The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Vincent Bugliosi, RIP
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Bugliosi was the hard-nosed Los Angeles prosecutor who got Charles Manson convicted of murder (which was legally harder than it sounds — I mean, he’s Charles Manson, right? — because Manson wasn’t at the scene of the crimes). He then became a strong writer of true crime fiction.

Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti (the current mayor’s dad) should have brought Bugliosi back to prosecute O.J. Simpson in return for the book rights. (Using a hired gun prosecutor worked for Indianopolis in Mike Tyson case: they brought back their best ex-prosecutor who had moved on to higher-paying defense work.)

Instead, Garcetti went with the civil servants, who botched the OJ trial. (I liked how several episodes of The Unbreakable Kimmie Schmidt were devoted to eviscerating Marcia Clark and Chris Darden for their long ago failures on the OJ case. Revenge is a dish best served 20 years cold.) If Bugliosi had been the prosecutor, the jury would have convicted not only OJ, but Johnny Cochran too, just on general principles.

 
Hide 175 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    An interesting documentary film was made a few years ago entitled ‘Manson the Man Who Killed the ’60s’.
    Excellent title for a film, it just about says it all, in that Charles Manson more or less singlehandedly ‘killed’ the whole concept of the late 60s at least, the Height Astbury delusion of gentle bearded long hairedness, love and peace, ‘raised consciousness’ and all the rest of it.
    Saying all that, Manson, the evil little fraudster himself, is still very much a ‘cultural hero’, in the sense that he somehow embodies the general craziness, and eventual dissolution of that whole era. Strangely enough, the Apollo moon landings happened at around the same time.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Anonymous

    I believe at the time Rolling Stone magazine was all set to come out with an issue glamorizing the Manson Family as anti-establishment rebels when at the last minute they decided to have a visit with Bugliosi's LA prosectutor's office leading to them to significately moderate the tone of their cover story.

    You think they could have learned a thing or two.

    , @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    ....Actually, I think 1970 killed the 60's...and not a minute too soon

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    , @Dirk Dagger
    @Anonymous

    In a weird 60s' twist Bugliosi was born, but not raised, in Hibbing, Minnesota, Bob Dylan's hometown (though he was born and lived in Duluth until school age).

    , @Prof. Woland
    @Anonymous

    Runner up would have to be the Rolling Stones concert at the Altamont Speedway. That was the one where they only had 4 porta-potty's and hired the Hell's Angels using beer as pay to handle security.

  2. I don’t know why Manson has such a bad reputation, he has a pretty mainstream, PC world view:
    Helter Skelter

    … Black men … would lash out in violent crimes against whites. A resultant murderous rampage against blacks by frightened whites would … provoke an internecine war of near-extermination between racist and non-racist whites over blacks’ treatment. Then the militant blacks would arise to … finish off the few whites … to have survived;

    In this holocaust, the members of the enlarged Family would have little to fear; they would wait out the war in a secret city …

    What college-educated liberal would disagree with that? Manson would be on the right side of the Ferguson issue.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Charlie was actually a pretty good musician...I downloaded some of his jailhouse recordings.

    Most of it was schizophrenic ramblings, but a few of those songs are actually quite good.

    He had some talent...I guess that's part of what enabled him to reel in the girls for the 'family'

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jim, @Ron Mexico

    , @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    "I don’t know why Manson has such a bad reputation".
    The Unabomber has a bad rep as well, but some of his views are prescient.

    , @SFG
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    You might eventually see people who regard him as a mad prophet, like the Marquis de Sade. Aleister Crowley has a fanbase, and he apparently did kill at least one person.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  3. • Replies: @Whiskey
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Oh yes seen it. Heartiste covered it in length I believe. If you're not reading his blig daily you should. Its full of ISteve stuff.

    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.

    Replies: @anonymous

  4. I read Helter Skelter while in my teens. Crazy story, crazy times. Switched me onto the Beatles.

  5. Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    • Replies: @e
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Ito didn't help matters.

    I think you're right, though. I can't see that there was any way a jury seated in that area would have convicted OJ.

    , @dearieme
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    "The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA": stupidly or wickedly?

    , @I, Libertine
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    You are absolutely right. Those black female jurors wouldn't have convicted OJ if they had been eyewitnesses. Marcia's inexperience showed (Darden was assistant counsel in charge of being black), but the game was over when Garcetti overconfidently set venue there.

    Remember. One of the jurors said in a televised interview that OJ "probably" did it, but they weren't convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. Then she went to OJ's victory party. Think about that.

    , @prosa123
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Holding the Simpson trial downtown was more or less unavoidable. AIUI, the facilities in Santa Monica weren't really suitable for what was certain to be a huge media circus. While there were other branch courthouses in LA County that would have been physically more suitable, under state law they weren't available. Trials either had to be in the nearest branch courthouses (Santa Monica for Simpson) or in the main facility downtown.

    , @Prof. Woland
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Marcia Clark thought the case would be easy. Just show a bunch of close ups of the battered woman to a female jury. Unfortunately, she did not anticipate that the jury would only see some white bitch.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  6. @Anonymous
    An interesting documentary film was made a few years ago entitled 'Manson the Man Who Killed the '60s'.
    Excellent title for a film, it just about says it all, in that Charles Manson more or less singlehandedly 'killed' the whole concept of the late 60s at least, the Height Astbury delusion of gentle bearded long hairedness, love and peace, 'raised consciousness' and all the rest of it.
    Saying all that, Manson, the evil little fraudster himself, is still very much a 'cultural hero', in the sense that he somehow embodies the general craziness, and eventual dissolution of that whole era. Strangely enough, the Apollo moon landings happened at around the same time.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @Prof. Woland

    I believe at the time Rolling Stone magazine was all set to come out with an issue glamorizing the Manson Family as anti-establishment rebels when at the last minute they decided to have a visit with Bugliosi’s LA prosectutor’s office leading to them to significately moderate the tone of their cover story.

    You think they could have learned a thing or two.

  7. @Hippopotamusdrome
    I don't know why Manson has such a bad reputation, he has a pretty mainstream, PC world view:
    Helter Skelter

    ... Black men ... would lash out in violent crimes against whites. A resultant murderous rampage against blacks by frightened whites would ... provoke an internecine war of near-extermination between racist and non-racist whites over blacks' treatment. Then the militant blacks would arise to ... finish off the few whites ... to have survived;

    In this holocaust, the members of the enlarged Family would have little to fear; they would wait out the war in a secret city ...
     
    What college-educated liberal would disagree with that? Manson would be on the right side of the Ferguson issue.

    Replies: @anonymous, @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @SFG

    Charlie was actually a pretty good musician…I downloaded some of his jailhouse recordings.

    Most of it was schizophrenic ramblings, but a few of those songs are actually quite good.

    He had some talent…I guess that’s part of what enabled him to reel in the girls for the ‘family’

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    , @Jim
    @anonymous

    Didn't Alvin Karpis teach him how to play the guitar?

    , @Ron Mexico
    @anonymous

    Guns N Roses recorded a song of his on The Spaghetti Incident.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  8. @anonymous
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Charlie was actually a pretty good musician...I downloaded some of his jailhouse recordings.

    Most of it was schizophrenic ramblings, but a few of those songs are actually quite good.

    He had some talent...I guess that's part of what enabled him to reel in the girls for the 'family'

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jim, @Ron Mexico

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian’s younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day’s son.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Steve Sailer

    Not only that but the Sharon Tate murders were a botched attempt to murder Doris Day's son the very successful record producer Terry Melcher (The Byrds and many others) and his then girlfriend Candice Bergen. Melcher had pervious rented the house where Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate were living, and Tate was mistaken for Bergen and fellow victim Jay Sebring for Melcher .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Melcher

    Manson wanted Melcher murdered because he made the mistake of telling Manson he had no musical talent.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    , @Jesse
    @Steve Sailer

    "Manson became a pal of Brian’s younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day’s son."

    If you read Jeff Guinn's excellent biography of Manson, it's not really true about Terry Melcher. It's more that Manson fixated on Melcher as someone who could get him a recording deal. As Doris Day's son, and a successful man in his own right, Melcher had honed the fine art of keeping the crazies at a distance without taking the risk - or expending the effort - of actively pushing them away.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Of course, as we all know, Manson really wanted to butcher record producer Terry Melcher, Doris Day's son, rather than Sharon Tate et al, when his dummy disciples raided and massacred at that rented LA mansion. Manson was under the impression that Melcher lived there. His dumb bastard followers took his word as gospel and killed totally innocent people because Manson put them up to it.
    Manson had a beef with Terry Melcher no doubt because Melcher did not think that Manson's 'music' was a viable business proposition. So Manson, who had spent most of his life in jail wanted to 'deal' with Melcher the way a hardened and embittered criminal would 'deal' with someone who disappoints them.
    Only his stupid bastard acolytes thought in their deluded way they were fighting some 'holy war' in the name of their 'prophet'.

    Replies: @anonymous

    , @WhatEvvs
    @Steve Sailer

    I'm sorry to hear of Bugliosi's passing. He was an amazing guy. Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.

    Re Manson, it's disturbing how well-connected he was to the LA/Hollywood music scene. The Manson girls hung out with Mama Cass Elliott and they became such pests she had to throw them out. There's all kinds of stories like that in Hollywood. Scary.

    Replies: @Brent, @Reg Cæsar

    , @bacon habanero ranch
    @Steve Sailer

    Wasn't Doris Day's son a well-known drug dealer around BH?

    Replies: @manton, @Dirk Dagger

  9. @Hippopotamusdrome
    I don't know why Manson has such a bad reputation, he has a pretty mainstream, PC world view:
    Helter Skelter

    ... Black men ... would lash out in violent crimes against whites. A resultant murderous rampage against blacks by frightened whites would ... provoke an internecine war of near-extermination between racist and non-racist whites over blacks' treatment. Then the militant blacks would arise to ... finish off the few whites ... to have survived;

    In this holocaust, the members of the enlarged Family would have little to fear; they would wait out the war in a secret city ...
     
    What college-educated liberal would disagree with that? Manson would be on the right side of the Ferguson issue.

    Replies: @anonymous, @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @SFG

    “I don’t know why Manson has such a bad reputation”.
    The Unabomber has a bad rep as well, but some of his views are prescient.

  10. Using a hired gun prosecutor worked for Indianopolis in Mike Tyson case: they brought back their best ex-prosecutor who had moved on to higher-paying defense work.

    No question that Indianapolis’s local conservative talk radio host Greg Garrison was a highly competent proscecutor. Still he went up against an legal team picked by Tyson’s manager Don King with little criminal defense experience and no connections with the Indianapolis legal scene.

    Still it would hae been interesting if Garrison went toe to toe with Tyson’s appeals attorney Alan Dershowitz at the initial trial.

    ‘Mike Tyson rape case was inevitable, I’m surprised more girls didn’t make claims against him,’ former manager opens up about boxer’s sex addiction

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2945856/Mike-Tyson-rape-case-inevitable-m-surprised-girls-didn-t-make-claims-against-former-manager-opens-boxer-s-sex-addiction.html#ixzz3cY1wmz00
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  11. @Malcolm X-Lax
    Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    Replies: @e, @dearieme, @I, Libertine, @prosa123, @Prof. Woland

    Ito didn’t help matters.

    I think you’re right, though. I can’t see that there was any way a jury seated in that area would have convicted OJ.

  12. @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    Not only that but the Sharon Tate murders were a botched attempt to murder Doris Day’s son the very successful record producer Terry Melcher (The Byrds and many others) and his then girlfriend Candice Bergen. Melcher had pervious rented the house where Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate were living, and Tate was mistaken for Bergen and fellow victim Jay Sebring for Melcher .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Melcher

    Manson wanted Melcher murdered because he made the mistake of telling Manson he had no musical talent.

    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Correction there is debate on whether Manson, knew Melcher was still living at Cielo drive when the Tate murders took place. Manson and his crew were tripping on acid most of the time. But Clearly Manson was motivated by the idea of intimidating Melcher.

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2786524/

    Replies: @Chris, @Jacobite

  13. @Hippopotamusdrome

    Oh yes seen it. Heartiste covered it in length I believe. If you’re not reading his blig daily you should. Its full of ISteve stuff.

    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Whiskey


    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.
     
    Bingo, that's what seems to have happened. You're the man.

    Replies: @Rifleman

  14. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Steve Sailer

    Not only that but the Sharon Tate murders were a botched attempt to murder Doris Day's son the very successful record producer Terry Melcher (The Byrds and many others) and his then girlfriend Candice Bergen. Melcher had pervious rented the house where Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate were living, and Tate was mistaken for Bergen and fellow victim Jay Sebring for Melcher .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Melcher

    Manson wanted Melcher murdered because he made the mistake of telling Manson he had no musical talent.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    Correction there is debate on whether Manson, knew Melcher was still living at Cielo drive when the Tate murders took place. Manson and his crew were tripping on acid most of the time. But Clearly Manson was motivated by the idea of intimidating Melcher.

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2786524/

    • Replies: @Chris
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Tex Watson said Manson directed him to the place where Melcher "used to live." Manson had been to Cielo looking for Melcher a few months before the murders and probably saw Sharon Tate. He got turned away which must have eaten at him.

    Manson had musical ability, just not the kind that could be turned into a top 40 hit, which was what would interest Terry Melcher. He auditioned Manson politely at the behest of Gregg Jakobson, a friend of Wilson who also liked Charlie.

    , @Jacobite
    @anonymous-antimarxist


    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles
     
    Bigger than The Beatles??? The Beatles were bigger than Jesus Christ. John Lennon said so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  15. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Correction there is debate on whether Manson, knew Melcher was still living at Cielo drive when the Tate murders took place. Manson and his crew were tripping on acid most of the time. But Clearly Manson was motivated by the idea of intimidating Melcher.

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2786524/

    Replies: @Chris, @Jacobite

    Tex Watson said Manson directed him to the place where Melcher “used to live.” Manson had been to Cielo looking for Melcher a few months before the murders and probably saw Sharon Tate. He got turned away which must have eaten at him.

    Manson had musical ability, just not the kind that could be turned into a top 40 hit, which was what would interest Terry Melcher. He auditioned Manson politely at the behest of Gregg Jakobson, a friend of Wilson who also liked Charlie.

  16. In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist’s shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his “family” as the “end of the Sixties,” so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @Auntie Analogue

    As someone who grew up in the '60's, it's weird to remember, because it seemed every year, and particularly every summer, was packed with one memorable event or crisis after another.

    The summer of 1969 was relatively staid compared to 1968, at least, at the beginning. The moon landing, which was in preparation, was on most people's minds. The launch began on July 16, mid-week. The landing itself ("The Eagle Has Landed") too place on Sunday, July 20. In between, Teddy Kennedy was involved in the Chappaquiddick incident on the previous Friday night, July 18. The Apollo 11 astronauts landed in the Pacific the following Thursday, July 24.

    The Manson murders took place just a bit over 2 weeks later, August 8-10, 1969. That was a shock: not so much because of the hippie angle, just the killings as such. Woodstock took place the following weekend.

    There were lots of other memorable events that year but the one I think really killed the '60's was the Altamont concert on December 6. The death of at least one attendee and the use of the Hell's Angels to provide security was pretty much it, as far as most people were concerned. Of course, again, there were lots of other things, such as the My Lai revelations, but I don't think people were so much surprised by that as disgusted.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @unit472

    , @BurplesonAFB
    @Auntie Analogue

    Yeah, I'd have to adjudicate the end of the 60s as December 1969 as well.

    , @Former Darfur
    @Auntie Analogue

    "In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist’s shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his “family” as the “end of the Sixties,” so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin."


    I've always believed that the so called "The Sixties" could be dated as accurately as being between 8/8/62 (the bizarre spectacle burial of Marilyn Monroe) and 8/8/74 (resignation speech of Richard M. Nixon) as in any other way. In neither case was that the absolute defining event, but it was in the middle on both ends and a convenient demarc, since Monroe so well represented fifties American culture and Nixon so vividly enraged the counterculture.

    As far as Bugliosi's book, I've read it and I don't think it "positively proves" Oswald acted alone, although it does make the case as well as any book could. I'm skeptical for several reasons, but mostly 1) the bizarre circumstances of Oswald's return to the US, 2) Oswald's bizarre choice of what was and is well accepted to be the worst rifle of WWII, when the best were all readily available for a couple days' pay via mailorder, including the M-1 Garand with which he trained as a Marine and 3) the lengths to which somebody went to kill him before he could talk (I do not accept that Ruby just did this on his own, he wasn't that sort.)

    Replies: @prosa123

  17. John Douglas, the former FBI forensic psychologist and profiler, has a different take on Manson, whom he interviewed and studied. He believes the Tate murders were carried out against Manson’s wishes by Tex Watson, who was trying to rival Manson for influence in the group. When Manson heard what had happened, he led them to the LaBianca house to do it again, but didn’t go in and take part, because he was on parole. He couldn’t back down at that stage, when his fanatical followers believed the helter-skelter had begun and wanted more blood – he would lose all authority among them if he told them they had taken his prophecies too seriously.

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn’t think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released – this was written 20 years ago.

    • Replies: @hodag
    @Rob McX

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Anonym

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Rob McX

    "Rob McX says:

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn’t think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released – this was written 20 years ago."

    I remember that from when I read his book (a very interesting read too). However, there is a danger in releasing him: that he might do the same thing again - mesmerize a bunch of young people into forming a murder-cult. He still has followers - one young groupie who visits him in prison has announced her intention to marry him.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Rob McX

  18. Ezra says:

    “Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti (the current mayor’s dad) should have brought Bugliosi back to prosecute O.J. Simpson in return for the book rights.”

    Garcetti should have done this, but I doubt he would be the current mayor’s dad if had. They pretty obviously threw the case for politics.

    His book on Oswald killing JFK is outstanding, I think.

  19. Don’t think so. “If the glove don’t fit you must acquit” was all the defense needed for that jury to secure a not guilty plea. Of course that’s dependent on on Vincent getting a change of venue.

  20. Those who say Manson had musical ability don’t realize how easy it is to write a three chord folk-rock song, especially if your not concerned how stupid the lyrics are (“Garbage dump, oh garbage dump”).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @josh

    Not all of his stuff was gold (most of it was bronze, if that)... But there *is* something there.

    A lot of musicians liked his stuff... Neil Young, Johnny Ramone.....Guns and Roses and the Beach Boys covered his songs. Henry Rollins produced a record with him but refused to release it after some protests.

    It's not going to be everyone's cup of tea (obviously)...but not because it's too 'easy' or only '3-chords'

  21. Bugliosi conclusively proved that Oswald was the shooter in the JFK assasination. That alone should earn him the undying appreciation of the educated layman.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    @jstrocchi

    I doubt it, would be a bit above a trial lawyer to understand, more a thugs and spies area. Good reason Oswald could never be allowed to stand trial, even the Warren Commission was a farce and struggled to come up with plausible scenario, as Nixon admitted.

    Of course Oswald was an FBI informant who was infiltrating Cuban exile groups and right wing subversive groups as an agent of the Defence Intelligence Agency. Doing a much better job of it than his infiltration of the Soviet Union as a supposed defector, KGB didn't fall for that one.

  22. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The best Manson book remains that of Jeff Guinn, easily available; when combined with your memories, anyone over 50 should reflect: Oh yeah, that Bigger than the Beatles bollocks. Forget it. Re: Josh.
    You Americans don’t understand how close your so-called pop culture is to barbarism.
    You believe in nothing, you believe in any shit.
    Read Guinn’s book. Also his Bonny and Clyde, if you wish. Same thing. There’s modernism — for which, yes, God bless America ! — then there’s the reaction of the lumpen counter-culture and its thugs; also America.
    Calling from good old Australia, that 18th century Pacific convict colony that replaced yours: please, America, count your blessings, and make up your mind.

  23. @Anonymous
    An interesting documentary film was made a few years ago entitled 'Manson the Man Who Killed the '60s'.
    Excellent title for a film, it just about says it all, in that Charles Manson more or less singlehandedly 'killed' the whole concept of the late 60s at least, the Height Astbury delusion of gentle bearded long hairedness, love and peace, 'raised consciousness' and all the rest of it.
    Saying all that, Manson, the evil little fraudster himself, is still very much a 'cultural hero', in the sense that he somehow embodies the general craziness, and eventual dissolution of that whole era. Strangely enough, the Apollo moon landings happened at around the same time.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @Prof. Woland

    ….Actually, I think 1970 killed the 60’s…and not a minute too soon

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Anonymous

    Think of just about every stereotype of the '60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the '70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair -- not really long hair -- on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous, @Anonymous

  24. @Rob McX
    John Douglas, the former FBI forensic psychologist and profiler, has a different take on Manson, whom he interviewed and studied. He believes the Tate murders were carried out against Manson's wishes by Tex Watson, who was trying to rival Manson for influence in the group. When Manson heard what had happened, he led them to the LaBianca house to do it again, but didn't go in and take part, because he was on parole. He couldn't back down at that stage, when his fanatical followers believed the helter-skelter had begun and wanted more blood - he would lose all authority among them if he told them they had taken his prophecies too seriously.

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn't think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released - this was written 20 years ago.

    Replies: @hodag, @Mr. Anon

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @hodag

    "hodag says:

    @Rob McX

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense."

    What Douglas started out doing made a lot of sense - talking to criminals to see what motivated them, why they did certain things. He didn't just interview serial killers. He also interviewed bank robbers. It was a good idea and strikes me as pretty sound police work.

    It's true that "profiling" became inflated in the public mind into some kind of magical art of divination, largely due to the operatic crime novels of Thomas Harris, who made the serial killer into some kind of depraved culture-hero. And, of course, the FBI got a lot of it wrong (the FBI gets a lot of things wrong) - their profile of the Unabomber probably led them farther away from the actual perpetrator and delayed his capture by years.

    , @Anonym
    @hodag

    Looking at sets of people with one trait and noticing that they have other traits in common is what the hbd community does. As long as there are provisos that profiling can only help to potentially cut down on wasted effort and is not conclusive, it is simply ignorant to conflate that with what a psychic does.

  25. @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    “Manson became a pal of Brian’s younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day’s son.”

    If you read Jeff Guinn’s excellent biography of Manson, it’s not really true about Terry Melcher. It’s more that Manson fixated on Melcher as someone who could get him a recording deal. As Doris Day’s son, and a successful man in his own right, Melcher had honed the fine art of keeping the crazies at a distance without taking the risk – or expending the effort – of actively pushing them away.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Jesse

    That was part of what freaked out the entertainment industry so much about the Manson murders: there were always lots of fringe folks hanging around, and at the end of the 1960s with the youth revolution in taste making everything uncertain, they'd been letting them get a little closer.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger

  26. @Malcolm X-Lax
    Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    Replies: @e, @dearieme, @I, Libertine, @prosa123, @Prof. Woland

    “The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA”: stupidly or wickedly?

  27. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @josh
    Those who say Manson had musical ability don't realize how easy it is to write a three chord folk-rock song, especially if your not concerned how stupid the lyrics are ("Garbage dump, oh garbage dump").

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Not all of his stuff was gold (most of it was bronze, if that)… But there *is* something there.

    A lot of musicians liked his stuff… Neil Young, Johnny Ramone…..Guns and Roses and the Beach Boys covered his songs. Henry Rollins produced a record with him but refused to release it after some protests.

    It’s not going to be everyone’s cup of tea (obviously)…but not because it’s too ‘easy’ or only ‘3-chords’

  28. @Jesse
    @Steve Sailer

    "Manson became a pal of Brian’s younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day’s son."

    If you read Jeff Guinn's excellent biography of Manson, it's not really true about Terry Melcher. It's more that Manson fixated on Melcher as someone who could get him a recording deal. As Doris Day's son, and a successful man in his own right, Melcher had honed the fine art of keeping the crazies at a distance without taking the risk - or expending the effort - of actively pushing them away.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    That was part of what freaked out the entertainment industry so much about the Manson murders: there were always lots of fringe folks hanging around, and at the end of the 1960s with the youth revolution in taste making everything uncertain, they’d been letting them get a little closer.

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    @Steve Sailer

    Neil Young admits he liked Manson's stuff:


    I asked him if he had a recording contract. He told me he didn’t yet, but he wanted to make records. I told Mo Ostin at Reprise [Young's label at the time] about him, and recommended that Reprise check him out…. Shortly afterward, the Sharon Tate-La Bianca murders happened, and Charlie Manson’s name was known around the world.

     

    According to Young:

    He [Manson] was an angry man. But brilliant… He sounds like [Bob] Dylan when he talks.
     
    Trivia buffs will note that Bugliosi was born in Hibbing, Minnesota, Dylan's hometown. When Young's bandmate David Crosby was in the Byrds (1964-67) the record producer for their first two highly acclaimed albums was Terry Melcher.
  29. I’ve just been reading up on Tex Watson. He’s been in prison ever since the murders, but got married and fathered four children through conjugal visits. So much for the eugenic effects of incarceration!

    • Replies: @PB and J
    @Rob McX

    I believe that's referred to as "Carceral Game." Watson scoffs at the low reproductive score of "Mystery."

    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    @Rob McX


    Watson became a born-again Christian in 1975 and through non-incarcerated friends operates "aboundinglove.org." He has written about his role in the murders, stating that he believes that God has forgiven him.[6] Will You Die For Me?, Watson's autobiography, as told to "Chaplain Ray" (Ray Hoekstra), was published in 1978.[7] In 1979, he married Kristin Joan Svege. Through conjugal visits they were able to have four children (three boys, one girl), but those visits for life prisoners were banned in October 1996. After 24 years of marriage, Svege divorced Watson after meeting another man in 2003.[8] Svege and Watson remain friends as parents of their children. He graduated from California Coast University in 2009 with a B.S. in Business Management.[9]
     
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tex_Watson#Later_years

    Astounding, WTF were they thinking???

    Can not confirm with secondary sources but I once read that Mumia Abu Jamal has fathered numerous children with various female worshipers by having his defense staff ferry his sperm from death row. Mumia in additional to being a proud cop killer is a notorious radical black natalist and you might say "disgenicist".

    Another case for Vasalgel(RISUG)!!!
  30. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    Of course, as we all know, Manson really wanted to butcher record producer Terry Melcher, Doris Day’s son, rather than Sharon Tate et al, when his dummy disciples raided and massacred at that rented LA mansion. Manson was under the impression that Melcher lived there. His dumb bastard followers took his word as gospel and killed totally innocent people because Manson put them up to it.
    Manson had a beef with Terry Melcher no doubt because Melcher did not think that Manson’s ‘music’ was a viable business proposition. So Manson, who had spent most of his life in jail wanted to ‘deal’ with Melcher the way a hardened and embittered criminal would ‘deal’ with someone who disappoints them.
    Only his stupid bastard acolytes thought in their deluded way they were fighting some ‘holy war’ in the name of their ‘prophet’.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Anonymous

    Manson took two of his cult members to rob and kill a drug dealer who was tangentially affiliated with the black panthers. During the robbery the members chickened out and Manson ended up shooting the drug dealer himself. After this he became convinced that the black panthers were coming after him and would invade the Spahn ranch at any time. In reality the drug dealer had no pull with the panthers,was scared of Manson, and had no desire ever to see Manson again or revenge himself. Manson convinced his followers a race war was imminent so they would guard the ranch against black trespassers. The Tate and LaBianca murders were done to frame the panthers so they would not be able to come after Manson.

  31. @Whiskey
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Oh yes seen it. Heartiste covered it in length I believe. If you're not reading his blig daily you should. Its full of ISteve stuff.

    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.

    Replies: @anonymous

    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.

    Bingo, that’s what seems to have happened. You’re the man.

    • Replies: @Rifleman
    @anonymous


    "Chicks dig killers". Bingo, that’s what seems to have happened. You’re the man.
     
    There is nothing "manly" about commenter "Whiskey". Not now, not ever.

    He's "anti-man" as in the opposite of what a man is.

    Remember Whiskey's entire agenda gets down to "Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women. Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women. Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women."

    Always and forever.
  32. @Rob McX
    I've just been reading up on Tex Watson. He's been in prison ever since the murders, but got married and fathered four children through conjugal visits. So much for the eugenic effects of incarceration!

    Replies: @PB and J, @anonymous-antimarxist

    I believe that’s referred to as “Carceral Game.” Watson scoffs at the low reproductive score of “Mystery.”

  33. Bugliosi

    Didn’t Manson represent himself in the trial? Didn’t he openly threaten jurors? Didn’t he carve an X into his forehead (much latter altered to be a swastika? I am not thinking Bugliosi was a genius.

    • Replies: @Jasper Been
    @George

    You'd be right, George.

    http://www.ctka.net/reclaim.html

    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either - see William C Dear's book OJ is Innocent and I can prove it. Evidence suggests his son Jason did.

    Replies: @Rifleman, @Danindc

    , @Lugash
    @George

    This one has been on my reading list for several years. IIRC the author's argument is that the murders were vicious that OJ would have been splattered with blood, and there would have been an evidence trail going all the way back to his house. Given the crime scene photos, it sounds plausible.

  34. WhatEvvs [AKA "Prada Yada Yada"] says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    I’m sorry to hear of Bugliosi’s passing. He was an amazing guy. Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.

    Re Manson, it’s disturbing how well-connected he was to the LA/Hollywood music scene. The Manson girls hung out with Mama Cass Elliott and they became such pests she had to throw them out. There’s all kinds of stories like that in Hollywood. Scary.

    • Replies: @Brent
    @WhatEvvs

    Here's a fascinating website that traces all sorts of weird connections to the Laurel Canyon crowd, including Charles Manson.

    http://informationfarm.blogspot.com/2010/02/inside-lc-strange-but-mostly-true-story.html

    I don't buy everything the author says, but he's dug up some very interesting stuff. (His thesis is that the hippie counterculture was a Pentagon/CIA psyop designed to divert the anti-war movement into drug addiction and silly hedonism.)

    Replies: @Ed, @WhatEvvs

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @WhatEvvs


    Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.
     
    "Stole" implies there was a rightful winner. Who would that have been? Nader? Buchanan?

    Replies: @WhatEvvs

  35. I always s thought OJ’s trial was over at jury selection. Could Bugliosi have changed the make-up of the jury that much?

    • Replies: @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    , @Alfa158
    @Danindc

    That was it. Even when trying the case in Los Angeles instead of Santa Monica, LA's population was only around 15% black despite all those images of Watts. Selecting a jury that was more than 2/3 black was totally disproportionate. Those women basically thought Nicole had it coming to her for being one of those despised White women who stole a successful Black man away from his Black first wife.

    Replies: @Danindc

    , @jim sweeney
    @Danindc

    Had the trial been in Santa Monica, we would not have had to suffer Judge Ito as he wasn't in that courthouse. So, yes, the change in venue could easily have substantially changed the trial.

    Garcetti, ever a publicity hound, wanted the trial downtown so he could be available to the media regularly while wearing those expensive clothes provided by his wealthy wife's family. He was extremely vain and equally untalented.

  36. How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prosecution_of_George_W._Bush_for_Murder

    • Replies: @fnn
    @keypusher

    Art Deco was the Bush fan who frequented this site, is he still around?

    , @Jacobite
    @keypusher


    How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?
     
    I like them both!

    Replies: @David In TN

  37. @George
    Bugliosi

    Didn't Manson represent himself in the trial? Didn't he openly threaten jurors? Didn't he carve an X into his forehead (much latter altered to be a swastika? I am not thinking Bugliosi was a genius.

    Replies: @Jasper Been, @Lugash

    You’d be right, George.

    http://www.ctka.net/reclaim.html

    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either – see William C Dear’s book OJ is Innocent and I can prove it. Evidence suggests his son Jason did.

    • Replies: @Rifleman
    @Jasper Been


    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either
     
    Actually he did, pretty obviously.

    Jasper Been
    June 3, 2014 at 3:10 pm GMT

    HIV has never been proven to cause any disease.
     
    Well that explains your previously quoted claim.
    , @Danindc
    @Jasper Been

    Huh? No. William Dear is a nutcase who writes predominantly about Roswell aliens. OJ definitely did it....with help from the Mossad.

  38. @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    ....Actually, I think 1970 killed the 60's...and not a minute too soon

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...

    Think of just about every stereotype of the ’60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the ’70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair — not really long hair — on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    • Replies: @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Just to forestall some kneebiter that should be country's not countries. Forgot to do QA before publishing.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I agree with you. What people think of as the 1960s didn't end with Altamont or the Manson killings, it ended around the time Nixon resigned. Basically, Kennedy assassination through Nixon resignation, or the most active part of the Vietnam War. I moved to NYC in 1970 and was there for five years. The Fillmore East was hosting rock concerts nightly, underground comics were coming out regularly, feminism had not yet put a damper on free love--the whole scene was still very hippie-ish.

    Replies: @Jacobite, @Anonymous

    , @Anonymous
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I remember reading that someone who traveled to the Texas book depository was amazed that the shots were basically straight away at a slow moving target. Not impossible for a decent marksman.

    Replies: @Former Darfur, @Alfa158

    , @Anonymous
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Watched "The Graduate" the other night with my wife. Ann Bancroft was hot. Unfortunately "Scarbourgh faire" is now stuck in my head.

  39. Mike Zwick [AKA "Dahinda"] says:

    I am glad that somebody else thought Marcia Clark and Chris Darden bungled the case against O.J. A lot of people blamed Johnny Cochran, Robert Shapiro, and Barry Scheck for letting a murderer go free. They were just doing their job. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden didn’t do their job!

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    @Mike Zwick

    Yes, yes, but the nearly all minority jury from downtown LA certainly did their job.

    , @Sgt. Joe Friday
    @Mike Zwick

    But the second the trial was over, Shapiro rushed to find a TV camera, get in front of it, and assert that they "played the race card, and dealt it from the bottom of the deck," or words to that effect. I remarked to my wife that it looked like he was feeling a little guilty on the Jewish day of atonement.

  40. @Hippopotamusdrome
    I don't know why Manson has such a bad reputation, he has a pretty mainstream, PC world view:
    Helter Skelter

    ... Black men ... would lash out in violent crimes against whites. A resultant murderous rampage against blacks by frightened whites would ... provoke an internecine war of near-extermination between racist and non-racist whites over blacks' treatment. Then the militant blacks would arise to ... finish off the few whites ... to have survived;

    In this holocaust, the members of the enlarged Family would have little to fear; they would wait out the war in a secret city ...
     
    What college-educated liberal would disagree with that? Manson would be on the right side of the Ferguson issue.

    Replies: @anonymous, @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever..., @SFG

    You might eventually see people who regard him as a mad prophet, like the Marquis de Sade. Aleister Crowley has a fanbase, and he apparently did kill at least one person.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @SFG

    Did he?

    All I can think of are some continental European mountain climbers who fell out with Crowley whilst they were attempting to conquer mount Kanchenjunga way, way back in the very early 1900s.
    Apparently, they squabbled amongst themselves to such an extent that the continentals and Crowley went their separate ways. The continentals came badly unstuck and screamed for help before dying in various mishaps and accidents. Although they were not aware of Crowley's proximity, he could hear their screams. Relishing a certain satisfaction, he resolutely refused to help - apparently a cardinal sin in mountain climbing circles.
    Other than that, I'm not aware of Crowley deliberately 'killing' anyone.

  41. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Anonymous

    Think of just about every stereotype of the '60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the '70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair -- not really long hair -- on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    Just to forestall some kneebiter that should be country’s not countries. Forgot to do QA before publishing.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Yes, I'm sure you are correct.

    I wasn't even conceived at the time, so I won't argue with you on this one!

    Actually, David Frum has a book about this exact topic. He argues that the 60's get the media attention, but it was the 70's that were really the pivotal decade... when things started to really go south.

  42. @Malcolm X-Lax
    Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    Replies: @e, @dearieme, @I, Libertine, @prosa123, @Prof. Woland

    You are absolutely right. Those black female jurors wouldn’t have convicted OJ if they had been eyewitnesses. Marcia’s inexperience showed (Darden was assistant counsel in charge of being black), but the game was over when Garcetti overconfidently set venue there.

    Remember. One of the jurors said in a televised interview that OJ “probably” did it, but they weren’t convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. Then she went to OJ’s victory party. Think about that.

  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    Just to forestall some kneebiter that should be country's not countries. Forgot to do QA before publishing.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Yes, I’m sure you are correct.

    I wasn’t even conceived at the time, so I won’t argue with you on this one!

    Actually, David Frum has a book about this exact topic. He argues that the 60’s get the media attention, but it was the 70’s that were really the pivotal decade… when things started to really go south.

  44. It is weird that Vincent Bugliosi died and Charles Manson lives on. They were both roughly the same age. You would think that years of prison would have taken a toll on Manson’s health and that Vincent Bugliosi would have had access to top medical care.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Mike Zwick

    "It is weird that Vincent Bugliosi died and Charles Manson lives on."

    Exactly. The more unrepentant the murderer, the longer he tends to live.

  45. Sure, Clark, Darden, et al might have been a pseudo-affirmative action prosecution team (also, recall that the original co-lead prosecutor had to retire from the case early on because of heart trouble, no doubt brought about by the brazenly unethical tactics of the defense team). But come on, they did prove with 100% certainty that O.J. was the killer.

    There was no reaching those people on that jury. As Clark later characterized their intelligence: “Moonrocks.”

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @Patrick in SC

    And the statistics on the DNA evidence led the jurors to believe that whitey was stichin' up OJ.

  46. @Danindc
    I always s thought OJ's trial was over at jury selection. Could Bugliosi have changed the make-up of the jury that much?

    Replies: @PatrickH, @Alfa158, @jim sweeney

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a “battered wife” and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It’s rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark’s absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    • Replies: @Hacienda
    @PatrickH

    The thing was televised. That had as much to do with Clark's failure as anything. Female modesty and justice don't mix. I blame Ito. That trial was Goku in action.

    , @Rifleman
    @PatrickH


    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a “battered wife” and so did not protest their presence.
     
    Marcia Clark is a Nice Jewish Lady who wasn't prepared for her black sisters to abandon the Liberal Feminist sisterhood and put two black males, Simpson and Cochran, above a dead White woman in the ground and a live one in the courtroom.

    At the time I thought the Simpson trial was an Anti-Riot Trial, as in Garcetti and LA's elite said - "Let him go, he's not a gangbanger, he's popular, he wont kill again and if we get a conviction LA is going to be torched again."

    The trial was 94/95, the riots were in 92.

    Replies: @PatrickH

    , @Das
    @PatrickH

    Yup.

    Both the prosecution and defense had jury consultants saying that black women were the group that was by far the most sympathetic to OJ, more so than black men, or women of any other race.

    But Marcia Clark was willing to trade black men and even non-blacks on the jury for black women, because, feminism.

    Then she made most of the case about OJ's pattern of domestic violence, which she assumed the black female jury would care a lot about... and they didn't.

    , @JSM
    @PatrickH


    It’s rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places
     
    Why embarrassed? Nothing cheers those of us despairing for our country's and kids' futures than to hear about another one who "woke up."

    Bravo, Bella!
    , @Inquiring Mind
    @PatrickH

    The defense want black jurors because the defendant was black and Marcia Clark wanted women jurors because one victim was a woman. Ergo, a jury with black women on it.

    I thought that Marcia Clark pushed the domestic abuse issue way too hard when a conviction could have been obtained on the strength of the physical evidence. In the world of an SJW white woman, the gender narrative is as strong as the race narrative. The sense I get is that black women, or at least from the stratum represented on the Simpson jury, are on a different planet from Marcia Clark on the gender narrative. This was as complete disconnect regarding what motivates people in another culture on the level of, say, the President getting all huffy and scolding about why the Regular Iraqi Army cannot or will not fight ISIS.

    This is not to say that domestic abuse is removed from the experience of black women. But I get the sense that many black women take a more pragmatic view that domestic abuse is part of the fallen nature of the human condition, and that the relationship dynamics can be more complicated than the cut-and-dried abuser-man-bad, victim-woman-good. That the prosecution was just hammering on the abuse angle, I believe, put many jurors into a skeptical mood.

  47. First, we have to remember Bugliosi was a great prosecutor—which means he was great at making his side of a sticky-wicket case seem absolutely right—especially when there was no one to interrupt him like a judge or opposing counsel. His books read like opening and closing arguments.

    That said, he does does a good job in the JFK case, mostly because he knows he’s facing a jury of either Oswald-did-it-aloneskeptics or at least people genuinely undecided on it. That means he’s gotta nail down a lot and explain away a lot, which I think he does. He’s basically arguing against Oliver Stones JFK.

    Because the jury (reader) wasn’t on his side, he had to use more than just rhetoric.

    But for the Bush books—especially the Bush is a Murderer book—-Bugliosi was, like Michael Moore, preaching to the choir: Democrat operatives and brainless, easily-led drones who already would have cheered for an assassination of W. No one outside of hardcore lefties read them, so Bugliosi could just through rhetorical nonsense and vicious, unfounded suspicions and personal attacks to give red meat to the lefties.

    The jury for these latter books was already biased—like the fabled all-white southern juries that always convict the poor defenseless black do-gooders in the imagination of Hollywood Jewish executives. With a jury already on your side, facts don’t matter, rhetoric does. Say what you want and get them cheering for the hangman.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Bugliosi wasn’t hurting for money when he wrote the latter books. Seemed to be quick cash-ins for the times and jury he wrote for.

    Also, as a side note: Judge Ito lost that case. He turned it into a TV-camera spectacle (first of it’s kind). Should have banned those cameras, especially after the first day when it was clear the defense was gonna turn it into a circus to distract from the evidence. But Ito was an affirmative-action judge with no cojonoes and was star-struck. If the cameras and other showbiz-nonsense had been clamped down on, Clark and Darden could have won, albeit their poor work on the case; the TV spotlight really made their flaws obvious, and allowed the defense to distract.

  48. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    True. But, of course, the people to blame are the jurors.

    I am glad that somebody else thought Marcia Clark and Chris Darden bungled the case against O.J. A lot of people blamed Johnny Cochran, Robert Shapiro, and Barry Scheck for letting a murderer go free. They were just doing their job. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden didn’t do their job!

    Again…jury.

    Just to forestall some kneebiter that should be country’s not countries. Forgot to do QA before publishing.

    “Knee-biter” works better, I think.

  49. Sean says:

    Nonsense. Bugliosi in his summing up insisted there was no difference between Manson’s girls and mafia hitmen. But it was clear they joined him while Manson was a standard peace and love hippy guru and got taken for a ride when he isolated them and morphed the band into accepting his increasingly crazy ideas. They got brainwashed by Manson and would never have hurt anyone if they had not met him. Manson might have been hard to convict if he hadn’t sent a girl who had only been with him for a few weeks on the both nights (because she was the only one with a valid driving licence) who didn’t take part in the killings; on the second night (when Manson went in with Tex Wilson and tied them up and left before the murders) she could testified he was present. that took care of him.

    Bugliosi was made to look good because the girls said Manson had nothing to do with it, and sacked any lawyer who tried to mount a real defence. And fact the only one who had a chance of reduced responsibility because she was only took part in killing the second night , Houton, actually falsely testified she had committed a murder Manson committed, and them tried to get herself executed by saying ‘sorry is just a word’ when her lawyer was trying to get her to express remorse.

    Bugliosi and his assistant actually made a bad mistake by not charging Houton with theft , thereby making it a felony murder. And he said in the book the the girls could be out in 12 years and would not serve more than 20 years. They are still inside getting on for half a century later. Bugliosi made a lot of money by writing a book making himself a legend. It is full of crap about the Mansons handfull of followers being big para-military style organisation and silly claims that they tried to murder a witness by giving her LSD (that would be coals to Newcastle) and that Houten’s lawyer , who drowned in a flash flood while hiking was murdered on Mason’s orders.

    Bugliosi made out that Manson’s motivation for the murders was basically that he was a white supremacist, a racist (it was actually fury at his failure to get a recording contract). Bugliosi’s main argument against the the girls ever being released was not so much that they were murderers, but they knowing joined and stayed in a Nazi-style racist cult. See, that racism is always the best argument to condemn people forever.

  50. @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    The thing was televised. That had as much to do with Clark’s failure as anything. Female modesty and justice don’t mix. I blame Ito. That trial was Goku in action.

  51. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @SFG
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    You might eventually see people who regard him as a mad prophet, like the Marquis de Sade. Aleister Crowley has a fanbase, and he apparently did kill at least one person.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Did he?

    All I can think of are some continental European mountain climbers who fell out with Crowley whilst they were attempting to conquer mount Kanchenjunga way, way back in the very early 1900s.
    Apparently, they squabbled amongst themselves to such an extent that the continentals and Crowley went their separate ways. The continentals came badly unstuck and screamed for help before dying in various mishaps and accidents. Although they were not aware of Crowley’s proximity, he could hear their screams. Relishing a certain satisfaction, he resolutely refused to help – apparently a cardinal sin in mountain climbing circles.
    Other than that, I’m not aware of Crowley deliberately ‘killing’ anyone.

  52. @Jasper Been
    @George

    You'd be right, George.

    http://www.ctka.net/reclaim.html

    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either - see William C Dear's book OJ is Innocent and I can prove it. Evidence suggests his son Jason did.

    Replies: @Rifleman, @Danindc

    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either

    Actually he did, pretty obviously.

    Jasper Been
    June 3, 2014 at 3:10 pm GMT

    HIV has never been proven to cause any disease.

    Well that explains your previously quoted claim.

  53. @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a “battered wife” and so did not protest their presence.

    Marcia Clark is a Nice Jewish Lady who wasn’t prepared for her black sisters to abandon the Liberal Feminist sisterhood and put two black males, Simpson and Cochran, above a dead White woman in the ground and a live one in the courtroom.

    At the time I thought the Simpson trial was an Anti-Riot Trial, as in Garcetti and LA’s elite said – “Let him go, he’s not a gangbanger, he’s popular, he wont kill again and if we get a conviction LA is going to be torched again.”

    The trial was 94/95, the riots were in 92.

    • Replies: @PatrickH
    @Rifleman

    Interesting. I hadn't thought of that possibility, but of course it is at least possible and perhaps even likely.

    I was astounded at how incompetent the prosecution seemed, including that idiocy of assuming, as Clark clearly did, that black women who might have experienced domestic violence would therefore be sympathetic to a white woman who had done so. What they may have perceived was the non sequitur quality of that information in the OJ trial - after all, not every woman who is beaten by her husband is also murdered by him.

    I'm not as troubled by the stupidity as I once was (although I still think it was stupid) because I am semi-considering the idea that perhaps OJ was innocent after all. The sheer confusion he evinced before, during and after the trial makes the Dear case for his innocence seem at least possible, though perhaps it's still a long shot.

  54. @anonymous
    @Whiskey


    Chicks dig killers. Bet the two escaped cons had a female prison worker help them escape.
     
    Bingo, that's what seems to have happened. You're the man.

    Replies: @Rifleman

    “Chicks dig killers”. Bingo, that’s what seems to have happened. You’re the man.

    There is nothing “manly” about commenter “Whiskey”. Not now, not ever.

    He’s “anti-man” as in the opposite of what a man is.

    Remember Whiskey’s entire agenda gets down to “Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women. Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women. Excuse the Jews, Blame the White women.”

    Always and forever.

  55. OT: The New York Times has an article today about Marco Rubio financial woes. The man who would be chief executive of the land appears to be a habitual deadbeat and neer-do-well.

    Marco Rubio’s Finances

    It’s remarkable how guys like Obama and Rubio, who can’t even manage their own finances, think they are fit to manage the entire federal government.

    • Replies: @Crassus
    @Mr. Anon

    "It’s remarkable how guys like Obama and Rubio, who can’t even manage their own finances, think they are fit to manage the entire federal government."

    Marco Rubio’s bold fiscal philosophy: spend furiously, get-rich-quick!

  56. @Rob McX
    John Douglas, the former FBI forensic psychologist and profiler, has a different take on Manson, whom he interviewed and studied. He believes the Tate murders were carried out against Manson's wishes by Tex Watson, who was trying to rival Manson for influence in the group. When Manson heard what had happened, he led them to the LaBianca house to do it again, but didn't go in and take part, because he was on parole. He couldn't back down at that stage, when his fanatical followers believed the helter-skelter had begun and wanted more blood - he would lose all authority among them if he told them they had taken his prophecies too seriously.

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn't think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released - this was written 20 years ago.

    Replies: @hodag, @Mr. Anon

    “Rob McX says:

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn’t think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released – this was written 20 years ago.”

    I remember that from when I read his book (a very interesting read too). However, there is a danger in releasing him: that he might do the same thing again – mesmerize a bunch of young people into forming a murder-cult. He still has followers – one young groupie who visits him in prison has announced her intention to marry him.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Mr. Anon

    That was Douglas's conclusion in the book: "The biggest threat [if he were released] would be from the misguided losers who would gravitate to him and proclaim him their god and leader."

    , @Rob McX
    @Mr. Anon

    Wasn't there political pressure not to have an all-white jury in the OJ case? Three years earlier, a white jury acquitted the cops in the Rodney King case, and black rioters laid waste to large parts of South Central LA, leaving more people dead than in in any such disturbance since the draft riots of 1863. There was a lot of frightened talk at the time of the prospect of a black man being convicted by a white jury with the King verdict so fresh in people's minds. Letting OJ off would be the lesser of two evils to many people who didn't relish the prospect of seeing their city burn all over again.

  57. @Rob McX
    I've just been reading up on Tex Watson. He's been in prison ever since the murders, but got married and fathered four children through conjugal visits. So much for the eugenic effects of incarceration!

    Replies: @PB and J, @anonymous-antimarxist

    Watson became a born-again Christian in 1975 and through non-incarcerated friends operates “aboundinglove.org.” He has written about his role in the murders, stating that he believes that God has forgiven him.[6] Will You Die For Me?, Watson’s autobiography, as told to “Chaplain Ray” (Ray Hoekstra), was published in 1978.[7] In 1979, he married Kristin Joan Svege. Through conjugal visits they were able to have four children (three boys, one girl), but those visits for life prisoners were banned in October 1996. After 24 years of marriage, Svege divorced Watson after meeting another man in 2003.[8] Svege and Watson remain friends as parents of their children. He graduated from California Coast University in 2009 with a B.S. in Business Management.[9]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tex_Watson#Later_years

    Astounding, WTF were they thinking???

    Can not confirm with secondary sources but I once read that Mumia Abu Jamal has fathered numerous children with various female worshipers by having his defense staff ferry his sperm from death row. Mumia in additional to being a proud cop killer is a notorious radical black natalist and you might say “disgenicist”.

    Another case for Vasalgel(RISUG)!!!

  58. Das says:
    @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    Yup.

    Both the prosecution and defense had jury consultants saying that black women were the group that was by far the most sympathetic to OJ, more so than black men, or women of any other race.

    But Marcia Clark was willing to trade black men and even non-blacks on the jury for black women, because, feminism.

    Then she made most of the case about OJ’s pattern of domestic violence, which she assumed the black female jury would care a lot about… and they didn’t.

  59. The story, as I recall it, goes something like this.

    Dennis—the wildest of the Beach Boys—had a place in Pacific Palisades, his main house, and a little beach shack in Malibu. This was back when Malibu was almost 100% cheap little pre-fabs, before the Hollywood money started building serious mansions there.

    One night Dennis was driving back to PP from Malibu on PCH alone. He saw two rather pretty hippie chicks hitchhiking and picked them up, brought them back to his place, had a threesome, and when he woke up they were gone.

    Exactly a week later, making the same drive, he saw the same two girls hitchhiking again. So he picked them up again and brought them to his house in PP and left them there when he went to a recording session in mid-Wilshire. (Brian W liked to record at all hours; especially after his Smile breakdown, he kept strange habits.)

    When Dennis returned home, there were about a dozen people in his house. The two girls plus a bunch he didn’t recognize. Manson came out and met him on the driveway and gave him some spiel about consciousness raising or whatever, so Dennis went in and they “rapped” and “tripped” for a while, as the kids said at the time.

    Dennis was initially impressed by Manson’s musical talent and arranged for him to meet Melcher, at the house where the Manson murders would later take place, which Melcher was renting at the time. Melcher thought Manson was crazy and not that talented and tried to brush him off without offending him but something he said convinced Manson that Melcher had offered him a record deal.

    It took Dennis longer to figure out that Manson was crazy but eventually he did and became scared of him. His solution was simply to abandon his house and leave “the family” in possession.

    Manson did indeed initially target Melcher for the murders out of revenge for not getting what he (Manson) believed was the record deal that Melcher had promised him. However, Manson scouted the house before the murders and discovered that Melcher had moved (to Malibu as it happens). But rather than track Melcher down, Manson told his followers to stick with the same house as the target. Ultimately, in his mind, the murders were the important thing, not Melcher, and any victims would do, so long as they fit the race-class profile.

    After the Manson family was arrested, Dennis moved back into his PP house.

  60. @Anonymous
    An interesting documentary film was made a few years ago entitled 'Manson the Man Who Killed the '60s'.
    Excellent title for a film, it just about says it all, in that Charles Manson more or less singlehandedly 'killed' the whole concept of the late 60s at least, the Height Astbury delusion of gentle bearded long hairedness, love and peace, 'raised consciousness' and all the rest of it.
    Saying all that, Manson, the evil little fraudster himself, is still very much a 'cultural hero', in the sense that he somehow embodies the general craziness, and eventual dissolution of that whole era. Strangely enough, the Apollo moon landings happened at around the same time.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @Prof. Woland

    In a weird 60s’ twist Bugliosi was born, but not raised, in Hibbing, Minnesota, Bob Dylan‘s hometown (though he was born and lived in Duluth until school age).

  61. @hodag
    @Rob McX

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Anonym

    “hodag says:

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense.”

    What Douglas started out doing made a lot of sense – talking to criminals to see what motivated them, why they did certain things. He didn’t just interview serial killers. He also interviewed bank robbers. It was a good idea and strikes me as pretty sound police work.

    It’s true that “profiling” became inflated in the public mind into some kind of magical art of divination, largely due to the operatic crime novels of Thomas Harris, who made the serial killer into some kind of depraved culture-hero. And, of course, the FBI got a lot of it wrong (the FBI gets a lot of things wrong) – their profile of the Unabomber probably led them farther away from the actual perpetrator and delayed his capture by years.

  62. @keypusher
    How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prosecution_of_George_W._Bush_for_Murder

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Betrayal-America-Undermined-Constitution/dp/156025355X

    Replies: @fnn, @Jacobite

    Art Deco was the Bush fan who frequented this site, is he still around?

  63. Is it just me, or does Charles Manson not bear a certain resemblance to George W. Bush?

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    @Mr. Anon

    Visually, no. Narcissistically, yes.

  64. @Mike Zwick
    I am glad that somebody else thought Marcia Clark and Chris Darden bungled the case against O.J. A lot of people blamed Johnny Cochran, Robert Shapiro, and Barry Scheck for letting a murderer go free. They were just doing their job. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden didn't do their job!

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Sgt. Joe Friday

    Yes, yes, but the nearly all minority jury from downtown LA certainly did their job.

  65. @anonymous
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Charlie was actually a pretty good musician...I downloaded some of his jailhouse recordings.

    Most of it was schizophrenic ramblings, but a few of those songs are actually quite good.

    He had some talent...I guess that's part of what enabled him to reel in the girls for the 'family'

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jim, @Ron Mexico

    Didn’t Alvin Karpis teach him how to play the guitar?

  66. @Auntie Analogue
    In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist's shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his "family" as the "end of the Sixties," so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @BurplesonAFB, @Former Darfur

    As someone who grew up in the ’60’s, it’s weird to remember, because it seemed every year, and particularly every summer, was packed with one memorable event or crisis after another.

    The summer of 1969 was relatively staid compared to 1968, at least, at the beginning. The moon landing, which was in preparation, was on most people’s minds. The launch began on July 16, mid-week. The landing itself (“The Eagle Has Landed”) too place on Sunday, July 20. In between, Teddy Kennedy was involved in the Chappaquiddick incident on the previous Friday night, July 18. The Apollo 11 astronauts landed in the Pacific the following Thursday, July 24.

    The Manson murders took place just a bit over 2 weeks later, August 8-10, 1969. That was a shock: not so much because of the hippie angle, just the killings as such. Woodstock took place the following weekend.

    There were lots of other memorable events that year but the one I think really killed the ’60’s was the Altamont concert on December 6. The death of at least one attendee and the use of the Hell’s Angels to provide security was pretty much it, as far as most people were concerned. Of course, again, there were lots of other things, such as the My Lai revelations, but I don’t think people were so much surprised by that as disgusted.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @SPMoore8

    Of course, Altamont involved an attempted knife attack on Mick Jagger. Footage of the incident clearly shows that the would-be assassin, a black man, had a knife in has hand as he attempted to storm the stage.
    The Hells Angels dealt with him in their own inimitable way.
    The song the Sones were performing at that precise moment was, ironically, 'sympathy for the devil'. A few years later, on the heels of this incident came a celebrated UK TV documentary in which a leading psychologist made the comparison with pop stars performing to immense stadia packed with thousands to Hitler and Nuremberg, the infamous 'cone of power' of psychic energy raised by the thousands in the enthusiasm, and the way the pop performer acted as a lightning conductor/'god' channeling this exceedingly powerful energy and the way this resembled some rather dubious religious cults of high antiquity.

    Replies: @Alvintostig

    , @unit472
    @SPMoore8

    History sure did seem to start to accelerate in the 1960's. I doubt the Tate/La Bianca murders would have been remembered much at all except for the astonishing fact that young white women were very much the killers. Not as secondary players but hands on butchers. I remember when the story broke the big news was the Hollywood angle. Starlet married to famous director and Jay Sebring ( minor celebrity) and Abigail Folger ( coffee heiress) all being murdered made it news but not by late 1960's standards exceptional news. It was only when the cast of characters was revealed to be a bunch of young Southern California girls named Krenwinkel, Van Houten etc that made it unique. Of course when later on Squeaky Fromme came within a two minute tutorial on how to fire a semiautomatic pistol from assassinating President Ford it only added to the gruesome nature of this strange band of people.

    Even worse, the Manson family seemed to set off an explosion of mass murder in California that seemed without end. Some creep murdered an optometrist and his family to prevent 'earthquakes' and showed up in court with one half of his bearded, long haired head shaved. Santa Cruz had a 5 foot tall runt and a six foot 9 inch giant committing serial murders simultaneously. Sickle Slayers and Trailside Killers, even a wanna be Ninja named Charles Ng. It was as if Manson had let loose a plague of demons upon California!

    Replies: @Anonymous, @SPMoore8

  67. I read four of Bugliosi’s books:

    * Helter Skelter

    * Till Death Do Us Part: A True Murder Mystery

    * Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got Away With Murder

    * Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

    All were great reads.

    The one that sticks in my mind the most is Till Death Do Us Part, although it is one of his least known books.

    He tells how he successfully prosecuted a murder case on only circumstantial evidence. He tells how he prepared for the trial and dealt with the witnesses, defense attorneys and judge during the trial.

    The book is an extremely interesting account of a prosecutor’s work in a murder trial.

  68. @Mike Zwick
    I am glad that somebody else thought Marcia Clark and Chris Darden bungled the case against O.J. A lot of people blamed Johnny Cochran, Robert Shapiro, and Barry Scheck for letting a murderer go free. They were just doing their job. Marcia Clark and Chris Darden didn't do their job!

    Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi, @Sgt. Joe Friday

    But the second the trial was over, Shapiro rushed to find a TV camera, get in front of it, and assert that they “played the race card, and dealt it from the bottom of the deck,” or words to that effect. I remarked to my wife that it looked like he was feeling a little guilty on the Jewish day of atonement.

  69. The OJ trial was a travesty. They led with the weakest evidence, that OJ was an unpleasant abusive man towards his wife. Should have led with the blood evidence, of which there was plenty.

  70. Few things it appears ensures long-lived fame more than getting a group of nubile females to kill for you.

  71. @Danindc
    I always s thought OJ's trial was over at jury selection. Could Bugliosi have changed the make-up of the jury that much?

    Replies: @PatrickH, @Alfa158, @jim sweeney

    That was it. Even when trying the case in Los Angeles instead of Santa Monica, LA’s population was only around 15% black despite all those images of Watts. Selecting a jury that was more than 2/3 black was totally disproportionate. Those women basically thought Nicole had it coming to her for being one of those despised White women who stole a successful Black man away from his Black first wife.

    • Replies: @Danindc
    @Alfa158

    Good points. I guess with a more responsible jury worst case scenario was a hung verdict. But idiots tend to get worn down over time so I agree now with Sailer and you. Thanks.

  72. @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    It’s rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places

    Why embarrassed? Nothing cheers those of us despairing for our country’s and kids’ futures than to hear about another one who “woke up.”

    Bravo, Bella!

  73. @Danindc
    I always s thought OJ's trial was over at jury selection. Could Bugliosi have changed the make-up of the jury that much?

    Replies: @PatrickH, @Alfa158, @jim sweeney

    Had the trial been in Santa Monica, we would not have had to suffer Judge Ito as he wasn’t in that courthouse. So, yes, the change in venue could easily have substantially changed the trial.

    Garcetti, ever a publicity hound, wanted the trial downtown so he could be available to the media regularly while wearing those expensive clothes provided by his wealthy wife’s family. He was extremely vain and equally untalented.

  74. @keypusher
    How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prosecution_of_George_W._Bush_for_Murder

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Betrayal-America-Undermined-Constitution/dp/156025355X

    Replies: @fnn, @Jacobite

    How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?

    I like them both!

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Jacobite

    As for Vince's hard feelings for George W. Bush, there is something from his life story usually forgotten. Vincent Bugliosi, you see, was politically ambitious after winning the Manson trial.

    In 1972, he ran against his boss, District Attorney Joseph Busch and lost by a narrow margin. In 1974, Bugliosi ran for the Democratic nomination for California Attorney General, losing in the Democratic primary.

    In 1976, Vince again ran for Los Angeles County DA, losing to John Van de Kamp (Joseph Busch had died in 1975 and Van De Kamp's connections got him appointed.

    By the way, until Steve Cooley ousted Gil Garcetti in 2000, none of the DA's between Busch and Cooley were known as trial lawyers, all were either politicians or administrators.

    I have a hunch Vincent Bugliosi was frustrated at seeing men with less intelligence than himself but more wealth and more connections go to the top.

    I think this explains his loathing for George W. Bush, or at least some of it.

    Replies: @keypusher

  75. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I really liked Bugliosi’s true-crime book The Sea Will Tell, about a murder in a small, uninhabited island in the South Pacific. I met Bugliosi in an airport about 5 years ago. Surprisingly, he was very gracious. I say surprisingly because he always seemed dismissive and gruff with people on TV.

  76. @anonymous-antimarxist
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    Correction there is debate on whether Manson, knew Melcher was still living at Cielo drive when the Tate murders took place. Manson and his crew were tripping on acid most of the time. But Clearly Manson was motivated by the idea of intimidating Melcher.

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2786524/

    Replies: @Chris, @Jacobite

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    Bigger than The Beatles??? The Beatles were bigger than Jesus Christ. John Lennon said so.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jacobite



    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles
     
    Bigger than The Beatles??? The Beatles were bigger than Jesus Christ. John Lennon said so.

     

    Does that mean Brian Wilson is bigger than John the Baptist?
  77. The OJ Simpson jury, and the reaction of blacks to the verdict, condemn black people as a whole.

    Only a minority of blacks are violent criminals, but virtually all blacks morally support blacks who are violent criminals. The OJ Simpson jury was a selection of sober black respectability- the kind of solid-citizen, middle-class people that serve on juries- and they said “You killed two white people? No problem.”

    All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict.

    • Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky
    @Thrasymachus

    "All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict."

    When the verdict came out over the TVs in the student center at my undergrad alma matter (Cal State Long Beach), all the EBT-Americans cheered. It helped convince me that when it comes to relations with blacks, there can be no equality - you are either feared or you are a victim. I don't like my people being victims, so I hope we have it in us to be feared again.

    , @David In TN
    @Thrasymachus

    "All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict."

    That was my own experience.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax, @Lugash

  78. • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Anonymous

    Steve has been on top of this for years.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    Old news. Steve has blogged about Shmuley's nephew before.

  79. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @SPMoore8
    @Auntie Analogue

    As someone who grew up in the '60's, it's weird to remember, because it seemed every year, and particularly every summer, was packed with one memorable event or crisis after another.

    The summer of 1969 was relatively staid compared to 1968, at least, at the beginning. The moon landing, which was in preparation, was on most people's minds. The launch began on July 16, mid-week. The landing itself ("The Eagle Has Landed") too place on Sunday, July 20. In between, Teddy Kennedy was involved in the Chappaquiddick incident on the previous Friday night, July 18. The Apollo 11 astronauts landed in the Pacific the following Thursday, July 24.

    The Manson murders took place just a bit over 2 weeks later, August 8-10, 1969. That was a shock: not so much because of the hippie angle, just the killings as such. Woodstock took place the following weekend.

    There were lots of other memorable events that year but the one I think really killed the '60's was the Altamont concert on December 6. The death of at least one attendee and the use of the Hell's Angels to provide security was pretty much it, as far as most people were concerned. Of course, again, there were lots of other things, such as the My Lai revelations, but I don't think people were so much surprised by that as disgusted.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @unit472

    Of course, Altamont involved an attempted knife attack on Mick Jagger. Footage of the incident clearly shows that the would-be assassin, a black man, had a knife in has hand as he attempted to storm the stage.
    The Hells Angels dealt with him in their own inimitable way.
    The song the Sones were performing at that precise moment was, ironically, ‘sympathy for the devil’. A few years later, on the heels of this incident came a celebrated UK TV documentary in which a leading psychologist made the comparison with pop stars performing to immense stadia packed with thousands to Hitler and Nuremberg, the infamous ‘cone of power’ of psychic energy raised by the thousands in the enthusiasm, and the way the pop performer acted as a lightning conductor/’god’ channeling this exceedingly powerful energy and the way this resembled some rather dubious religious cults of high antiquity.

    • Replies: @Alvintostig
    @Anonymous

    A few mistakes:

    The Maysles Brothers footage shows the young man was waving a gun around, not a knife, and was involved in some sort of scuffling going on near the stage. The knife was wielded by the Angel.

    That the Stones were performing "Sympathy for the Devil" when the killing took place has become one of those things that "everybody knows" but that song had been played earlier in the night. The actual song was "Under My Thumb."

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  80. @George
    Bugliosi

    Didn't Manson represent himself in the trial? Didn't he openly threaten jurors? Didn't he carve an X into his forehead (much latter altered to be a swastika? I am not thinking Bugliosi was a genius.

    Replies: @Jasper Been, @Lugash

    This one has been on my reading list for several years. IIRC the author’s argument is that the murders were vicious that OJ would have been splattered with blood, and there would have been an evidence trail going all the way back to his house. Given the crime scene photos, it sounds plausible.

  81. Vincent Bugliosi went to the University of Miami on a tennis scholarship. Bugliosi is from Hibbing, MN, as are: Bob Dylan, Gary Puckett, Robert Mondavi, and Roger Maris.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous


    Bugliosi is from Hibbing, MN, as are: Bob Dylan, Gary Puckett, Robert Mondavi, and Roger Maris.
     
    Hibbing, MN must be one of Raj Chetty's hellholes.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger

  82. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Anonymous

    Think of just about every stereotype of the '60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the '70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair -- not really long hair -- on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    I agree with you. What people think of as the 1960s didn’t end with Altamont or the Manson killings, it ended around the time Nixon resigned. Basically, Kennedy assassination through Nixon resignation, or the most active part of the Vietnam War. I moved to NYC in 1970 and was there for five years. The Fillmore East was hosting rock concerts nightly, underground comics were coming out regularly, feminism had not yet put a damper on free love–the whole scene was still very hippie-ish.

    • Replies: @Jacobite
    @Harry Baldwin

    This sounds right but I have never really been able to remember it...

    , @Anonymous
    @Harry Baldwin

    In 1983 I was sitting on the seawall near the St. Francis Yacht Club when a chick in hippy garb who I'd never seen before said to me, "so, are we gonna do it?"

  83. @Alfa158
    @Danindc

    That was it. Even when trying the case in Los Angeles instead of Santa Monica, LA's population was only around 15% black despite all those images of Watts. Selecting a jury that was more than 2/3 black was totally disproportionate. Those women basically thought Nicole had it coming to her for being one of those despised White women who stole a successful Black man away from his Black first wife.

    Replies: @Danindc

    Good points. I guess with a more responsible jury worst case scenario was a hung verdict. But idiots tend to get worn down over time so I agree now with Sailer and you. Thanks.

  84. @Jasper Been
    @George

    You'd be right, George.

    http://www.ctka.net/reclaim.html

    BTW it is unlikely OJ committed double murder either - see William C Dear's book OJ is Innocent and I can prove it. Evidence suggests his son Jason did.

    Replies: @Rifleman, @Danindc

    Huh? No. William Dear is a nutcase who writes predominantly about Roswell aliens. OJ definitely did it….with help from the Mossad.

  85. @PatrickH
    @Danindc

    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a "battered wife" and so did not protest their presence. Don Vinson, the litigation expert her team hired to assist at jury selection, was dismissed because he tried too hard to convince them of this.

    It's rather embarrassing to admit here, of all places, but I used to be more feminist than I am now, and one of the facts that convinced me that feminists are often willfully blind to reality was Marcia Clark's absurd assumption about black women and their sympathies.

    Replies: @Hacienda, @Rifleman, @Das, @JSM, @Inquiring Mind

    The defense want black jurors because the defendant was black and Marcia Clark wanted women jurors because one victim was a woman. Ergo, a jury with black women on it.

    I thought that Marcia Clark pushed the domestic abuse issue way too hard when a conviction could have been obtained on the strength of the physical evidence. In the world of an SJW white woman, the gender narrative is as strong as the race narrative. The sense I get is that black women, or at least from the stratum represented on the Simpson jury, are on a different planet from Marcia Clark on the gender narrative. This was as complete disconnect regarding what motivates people in another culture on the level of, say, the President getting all huffy and scolding about why the Regular Iraqi Army cannot or will not fight ISIS.

    This is not to say that domestic abuse is removed from the experience of black women. But I get the sense that many black women take a more pragmatic view that domestic abuse is part of the fallen nature of the human condition, and that the relationship dynamics can be more complicated than the cut-and-dried abuser-man-bad, victim-woman-good. That the prosecution was just hammering on the abuse angle, I believe, put many jurors into a skeptical mood.

  86. @SPMoore8
    @Auntie Analogue

    As someone who grew up in the '60's, it's weird to remember, because it seemed every year, and particularly every summer, was packed with one memorable event or crisis after another.

    The summer of 1969 was relatively staid compared to 1968, at least, at the beginning. The moon landing, which was in preparation, was on most people's minds. The launch began on July 16, mid-week. The landing itself ("The Eagle Has Landed") too place on Sunday, July 20. In between, Teddy Kennedy was involved in the Chappaquiddick incident on the previous Friday night, July 18. The Apollo 11 astronauts landed in the Pacific the following Thursday, July 24.

    The Manson murders took place just a bit over 2 weeks later, August 8-10, 1969. That was a shock: not so much because of the hippie angle, just the killings as such. Woodstock took place the following weekend.

    There were lots of other memorable events that year but the one I think really killed the '60's was the Altamont concert on December 6. The death of at least one attendee and the use of the Hell's Angels to provide security was pretty much it, as far as most people were concerned. Of course, again, there were lots of other things, such as the My Lai revelations, but I don't think people were so much surprised by that as disgusted.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @unit472

    History sure did seem to start to accelerate in the 1960’s. I doubt the Tate/La Bianca murders would have been remembered much at all except for the astonishing fact that young white women were very much the killers. Not as secondary players but hands on butchers. I remember when the story broke the big news was the Hollywood angle. Starlet married to famous director and Jay Sebring ( minor celebrity) and Abigail Folger ( coffee heiress) all being murdered made it news but not by late 1960’s standards exceptional news. It was only when the cast of characters was revealed to be a bunch of young Southern California girls named Krenwinkel, Van Houten etc that made it unique. Of course when later on Squeaky Fromme came within a two minute tutorial on how to fire a semiautomatic pistol from assassinating President Ford it only added to the gruesome nature of this strange band of people.

    Even worse, the Manson family seemed to set off an explosion of mass murder in California that seemed without end. Some creep murdered an optometrist and his family to prevent ‘earthquakes’ and showed up in court with one half of his bearded, long haired head shaved. Santa Cruz had a 5 foot tall runt and a six foot 9 inch giant committing serial murders simultaneously. Sickle Slayers and Trailside Killers, even a wanna be Ninja named Charles Ng. It was as if Manson had let loose a plague of demons upon California!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @unit472

    Did the dwarf and the giant operate as a team or were they separate and unknowing of each other?

    , @SPMoore8
    @unit472

    Thank you for adding to the topic: I forgot to mention in my first post that the first Zodiac letters (Zodiac, the serial killer) were published the weekend before the Tate-La Bianca murders and and the code was cracked the same weekend as the Tate-La Bianca murders.

    I don't know, it was a weird time, it certainly seemed extraordinary at the time, I'm not sure if it was or not.

    What I do know is that Altamont "felt" like it was the end. But there were lots of things that felt like the end: Kent State the following May, etc. I can say that a lot of the hippy stuff (in the Bay Area at least) seemed passe by 1971. Of course, that's about the time I went into the service for four years .... Certainly by the time I got out it was all polyester, unisex, disco, fondue pots and crepes.

  87. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    One woman who wasn’t raped by Mike Tyson:

    One of the last of the many legendary contests won by the British philosopher A. J. Ayer was his encounter with Mike Tyson in 1987. As related by Ben Rogers in ”A. J. Ayer: A Life,” Ayer — small, frail, slight as a sparrow and then 77 years old — was entertaining a group of models at a New York party when a girl ran in screaming that her friend was being assaulted in a bedroom. The parties involved turned out to be Tyson and Naomi Campbell. ”Do you know who the fuck I am?” Tyson asked in disbelief when Ayer urged him to desist: ”I’m the heavyweight champion of the world.” ”And I am the former Wykeham professor of logic,” Ayer answered politely. ”We are both pre-eminent in our field. I suggest that we talk about this like rational men.”

    So they did, while Campbell slipped away.

    Ah, those evil English gentlemen.

  88. @Thrasymachus
    The OJ Simpson jury, and the reaction of blacks to the verdict, condemn black people as a whole.

    Only a minority of blacks are violent criminals, but virtually all blacks morally support blacks who are violent criminals. The OJ Simpson jury was a selection of sober black respectability- the kind of solid-citizen, middle-class people that serve on juries- and they said "You killed two white people? No problem."

    All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @David In TN

    “All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict.”

    When the verdict came out over the TVs in the student center at my undergrad alma matter (Cal State Long Beach), all the EBT-Americans cheered. It helped convince me that when it comes to relations with blacks, there can be no equality – you are either feared or you are a victim. I don’t like my people being victims, so I hope we have it in us to be feared again.

  89. @hodag
    @Rob McX

    Their is no such thing as profiler, in the sense that they can find criminals, more specifically serial murderers and rapists. What they do is give general hints based on common criminal traits then many details, some of wich are bound to be true and look good in retrospect.

    IE, the killer owns at least one hat, has driven a car, has killed an animal, does not have a normal sex life (etc).

    Kinda like what psychics do.

    Ascientific nonsense.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon, @Anonym

    Looking at sets of people with one trait and noticing that they have other traits in common is what the hbd community does. As long as there are provisos that profiling can only help to potentially cut down on wasted effort and is not conclusive, it is simply ignorant to conflate that with what a psychic does.

  90. prosa123 [AKA "Peter"] says: • Website
    @Malcolm X-Lax
    Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    Replies: @e, @dearieme, @I, Libertine, @prosa123, @Prof. Woland

    Holding the Simpson trial downtown was more or less unavoidable. AIUI, the facilities in Santa Monica weren’t really suitable for what was certain to be a huge media circus. While there were other branch courthouses in LA County that would have been physically more suitable, under state law they weren’t available. Trials either had to be in the nearest branch courthouses (Santa Monica for Simpson) or in the main facility downtown.

  91. @Steve Sailer
    @Jesse

    That was part of what freaked out the entertainment industry so much about the Manson murders: there were always lots of fringe folks hanging around, and at the end of the 1960s with the youth revolution in taste making everything uncertain, they'd been letting them get a little closer.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger

    Neil Young admits he liked Manson’s stuff:

    I asked him if he had a recording contract. He told me he didn’t yet, but he wanted to make records. I told Mo Ostin at Reprise [Young’s label at the time] about him, and recommended that Reprise check him out…. Shortly afterward, the Sharon Tate-La Bianca murders happened, and Charlie Manson’s name was known around the world.

    According to Young:

    He [Manson] was an angry man. But brilliant… He sounds like [Bob] Dylan when he talks.

    Trivia buffs will note that Bugliosi was born in Hibbing, Minnesota, Dylan’s hometown. When Young’s bandmate David Crosby was in the Byrds (1964-67) the record producer for their first two highly acclaimed albums was Terry Melcher.

  92. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    Of course, as we all know, Manson really wanted to butcher record producer Terry Melcher, Doris Day's son, rather than Sharon Tate et al, when his dummy disciples raided and massacred at that rented LA mansion. Manson was under the impression that Melcher lived there. His dumb bastard followers took his word as gospel and killed totally innocent people because Manson put them up to it.
    Manson had a beef with Terry Melcher no doubt because Melcher did not think that Manson's 'music' was a viable business proposition. So Manson, who had spent most of his life in jail wanted to 'deal' with Melcher the way a hardened and embittered criminal would 'deal' with someone who disappoints them.
    Only his stupid bastard acolytes thought in their deluded way they were fighting some 'holy war' in the name of their 'prophet'.

    Replies: @anonymous

    Manson took two of his cult members to rob and kill a drug dealer who was tangentially affiliated with the black panthers. During the robbery the members chickened out and Manson ended up shooting the drug dealer himself. After this he became convinced that the black panthers were coming after him and would invade the Spahn ranch at any time. In reality the drug dealer had no pull with the panthers,was scared of Manson, and had no desire ever to see Manson again or revenge himself. Manson convinced his followers a race war was imminent so they would guard the ranch against black trespassers. The Tate and LaBianca murders were done to frame the panthers so they would not be able to come after Manson.

  93. @Anonymous
    An interesting documentary film was made a few years ago entitled 'Manson the Man Who Killed the '60s'.
    Excellent title for a film, it just about says it all, in that Charles Manson more or less singlehandedly 'killed' the whole concept of the late 60s at least, the Height Astbury delusion of gentle bearded long hairedness, love and peace, 'raised consciousness' and all the rest of it.
    Saying all that, Manson, the evil little fraudster himself, is still very much a 'cultural hero', in the sense that he somehow embodies the general craziness, and eventual dissolution of that whole era. Strangely enough, the Apollo moon landings happened at around the same time.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Anonymous, @Dirk Dagger, @Prof. Woland

    Runner up would have to be the Rolling Stones concert at the Altamont Speedway. That was the one where they only had 4 porta-potty’s and hired the Hell’s Angels using beer as pay to handle security.

  94. @Auntie Analogue
    In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist's shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his "family" as the "end of the Sixties," so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @BurplesonAFB, @Former Darfur

    Yeah, I’d have to adjudicate the end of the 60s as December 1969 as well.

  95. @Malcolm X-Lax
    Clark and Darden may not have been the best prosecutors to ever enter a courtroom, but they did more than well enough to prove Simpson's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The person who botched the case was Garcetti for stupidly filing the case in downtown LA (instead of Santa Monica where it belonged) thereby allowing the seating of a jury composed mainly of angry and stupid black women.

    Replies: @e, @dearieme, @I, Libertine, @prosa123, @Prof. Woland

    Marcia Clark thought the case would be easy. Just show a bunch of close ups of the battered woman to a female jury. Unfortunately, she did not anticipate that the jury would only see some white bitch.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Prof. Woland

    At that time white feminists didn't understand that for black women race trumps gender - and by a mile. This reality needs no further explication on this site. But still it bears remarking that white feminists seem to take a special thrill out of putting gender above race. In the Duke Lacrosse case, were there any more gleeful attack dogs than white feminists? And yet even black feminists will defend a black rapist if the accuser is a white woman. I'd like to have an honest talk with a white feminist about this.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

  96. @unit472
    @SPMoore8

    History sure did seem to start to accelerate in the 1960's. I doubt the Tate/La Bianca murders would have been remembered much at all except for the astonishing fact that young white women were very much the killers. Not as secondary players but hands on butchers. I remember when the story broke the big news was the Hollywood angle. Starlet married to famous director and Jay Sebring ( minor celebrity) and Abigail Folger ( coffee heiress) all being murdered made it news but not by late 1960's standards exceptional news. It was only when the cast of characters was revealed to be a bunch of young Southern California girls named Krenwinkel, Van Houten etc that made it unique. Of course when later on Squeaky Fromme came within a two minute tutorial on how to fire a semiautomatic pistol from assassinating President Ford it only added to the gruesome nature of this strange band of people.

    Even worse, the Manson family seemed to set off an explosion of mass murder in California that seemed without end. Some creep murdered an optometrist and his family to prevent 'earthquakes' and showed up in court with one half of his bearded, long haired head shaved. Santa Cruz had a 5 foot tall runt and a six foot 9 inch giant committing serial murders simultaneously. Sickle Slayers and Trailside Killers, even a wanna be Ninja named Charles Ng. It was as if Manson had let loose a plague of demons upon California!

    Replies: @Anonymous, @SPMoore8

    Did the dwarf and the giant operate as a team or were they separate and unknowing of each other?

  97. @unit472
    @SPMoore8

    History sure did seem to start to accelerate in the 1960's. I doubt the Tate/La Bianca murders would have been remembered much at all except for the astonishing fact that young white women were very much the killers. Not as secondary players but hands on butchers. I remember when the story broke the big news was the Hollywood angle. Starlet married to famous director and Jay Sebring ( minor celebrity) and Abigail Folger ( coffee heiress) all being murdered made it news but not by late 1960's standards exceptional news. It was only when the cast of characters was revealed to be a bunch of young Southern California girls named Krenwinkel, Van Houten etc that made it unique. Of course when later on Squeaky Fromme came within a two minute tutorial on how to fire a semiautomatic pistol from assassinating President Ford it only added to the gruesome nature of this strange band of people.

    Even worse, the Manson family seemed to set off an explosion of mass murder in California that seemed without end. Some creep murdered an optometrist and his family to prevent 'earthquakes' and showed up in court with one half of his bearded, long haired head shaved. Santa Cruz had a 5 foot tall runt and a six foot 9 inch giant committing serial murders simultaneously. Sickle Slayers and Trailside Killers, even a wanna be Ninja named Charles Ng. It was as if Manson had let loose a plague of demons upon California!

    Replies: @Anonymous, @SPMoore8

    Thank you for adding to the topic: I forgot to mention in my first post that the first Zodiac letters (Zodiac, the serial killer) were published the weekend before the Tate-La Bianca murders and and the code was cracked the same weekend as the Tate-La Bianca murders.

    I don’t know, it was a weird time, it certainly seemed extraordinary at the time, I’m not sure if it was or not.

    What I do know is that Altamont “felt” like it was the end. But there were lots of things that felt like the end: Kent State the following May, etc. I can say that a lot of the hippy stuff (in the Bay Area at least) seemed passe by 1971. Of course, that’s about the time I went into the service for four years …. Certainly by the time I got out it was all polyester, unisex, disco, fondue pots and crepes.

  98. In the Bay Area, the madness continued for a while. (Some might say it never ended.) Not just Zodiac but Zebra (remember them?), Soledad Brothers, the SLA/Patty Hearst, and of course People’s Temple. All of that was very “Sixties” even though it all happened in the ’70s.

    The Moscone-Milk assassinations really had nothing to do with the ’60s.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    @manton

    I was overseas for Patty Hearst, etc. but my sister actually knew her at Cal Berkeley. Zebra, overseas.

    I was out and going to Berkeley myself by the time of People's Temple, which was uncovered in late 1978 as I recall, and Moscone-Milk were assassinated about a week later ......

    The whole Soledad Brothers thing started in the late '60's, but the shooting in Marin and the killing of George Jackson happened in 1970 and 1971. So, there was some continuity.

    The '60's came to an end when the 49ers lost to the Cowboys in January, 1971, the last game at Kezar before they went to Candlestick: Haight Ashbury was right across the street .....

  99. I have to admit I’ve always been intrigued by Manson and have watched a number of his interviews on YouTube. In the early ones he shows flashes of sudden anger. During an interview with an Italian woman journalist, she says something insulting to him and he suddenly cocks his arm as if to give her the back of his hand, though they are separated by thick glass. In more recent videos, such as his parole hearings, he adopts a more ingratiating manner, speaking respectfully to the board though he has no desire to be released from prison. He’s quite manipulative and I’ve heard that he’s read all the books like How to Win Friends and Influence People in the prison library.

    It is interesting to see him interviewed by a grandstanding fool like Geraldo. Geraldo accused him of telling America’s children to kill their parents and Manson responded, “No, the guy that said that is now a Yuppie on Wall Street.” Geraldo called him a liar, repeatedly, and Manson just shrugged. Of course, he was correctly referring to Jerry Rubin.

    Manson says that his image was largely created by Bugliosi in Helter Skelter and Ed Sanders in The Family in order to sell books. For example, he says the idea of a “Manson Family” was an invention of Sanders. He said he wanted the girls to form a singing group that was going to be called The Family, but he hadn’t otherwise used that expression. Manson is a con-artist and contradicts himself at times, but I have no problem believing that his story has been sensationalized to meet audience expectations.

  100. @Anonymous
    @SPMoore8

    Of course, Altamont involved an attempted knife attack on Mick Jagger. Footage of the incident clearly shows that the would-be assassin, a black man, had a knife in has hand as he attempted to storm the stage.
    The Hells Angels dealt with him in their own inimitable way.
    The song the Sones were performing at that precise moment was, ironically, 'sympathy for the devil'. A few years later, on the heels of this incident came a celebrated UK TV documentary in which a leading psychologist made the comparison with pop stars performing to immense stadia packed with thousands to Hitler and Nuremberg, the infamous 'cone of power' of psychic energy raised by the thousands in the enthusiasm, and the way the pop performer acted as a lightning conductor/'god' channeling this exceedingly powerful energy and the way this resembled some rather dubious religious cults of high antiquity.

    Replies: @Alvintostig

    A few mistakes:

    The Maysles Brothers footage shows the young man was waving a gun around, not a knife, and was involved in some sort of scuffling going on near the stage. The knife was wielded by the Angel.

    That the Stones were performing “Sympathy for the Devil” when the killing took place has become one of those things that “everybody knows” but that song had been played earlier in the night. The actual song was “Under My Thumb.”

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Alvintostig

    Thank you for saving me the trouble. I think I've watched Gimme Shelter a couple dozen times in the past 30 years. Really, an amazing document. ("I pray that it's all right...I pray that it's all right...")

  101. @Mike Zwick
    It is weird that Vincent Bugliosi died and Charles Manson lives on. They were both roughly the same age. You would think that years of prison would have taken a toll on Manson's health and that Vincent Bugliosi would have had access to top medical care.

    Replies: @David In TN

    “It is weird that Vincent Bugliosi died and Charles Manson lives on.”

    Exactly. The more unrepentant the murderer, the longer he tends to live.

  102. @Harry Baldwin
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I agree with you. What people think of as the 1960s didn't end with Altamont or the Manson killings, it ended around the time Nixon resigned. Basically, Kennedy assassination through Nixon resignation, or the most active part of the Vietnam War. I moved to NYC in 1970 and was there for five years. The Fillmore East was hosting rock concerts nightly, underground comics were coming out regularly, feminism had not yet put a damper on free love--the whole scene was still very hippie-ish.

    Replies: @Jacobite, @Anonymous

    This sounds right but I have never really been able to remember it…

  103. @manton
    In the Bay Area, the madness continued for a while. (Some might say it never ended.) Not just Zodiac but Zebra (remember them?), Soledad Brothers, the SLA/Patty Hearst, and of course People's Temple. All of that was very "Sixties" even though it all happened in the '70s.

    The Moscone-Milk assassinations really had nothing to do with the '60s.

    Replies: @SPMoore8

    I was overseas for Patty Hearst, etc. but my sister actually knew her at Cal Berkeley. Zebra, overseas.

    I was out and going to Berkeley myself by the time of People’s Temple, which was uncovered in late 1978 as I recall, and Moscone-Milk were assassinated about a week later ……

    The whole Soledad Brothers thing started in the late ’60’s, but the shooting in Marin and the killing of George Jackson happened in 1970 and 1971. So, there was some continuity.

    The ’60’s came to an end when the 49ers lost to the Cowboys in January, 1971, the last game at Kezar before they went to Candlestick: Haight Ashbury was right across the street …..

  104. @Jacobite
    @keypusher


    How do fans of his Oswald book feel about his books about Bush v. Gore and putting Dubya on trial for murder?
     
    I like them both!

    Replies: @David In TN

    As for Vince’s hard feelings for George W. Bush, there is something from his life story usually forgotten. Vincent Bugliosi, you see, was politically ambitious after winning the Manson trial.

    In 1972, he ran against his boss, District Attorney Joseph Busch and lost by a narrow margin. In 1974, Bugliosi ran for the Democratic nomination for California Attorney General, losing in the Democratic primary.

    In 1976, Vince again ran for Los Angeles County DA, losing to John Van de Kamp (Joseph Busch had died in 1975 and Van De Kamp’s connections got him appointed.

    By the way, until Steve Cooley ousted Gil Garcetti in 2000, none of the DA’s between Busch and Cooley were known as trial lawyers, all were either politicians or administrators.

    I have a hunch Vincent Bugliosi was frustrated at seeing men with less intelligence than himself but more wealth and more connections go to the top.

    I think this explains his loathing for George W. Bush, or at least some of it.

    • Replies: @keypusher
    @David In TN

    There's also causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and bankrupting the country. Isn't that enough?

    Replies: @David In TN

  105. @David In TN
    @Jacobite

    As for Vince's hard feelings for George W. Bush, there is something from his life story usually forgotten. Vincent Bugliosi, you see, was politically ambitious after winning the Manson trial.

    In 1972, he ran against his boss, District Attorney Joseph Busch and lost by a narrow margin. In 1974, Bugliosi ran for the Democratic nomination for California Attorney General, losing in the Democratic primary.

    In 1976, Vince again ran for Los Angeles County DA, losing to John Van de Kamp (Joseph Busch had died in 1975 and Van De Kamp's connections got him appointed.

    By the way, until Steve Cooley ousted Gil Garcetti in 2000, none of the DA's between Busch and Cooley were known as trial lawyers, all were either politicians or administrators.

    I have a hunch Vincent Bugliosi was frustrated at seeing men with less intelligence than himself but more wealth and more connections go to the top.

    I think this explains his loathing for George W. Bush, or at least some of it.

    Replies: @keypusher

    There’s also causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and bankrupting the country. Isn’t that enough?

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @keypusher

    I don't like George W. Bush any more than Bugliosi did.

  106. @Anonymous
    Vincent Bugliosi went to the University of Miami on a tennis scholarship. Bugliosi is from Hibbing, MN, as are: Bob Dylan, Gary Puckett, Robert Mondavi, and Roger Maris.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Bugliosi is from Hibbing, MN, as are: Bob Dylan, Gary Puckett, Robert Mondavi, and Roger Maris.

    Hibbing, MN must be one of Raj Chetty’s hellholes.

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Why leave out Kevin McHale? Are you Gophophobic?

  107. I started at Berkeley in 1987, and it was amazing to me how “alive” all these events and issues still were. I had been either not alive, or very young during most of them so I was at best dimly aware. But people talked about “The Sixties” incessantly. Eventually I had to read about it all for myself because their memories were not always entirely reliable …

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @manton

    '87 was the year there were lines outside the art museum on Bancroft to see "Piss Christ." Also, blacks would walk down the street mouthing Leonard Jeffries' tripe about "ice people" and "sun people."

  108. @Patrick in SC
    Sure, Clark, Darden, et al might have been a pseudo-affirmative action prosecution team (also, recall that the original co-lead prosecutor had to retire from the case early on because of heart trouble, no doubt brought about by the brazenly unethical tactics of the defense team). But come on, they did prove with 100% certainty that O.J. was the killer.

    There was no reaching those people on that jury. As Clark later characterized their intelligence: "Moonrocks."

    Replies: @Forbes

    And the statistics on the DNA evidence led the jurors to believe that whitey was stichin’ up OJ.

  109. @Thrasymachus
    The OJ Simpson jury, and the reaction of blacks to the verdict, condemn black people as a whole.

    Only a minority of blacks are violent criminals, but virtually all blacks morally support blacks who are violent criminals. The OJ Simpson jury was a selection of sober black respectability- the kind of solid-citizen, middle-class people that serve on juries- and they said "You killed two white people? No problem."

    All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict.

    Replies: @fredyetagain aka superhonky, @David In TN

    “All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict.”

    That was my own experience.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @David In TN

    The past couple of years, I've been trying to find that video of a filled auditorium of black college students (at Howard, I think) exploding in celebration at the moment the verdict was announced. I wonder if anyone else can find it. I think it's been suppressed, because it reflects such an uncomfortable truth for white liberals. At any rate, the black reaction to the verdict always reminds me of Malcolm X's claim that blacks are always happy and feel a sense of revenge every time a plane filled with white people crashes. While it's worth noting that Malcolm X regretted making that statement, he never corrected it.

    Replies: @Jimster, @Das

    , @Lugash
    @David In TN

    One of the reactions on this video?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsnuhz-Kb7k

    I'm trying to find the CNN/MSNBC legal commentary right before the verdict. IIRC, pretty much everyone was calling a guilty verdict because the jury deliberated for such a short amount of time.

    Replies: @David In TN

  110. Sean says:

    Moscone Milk killings failed to end in murder convictions because the prosecutor was a drunk whose heart was not in it because the defendant was an ex cop. Detective were swearing at the prosecutor in the corridors of the court. The Twinkie defence was of a defendant who was an ex cop. And he had good legal advice because they didn’t let him testify, which would have exposed him to cross examination about his actions, several of which like reloading and sneaking in the back window to avoid a search at the door showed premeditation. They played Dan White’s taped statements in court taking about the killing in which he was crying He was crying on tape and in person in the court listening to himself. Even the prosecutor was crying. White’s defence got a prominent psychiatrist to testify for him. The only other time the Twinkie defence worked was with the prosecution of a cop.

  111. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Anonymous


    Bugliosi is from Hibbing, MN, as are: Bob Dylan, Gary Puckett, Robert Mondavi, and Roger Maris.
     
    Hibbing, MN must be one of Raj Chetty's hellholes.

    Replies: @Dirk Dagger

    Why leave out Kevin McHale? Are you Gophophobic?

  112. @Prof. Woland
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Marcia Clark thought the case would be easy. Just show a bunch of close ups of the battered woman to a female jury. Unfortunately, she did not anticipate that the jury would only see some white bitch.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    At that time white feminists didn’t understand that for black women race trumps gender – and by a mile. This reality needs no further explication on this site. But still it bears remarking that white feminists seem to take a special thrill out of putting gender above race. In the Duke Lacrosse case, were there any more gleeful attack dogs than white feminists? And yet even black feminists will defend a black rapist if the accuser is a white woman. I’d like to have an honest talk with a white feminist about this.

    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Part of the cynical point I was making is that Marsha Clark, like a lot of women, thought that she could use prejudice to her advantage only to have the tables turned. It probably never occurred to her that she was the one who would ended up getting played. After all, you just don't do that to women.

  113. @Alvintostig
    @Anonymous

    A few mistakes:

    The Maysles Brothers footage shows the young man was waving a gun around, not a knife, and was involved in some sort of scuffling going on near the stage. The knife was wielded by the Angel.

    That the Stones were performing "Sympathy for the Devil" when the killing took place has become one of those things that "everybody knows" but that song had been played earlier in the night. The actual song was "Under My Thumb."

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    Thank you for saving me the trouble. I think I’ve watched Gimme Shelter a couple dozen times in the past 30 years. Really, an amazing document. (“I pray that it’s all right…I pray that it’s all right…”)

  114. @David In TN
    @Thrasymachus

    "All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict."

    That was my own experience.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax, @Lugash

    The past couple of years, I’ve been trying to find that video of a filled auditorium of black college students (at Howard, I think) exploding in celebration at the moment the verdict was announced. I wonder if anyone else can find it. I think it’s been suppressed, because it reflects such an uncomfortable truth for white liberals. At any rate, the black reaction to the verdict always reminds me of Malcolm X’s claim that blacks are always happy and feel a sense of revenge every time a plane filled with white people crashes. While it’s worth noting that Malcolm X regretted making that statement, he never corrected it.

    • Replies: @Jimster
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    I remember that video quite well- I suspect many whites do. I am 99% sure it was indeed Howard University. I tried searching for it on youtube just now but the Thought Police seem to have had it hidden. It must be out there though- it was seen by millions of people.

    Replies: @Danindc, @flyover hick

    , @Das
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Now, everyone sort of admits that OJ was guilty, but it was different at the time. Something like 40% of white people said they supported the OJ verdict in polls taken after the announcement.

    And there wasn't much of a big partisan divide, either. Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.

    Basically, OJ was not a random inner city thug. He was a handsome, wealthy, successful guy who attracted support from large sections of society.

    The black ladies on the jury would have had no problem throwing the book at a gangbanger from their neighborhood. But OJ was a credit to their race, so the cognitive dissonance was too much.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Jacobite

  115. @Steve Sailer
    @anonymous

    They left Manson out of the Brian Wilson biopic I am reviewing. Manson became a pal of Brian's younger brother Dennis and of Doris Day's son.

    Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist, @Jesse, @Anonymous, @WhatEvvs, @bacon habanero ranch

    Wasn’t Doris Day’s son a well-known drug dealer around BH?

    • Replies: @manton
    @bacon habanero ranch

    If you're talking about Terry Melcher, I've never read that.

    , @Dirk Dagger
    @bacon habanero ranch


    Wasn't [Melcher] a well-known drug dealer ...
     
    Only in the sense that big time record producers are there to keep the talent working and happy. More crazy trivia, Melcher shared the house with Mark Lindsay, lead singer of Paul Revere and the Raiders ... and I don't think they were gay, there was a time when that existed in these United States. Groovy times, groovy times. Finally, the rumours that Lindsey Graham is Mark Lindsay's love-child are, at this point, unproven.
  116. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Anonymous

    Think of just about every stereotype of the '60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the '70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair -- not really long hair -- on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    I remember reading that someone who traveled to the Texas book depository was amazed that the shots were basically straight away at a slow moving target. Not impossible for a decent marksman.

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    @Anonymous

    Actually it wasn't as easy as it at first appears, and though one would not have needed to be a Hathcock to do it, one would have had to be a properly trained marksman with some reasonable level of currency with the weapon in question. That the weapon itself was so crummy makes it even more of a task. No proficient marksman would have voluntarily picked such a POS and if it were all that was available, he would have made some judicious modifications which as I understand the rifle shows absolutely no evidence of.

    Oswald was no more than minimally proficient as a Marine, and had he had his assigned service rifle and had had to do the job on the day after boot camp graduation, probably could have. Neither of those conditions being the case, it's iffy at best.

    , @Alfa158
    @Anonymous

    I saw the video clip of that person on the History channel, and it was one of Kennedy's Secret Service bodyguards from just a couple of years ago. He had never been in the depository shooting site before that and said you really can't tell from the sidewalk just how short the range was and that the street ran in a straight line directly away from the window. He was distraught that the motorcade had unwittingly driven the President right into a shooting gallery.

    I think it was lucky that Oswald didn't have a larger budget. The same catalog page that he ordered his Carcano from, had surplus M1 Garands for $100. With one of those, he might have killed everyone in the limousine.

  117. @Jus' Sayin'...
    @Anonymous

    Think of just about every stereotype of the '60s that you may have in your mind. Then look it up and you will more than likely find that it began or peaked in the '70s. The early and mid-1960s were pretty much a seamless continuation of the 1950s.

    I graduated from one of the countries better and more left-wing universities in 1969. It was only towards the very end of my undergraduate career that marijuana use became noderately widespread on campus, that the first disruptive student demonstration occurred, that attire like jeans became widespread, that longish hair -- not really long hair -- on male students became common. Pop music on campus was mostly folk, the Beattles, Stones, Simon and Garfunkle, The Mommas and Poppas etc., and Motown. The big movie was The Graduate, which was panned by Pauline Kael.

    Replies: @Jus' Sayin'..., @Harry Baldwin, @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    Watched “The Graduate” the other night with my wife. Ann Bancroft was hot. Unfortunately “Scarbourgh faire” is now stuck in my head.

  118. @jstrocchi
    Bugliosi conclusively proved that Oswald was the shooter in the JFK assasination. That alone should earn him the undying appreciation of the educated layman.

    Replies: @LondonBob

    I doubt it, would be a bit above a trial lawyer to understand, more a thugs and spies area. Good reason Oswald could never be allowed to stand trial, even the Warren Commission was a farce and struggled to come up with plausible scenario, as Nixon admitted.

    Of course Oswald was an FBI informant who was infiltrating Cuban exile groups and right wing subversive groups as an agent of the Defence Intelligence Agency. Doing a much better job of it than his infiltration of the Soviet Union as a supposed defector, KGB didn’t fall for that one.

  119. @Harry Baldwin
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I agree with you. What people think of as the 1960s didn't end with Altamont or the Manson killings, it ended around the time Nixon resigned. Basically, Kennedy assassination through Nixon resignation, or the most active part of the Vietnam War. I moved to NYC in 1970 and was there for five years. The Fillmore East was hosting rock concerts nightly, underground comics were coming out regularly, feminism had not yet put a damper on free love--the whole scene was still very hippie-ish.

    Replies: @Jacobite, @Anonymous

    In 1983 I was sitting on the seawall near the St. Francis Yacht Club when a chick in hippy garb who I’d never seen before said to me, “so, are we gonna do it?”

  120. @Auntie Analogue
    In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist's shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his "family" as the "end of the Sixties," so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin.

    Replies: @SPMoore8, @BurplesonAFB, @Former Darfur

    “In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist’s shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his “family” as the “end of the Sixties,” so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin.”

    I’ve always believed that the so called “The Sixties” could be dated as accurately as being between 8/8/62 (the bizarre spectacle burial of Marilyn Monroe) and 8/8/74 (resignation speech of Richard M. Nixon) as in any other way. In neither case was that the absolute defining event, but it was in the middle on both ends and a convenient demarc, since Monroe so well represented fifties American culture and Nixon so vividly enraged the counterculture.

    As far as Bugliosi’s book, I’ve read it and I don’t think it “positively proves” Oswald acted alone, although it does make the case as well as any book could. I’m skeptical for several reasons, but mostly 1) the bizarre circumstances of Oswald’s return to the US, 2) Oswald’s bizarre choice of what was and is well accepted to be the worst rifle of WWII, when the best were all readily available for a couple days’ pay via mailorder, including the M-1 Garand with which he trained as a Marine and 3) the lengths to which somebody went to kill him before he could talk (I do not accept that Ruby just did this on his own, he wasn’t that sort.)

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @Former Darfur

    Ruby's shooting of Oswald almost certainly was a spur of the moment, unplanned action. Just a few minutes before the shooting he had been sending money at a nearby Western Union office. There was a time stamped receipt proving this. Had Oswald's transfer to the county jail gone as planned Ruby would have been too late to shoot him. But Oswald wanted to change his sweater, delaying the transfer for a crucial several minutes.

  121. @Malcolm X-Lax
    @David In TN

    The past couple of years, I've been trying to find that video of a filled auditorium of black college students (at Howard, I think) exploding in celebration at the moment the verdict was announced. I wonder if anyone else can find it. I think it's been suppressed, because it reflects such an uncomfortable truth for white liberals. At any rate, the black reaction to the verdict always reminds me of Malcolm X's claim that blacks are always happy and feel a sense of revenge every time a plane filled with white people crashes. While it's worth noting that Malcolm X regretted making that statement, he never corrected it.

    Replies: @Jimster, @Das

    I remember that video quite well- I suspect many whites do. I am 99% sure it was indeed Howard University. I tried searching for it on youtube just now but the Thought Police seem to have had it hidden. It must be out there though- it was seen by millions of people.

    • Replies: @Danindc
    @Jimster

    It was Howard. And it was eye opening.

    , @flyover hick
    @Jimster

    It was Howard University Law School students.
    Not just Howard University undergrads, but law students. The "talented tenth."
    They cheered as if their team had just scored a touchdown. Tribalism trumps all.

    I've occasionally looked for that specific video as well. Haven't found it.
    The reaction of blacks to the OJ verdict permanently altered my perception of them.

  122. @Anonymous
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I remember reading that someone who traveled to the Texas book depository was amazed that the shots were basically straight away at a slow moving target. Not impossible for a decent marksman.

    Replies: @Former Darfur, @Alfa158

    Actually it wasn’t as easy as it at first appears, and though one would not have needed to be a Hathcock to do it, one would have had to be a properly trained marksman with some reasonable level of currency with the weapon in question. That the weapon itself was so crummy makes it even more of a task. No proficient marksman would have voluntarily picked such a POS and if it were all that was available, he would have made some judicious modifications which as I understand the rifle shows absolutely no evidence of.

    Oswald was no more than minimally proficient as a Marine, and had he had his assigned service rifle and had had to do the job on the day after boot camp graduation, probably could have. Neither of those conditions being the case, it’s iffy at best.

  123. @Mr. Anon
    OT: The New York Times has an article today about Marco Rubio financial woes. The man who would be chief executive of the land appears to be a habitual deadbeat and neer-do-well.

    Marco Rubio's Finances

    It's remarkable how guys like Obama and Rubio, who can't even manage their own finances, think they are fit to manage the entire federal government.

    Replies: @Crassus

    “It’s remarkable how guys like Obama and Rubio, who can’t even manage their own finances, think they are fit to manage the entire federal government.”

    Marco Rubio’s bold fiscal philosophy: spend furiously, get-rich-quick!

  124. @Anonymous
    OT: How a couple of high school-dropout, pot dealing twenty-something's were able to get a $300 million Pentagon arms contract.
    Two Orthodox Jewish kids from Miami, including a nephew of Smulley Boteach.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous

    Steve has been on top of this for years.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @kaganovitch

    @Anonymous


    Steve has been on top of this for years.
     

    Old news. Steve has blogged about Shmuley’s nephew before.
     
    I know. My extra comments were for the benefit of those not aware of the story. The article I linked to from Mother Jones is from yesterday (6/8/15) and is an interview with the author of a new book on the subject. Repetitio mater memoriae.
  125. @Anonymous
    OT: How a couple of high school-dropout, pot dealing twenty-something's were able to get a $300 million Pentagon arms contract.
    Two Orthodox Jewish kids from Miami, including a nephew of Smulley Boteach.

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Anonymous

    Old news. Steve has blogged about Shmuley’s nephew before.

  126. @Anonymous
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I remember reading that someone who traveled to the Texas book depository was amazed that the shots were basically straight away at a slow moving target. Not impossible for a decent marksman.

    Replies: @Former Darfur, @Alfa158

    I saw the video clip of that person on the History channel, and it was one of Kennedy’s Secret Service bodyguards from just a couple of years ago. He had never been in the depository shooting site before that and said you really can’t tell from the sidewalk just how short the range was and that the street ran in a straight line directly away from the window. He was distraught that the motorcade had unwittingly driven the President right into a shooting gallery.

    I think it was lucky that Oswald didn’t have a larger budget. The same catalog page that he ordered his Carcano from, had surplus M1 Garands for $100. With one of those, he might have killed everyone in the limousine.

  127. Das says:
    @Malcolm X-Lax
    @David In TN

    The past couple of years, I've been trying to find that video of a filled auditorium of black college students (at Howard, I think) exploding in celebration at the moment the verdict was announced. I wonder if anyone else can find it. I think it's been suppressed, because it reflects such an uncomfortable truth for white liberals. At any rate, the black reaction to the verdict always reminds me of Malcolm X's claim that blacks are always happy and feel a sense of revenge every time a plane filled with white people crashes. While it's worth noting that Malcolm X regretted making that statement, he never corrected it.

    Replies: @Jimster, @Das

    Now, everyone sort of admits that OJ was guilty, but it was different at the time. Something like 40% of white people said they supported the OJ verdict in polls taken after the announcement.

    And there wasn’t much of a big partisan divide, either. Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.

    Basically, OJ was not a random inner city thug. He was a handsome, wealthy, successful guy who attracted support from large sections of society.

    The black ladies on the jury would have had no problem throwing the book at a gangbanger from their neighborhood. But OJ was a credit to their race, so the cognitive dissonance was too much.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Das

    And how did Ron Goldman's blood get in O.J. Simpson's Ford Bronco?

    Replies: @Das

    , @Jacobite
    @Das


    Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.
     
    Well I know plenty of White Republicans and don't know any of them who ever thought that OJ is innocent.

    Replies: @Danindc

  128. @keypusher
    @David In TN

    There's also causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and bankrupting the country. Isn't that enough?

    Replies: @David In TN

    I don’t like George W. Bush any more than Bugliosi did.

  129. Wow Bugliosi got his ass kicked in this thread with 80% of the posts off topic from Bugliosi himself.

    ISteve-ers are shallow and celeb-obsessed.

    Caitlin and Manson
    Up in a tree
    K-i-s-s-i-n-g

  130. @Das
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Now, everyone sort of admits that OJ was guilty, but it was different at the time. Something like 40% of white people said they supported the OJ verdict in polls taken after the announcement.

    And there wasn't much of a big partisan divide, either. Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.

    Basically, OJ was not a random inner city thug. He was a handsome, wealthy, successful guy who attracted support from large sections of society.

    The black ladies on the jury would have had no problem throwing the book at a gangbanger from their neighborhood. But OJ was a credit to their race, so the cognitive dissonance was too much.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Jacobite

    And how did Ron Goldman’s blood get in O.J. Simpson’s Ford Bronco?

    • Replies: @Das
    @David In TN

    OJ Simpson was obviously guilty.

    But in summer 1995, 42% of whites said they approved of the OJ verdict. White people weren't totally immune to the celebrity worship that let him get off.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Hibernian

  131. @bacon habanero ranch
    @Steve Sailer

    Wasn't Doris Day's son a well-known drug dealer around BH?

    Replies: @manton, @Dirk Dagger

    If you’re talking about Terry Melcher, I’ve never read that.

  132. @David In TN
    @Das

    And how did Ron Goldman's blood get in O.J. Simpson's Ford Bronco?

    Replies: @Das

    OJ Simpson was obviously guilty.

    But in summer 1995, 42% of whites said they approved of the OJ verdict. White people weren’t totally immune to the celebrity worship that let him get off.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Das

    And 99% of blacks approved. They didn't support Simpson because of doubt of his guilt but due to their certainty of it.

    BTW, just what poll said 42% of whites "approved of the verdict?"

    Replies: @Das

    , @Hibernian
    @Das

    They may have been telling the polltakers what they wanted to hear.

  133. prosa123 [AKA "Peter"] says: • Website
    @Former Darfur
    @Auntie Analogue

    "In his book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Vincent Bugliosi made a case for Oswald as lone-wolf assassin that I found overwhelmingly, conclusively convincing. Of course that book put Bugliosi onto every JFK conspiracy theorist’s shit list.

    As much as a case as can be made for Manson and his “family” as the “end of the Sixties,” so too can a case be made for the Altamont rock concert as the cultural end of that decade. They were two sides of the same bad coin."


    I've always believed that the so called "The Sixties" could be dated as accurately as being between 8/8/62 (the bizarre spectacle burial of Marilyn Monroe) and 8/8/74 (resignation speech of Richard M. Nixon) as in any other way. In neither case was that the absolute defining event, but it was in the middle on both ends and a convenient demarc, since Monroe so well represented fifties American culture and Nixon so vividly enraged the counterculture.

    As far as Bugliosi's book, I've read it and I don't think it "positively proves" Oswald acted alone, although it does make the case as well as any book could. I'm skeptical for several reasons, but mostly 1) the bizarre circumstances of Oswald's return to the US, 2) Oswald's bizarre choice of what was and is well accepted to be the worst rifle of WWII, when the best were all readily available for a couple days' pay via mailorder, including the M-1 Garand with which he trained as a Marine and 3) the lengths to which somebody went to kill him before he could talk (I do not accept that Ruby just did this on his own, he wasn't that sort.)

    Replies: @prosa123

    Ruby’s shooting of Oswald almost certainly was a spur of the moment, unplanned action. Just a few minutes before the shooting he had been sending money at a nearby Western Union office. There was a time stamped receipt proving this. Had Oswald’s transfer to the county jail gone as planned Ruby would have been too late to shoot him. But Oswald wanted to change his sweater, delaying the transfer for a crucial several minutes.

  134. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @kaganovitch
    @Anonymous

    Steve has been on top of this for years.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Steve has been on top of this for years.

    Old news. Steve has blogged about Shmuley’s nephew before.

    I know. My extra comments were for the benefit of those not aware of the story. The article I linked to from Mother Jones is from yesterday (6/8/15) and is an interview with the author of a new book on the subject. Repetitio mater memoriae.

  135. @Das
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Now, everyone sort of admits that OJ was guilty, but it was different at the time. Something like 40% of white people said they supported the OJ verdict in polls taken after the announcement.

    And there wasn't much of a big partisan divide, either. Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.

    Basically, OJ was not a random inner city thug. He was a handsome, wealthy, successful guy who attracted support from large sections of society.

    The black ladies on the jury would have had no problem throwing the book at a gangbanger from their neighborhood. But OJ was a credit to their race, so the cognitive dissonance was too much.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Jacobite

    Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.

    Well I know plenty of White Republicans and don’t know any of them who ever thought that OJ is innocent.

    • Replies: @Danindc
    @Jacobite

    Not one white republican thought OJ was guilty.

  136. Isn’t it terrible that Hispanics are taking over SoCal. Reading all these comments, it seemed like such a nice place.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @anony-mouse


    Isn’t it terrible that Hispanics are taking over SoCal. Reading all these comments, it seemed like such a nice place.
     
    Of course, it will be interesting to see Elysium made real as California slowly devolves into a Mexican rubbish heap......
  137. @Jacobite
    @Das


    Plenty of white Republicans thought that OJ was innocent.
     
    Well I know plenty of White Republicans and don't know any of them who ever thought that OJ is innocent.

    Replies: @Danindc

    Not one white republican thought OJ was guilty.

  138. @Jimster
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    I remember that video quite well- I suspect many whites do. I am 99% sure it was indeed Howard University. I tried searching for it on youtube just now but the Thought Police seem to have had it hidden. It must be out there though- it was seen by millions of people.

    Replies: @Danindc, @flyover hick

    It was Howard. And it was eye opening.

  139. @anony-mouse
    Isn't it terrible that Hispanics are taking over SoCal. Reading all these comments, it seemed like such a nice place.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Isn’t it terrible that Hispanics are taking over SoCal. Reading all these comments, it seemed like such a nice place.

    Of course, it will be interesting to see Elysium made real as California slowly devolves into a Mexican rubbish heap……

  140. @WhatEvvs
    @Steve Sailer

    I'm sorry to hear of Bugliosi's passing. He was an amazing guy. Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.

    Re Manson, it's disturbing how well-connected he was to the LA/Hollywood music scene. The Manson girls hung out with Mama Cass Elliott and they became such pests she had to throw them out. There's all kinds of stories like that in Hollywood. Scary.

    Replies: @Brent, @Reg Cæsar

    Here’s a fascinating website that traces all sorts of weird connections to the Laurel Canyon crowd, including Charles Manson.

    http://informationfarm.blogspot.com/2010/02/inside-lc-strange-but-mostly-true-story.html

    I don’t buy everything the author says, but he’s dug up some very interesting stuff. (His thesis is that the hippie counterculture was a Pentagon/CIA psyop designed to divert the anti-war movement into drug addiction and silly hedonism.)

    • Replies: @Ed
    @Brent

    Dave McGowan, who unfortunately is dying of terminal cancer, wrote a book about Laurel Canyon which is worth reading, which is worth reading for his description of the scene, even if you don't buy his thesis. He is a talented writer.

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter).

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Mr. Anon

    , @WhatEvvs
    @Brent

    I've seen the site, but I'll give it another look. I enjoy reading these sites until they start to go wooo.

    Yes, Manson was very much a part of the Laurel Canyon crowd. Very creepy. But I don't buy the psy-ops stuff.

  141. @Das
    @David In TN

    OJ Simpson was obviously guilty.

    But in summer 1995, 42% of whites said they approved of the OJ verdict. White people weren't totally immune to the celebrity worship that let him get off.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Hibernian

    And 99% of blacks approved. They didn’t support Simpson because of doubt of his guilt but due to their certainty of it.

    BTW, just what poll said 42% of whites “approved of the verdict?”

    • Replies: @Das
    @David In TN

    A 1995 Gallup poll showed that 42% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 78% of blacks. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/polls.html

    A CNN poll taken at the same time showed that 41% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 88% of blacks. http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/daily/9510/10-06/poll_race/oj_poll_txt.html

    Obviously blacks supported OJ out of racial pride, but plenty of white people supported him too, because he was a popular celebrity with an awesome legal team.

    Replies: @Rob McX

  142. @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Prof. Woland

    At that time white feminists didn't understand that for black women race trumps gender - and by a mile. This reality needs no further explication on this site. But still it bears remarking that white feminists seem to take a special thrill out of putting gender above race. In the Duke Lacrosse case, were there any more gleeful attack dogs than white feminists? And yet even black feminists will defend a black rapist if the accuser is a white woman. I'd like to have an honest talk with a white feminist about this.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

    Part of the cynical point I was making is that Marsha Clark, like a lot of women, thought that she could use prejudice to her advantage only to have the tables turned. It probably never occurred to her that she was the one who would ended up getting played. After all, you just don’t do that to women.

  143. @manton
    I started at Berkeley in 1987, and it was amazing to me how "alive" all these events and issues still were. I had been either not alive, or very young during most of them so I was at best dimly aware. But people talked about "The Sixties" incessantly. Eventually I had to read about it all for myself because their memories were not always entirely reliable ...

    Replies: @Anonymous

    ’87 was the year there were lines outside the art museum on Bancroft to see “Piss Christ.” Also, blacks would walk down the street mouthing Leonard Jeffries’ tripe about “ice people” and “sun people.”

  144. @Mr. Anon
    @Rob McX

    "Rob McX says:

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn’t think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released – this was written 20 years ago."

    I remember that from when I read his book (a very interesting read too). However, there is a danger in releasing him: that he might do the same thing again - mesmerize a bunch of young people into forming a murder-cult. He still has followers - one young groupie who visits him in prison has announced her intention to marry him.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Rob McX

    That was Douglas’s conclusion in the book: “The biggest threat [if he were released] would be from the misguided losers who would gravitate to him and proclaim him their god and leader.”

  145. @David In TN
    @Thrasymachus

    "All the nice, respectable, middle-class black people I knew in the time period supported the verdict."

    That was my own experience.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax, @Lugash

    One of the reactions on this video?

    I’m trying to find the CNN/MSNBC legal commentary right before the verdict. IIRC, pretty much everyone was calling a guilty verdict because the jury deliberated for such a short amount of time.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Lugash

    Yes, that's what they did the night before the verdict. For months, the talking heads had been criticizing the prosecutors and praising Cochran and Company as legal geniuses and great trial lawyers.

    But the night before they were predicting a guilty verdict, about the exact opposite of what their commentary would seem to indicate.

    Jeffrey Toobin wrote afterward that "everybody in the courtroom was afraid of being accused of racism." So they "picked away at the prosecution's case" and played down the facts, such as the DNA evidence. Toobin wrote "We didn't say that the case against Simpson was simply overwhelming." In other words, they were afraid to.

    Toobin also predicted a guilty verdict the night before. After the acquittal, Toobin detailed (in New Yorker magazine) the dead-bang certainty of Simpson's guilty, something he was admittedly afraid to do throughout the trial.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  146. Das says:
    @David In TN
    @Das

    And 99% of blacks approved. They didn't support Simpson because of doubt of his guilt but due to their certainty of it.

    BTW, just what poll said 42% of whites "approved of the verdict?"

    Replies: @Das

    A 1995 Gallup poll showed that 42% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 78% of blacks. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/polls.html

    A CNN poll taken at the same time showed that 41% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 88% of blacks. http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/daily/9510/10-06/poll_race/oj_poll_txt.html

    Obviously blacks supported OJ out of racial pride, but plenty of white people supported him too, because he was a popular celebrity with an awesome legal team.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Das

    However, blacks and whites may have had different reasons for approving of the verdict. Whites may just have been relieved, thinking of what blacks might have done had OJ been convicted. They might not like to explain it that way to pollsters, though.

  147. Ed says:
    @Brent
    @WhatEvvs

    Here's a fascinating website that traces all sorts of weird connections to the Laurel Canyon crowd, including Charles Manson.

    http://informationfarm.blogspot.com/2010/02/inside-lc-strange-but-mostly-true-story.html

    I don't buy everything the author says, but he's dug up some very interesting stuff. (His thesis is that the hippie counterculture was a Pentagon/CIA psyop designed to divert the anti-war movement into drug addiction and silly hedonism.)

    Replies: @Ed, @WhatEvvs

    Dave McGowan, who unfortunately is dying of terminal cancer, wrote a book about Laurel Canyon which is worth reading, which is worth reading for his description of the scene, even if you don’t buy his thesis. He is a talented writer.

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter).

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Ed

    Did Allen Dulles time travel to 1865 to kill Lincoln? Or did you mean Kennedy?

    , @Mr. Anon
    @Ed

    "Ed says:

    "Dave McGowan,.................

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter)."

    No, he doesn't have plausible arguments. He has the stupid, ignorant, poorly-informed arguments of a stupid, ignorant, poorly informed person. Dave McGowan is a f**king idiot.

  148. @Lugash
    @David In TN

    One of the reactions on this video?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsnuhz-Kb7k

    I'm trying to find the CNN/MSNBC legal commentary right before the verdict. IIRC, pretty much everyone was calling a guilty verdict because the jury deliberated for such a short amount of time.

    Replies: @David In TN

    Yes, that’s what they did the night before the verdict. For months, the talking heads had been criticizing the prosecutors and praising Cochran and Company as legal geniuses and great trial lawyers.

    But the night before they were predicting a guilty verdict, about the exact opposite of what their commentary would seem to indicate.

    Jeffrey Toobin wrote afterward that “everybody in the courtroom was afraid of being accused of racism.” So they “picked away at the prosecution’s case” and played down the facts, such as the DNA evidence. Toobin wrote “We didn’t say that the case against Simpson was simply overwhelming.” In other words, they were afraid to.

    Toobin also predicted a guilty verdict the night before. After the acquittal, Toobin detailed (in New Yorker magazine) the dead-bang certainty of Simpson’s guilty, something he was admittedly afraid to do throughout the trial.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @David In TN

    Toobin was the one who first introduced the red herring of Mark Furhman into the trial, which he did in some article for the New Yorker. The media treated the article like it was some bombshell that an LA cop involved in the case had used the (ugh) "N-word" before in his life. F. Lee Bailey then shamelessly manipulated a stupid and dishonest jury into thinking it had some evidentiary significance -- and it gave them further license to disregard the evidence. F. Lee Bailey should be rotting in fucking hell right about now.

    Replies: @David In TN

  149. @Jacobite
    @anonymous-antimarxist


    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles
     
    Bigger than The Beatles??? The Beatles were bigger than Jesus Christ. John Lennon said so.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    By the way there is a movie coming out in 2016 specifically about the Dennis Wilson, Melcher, and Manson relationship called Bigger Than the Beatles

    Bigger than The Beatles??? The Beatles were bigger than Jesus Christ. John Lennon said so.

    Does that mean Brian Wilson is bigger than John the Baptist?

  150. @WhatEvvs
    @Steve Sailer

    I'm sorry to hear of Bugliosi's passing. He was an amazing guy. Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.

    Re Manson, it's disturbing how well-connected he was to the LA/Hollywood music scene. The Manson girls hung out with Mama Cass Elliott and they became such pests she had to throw them out. There's all kinds of stories like that in Hollywood. Scary.

    Replies: @Brent, @Reg Cæsar

    Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.

    “Stole” implies there was a rightful winner. Who would that have been? Nader? Buchanan?

    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    @Reg Cæsar

    Dunno. Read the book.

  151. @Mr. Anon
    @Rob McX

    "Rob McX says:

    Even though Douglas is a hardliner on crime, and believes murderers should get the death penalty as quickly as possible after conviction, he says in his book Mindhunter that he doesn’t think Manson would be a serious violent threat to anyone if he were released – this was written 20 years ago."

    I remember that from when I read his book (a very interesting read too). However, there is a danger in releasing him: that he might do the same thing again - mesmerize a bunch of young people into forming a murder-cult. He still has followers - one young groupie who visits him in prison has announced her intention to marry him.

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Rob McX

    Wasn’t there political pressure not to have an all-white jury in the OJ case? Three years earlier, a white jury acquitted the cops in the Rodney King case, and black rioters laid waste to large parts of South Central LA, leaving more people dead than in in any such disturbance since the draft riots of 1863. There was a lot of frightened talk at the time of the prospect of a black man being convicted by a white jury with the King verdict so fresh in people’s minds. Letting OJ off would be the lesser of two evils to many people who didn’t relish the prospect of seeing their city burn all over again.

  152. @Das
    @David In TN

    A 1995 Gallup poll showed that 42% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 78% of blacks. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/polls.html

    A CNN poll taken at the same time showed that 41% of whites approved of the verdict, compared to 88% of blacks. http://www.cnn.com/US/OJ/daily/9510/10-06/poll_race/oj_poll_txt.html

    Obviously blacks supported OJ out of racial pride, but plenty of white people supported him too, because he was a popular celebrity with an awesome legal team.

    Replies: @Rob McX

    However, blacks and whites may have had different reasons for approving of the verdict. Whites may just have been relieved, thinking of what blacks might have done had OJ been convicted. They might not like to explain it that way to pollsters, though.

  153. @Das
    @David In TN

    OJ Simpson was obviously guilty.

    But in summer 1995, 42% of whites said they approved of the OJ verdict. White people weren't totally immune to the celebrity worship that let him get off.

    Replies: @David In TN, @Hibernian

    They may have been telling the polltakers what they wanted to hear.

  154. Helter Skelter was a great and terrifying book.

    It’s opening line still sends shivers down my spine:

    “It was so quiet, one of the killers would later say, you could almost hear the sound of ice rattling in cocktail shakers in the homes way down the canyon.”

  155. @Ed
    @Brent

    Dave McGowan, who unfortunately is dying of terminal cancer, wrote a book about Laurel Canyon which is worth reading, which is worth reading for his description of the scene, even if you don't buy his thesis. He is a talented writer.

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter).

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Mr. Anon

    Did Allen Dulles time travel to 1865 to kill Lincoln? Or did you mean Kennedy?

  156. @Jimster
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    I remember that video quite well- I suspect many whites do. I am 99% sure it was indeed Howard University. I tried searching for it on youtube just now but the Thought Police seem to have had it hidden. It must be out there though- it was seen by millions of people.

    Replies: @Danindc, @flyover hick

    It was Howard University Law School students.
    Not just Howard University undergrads, but law students. The “talented tenth.”
    They cheered as if their team had just scored a touchdown. Tribalism trumps all.

    I’ve occasionally looked for that specific video as well. Haven’t found it.
    The reaction of blacks to the OJ verdict permanently altered my perception of them.

  157. @anonymous
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Charlie was actually a pretty good musician...I downloaded some of his jailhouse recordings.

    Most of it was schizophrenic ramblings, but a few of those songs are actually quite good.

    He had some talent...I guess that's part of what enabled him to reel in the girls for the 'family'

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jim, @Ron Mexico

    Guns N Roses recorded a song of his on The Spaghetti Incident.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Ron Mexico

    What's your game, girl? That's so, so Charlie.

  158. Ed says:

    “Did Allen Dulles time travel to 1865 to kill Lincoln? Or did you mean Kennedy?”

    Seriously, he meant the 1865 equivalent of the CIA, which was the Pinkertons and Stanton.

    Booth really was an agent of the Confederate government, but the Confederate spy network in Washington was downplayed in the interest of reconciliation after the war.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Ed


    Booth really was an agent of the Confederate government, but the Confederate spy network in Washington was downplayed in the interest of reconciliation after the war.
     
    Booth's brother must've been an agent as well, and tracking Lincoln and his activities. It explains how he just happened to be on the same train platform in NJ as Lincoln's son and save him from being killed by a train. IIRC this was a year before Lincoln's assassination.
  159. @Mr. Anon
    Is it just me, or does Charles Manson not bear a certain resemblance to George W. Bush?

    Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Visually, no. Narcissistically, yes.

  160. There’s a fictionalized TV series about the Manson murders and supposed events leading up to them called Aquarius, starring David Duchovny.

    As a period-piece, it isn’t bad. The guy portraying Manson is pretty good, as are some of the actresses portraying the Manson girls, and Duchovny plays a bit more staid than usual, which works in this instance. I was surprised that the Black Panthers weren’t totally canonized, though the show does get into the usual ‘racism’ breast-beating.

    However, it goes completely off the rails when it portrays Charles Manson in a homosexual relationship with the California finance chairman of Nixon’s ’68 campaign, as well as a simultaneous heterosexual relationship with said GOPer’s 16-year-old daughter (I kid you not, pardon the pun; no threesome, at least so far). The implication is that the California GOP, and by extension, Nixon, were responsible for financing the Manson ‘family’ via blackmail payments and political protection given Manson by the Los Angeles GOP establishment to cover up his previous pimping and murders of prostitutes for and by GOP operatives.

    The entire first season is available for download via iTunes.

  161. One other comment about Aquarius – there’s a Pentagon Papers-like subplot about exposing the secret bombing of Cambodia. When the Vietnam War is discussed, the characters never say ‘LBJ’; they say ‘the President’.

    This is a great example of how liberals (at the time and afterwards) pretty successfully obscured the fact that Jack Kennedy got the United States into Vietnam, and how LBJ kept us there and totally mismanaged the war effort.

    As a result of this successful rewriting of history, most people today believe that the GOP got the United States into Vietnam and then lost the war. I just thought Aquarius was an interesting/depressing instance of this retconning.

  162. @David In TN
    @Lugash

    Yes, that's what they did the night before the verdict. For months, the talking heads had been criticizing the prosecutors and praising Cochran and Company as legal geniuses and great trial lawyers.

    But the night before they were predicting a guilty verdict, about the exact opposite of what their commentary would seem to indicate.

    Jeffrey Toobin wrote afterward that "everybody in the courtroom was afraid of being accused of racism." So they "picked away at the prosecution's case" and played down the facts, such as the DNA evidence. Toobin wrote "We didn't say that the case against Simpson was simply overwhelming." In other words, they were afraid to.

    Toobin also predicted a guilty verdict the night before. After the acquittal, Toobin detailed (in New Yorker magazine) the dead-bang certainty of Simpson's guilty, something he was admittedly afraid to do throughout the trial.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    Toobin was the one who first introduced the red herring of Mark Furhman into the trial, which he did in some article for the New Yorker. The media treated the article like it was some bombshell that an LA cop involved in the case had used the (ugh) “N-word” before in his life. F. Lee Bailey then shamelessly manipulated a stupid and dishonest jury into thinking it had some evidentiary significance — and it gave them further license to disregard the evidence. F. Lee Bailey should be rotting in fucking hell right about now.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Yes, as I recall someone on the defense team alerted Toobin to Furhman and he brought it out in the open well before the trial, something the defense was glad to see.

  163. @Ron Mexico
    @anonymous

    Guns N Roses recorded a song of his on The Spaghetti Incident.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    What’s your game, girl? That’s so, so Charlie.

  164. @bacon habanero ranch
    @Steve Sailer

    Wasn't Doris Day's son a well-known drug dealer around BH?

    Replies: @manton, @Dirk Dagger

    Wasn’t [Melcher] a well-known drug dealer …

    Only in the sense that big time record producers are there to keep the talent working and happy. More crazy trivia, Melcher shared the house with Mark Lindsay, lead singer of Paul Revere and the Raiders … and I don’t think they were gay, there was a time when that existed in these United States. Groovy times, groovy times. Finally, the rumours that Lindsey Graham is Mark Lindsay’s love-child are, at this point, unproven.

  165. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Ed
    "Did Allen Dulles time travel to 1865 to kill Lincoln? Or did you mean Kennedy?"

    Seriously, he meant the 1865 equivalent of the CIA, which was the Pinkertons and Stanton.

    Booth really was an agent of the Confederate government, but the Confederate spy network in Washington was downplayed in the interest of reconciliation after the war.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Booth really was an agent of the Confederate government, but the Confederate spy network in Washington was downplayed in the interest of reconciliation after the war.

    Booth’s brother must’ve been an agent as well, and tracking Lincoln and his activities. It explains how he just happened to be on the same train platform in NJ as Lincoln’s son and save him from being killed by a train. IIRC this was a year before Lincoln’s assassination.

  166. Black women hate miscegenation at least as much as any man with white pride, probably more, but will always blame the white woman and not the black man. Hatred of miscegenation makes for strange bedfellows……….

  167. @Ed
    @Brent

    Dave McGowan, who unfortunately is dying of terminal cancer, wrote a book about Laurel Canyon which is worth reading, which is worth reading for his description of the scene, even if you don't buy his thesis. He is a talented writer.

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter).

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Mr. Anon

    “Ed says:

    “Dave McGowan,……………..

    His website, the Center for an Informed America, has writings accusing the CIA of killing Lincoln and arguing that the Moon landings were faked too (actually he has a pretty plausible argument for the latter).”

    No, he doesn’t have plausible arguments. He has the stupid, ignorant, poorly-informed arguments of a stupid, ignorant, poorly informed person. Dave McGowan is a f**king idiot.

  168. @Malcolm X-Lax
    @David In TN

    Toobin was the one who first introduced the red herring of Mark Furhman into the trial, which he did in some article for the New Yorker. The media treated the article like it was some bombshell that an LA cop involved in the case had used the (ugh) "N-word" before in his life. F. Lee Bailey then shamelessly manipulated a stupid and dishonest jury into thinking it had some evidentiary significance -- and it gave them further license to disregard the evidence. F. Lee Bailey should be rotting in fucking hell right about now.

    Replies: @David In TN

    Yes, as I recall someone on the defense team alerted Toobin to Furhman and he brought it out in the open well before the trial, something the defense was glad to see.

  169. @Rifleman
    @PatrickH


    I had always understood that Marcia Clark assented to the jury being composed mainly of black women. During the voir dire phase of jury selection, which gives both sides some discretion in the composition of the jury, she was mistakenly convinced that black women would be sympathetic to a “battered wife” and so did not protest their presence.
     
    Marcia Clark is a Nice Jewish Lady who wasn't prepared for her black sisters to abandon the Liberal Feminist sisterhood and put two black males, Simpson and Cochran, above a dead White woman in the ground and a live one in the courtroom.

    At the time I thought the Simpson trial was an Anti-Riot Trial, as in Garcetti and LA's elite said - "Let him go, he's not a gangbanger, he's popular, he wont kill again and if we get a conviction LA is going to be torched again."

    The trial was 94/95, the riots were in 92.

    Replies: @PatrickH

    Interesting. I hadn’t thought of that possibility, but of course it is at least possible and perhaps even likely.

    I was astounded at how incompetent the prosecution seemed, including that idiocy of assuming, as Clark clearly did, that black women who might have experienced domestic violence would therefore be sympathetic to a white woman who had done so. What they may have perceived was the non sequitur quality of that information in the OJ trial – after all, not every woman who is beaten by her husband is also murdered by him.

    I’m not as troubled by the stupidity as I once was (although I still think it was stupid) because I am semi-considering the idea that perhaps OJ was innocent after all. The sheer confusion he evinced before, during and after the trial makes the Dear case for his innocence seem at least possible, though perhaps it’s still a long shot.

  170. Here’s a decent video of differing reactions to the OJ verdict

    The real question in my mind is how many of “liberal” whites today would fail to support the view 0f blacks on the OJ verdict? My guess is that one and all would be on board with the verdict, because they can no longer contradict the stories told by blacks as a group. If the cases of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown can be twisted as they were, how hard would it be to do the same with the OJ case? “The gloves didn’t fit! The police planted the evidence!” The Obama DOJ would find a way to make the verdict seem reasonable, and the NY Times Editorial Board would be trumpeting that Justice was served.

    We live in a very different time from the days of the OJ verdict.

    • Replies: @David In TN
    @candid_observer

    For the most part so-called liberal whites supported the verdict and the black reaction at the time, though it wasn't unanimous. Richard Cohen, the most standard-issue liberal columnist of all, mocked white people for disagreeing with the verdict. The New York Times did editorialize in favor of accepting the verdict as I recall.

    "We must accept the verdict," was the generic Liberal Opinion after the verdict in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial. Along with "We have to understand the feelings of African-Americans."

    , @David In TN
    @candid_observer

    The white liberals are more aggressive about publicizing every confrontation between black criminal types and white police officers. And spinning it as "evil white cop against angelic African-American." I believe they think this is easier in 21st Century America.

    They also get more inclined every year to ignore, insofar as possible, black on white violence.

  171. @candid_observer
    Here's a decent video of differing reactions to the OJ verdict

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsnuhz-Kb7k

    The real question in my mind is how many of "liberal" whites today would fail to support the view 0f blacks on the OJ verdict? My guess is that one and all would be on board with the verdict, because they can no longer contradict the stories told by blacks as a group. If the cases of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown can be twisted as they were, how hard would it be to do the same with the OJ case? "The gloves didn't fit! The police planted the evidence!" The Obama DOJ would find a way to make the verdict seem reasonable, and the NY Times Editorial Board would be trumpeting that Justice was served.

    We live in a very different time from the days of the OJ verdict.

    Replies: @David In TN, @David In TN

    For the most part so-called liberal whites supported the verdict and the black reaction at the time, though it wasn’t unanimous. Richard Cohen, the most standard-issue liberal columnist of all, mocked white people for disagreeing with the verdict. The New York Times did editorialize in favor of accepting the verdict as I recall.

    “We must accept the verdict,” was the generic Liberal Opinion after the verdict in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial. Along with “We have to understand the feelings of African-Americans.”

  172. Vincent Bugliosi is the best prosecutor Los Angeles ever had.
    He made sure that justice was served through relentless hard work and devotion.
    I can only hope that others take his example of what it takes to be great.

    George Vreeland Hill

  173. WhatEvvs [AKA "Prada Yada Yada"] says:
    @Brent
    @WhatEvvs

    Here's a fascinating website that traces all sorts of weird connections to the Laurel Canyon crowd, including Charles Manson.

    http://informationfarm.blogspot.com/2010/02/inside-lc-strange-but-mostly-true-story.html

    I don't buy everything the author says, but he's dug up some very interesting stuff. (His thesis is that the hippie counterculture was a Pentagon/CIA psyop designed to divert the anti-war movement into drug addiction and silly hedonism.)

    Replies: @Ed, @WhatEvvs

    I’ve seen the site, but I’ll give it another look. I enjoy reading these sites until they start to go wooo.

    Yes, Manson was very much a part of the Laurel Canyon crowd. Very creepy. But I don’t buy the psy-ops stuff.

  174. WhatEvvs [AKA "Prada Yada Yada"] says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    @WhatEvvs


    Wrote a great book about how the Republicans stole the 2000 election, as well.
     
    "Stole" implies there was a rightful winner. Who would that have been? Nader? Buchanan?

    Replies: @WhatEvvs

    Dunno. Read the book.

  175. @candid_observer
    Here's a decent video of differing reactions to the OJ verdict

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsnuhz-Kb7k

    The real question in my mind is how many of "liberal" whites today would fail to support the view 0f blacks on the OJ verdict? My guess is that one and all would be on board with the verdict, because they can no longer contradict the stories told by blacks as a group. If the cases of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown can be twisted as they were, how hard would it be to do the same with the OJ case? "The gloves didn't fit! The police planted the evidence!" The Obama DOJ would find a way to make the verdict seem reasonable, and the NY Times Editorial Board would be trumpeting that Justice was served.

    We live in a very different time from the days of the OJ verdict.

    Replies: @David In TN, @David In TN

    The white liberals are more aggressive about publicizing every confrontation between black criminal types and white police officers. And spinning it as “evil white cop against angelic African-American.” I believe they think this is easier in 21st Century America.

    They also get more inclined every year to ignore, insofar as possible, black on white violence.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS