Usually, when I'm reading them, I try to guess who has written them before I get to the end. A month before he was even on the case, the police had Charles Manson down as a suspect and things were unravelling.Not only that, they all happened to be dramatic and under the surfaces lurks alternative and more reasonable possibilitiesAll happened to be dramatic ? They had a second child together, and Robert Kasabian left for South America. Both maligned by so-called democrats and liberal media with out-of-context quotes. Nothing new. His closing argument, like the closing argument of any attorney, is just that 'argument'. She's the better alternative to a man who says "mean things".I will say Donald Trump and Manson are very similar. She down plays her Boston arrest by saying she was present where narcotics were present (technically correct) but wouldn't it have been fun to have a few more details for the jury: a fed/state narcotics raid involving 20k worth of LSD? ?Leslie & Tex are the only ones that have stated that categorically and have remained with it. That's hardly her doing. Susan Denise Atkins aka Sadie Mae Glutz . MM, Thank you on the PK- I didn't recall her saying it was but didn't know.I think you have to be a bit careful. It has positive aspects but often, is anything but.Linda is one person people on both sides can agree was no good personally.I wouldn't say that about anybody. I love Bill Kurtis, just the way he would say "body" (somewhere between body and buddy, so I can imagine his pronunciation of Linda's last name would be intriguing. Far more than the others that actually went to jail, fingers can be pointed at Linda about how not to conduct one's life. Its been awhile but I think I recall she said she took his wallet. It was through Charles Melton that she came into contact with Catherine Gypsy Share, a member of Manson family. He also wasn't interested as long as they had Susan even though it was reluctantly.That all said, have a look at this interesting piece from Col Scott's site 7 years ago and tell me what you think. But not every brain is wired the same - our neurotransmitters are just ridiculously different in everyone. Not even in her Grand Jury testimony did Atkins say anything. Sure, I see all that but what are the statistics for us on this site related to those issues? Dec. 3, 1969, Concord, N.H. - Linda Kasabian, right, covers her face as Los Angeles Police woman Joan Simpson escorts her from Court House to start the trip back to California. A young Linda, as per her friends, neighbours and teachers, was intelligent, kind and shy but starry-eyed romantic. If it took Clem 2 years to clear the drug residue from his head and Susan 5 years to be thinking clearly and Gypsy a decade to free her mind of Charlie & Spahn and if Brooks can say Charlie had a vice grip on his mind and if Tex can admit that he ran away then came back, then ran away finally then still made his way back, was somehow drawn back, then you can see that young people aged 20~23 weren't going to suddenly switch back to pre~rebel thinking and self preservation and put it all on Tex when he was part of the Family. WOW! It must have taken a lot of time and effort to research and put this post together. In HS Bugliosi more or less says the same thing. I find some of the holes {depending on what one may see as a hole} lead to interesting places but still nowhere that dents her essential picture of what happened.Or for purposes of this blog do they show an alternative narrative to what is the official narrativeIn terms of why they were put away, I've yet to be convinced that the alternatives proposed have been what actually took place. She later became the prosecutions chief witness against Charles Manson and his followers after the 1969Tate-LaBianca murders. After her sophomore year she dropped out to marry Robert Moses Peaslee. AKA: Linda Christian, Yana the Witch, Linda Chiochios. Post this, she moved in with her father who was working as a bartender in Miami. Of course, "robbery" also STIMULATES a capitalist society. So if I appear to be defending her or anyone else that is generally presented as unsavoury, it's because I think there should be a balance to anyone spoken about.Even Charles Watson. About Nadar.You are missing the point, Grim. As for the night of LaBianca, it's so shrouded in mystery and there are so many questions that I am not exactly sure what his role was. Clear and simple, murder. Note all the white faces. After the trials you have 'the' motive and it is in their best interest to jump on the band wagon. I try not to view life in a binary way. Sgt. I would have testified without a deal" translates when the evidence is revealed to 'I'm not talking even if the sky falls (but I will for immunity)". ?I think Linda is one person people on both sides can agree was no good personally. ME thinks there might be a REAL story there. It was the general consensus at the end of '69/start of '70 that the prosecution had a very weak case. Thing is though, it can be hard to spot or be conclusive at the time because it feels kind of heavy to assume a child or teenager is on the road to ruin due to things they might have done or be doing that haven't yet bloomed into something that everyone holds their heads in their hands about.That job as an aide at a nursing home sounds so kind and sweet..Perhaps I'm cynical, and she found joy sponge bathing a freshly soiled seniorI don't think you were being any more cynical than anyone else gets when discussing Mrs K and I don't think she was a nursing home aide out of some strong desire to replicate Florence Nightingale. Yeah, all true.There again, some of us have brothers, sisters, Dads, Mums, cousins, close friends etc that are in that vein and we still love them just the same and haven't yet abandoned them, though it may have been touch and go sometimes.You have a different sort of connection to your family and close friends than you do to a stranger who you have never met I hope.Had my brother lived a life like Lindas- maybe I feel some obligation to go above and beyond to feel something he doesn't deserve. Because the media and Bernie told me so. Kids who got in trouble in school and did not finish high school- and most of them don't go on to become murderers. About what time did you arrive at the place?A (by Kasabian). And there are times her testimony 'just don't make no sense'.A large part of this never saw the light of day because as Mr. Hendrickson noted there was no $$$$. ?Then she walks and spends the rest of her live breaking the law and partying wit her own child who she breaks laws with.Human side? A couple of days later, she escaped and later returned to her mothers home in New Hampshire along with her daughter. Bobby about mescaline deals and Danny DeCarlo, Pat about not carving WAR on Leno or instructing Leslie to wipe prints {she told the '78 hearing panel there were "15 or 16" things that she would like to correct that Steven Kay got wrong}, Susan about not stabbing Sharon, Leslie about being coerced to "do something," Bruce about the involvement of Tex, Bill Vance & Larry Jones in Shorty's murder and Tex about Susan not stabbing Tate, carving WAR and making Leslie stab Rosemary when she had chickened out ~ none of these things are part of the official record and are not taken on board as being so but the prisoners continue[d] to follow those lines.I'm of the opinion that some of what you get from people who are willing to spill the beans after conviction have to be taken on board if one is going to attempt to understand these people in the aftermath of that point they were at when they committed their crimes. Manson Blog Proves that Tenerelli Was Not a Gypsy Joker! Now, give me an approximation.A. "Journey into Darkness" is a good start. There is no reason why it would be rejected when she went to see Bobby Beausoleil. ]But her last statement in the world of saintly jurists is not 'reliable': you as the listener/ reader should stop listening/reading where indicated. When this second marriage hit the rocks, Linda.