I should have found a way and not gone over the fence and run down the hill. Member of the Manson Family (born 1949) Add links. 'Best at the backhand slash' might not have sold well to the jury. When Charlie meets with Susan, even though she's plumbed him firmly in it with confessions, articles, interviews,a book and a grand jury starring role, she recants and ends up granting herself a one way ticket to oblivion.Coincidence ?Tex and Linda, on the other hand, don't see or have contact with Charlie and stick with their stories {even though we know Tex's is bullshit, some of Linda's is corroborated by Joe Sage}.Coincidence ?Fits her personality (disorder? In his closing argument, he uttered some very telling words, namely; "The motives that the co~defendants, the actual killers, had, on the other hand, was a very simple motive. On August 8, 1969, Linda was selected to drive the killers to the Tate residence because she had the only valid driver's license. Secondlyhow did the jury know she was different? And some members of the killer's families such as Leslie's dad or one of Tex's siblings might have lived for years haunted by what someone they loved was capable of doing.My original point in the above post was just to say that old cliche of being impossible to judge a person or situation unless you walk a mile in their shoes. We all know that the Saint is a good guy. If Kanarek had handled this properly they never would have heard it. It was done with no thought, " may offer a window into the confusion and their lack of planning and co~ordination. And nothing she said could ever be used against her co~defendants.and Leslie lined up right behind her to do the same by puttin' on the crazy brainwashed actYou frequently say this even though it is frequently pointed out to you that this simply isn't the case and demonstrably so. The Brits threw him out because he was accused of rape. When her second marriage started to deteriorate, the article stated that Linda and Tanya moved back to New Hampshire to live with Joyce. She has always maintained at hearing she knew nothing about that being a motive and says she thought it was a robbery.Nice jab at Trump supporters too. Manson Blog Proves the Updated Manson File is Fiction! He said something to the effect that Charlie had a very strong case and that there was pretty much no evidence against him. How perfect did the stars align for the prosecutor that there was one angel among the group. I hope I do thatI think you do.This is a good piece. ?Everybody in this story represents the human side. How's that? Given that she says all this in more or less the same group of sentences {in Robert's book}, which is it ? As we all know Linda Kasabian was born Linda Darlene Drouin on June 21, 1949. IF I was one of the defense attorneys, I would have asked Linda and most other Prosecution witnesses:1) I'm a little confused and maybe you can help us ALL understand this Helter Skelter business a little better. I believe it. I still thought I read something somewhere that Krenwinkel said it at a parole hearing or something. Linda Darlene Drouin was born on 21 June 1949, in Biddeford, Maine, US as the eldest child of Rosaire Drouin and Joyce Taylor. But he never answers the leading the witness objection. I certainly wouldn't rely on it for back up proving Linda to be dodgy. Manson Mythos saidThere is an interesting quote from Fleischmann in an issue of the Free Press prior to Kasabian becoming the star witness. A trip to see the SS might have broken his case apart and make another witness (DeCarlo) useless. At least ONE Black man personally died in the jungles of Vietnam so HE could get a FREE Blow-Job. If she was serious about half of what she said on it, she wouldn't have tried to avoid arrest. There aren't many theories though. I did not mean to offend and apoligise if I didYou didn't offend at all.I'll stop now. Everything he did was part of a plan to wage a horrible warDon't get me wrong, I'm not a 3rd Reich admirer or apologist. Later, Robert Kasabian contacted Linda and invited her to meet him in Los Angeles. But when I compare the before with the after in Jay's death, for me there's no comparison.The question is why would Atkins leave Sharon, alive and alone, in the house to take this little stroll?Going to get a knife from Linda, struggling with Frykowski towards the front door, shouting to Tex for helpThere is no one inside. DEBUNKING THE BUNK PART 1: A Look at Joel Rostau, Thoughts on the LaBiancas and the motive on August 10th, Benedict Canyon Acoustics and Bugliosi's Timeline, The Law: Conspiracy to Commit Murder, Felony Murder and One for the Colonel. Thank you for this post- very interesting and thought provoking. Those failed strategies are ineffective in bringing about change. It was at this point of time that she got associated with the Manson family and became a part of their horrific crimes. It's kind of passed into folklore that that is the reason but no reason has ever been actually given. She was the key witness in District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi's prosecution of Manson and his followers for the Tate-LaBianca murders. AustinAnn74 earlier pointed out, regarding Linda, What if she wouldn't have testified? The parts I found 'dramatic' would probably pass many people by. Dreath saidDo I give weight to what anyone says after they were convicted: Not much. The trial was covered extensively by the media and after it ended, she returned to New Hampshire to be with her husband and children in peace and away from media attention. Linda married Robert Peasley when she was only sixteen-years-old. If Kasabian was what you are implying here, Nader would be dead and with Clem and Sadie as accomplices, no one would be any the wiser. Goddamn I am tripping back to like 1998. We can listen to Schrek and George and the others who came later claiming to have talked to everyone around the actual killers.Or we can listen to the animals who actually did it?????? So WHY go the distance. AustinAnn74 saidI never thought she was an innocent flower childOf her being a Hippie he commented that "if any witness was ever placed under a microscope, it was Linda Kasabian, and I am convinced that each and every one of you saw the same thing under that microscope, a young hippie girl whose aimless drug oriented life tragically led her to Spahn Ranch, Charles Manson, and two nights of murder ~ two nights of horror"Hippies were not seen as the vanguard of morality or these nice folk that straight society looked to as the shining example of what young people were to be. Went to high school with her in Milford, NH. But1. He asks her again and she reaffirms the timeframe. We believe there to be more than one motive. Her association with substance abusers was still the same. At the very least, he was an accessory before the fact in that particular crime. But what happened before and after that. But if he did use Helter Skleter to motivate the others to do the crimes for him, and those who actually did the killing- thought they were doing it in the name of Helter Skleter.Which is the real motive? Dreath, I seem to agree with most things you have said.Does it carry any weight with you that The Actual Killers say they want there to ignite H/S?? It certainly wasn't even a consideration when she gives her own point of view on why she recanted.All 5 Tate/LaBianca killers, when apart from Charlie told others he'd orchestrated the murders. Some things I read even suggested physical abuse. Their involvement in the murders was soon discovered. You leave it to someone else to decide if someone is lying: judge or jury. Hardly surprising given the dramatic nature of the cast of characters. I'm kinda thinkn' there were plenty of precursors, gleefully ignored, or dismissed.Linda's report cards packed with A's and B's? I did know that that was, the plan was to murder two women inside the house. Eventually, Linda moved to Boston where she married a man named Robert Kasabian. I don't believe he was the masterminded behind the Hinman murder. All the stuff we're interested in wasn't of such weighty consideration for a jury that wanted facts about who did what and why and were they guilty ?And there are times her testimony 'just don't make no sense'There were times when Kanarek's questions just made no sense ! If Linda did in fact have a valid driver's license. I've never thought of it like that. She chose to be the way she was and then she eventually became the same kind of parent that Diane and Ruth had.So Sad. Reporters ask someone who is being arrested for murder to say something to which she replies "I don't care if the whole world comes down, I'm not talking." Yes, if you stop at the Grand Jury he has no case against Kasabian as it's inadmissible and/or it was all he had. document.write(''); Uh oh, not being a 'motive guy' I best stay out of this. Dreath saidyou have a tendency to 'move the goal posts' which makes responding to you rather difficultIf by that you mean that I seem to jump around on the subjects and quotes I'll comment on, that's true. // -->,