and swimming to the other side — the quickest route to safety.

“Live Freaky, die Freaky,” one of the people gathering outside Sharon Tate’s house reportedly said the morning after her murder. What that meant for the hills and valleys of Hollywood was, “From now on it’s lock your doors, close your gates, hire some guards, get some guns.”

Bread and Circuses
Some important people and events fade with time. A few years ago, I gave a talk at a large Midwest university on the subject of 1968, and I spoke about the time Allen Ginsberg chanted a poem by William Blake in a confrontation with military troops during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

After my presentation, I was leaving the auditorium when a young man approached me and asked, “Mr. Sanders — Allen Ginsberg, he was one of the lawyers at the O.J. Simpson trial, right?”

But some events last and last and last.

Ask Tarantino. He has his finger firmly on a key element of human proclivities. His “Once Upon a Time” received a six-minute standing ovation this year at Cannes.

He knows, to paraphrase the ancient Roman poet Juvenal, that the people want bread and circuses. They want sex scandals and shocking violence, the more vicious the better — even today, when such things seem as common as a hamburger stand.

Ed Sanders is a poet, writer and co-founder of the underground rock band the Fugs. For his 1971 book, “The Family,” he embedded himself among several of Charles Manson’s followers.

Correction: July 29, 2019
An earlier version of this article referred imprecisely to the timing of events of the summer of 1969. The Woodstock music festival took place the week after the Manson family murders, not beforehand.

[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times.]



How the Manson Killings Gripped Los Angeles
By Laura M. Holson | July 5, 2019

A maid called the police at 9 a.m. on Aug. 9, 1969, after finding five dead people in a Beverly Hills home. There was a blond woman on the living room floor, a rope wrapped around her neck and stab wounds in her swollen belly. A bloodied corpse wore a hood; another was behind the wheel of a car. Two more were sprawled on the lawn about 50 feet apart. A neighbor recalled hearing shots around midnight.

The word “pig” was wiped in blood on a white front door.

Charles Manson, an ex-convict turned cult leader, had planned the attack, directing his followers to sneak into a Benedict Canyon home rented by the director Roman Polanski, where they killed his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, and four guests before dawn.

Americans have long had an insatiable appetite for gruesome crime stories. But this inexplicable act left many in Hollywood panicked that they could be next.

Some celebrities bought handguns to protect themselves. Others installed security cameras or holed up at the Beverly Hills Hotel. For many, the killings exposed the network of hustlers and hangers-on who lurk in the shadows of Los Angeles, barely within grasp of celebrity culture and the desire that fuels it.

“The murders brought into focus several life cycles — disparate but connected — that displayed some of the glamour and intrigue that have long fed the Hollywood script mill,” The New York Times reported.

Adding to the curiosity was the fact that Polanski had directed “Rosemary’s Baby,” the 1968 classic about a satanic cult that tricks a woman into birthing the devil’s child. Tate, for her part, was best known for her role in 1967’s “Valley of the Dolls” as Jennifer North, a beauty with limited acting ability who dies of a drug overdose.

Even today, the murders remain a subject of morbid fascination. In July, the director Quentin Tarantino will release “Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood,” a Technicolor pastiche that explores Los Angeles in 1969 through the fictional friendship of a has-been actor (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his stuntman (Brad Pitt) who live next door to Polanski and Tate.

The married couple were described then as members of a new Hollywood elite — international, stylishly restless and lacking the deep ties to Los Angeles of their more established peers. A Times article published weeks after the murders noted that the couple and their entourage had been said to prefer renting homes instead of buying them. They bounded among London, Paris, New York and Los Angeles, where uninhibited sex and drugs were parcel to the hippie California vibe in the 1960s.

"The impermanence makes for an edginess, an urgency, an unreality — or more precisely, for an almost involuntary detachment from the ongoing concerns which move and occupy most mortals,” Charles Champlin, a Los Angeles Times critic, told The New York Times.

Polanski was born in Paris in 1933, but returned to his parents’ native Poland when he was a toddler. He made a number of films before moving to the United States in 1968, fostering friendships with Polish and French expats in Los Angeles. That year, Polanski married Tate in London after the couple met on the set of a movie he directed in Italy.

“We were always out enjoying ourselves, it was always great fun,” the actor Peter Sellers told The Times then. “If Roman had a premiere in Paris, why we’d all fly over there for it. Or we would have lunch in London and dinner in Copenhagen.”

The celebrity murders were front-page news. “Actress Is Among 5 Slain At Home in Beverly Hills,” read a headline on Page One of The New York Times. The New York Daily News called it a ritualistic slaying of a “sexpot.” Polanski was in London and did not know Manson or the killers, who included Charles Watson and a cadre of Manson’s “girls” who lived with Manson at the Spahn Ranch in Los Angeles County. (They were Susan Atkins and Patricia Krenwinkel; a third, Linda Kasabian, said she did not participate in the killings and became the star witness against the others.)

The French Normandy-style home with sweeping ocean views that Polanski had rented was a central character in the murderous affair. Rudolph Altobelli, a Hollywood business agent who represented Katharine Hepburn and Henry Fonda, bought the house in 1963. He rented it to high-profile clients and celebrity friends, including Cary Grant and Terry Melcher, the son of the actress Doris Day. Melcher was a young music producer who testified at Manson’s 1970 trial that he had gone to a music audition for Manson — the cult leader sang and played guitar — but “wasn’t impressed enough to want to make a record.”

Lawyers contended at the time that Manson had commanded his followers to go to the home to kill Melcher after he was spurned. But Melcher had already moved out, and Manson ordered the death of the inhabitants anyway. The next day, members of the cult killed two more people, the grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary.

Julian Wasser was a Life photographer at the time and, after hearing about the murder of Tate, he went to the house. There, he told The Guardian in 2014, he met a distraught Polanski and took photographs of the scene for him so they could be shared with a psychic. (Years later, Polanski would flee the United States to avoid a jail sentence for unlawful sex with a 13-year-old, and he remains wanted by the American authorities.)

As news of the murders spread from the seaside bungalows in Venice to the hillside estates above Sunset Boulevard, panic set in. The author Joan Didion wrote in “The White Album,” her 1979 book of essays, “Many people I know in Los Angeles believe that the Sixties ended abruptly on August 9, 1969.” Even the house in Benedict Canyon didn’t last. It was demolished in 1994.

“Hollywood was afraid because they didn’t know what was going on,” Wasser told The Guardian. “They thought it was a strange cult that was going to kill everybody. It led to security mania, everybody putting in special alarm systems. If you said ‘hi’ to someone in the street, they’d think you were another Manson. Total paranoia.”

Indeed, the murders spawned copycats. In February 1970, Capt. Jeffrey R. MacDonald, an Army medical field officer with the Green Berets at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, told the police that three men and a blond woman had entered his house, screamed “Acid is groovy, kill the pigs,” and killed his wife and two young daughters.

Like Tate, his wife was pregnant and was stabbed in the stomach. In 1979, a jury convicted Captain MacDonald of the crime, saying he had been inspired after reading an Esquire magazine article about the Tate murder.

Back in Los Angeles, a string of violent crimes kept the city on edge. In May 1970, the police arrested five men who had stored 250 weapons and charged them with plotting to assassinate a Superior Court judge.

Later that year, the crew and cast for “The Last Picture Show,” a movie starring Jeff Bridges and Cybill Shepherd about two teenagers growing up in the early 1950s, moved to Archer City, Tex., to begin filming. A Dec. 14 Times article noted that the townspeople didn’t know much about making a movie. But everyone knew Sharon Tate.

R.J. Walsh, who ran a gas station, recalled at the time, “Most of our people have never been out of Texas and they have heard a lot about California — all the trials and the kidnapping and all them Tate murders coming out of there. But one after another people have said to me they never dreamed that people who followed the movie business could be that nice.”

[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times.]



How many more did Manson family kill? LAPD investigating 12 unsolved murders
By Richard Winton | August 8, 2019

The Manson murders mostly are remembered as two events that occurred 50 years ago this month: the killing of actress Sharon Tate and four others in Benedict Canyon and then the butchering of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca in Los Feliz.

But cold-case investigators and others long have believed that Charles Manson and his cult followers were responsible for many more deaths.

The Los Angeles Police Department officially has a dozen unsolved homicide cases linked to Manson. And there are additional slayings outside the jurisdiction that some believe to be the work of his “family.” Some of those ties seem more plausible than others, but all have been extensively examined and theorized — as are all things involving Manson.

The supposed suicide of one Manson follower’s boyfriend in England. The drowning of an attorney whom Manson declared during the middle of his trial he never wanted to see again. A young man killed during a game of Russian roulette with family members present. Two young women stabbed to death off Mulholland Drive and a couple of young Scientology followers who met a similar fate.

Manson “repeatedly” said many others were killed, said Cliff Shepard, a former LAPD Robbery-Homicide Division detective who worked some of those cold cases. “We may never know or identify all their victims.”

In all, Manson and his followers were convicted of nine murders — the Tate and LaBianca attacks plus the slayings of musician Gary Hinman and stuntman and ranch hand Donald “Shorty” Shea.

Dan Jenks, an LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective, said the unsolved cases still were under active investigation and that the department would not comment on specifics.

“There is no statute of limitations. We are always developing new techniques. The last 10 years, DNA has come a long way,” Jenks said. “We will stay on them and keep them as active as we can.”

The LAPD repeatedly has declined requests by the Los Angeles Times for information about those cases. But seven years ago, while seeking to obtain audiotapes of a Manson follower that detectives hoped would yield clues, the department formally declared that a dozen unsolved cases might be tied to the family.

The tapes involved conversations between convicted killer Charles “Tex” Watson and his attorney in 1969. The LAPD obtained the tapes after a legal battle, but they appeared to provide few clues. The department, however, refused a Times request to review them, citing ongoing investigations. A judge in 2017 ruled that attorneys for Manson follower Leslie Van Houten could not have the recordings as part of her efforts to gain parole.

“The thing we discovered after reviewing the tapes, there was no new information related to any of the unsolved cases,” Jenks said. The death of Manson in 2017, as well as those of other family members, has made efforts to pursue the cases harder.

Manson prosecutor Stephen Kay said he and his partner, the late Vincent T. Bugliosi, always suspected that the cult had killed others.

“I know that Manson one time told one of his cellmates that he was responsible for 35 murders,” said Kay, who has attended 60 or so parole hearings to keep those he convicted of the Manson slayings in prison. “Whether that is true or not or just jail bragging, I don’t know. We prosecuted him for nine murders, and those were all the murders we had evidence on.”

A suspicious death in London
Just months after the Tate and LaBianca murders, Joel Pugh — the 29-year-old boyfriend of Manson clan member Sandra Good — was found dead in the Talgarth Hotel in London. His wrists and throat had been cut. British authorities listed it as a suicide, saying Pugh had been depressed. No suicide note was left.

Kay and others said Manson hated Pugh. “He had no reason to commit suicide, and Manson was very unhappy that Sandy” was with Pugh, Kay said.

Manson follower Bruce M. Davis, who recently was cleared for parole after nearly 50 years in prison, was in London at the time Pugh died. Kay said that Davis, now 76, was the family member most able to kill. The prospect of his pending release — which still could be blocked by Gov. Gavin Newsom — has energized investigations during the last decade.

Davis was convicted in the killings of Hinman and Shea in 1971 and sentenced to death. When California for a time abolished the death penalty, Davis and other members of the family were given life sentences.

At a parole hearing, Davis said he hadn’t known about the Tate killings until the morning after they happened but had committed the other murders because “I wanted to be Charlie’s favorite guy.”

Deadly game of Russian Roulette
Davis also was a witness to the November 1969 death of John “Zero” Haught in Venice, according to investigators. Authorities concluded that Haught had died accidentally while playing Russian roulette with a revolver, but that finding came under question.

The gun recovered didn’t have any fingerprints on it, The Times’ Jerry Cohen reported in 1969. A young man who held Haight’s head after the shooting told Cohen he entered the room to find a female Manson follower with the gun in her hand. Several Manson followers were inside the home that night, including Davis, The Times reported.

Davis could not be reached for comment, and his attorney did not return messages.

In his book about the Manson family murders , “Helter Skelter,” Bugliosi said he believed that a woman known for years only as Jane Doe 59 was killed because she had witnessed Haught’s killing.

She was stabbed 150 times. A bird-watcher discovered her remains on Mulholland Drive, about six miles from the Benedict Canyon home where Tate and the others were killed.

Three years ago, the LAPD identified her as 19-year-old Reet Jurvetson from Montreal, using a DNA sample from her sister. She had come to Los Angeles from Canada to join a man she had first met in a Montreal coffee shop.

“She thought he looked like Jim Morrison,” Shepard, the former LAPD detective, said.

She sent a postcard to her mother about getting an apartment in L.A. 16 days before her death.

LAPD detectives asked Manson about Jurvetson before the killer’s death. He denied knowing her.

“It was like talking to a wall,” said LAPD Robbery-Homicide Division Capt. Billy Hayes.

That Manson wouldn’t say much doesn’t surprise his son.

Manson’s son Michael Brunner told The Times recently that “Charlie lived by a code. He was an outlaw. He was not a nice guy. But he lived by a code and he was not gonna be the one that was snitching. And there was a lot of snitching going on. And the people that were snitching, you know, they say snitches get stitches.”

Shepard said much of the speculation about Jurvetson stemmed from a photo of a woman resembling her who was dancing at the family’s Spahn Ranch hangout with Manson follower Steve Dennis “Clem” Grogan. He was paroled in 1985 after being convicted of murder for his role in Shea’s death.

Grogan told detectives a few years ago that the woman was another Manson follower, not the Jane Doe, Shepard said.

Still, the LAPD has not ruled out the Manson cult in her killing.

A violent time
Complicating the effort to solve Jurvetson’s murder is the fact that the period of the late 1960s and ’70s was marked by numerous serial killers roaming California.

Sandi Gibbons, a former City News Service reporter who later served as the spokeswoman for several L.A. County district attorneys, said the area off Mulholland was a popular place for dumping bodies at the time.

On New Year’s Day 1969, the body of 17-year-old Marina Habe — who was kidnapped outside her West Hollywood home — was found less than half a mile from Jurvetson’s remains in a ravine off Mulholland Drive. Habe, the daughter of a Hollywood screenwriter, also had multiple stab wounds to her neck.

Shepard said Manson also was asked about Habe and dismissed any suggestion she was one of his crowd.

LAPD homicide detectives also saw similarities between the vicious knife attack on Jurvetson and the November 1969 killings of James Sharp, 15, of Crestwood, Mo., and Doreen Gaul, 19, from Albany, N.Y. Stabbed and beaten, their bodies were dumped in a downtown Los Angeles alley a week before the discovery of Jurvetson’s remains.

At the time, LAPD Lt. Earl Deemer described the wounds on the pair as being inflicted by a “fanatic.” Each had been stabbed 50 to 60 times. In “Helter Skelter,” Bugliosi wrote that Gaul was rumored to be a former girlfriend of Davis — who, like the dead teenagers, once was a Scientologist.

Davis had lived at the same housing complex as Gaul, but in a police interview in the 1970s he denied knowing her. Years later, another man confessed to killing the pair in a robbery but was never charged. He has since died.

Death of a lawyer
Then there was the death of Ronald Hughes.

The 35-year-old attorney strongly defended Leslie Van Houten during the family’s murder trial, seemingly at the expense of Manson.

“We recessed for the weekend, and Manson — who sat in the corner of the counsel table — pointed to Hughes and said to her attorney: ‘I don’t want to see you in this courtroom again.’ And we never saw him again,” Kay said.

In late November 1970, as the trial neared its end, Hughes disappeared. Four months later, his decomposed body turned up wedged in a rocky creek in Ventura County. Kay said Hughes was last seen swimming in the nearby hot springs right before a flash flood.

In “Helter Skelter” and in later interviews, Bugliosi suggested that Manson directed Hughes’ killing, calling it “the first of the retaliation murders.”

But Charlie Rudd, a retired Ventura County sheriff’s sergeant, told The Times in 2012 that Hughes’ death probably had nothing to do with Manson. Authorities recovered Hughes’ body near Sespe Hot Springs in the Los Padres National Forest, and Rudd said there was little evidence of foul play.

According to Rudd, the creek probably swelled dangerously and Hughes died either because he drowned or because he was battered to death by debris and rocks. “There was nothing else to indicate otherwise, and the medical examiner couldn’t come to a conclusion of anything other than that.”

Was Hughes murdered? Kay said he wasn’t so sure.

“I’m on the fence.”

[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times.]